RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer

RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 1:21:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you Normally, I would think she was a little out of line. However, the General did address all the males as Senator and she was the only Senator not addressed by her title. Got a cite for that? Not that I don't trust you, but I'd like to see it for myself.

PeonForHer -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 1:48:18 PM)
Me too. I've only been able to find reams and reams of opinion pages. Little real info.

RumpusParable -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 3:40:38 PM)
FR On viewing the video, it definitely looks like the big issue people are making out of this is based on sexism. Had the sexes been different no one would care as this was a minor and, were she not female, not a rude exchange at all. The perceived poor manners are coming entirely from the fact she is a female considered to have stepped out of her place.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 3:44:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RumpusParable FR On viewing the video, it definitely looks like the big issue people are making out of this is based on sexism. Had the sexes been different no one would care as this was a minor and, were she not female, not a rude exchange at all. The perceived poor manners are coming entirely from the fact she is a female considered to have stepped out of her place. What do you base that on? I have no idea where you're getting that.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 5:51:52 PM)
quote: Normally, I would think she was a little out of line. However, the General did address all the males as Senator and she was the only Senator not addressed by her title. Housesub4you, where did you see that? I watched the entire hearing, and I didn't see him doing that. Sir and Ma'am are titles that military personel use for officers and civilians (especially civilian government superiors). It was a natural response for a Brigadier General (he worked a lot harder to get in his position than Madame Boxer did, I assure you) to use. From here on out, I will continue to refer to Barbara Boxer as Madame Boxer. How dare she be such a pretentious twat? How dare she? She is an elected constitutional officer, not an Empress. She isn't entitled to anything.

aidan -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 5:58:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: RumpusParable FR On viewing the video, it definitely looks like the big issue people are making out of this is based on sexism. Had the sexes been different no one would care as this was a minor and, were she not female, not a rude exchange at all. The perceived poor manners are coming entirely from the fact she is a female considered to have stepped out of her place. What do you base that on? I have no idea where you're getting that. Really? Really? Let's flip through the pages, shall we? quote: ORIGINAL: CatdeMedici I tink it was arrogant, ignorant and uncalled for--behavior like that only fuels the "women are hormonal domineering bitches" concept. Next... quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Oh yea, because Ma'am is such an offensive word. maybe she would have prefered "her majasty the high bitch" Next... quote: ORIGINAL: girlygurl I have to ask why she felt it appropriate to make her comment. Equality? My bet is if that man were addressing a male he would have said "sir". Next... quote: slaveboyforyou Madame Boxer is just a nit-picky, show-off. She doesn't like the military, and she seized on an opportunity to knock this well accomplished man down a peg. I'm sure giggled like a school-girl to herself in her office later as she thought about how she put this man in his proper place. She's a cunt. And this is just from our little ol' three page BBS thread. I'm not even pulling from the dozens of news sources and commentary sources out there covering this. It takes a lot of self-delusion to not see this is about a woman being "uppity" with a man. And this all doesn't even tap into the rich vein of bullshit that is the idea of him being a general according him special consideration.

PeonForHer -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 6:31:01 PM)
For me, the comments here don't matter, neither do those of the "pundits". We have right-wing farties like those newspaper columnists in abundance here in the UK, too, and I'm well used to their rancid wind. If Housesub4you was right and the General addressed all the male senators only as "Senator" and never "Sir" - but Senator Boxer as "Ma'am"- that pretty much clinches it. The General is a sexist. If not - well, he still may be a sexist (who knows?), but it was the Senator's bad, here. (This comes from me, someone who has himself earned a particular title and got annoyed at times because it's not been used, I should add. Always, the offending parties have been the bottom level of State employees. Public servants, that is. I do have some personal sympathy for the Senator.)

LookieNoNookie -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 6:45:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CatdeMedici I tink it was arrogant, ignorant and uncalled for--behavior like that only fuels the "women are hormonal domineering bitches" concept. It was obvious her insecurities were showing. She is high ranking elected official, she damn well should be referred to as Maam, its probably one of the nicest things she will hear, especially now. I believe the correct moniker for a woman in Congress is in fact "Ma'am"....if she doesn't like it....she can go....enjoy a nice cup of tea.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 8:06:52 PM)
quote: And this is just from our little ol' three page BBS thread. I'm not even pulling from the dozens of news sources and commentary sources out there covering this. It takes a lot of self-delusion to not see this is about a woman being "uppity" with a man. And this all doesn't even tap into the rich vein of bullshit that is the idea of him being a general according him special consideration. What dozens of news sources? He is a Brigadier General. He is accorded some respect. He went through a hell of a lot more to attain his position than Madame Boxer did. He is an Army officer, he was using the proper protocol in addressing a government official or a civilian. I know, I'm an Army brat. My father is a retired Colonel. Superior officers and civilians are always addressed as Sir and Ma'am....period. Madame Boxer (like I said, she will forever be called this by me because of her pretentious outburst) is an elected official. She is not an Empress, Queen, Baroness, etc, etc. Again, if this had been a farmer testifying on agricultural subsidies, a radio shack assistant manager testifying on wages, a convenient store clerk testifying about armed robberies....she WOULDN'T HAVE FUCKING DARED TO PULL THIS SHIT. She saw a chance to belittle a military officer, and she took it. She's a cunt.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 9:14:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aidan quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: RumpusParable FR On viewing the video, it definitely looks like the big issue people are making out of this is based on sexism. Had the sexes been different no one would care as this was a minor and, were she not female, not a rude exchange at all. The perceived poor manners are coming entirely from the fact she is a female considered to have stepped out of her place. What do you base that on? I have no idea where you're getting that. Really? Really? Let's flip through the pages, shall we? And this is just from our little ol' three page BBS thread. I'm not even pulling from the dozens of news sources and commentary sources out there covering this. It takes a lot of self-delusion to not see this is about a woman being "uppity" with a man. And this all doesn't even tap into the rich vein of bullshit that is the idea of him being a general according him special consideration. Aidan, you might want to dial back the adrenaline a little bit. Just a word of friendly advice. Something seems to be getting in the way of your reasoning, and I'm thinking it might be the emotional investment you seem to have taken in this issue. At any rate, your argument here is a shambles. Let's break it down. The assertion I challenged was "Had the sexes been different no one would care as this was a minor and, were she not female, not a rude exchange at all. The perceived poor manners are coming entirely from the fact she is a female considered to have stepped out of her place." In support of that assertion, you list 4 examples of posts from this thread. 4 posts out of 45. Of the 4 examples you list, 1 of them is a simple observation from CatdeMedici. Are you going to seriously suggest that Cat is picking on Boxer because she thinks Boxer is an uppity woman who needs to be slapped down? If you really have the stones to drag Cat into this and accuse her of being a sexist, you're a braver man than I am, and I'll pay money to watch the aftermath of that. But before you do, I'd really suggest you spend a little more time thinking about your argument than you did before you made this last post, because I don't think it'll be pretty. So, if we agree that you're going to do the smart thing and back away from that one, it leaves 3. Of the remaining 3, the one from girlygurl can best be described as an apparent accusation that the general was being sexist. If you can offer a rational explanation of why an accusation that the general is a sexist can possibly be construed as a sexist attack on Boxer, be my guest. So, assuming you're not going to bother trying to make that argument (because I really think you have more sense than to even try that), we're now left with 2 examples from your original 4. 2 posters insulted the Senator, using the word "cunt"and the word "bitch." OK, strong words. I don't know if I've ever in my life used either word to refer to a woman, and I certainly wouldn't in this case. But the fact that I wouldn't use those words to insult a woman doesn't mean i agree that using them is automatically a sexist insult, any more than calling a man a "dick" or a "bastard" is a sexist insult. I've always found that to be a weak argument, a politically correct double standard. But if you want to hang your entire argument on those 2 insults, I'll be magnanimous and give 'em to you. I won't go so far as to say i agree with you, or that I'm persuaded by the argument - I don't agree, and i don't respect the argument because it's intellectually weak. But I'll give it to you in the sense that I'll acknowledge you sincerely believe it's a valid argument. And I can afford to give it to you, because it doesn't even come close to proving your point. Remember, the original assertion was that "the perceived poor manners are coming entirely from the fact she is a female considered to have stepped out of her place." Right? So unless you seriously believe that out of 45 posts, 1 post calling Boxer a bitch and another 1 calling her a cunt proves that the criticism of Boxer is *entirely* driven by a sexist effort to put the woman back in her place, I think you need to take a long hard look at just whose argument is an example of self-delusion.

DemonKia -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/22/2009 10:37:42 PM)
FR, after read thru Hmmmm. My policy is to call people what they prefer to be called. In my world, that's polite.

thetammyjo -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 11:19:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aidan Yes yes, gods forbid that she should ask to be called by her official title. If somebody was to address the president as "Mr. Obama", most of us would think it a fairly gouache thing to do and would not fault the president for correcting the speaker. The same principle applies here. She's not "Ms. Boxer" or "Mrs. Boxer" or, as the use of Ma'am implies, "Madame Boxer". She's Senator Boxer. Senator is her title. There's nothing wrong with her expecting to be addressed as such by other officials in formal situations. Still haven't seen a link to the original issue. My question is: How was this general addressing the male members of the committee he was speaking to? If he was calling them "Sir" then she needs to chill out. If he was calling them "Senator" then unconsciously he may have been belittling her status by calling her something else.

thetammyjo -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 11:21:07 AM)
The below looks perfectly reasonable to me. Much like if I asked someone to "please call me TammyJo instead of Tammy, thank you." quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW quote: ORIGINAL: aidan Yes yes, gods forbid that she should ask to be called by her official title. If somebody was to address the president as "Mr. Obama", most of us would think it a fairly gouache thing to do and would not fault the president for correcting the speaker. The same principle applies here. She's not "Ms. Boxer" or "Mrs. Boxer" or, as the use of Ma'am implies, "Madame Boxer". She's Senator Boxer. Senator is her title. There's nothing wrong with her expecting to be addressed as such by other officials in formal situations. Even when a title is used, words like sir, ma'am, your honor, etc., are still acceptable alternatives. Now, to be fair, I hadn't actually heard the conversation, aside from the commentary about her "dressing down" the General. This afternoon, I had the opportunity to see a transcript of the conversation: Senator Boxer: “Do me a favor, can you say ’senator’ instead of ‘ma’am’?” Boxer said, interrupting the Army general. “It’s just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title, so I’d appreciate it. Thank you.” General Smith: “Yes, senator.” Now, in seeing the conversation, it seems that she wasn't the ravening, frothing-at-the-mouth banshee that some individuals would make it appear. She was actually pretty doggone courteous about her request, as was the General in responding. I am beginning to think that the -real- issue here is people trying to make a big deal out of little things -- and I wonder what it is that the 'slight of mind' is trying to distract us from. I humbly withdraw my earlier rant, as I believe that it was not called for, nor justified, in this situation. Dame Calla

thetammyjo -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 11:30:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you Normally, I would think she was a little out of line. However, the General did address all the males as Senator and she was the only Senator not addressed by her title. That's what I asked about in my first reply to this thread. The General may not have even realized what he was doing but using different titles for people in the same job can signal disrespect or inequality. I wonder if all the folks so angry about this got as angry when various male senators and representatives and vice presidents directed swear words at others? Or was that just them using freedom of speech and not a respect issue?

ShaktiSama -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 11:40:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda So unless you seriously believe that out of 45 posts, 1 post calling Boxer a bitch and another 1 calling her a cunt proves that the criticism of Boxer is *entirely* driven by a sexist effort to put the woman back in her place, I think you need to take a long hard look at just whose argument is an example of self-delusion. "Bitch" and "cunt" are just as inappropriate as terms for a U.S. Senator as "Ma'am", "Miss", or "Madame", especially if you call every male Senator by the gender neutral title of his rank: "Senator". Personally, I think that both "bitch" and "cunt" in the context of this discussion are indicative of good ol'-fashioned misogyny, especially when the person who was in error in this situation was MALE. I don't see anyone calling the general "prick", "cocksucker" or the equivalent anti-masculine slurs, so exactly how in God's green earth could these vicious terms for Senator Boxer be appropriate? As for the rich vein of plain old fashioned ridiculous and barbarous worship of the military that is being expressed--? One word: yikes. It's just plain creepy. I've never met a decent soldier in my life who wanted OR deserved to be turned into some kind of sacred cow like that. Nor is it at all true that soldiers have to work harder to achieve rank than senators do to achieve office; I have no idea where people get notions like this, but it's bunk.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 2:35:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda So unless you seriously believe that out of 45 posts, 1 post calling Boxer a bitch and another 1 calling her a cunt proves that the criticism of Boxer is *entirely* driven by a sexist effort to put the woman back in her place, I think you need to take a long hard look at just whose argument is an example of self-delusion. "Bitch" and "cunt" are just as inappropriate as terms for a U.S. Senator as "Ma'am", "Miss", or "Madame", especially if you call every male Senator by the gender neutral title of his rank: "Senator". Personally, I think that both "bitch" and "cunt" in the context of this discussion are indicative of good ol'-fashioned misogyny, especially when the person who was in error in this situation was MALE. You know, my disagreement with you on this point is so very slight, for me to even argue it would just be contentious and pedantic. Even though I somewhat disagree, your point is at least as good as mine and at least as valid, and certainly as sincerely argued as my own; and after reflecting over the last couple of days upon Aidan's position and his argument, I feel shitty enough arguing over it with just one of you guys this week that I don't want to feel even shittier arguing about it with both of you. I yield. I do continue to maintain that it doesn't support the other poster's original assertion that sexism is the only thing driving the criticism of Boxer, but you guys are right on the nature of the insult. quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama As for the rich vein of plain old fashioned ridiculous and barbarous worship of the military that is being expressed--? One word: yikes. It's just plain creepy. I've never met a decent soldier in my life who wanted OR deserved to be turned into some kind of sacred cow like that. Nor is it at all true that soldiers have to work harder to achieve rank than senators do to achieve office; I have no idea where people get notions like this, but it's bunk. I can't disagree with this one, either, even though some of my earlier posts may seem to contradict that. My feeling is that even though there may be only about 3 things in the world upon which a career military man and I would agree, I have a lot of respect for anyone who chooses to live their whole life in a service occupation, such as the military, the police force, the fire department, etc. They and I may not like each other, but I do respect discipline and commitment to ideals and a sense of duty - and even if I don't share the particular ideals, I can still respect the concept of the commitment. So, does the man deserve respect for the life he's lived? Yes, absolutely. He's earned that. Worship? God, no. Let's keep things in perspective.

Starbuck09 -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 4:29:50 PM)
House sub 4 u I have looked quite hard but I can't see any evidence that the general adressed the male senators as senator and only boxer as ma'am. Where did you see this. If that is true then he was wrong. If it is incorrect then the senator wascompletely in the wrong. ShaktiSama the reason people are using bitch and cunt is because they belive the senator was in the wrong and as she is a woman these are feminine slurs. They are not calling the general a prick because they do not believe he acted like one. You say the general was in error but they and I disagree. Unless he referred to the men as senator only [which I have seen no evidence for] then how he adressed her was quite appropriate and her disagreement was a matter of taste not function. Accordingly she should have let her feelings be known in private.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 4:34:28 PM)
quote: Personally, I think that both "bitch" and "cunt" in the context of this discussion are indicative of good ol'-fashioned misogyny, especially when the person who was in error in this situation was MALE. I don't see anyone calling the general "prick", "cocksucker" or the equivalent anti-masculine slurs, so exactly how in God's green earth could these vicious terms for Senator Boxer be appropriate? Yeah, you caught me. I am a misogynist; I hate women so much. Colorful language is just a ruse I use to cover up my insecurities around the opposite sex. In truth, I was horrified that Ms. Boxer dared to stand up to the entire white-male dominated military-industrial complex. [8\|] quote: As for the rich vein of plain old fashioned ridiculous and barbarous worship of the military that is being expressed--? One word: yikes. It's just plain creepy. I've never met a decent soldier in my life who wanted OR deserved to be turned into some kind of sacred cow like that. Nor is it at all true that soldiers have to work harder to achieve rank than senators do to achieve office; I have no idea where people get notions like this, but it's bunk. You obviously have no idea what becoming a Brigadier General entails. Ms. Boxer hasn't done a whole lot other than running for political office. I'm sorry, but I have very little respect for career politicians. In no way was I offering the General up as a sacred cow. I don't think of the military that way; I was pushed toward a career in the military from a early age, but I rebelled against it. However, I know what kind of sacrifices have to be made, and I deeply respect it. Ms. Boxer doesn't. She deliberately went out of her way to belittle this man. It cemented my long time dislike for her.

thishereboi -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 6:13:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda OK, strong words. I don't know if I've ever in my life used either word to refer to a woman, and I certainly wouldn't in this case. But the fact that I wouldn't use those words to insult a woman doesn't mean i agree that using them is automatically a sexist insult, any more than calling a man a "dick" or a "bastard" is a sexist insult. I have used bitch as an insult as well as a compliment. Depends on the situation and bitch in question. I agree that it isn't automatically a sexist insult, but I can also see where someone might see it that way.

thishereboi -> RE: “Senator” Barbara Boxer (6/24/2009 6:19:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda So unless you seriously believe that out of 45 posts, 1 post calling Boxer a bitch and another 1 calling her a cunt proves that the criticism of Boxer is *entirely* driven by a sexist effort to put the woman back in her place, I think you need to take a long hard look at just whose argument is an example of self-delusion. "Bitch" and "cunt" are just as inappropriate as terms for a U.S. Senator as "Ma'am", "Miss", or "Madame", especially if you call every male Senator by the gender neutral title of his rank: "Senator". Personally, I think that both "bitch" and "cunt" in the context of this discussion are indicative of good ol'-fashioned misogyny, especially when the person who was in error in this situation was MALE. I don't see anyone calling the general "prick", "cocksucker" or the equivalent anti-masculine slurs, so exactly how in God's green earth could these vicious terms for Senator Boxer be appropriate? As for the rich vein of plain old fashioned ridiculous and barbarous worship of the military that is being expressed--? One word: yikes. It's just plain creepy. I've never met a decent soldier in my life who wanted OR deserved to be turned into some kind of sacred cow like that. Nor is it at all true that soldiers have to work harder to achieve rank than senators do to achieve office; I have no idea where people get notions like this, but it's bunk. I didn't call her a bitch, I said "her majesty the high bitch" If people are going to quote me, then they should quote the whole thing. If you feel the need to call that misogyny then I guess I will just have to live with that. .

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875