Why does everything with you and me have to be so political?

I don't do political art as a general rule. Not that I don't like it, just I've never had a particular need to make much of my own. But something a friend said, sparked an image in my mind. Because while I don't typically do political art, I often like to follow up on a joke.

Where did this stem from? And what is so political about the pig in the picture.

My sister sent me a link to a site "Girl Scouts Exposed: Lessons in lesbianism". Which so horrified and so amused me in turns, it really made me think that it had to be a joke. Because I couldn't imagine anyone seriously thinking some of the things in the articles. It questioned the Girl Scout curriculum, taking issues with a lack of Christian teachings, use of quotes from eastern religions, global warming, labyrinths, and if I'm not mistaken world peace. There were also issues with feminism, which considering the group, The Girl Scouts, founded by a woman, run by women, for girls... it didn't really make sense to me.

I sent this link to a friend who wrote back:


I would like to say as a former Girl Scout (Mom made me), there was absolutely no religious content in my troupe experience - other than the word "God" in the GS promise (which I no longer remember). We took walks in the woods, learned how to recognize poison ivy, learned to make a stove out of a tin can and a candle and made french toast with it, made God's eyes (not religious either - yarn craft), played with gimp, made friendship bracelets, had an international day, visited nursing homes, and sold cookies. Of course, once you learn all that stuff, they give you a card to keep in your wallet that says "God-hating/Communist/Buddhist/Feminist Pig." I still have mine.

I thought it might be funny to give her a card for her wallet that said "God-hating/Communist/Buddhist/Feminist Pig."

So I came up with this. You'll notice her badges are a crossed our Jesus fish, a hammer and sickle, an ohm, and mirror of Venus. It was just too fun to pass up.

Tina Fey isn’t sexist. And neither were the people who wrote that skit.

Tina Fey isn’t sexist. And neither were the people who wrote that skit.

But you might have an argument that they are leftist.

There is a tempest in a teacup about the supposedly sexist skit on SNL last Saturday. While being brilliant and insightful, well timed and well played… I find it odd that anyone would argue sexism.

From me? The woman who agreed that Obama was sexist to use the pig in lipstick statement? Which believe me, has my mother furious with me. She’s a party girl, a democratic party girl, and come election time she tends to line up with the party. I tend to get angry with them and threaten not to vote for them, and on occasion don’t vote for them. I don’t like the party line. And I hate that assume they can just have my vote because I fit their demographic. Earn it people!

I digress.

And for all the arguments people have about why this skit isn’t sexist… mostly stating it’s a parody or it’s so dead on that it true.

I think the more obvious and telling sign that it’s not sexist is… and the people calling sexist agree with this point… it portrays Hillary as a woman of substance. Sexism in the context doesn’t work if you aren’t arguing the portrayal of both women. If you were saying that both women where treated disrespectfully, or as insubstantial, had there been a man in the skit and he was the voice of reason… etc., that would be sexist.

But because the skit leans to flattering to Hillary Clinton, and dismissing Sarah Palin… it’s not sexist, it’s just humor. It’s just parody, and it reflects the media’s portrayal of the two politicians. Sure SNL leans liberal, you could certainly argue that. Most of the time you could even arguer sexism. But not in this skit. Sexism would have to apply to both parties. SNL can pick on a woman without it being sexist, especially if there is another woman in the skit to compare her too.

So why is this bothering me so much?

It’s crying wolf.

It’s a public media frenzy of crying wolf. You can’t cry wolf, without there being a wolf because when the wolf comes no one takes you seriously. And sexism is a serious problem.

It was a hilarious skit. Tina Fey was dead on as Sarah Palin, and Amy Poehler is a great Hillary Clinton, I loved the bitterness with the big smile! That’s my girl.

I’m a feminist.

And I mean that. I mean it in the “I won’t apologize” kind of way. I mean it in the “I’ll stand up for myself and anyone else I need to” kind of way. And I mean that in the “I’ll support Hillary” kind of way.

If you don’t support Hillary are you not a feminist?

No, of course not. You might be a republican. Or an independent. Or an Obama supporter.

You can be an Obama supporter and a feminist of course.

I’ll try to refrain from adding a judgmental comment about Obama’s voting record, his inexperience, and the slightly misogynistic language he occasionally uses. Oh snap! I commented on that. Well it’s all in good fun.

This bit is from a Lynn Harris piece on Salon.com

But. If Hillary supporters are pissed off, and maybe even taking it out inappropriately on their Obama friends, I'd say we have reason to be. And this is what Darnton's essay fails to capture. We are frustrated. Not necessarily because we expect or demand that all women (!) must vote a certain way. Not necessarily by the possibility of an Obama win, but by that of a Clinton loss. And not just by that potential loss -- which, I should underscore, is not a done deal, even as the orchestra tunes for the ritual dance-on-grave -- but by (some of) the reasons that may be behind it.

We are frustrated by Clinton's dumb luck: Obama's advent, in this race of all races, is her "Snakes. It had to be snakes."

We are frustrated by the much-documented and -discussed perception that the media is harder on Hillary, or, as the case may be, sillier. (Witness the "Miss Frigidaire" question from Katie Couric, a woman who should know a little something about having one's "personality" appear to trump one's accomplishments.)

We are frustrated by the feeling that we skipped a step somewhere: How did a progressive female candidate come -- at least by comparison -- to represent The Man?
We are frustrated by the way it became "cool" to vote Obama and uncool to vote otherwise; this is an orthodoxy unto itself.

We are frustrated that diversity of opinion among women -- as if we're all on one big giant Listserv ("Who are you voting for? And what are you wearing? OK me too bye!") -- is so often reported as "division." (Even in articles about why Clinton supporters are frustrated!)

We are frustrated because it really would be pretty great to have a progressive woman president. Sue us.

And we are, yes, frustrated by people -- enlightened people! -- who say things like, "I agree with all her policies, I just don't ... like her." Or that she’s "cold." Or "calculating." (We all know about "shrill.") (Which to me, for the record, describes John McCain.)

That, my friends, is sexism the way racism is crossing the street at night when someone black approaches; it's ingrained at this point, reflexive. And that, my friends, is (in part) drinking the misogynist anti-Clinton Kool-Aid the GOP's been stirring up since 1993. I won't call them "terrorists," but it's letting them win.

So anyway I’m a feminist, and I like Hillary and I’m tired of apologizing for it. And if you really want to hate Hill go for it. Just understand what your reasons are, and what part the media played in them.

I’m sick of people telling me I’m a raging feminist, I’d like them to say I’m a supportive feminist. I’m tired of people teasing me, or belittling my points even as a joke. I have a sense of humor but that’s just not funny. But I put up with more than I’d care to.

Worse than that are the people who think we’ve achieved the proper balance and there’s no fight left. It’s this men and women are different and we should just accept this attitude that really does me in. Women who seemingly inherently trust men more than women hurt my head. They’re out there though.

Sigh.

So I’m a feminist, frustrated, but trained to be patient. I can wait with the best of them.

And as I waited for the writer’s strike to end… I never really gave it any thought of how it was affecting campaigns. I didn’t think about late night, or SNL or really anything, certain not the political part they play in primaries. Maybe Arron Sorkin was right… he did follow up the West Wing with Studio 60. And one of the complaints was that the comedy was taken just as seriously as the politics were.

And then I saw this in the Boston Globe today.