Is Obama a Misogynist ... ?

[Julien Sorel]

After the Uruguayan President referred to his female Argentinian counterpart as 'an old hag', it appears Obama is in trouble with extreme feminists and their politically-correct fellow-travellers for exactly the opposite reasons.[URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22049070"]

I'd rather Obama was in trouble for breaking his promises over Guantánamo

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/06/obama-promise-close-guantanamo-worse

and for his policy on the use of drones

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2966447.html.

Compliments are rarely "relevant". But they are usually nice to get anyway.

Desired compliment from any colleague:

That's a brilliant piece of work Ruth. Thanks to the hours you've put in and the diligence of your research we have significantly rethought the marketing demographics for cheesy peas in the Midlands.

Gratuitous compliment, especially from a male colleague (a female colleague might well fancy Ruth, of course: but is also probably more likely to remark Ruth's appearance out of friendliness or disinterested interest in what Ruth is wearing, how her hair is cut: girlies liking that sort of thing don't you know) - only wanted if there is some reciprocal relationship between the person giving the compliment and the person receiving it, the person receiving the compliment in all likelihood not being wildly off the mark thinking the person giving the compliment hasn't much interest in what goes on between the person receiving the compliment's ears:

May I just say Ruth, you look absolutely stunning this morning?!

Ruth (thinks, not says: because it wouldn't do for the scottycelts and Mr Pees she works with to think she's a humourless, feminist, leftie, Guardian reader blah blah: after all, who could possibly not like the scottycelts and the Mr Pees complimenting them on their appearance? And, besides, the person doing the complimenting might be their boss):

No you can't. Get lost, creep.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Not if they don't ... or at least they are only damned by the great humourless and graceless ones themselves. There is absolutely no evidence that Ms Harris even wanted to fend off the 'inapt remark'.

Is that relevant, scotty? If, in the course of one of our on-forum chats about how magnificent Bruckner's Symphonies are, I mentioned how perceptive and intelligent I thought your comments were, ending with a gentle "josh" to the effect " ... and so surprising from a Catholic/Scotsman, too", I'm sure you wouldn't be offended. But anyone new to the Forum who didn't know that I wasn't intending to be serious or give offense, might be offended by the crass idea implied that "no Catholic/Scotsman is capable of perceptive and/or intelligent remarks - offended, even if they themselves weren't Catholic/Scottish. I would be deeply concerned if I learnt that I'd offended anyone with my careless remarks ("inept" rather than "inapt" in this case) - and would apologize. A remark doesn't have to offend a specific individual for it to be offensive, nor is it necessarily indicative of "humourlessness and gracelessness" to find such a remark offensive.

[Flosshilde]

I'd rather Obama was in trouble for breaking his promises over Guantánamo

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/06/obama-promise-close-guantanamo-worse

and for his policy on the use of drones

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2966447.html.

Gratuitous compliment,

May I just say Ruth, you look absolutely stunning this morning?!

Ruth (thinks, not says: because it wouldn't do for the scottycelts and Mr Pees she works with to think she's a humourless, feminist, leftie, Guardian reader blah blah: after all, who could possibly not like the scottycelts and the Mr Pees complimenting them on their appearance? And, besides, the person doing the complimenting might be their boss):

No you can't. Get lost, creep.

[Beef Oven]

.....................scotty and Mr Pee, both of whom come in for unfair treatment here.

A reminder is needed.

[amateur51]

A reminder is needed.

Ah positive reinforcement, modern parenting at its most thorough

[Beef Oven]

Ah positive reinforcement, modern parenting at its most thorough

Behave Amsy!!

And by the way, that CD you and Jayne forced me to buy still hasn't arrived - I'm consulting moy solicitor (might sue the vendor too).

[Flosshilde]

scotty and Mr Pee, both of whom come in for unfair treatment here.

To paraphrase Mr P, it's only unfair if you disagree with what's said. Otherwise it's robust discussion.

[scottycelt]

Is that relevant, scotty? If, in the course of one of our on-forum chats about how magnificent Bruckner's Symphonies are, I mentioned how perceptive and intelligent I thought your comments were, ending with a gentle "josh" to the effect " ... and so surprising from a Catholic/Scotsman, too", I'm sure you wouldn't be offended. But anyone new to the Forum who didn't know that I wasn't intending to be serious or give offense, might be offended by the crass idea implied that "no Catholic/Scotsman is capable of perceptive and/or intelligent remarks - offended, even if they themselves weren't Catholic/Scottish. I would be deeply concerned if I learnt that I'd offended anyone with my careless remarks ("inept" rather than "inapt" in this case) - and would apologize. A remark doesn't have to offend a specific individual for it to be offensive, nor is it necessarily indicative of "humourlessness and gracelessness" to find such a remark offensive.

No, you're right, ferney, I wouldn't be at all offended. Most Catholic Scotsmen have probably never even heard of Bruckner, though they would hardly be a unique group in that respect. Anyway, I've made a solemn promise never to discuss religion again on this forum so please stop provoking me!

Seriously, I don't think it is irrelevant to point out that Ms Harris didn't appear to find the remark offensive and it was others who did so on her behalf. Is that not in itself thoroughly 'patronising'? In any case how can a simple compliment be deemed 'offensive' as claimed? It makes a mockery of language apart from anything else. Could it have been simply bad manners to say it in public, as ff claims? Possibly, but as the compliment was meant to be nice and friendly, and the recipient apparently took that as the intention, even that seems a bit too strong to me. Now, if we were talking about the Uruguayan President's hurtful remarks about the Argentinian President I could well understand the 'sexist' argument as the remarks were intended to be offensive, even though he thought his words were private.

I certainly think, though, that Obama might be fairly criticised on the grounds of political naivety rather than any 'careless remark' and, whatever our views, the President (or any other leading politician) is most unlikely to make the same mistake again!

[amateur51]

I certainly think, though, that Obama might be fairly criticised on the grounds of political naivety rather than any 'careless remark' and, whatever our views, the President (or any other leading politician) is most unlikely to make the same mistake again!

In the light of your opening para, I think it's a bit rich to accuse President Obama of naivety (no '' I note)

[french frank]

I certainly think, though, that Obama might be fairly criticised on the grounds of political naivety rather than any 'careless remark' and, whatever our views, the President (or any other leading politician) is most unlikely to make the same mistake again!

That is certainly true, and even your Robin Abcarian of the LA Times whose views you regarded as 'balanced' (and a woman incidentally, not a man ) said that it was more 'wolfish than sexist - may be a little problem he needs to work on'.

[Petrushka]

Personally, I'd feel a good deal more reassured to know that Obama has his hand firmly on the tiller where North Korea is concerned than worry about this particular piece of inconsequential trivia.

[scottycelt]

That is certainly true, and even your Robin Abcarian of the LA Times whose views you regarded as 'balanced' (and a woman incidentally, not a man ) said that it was more 'wolfish than sexist - may be a little problem he needs to work on'.

On checking Wiki regarding Abcarian's correct official gender you would appear to be correct, ff ... I can only apolgise profusely to 'my' Ms Abcarian.

However, you did appear to miss the fact that in Mercia's linked BBC article the lady is most definitely described as a 'he', and, if nothing else, I still retain a certain degree of faith in the gender accuracy of BBC journalists. I therefore plead guilty to my own risible naivety!

I also believe that Ms Abcarian is now entitled to feel one heck of a lot more insulted by the BBC, and its ill-informed website readers, than Ms Harris ever could be at the admiring, if similarly naive, words of her doting President!

[french frank]

However, you did appear to miss the fact that in Mercia's linked BBC article the lady is most definitely described as a 'he', and, if nothing else, I still retain a certain degree of faith in the gender accuracy of BBC journalists. I therefore plead guilty to my own risible naivety!

Ah, Mercia's #41, yes. Of course, and you missed the point of my, earlier, message #31: "Plus two women named who are both journalists."

[Mr Pee]

Personally, I'd feel a good deal more reassured to know that Obama has his hand firmly on the tiller where North Korea is concerned than worry about this particular piece of inconsequential trivia.

[Padraig]

I'd rather Obama was in trouble for breaking his promises over Guantánamo

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/06/obama-promise-close-guantanamo-worse

and for his policy on the use of drones

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2966447.html.




Desired compliment from any colleague:

That's a brilliant piece of work Ruth. Thanks to the hours you've put in and the diligence of your research we have significantly rethought the marketing demographics for cheesy peas in the Midlands.

Gratuitous compliment, especially from a male colleague (a female colleague might well fancy Ruth, of course: but is also probably more likely to remark Ruth's appearance out of friendliness or disinterested interest in what Ruth is wearing, how her hair is cut: girlies liking that sort of thing don't you know) - only wanted if there is some reciprocal relationship between the person giving the compliment and the person receiving it, the person receiving the compliment in all likelihood not being wildly off the mark thinking the person giving the compliment hasn't much interest in what goes on between the person receiving the compliment's ears:

May I just say Ruth, you look absolutely stunning this morning?!

Ruth (thinks, not says: because it wouldn't do for the scottycelts and Mr Pees she works with to think she's a humourless, feminist, leftie, Guardian reader blah blah: after all, who could possibly not like the scottycelts and the Mr Pees complimenting them on their appearance? And, besides, the person doing the complimenting might be their boss):

No you can't. Get lost, creep.

Just one comment, JS. I hope Ruth reflects on her coarse and shrewish behaviour to a colleague, and apologises.