My live interview with Anita Finlay, author of Dirty Words on Clean Skin, starts at 6PM Pacific. Belly up to your computer then click here!
Recent Comments
conner43 on Salamisha Tillet conner43 on Obama V. Obama JohnSmart on Bushbama Matt Cavanaugh on Bushbama Sweet Sue on Bushbama Thank You!
Buy This Movie!
On the radio!
John & Ani, I just tweeted out the link. Hopefully it’ll snag some listeners.
Great show, John & Ani. Really enjoyed it.
What NES said!! Great show!
You needed another hour, John.
Yes, another hour would’ve been dandy.
John — I have been shut out of my google email account for the moment — wanted to tell you how much I enjoyed talking with you! I could have done another hour!! Thank you — and many thanks to your listeners for their support!!
xo
Ani
Just ordered the book, I feel that when and where we can, we need to keep the conversation going about the travesty we call ‘The Media’..They ruin lives and dreams daily, and are called ‘celebrities’ while making big bucks,.Yet they keep blithely puttering along, above it all. To all those who do not see this or who did not focus on what happened in ’08, bear in mind, next time it might be Your candidate who attracts their wrath and churlishness.
Anita,
Thank you. It was a terrific hour. yes we could have gone on but…leave ‘em wanting more…right? Maybe we can continue the conversation on a future show.
I do hope the caller ‘named’ “Incognito” posts comments here. She seemed animated by a delicious disgust at all things O.B.A.M.A. (and rightly so!).
Yes, she was very animated and well spoken!
Yes indeed, she was a very interesting person, wasn’t she?
Wicked. She was wicked.
Kind of sexy, ya think?
Being a hitched woman and all, I couldn’t possibly comment, Upps.
I learned something today… never do a call in show.
Chalk it up to stage fright and lack of time.
Great show John and Ani!!
Hey Dan, you were great. I hope I heard this correctly…I had no idea you were involved with the Apple 1984 ad. Good going.
Dan I understood your point about women’s names completely, and your Gabby example was Right On. The subtle marginalization of a woman using a girl nickname with a “Y” or “Ie” at the end is a common practice in corporate America. Politics mimics them perfectly in so many ways. Thus, Gabrielle Giffords is “Gabby” but Jim Brady was Jim Brady, not “Jimmy”. His law is the “Brady Law,” Her law would be “Gabby’s Law” of course. That you noticed it was not lost on me.
Dan, I won’t hear of this nonsense. You added to the conversation and made a very interesting point. Call in again!
Hi NES… I didnt work on the Apple 1984 ad, that was a little bit before my time, but it was done at the agency I worked at and we had the account for a long time, the most current work that they were producing for Apple was the “Im a Mac..Im a PC” stuff with Justin Long.
Trying to address the previous caller’s comment that it was some kind of conspiracy, I was just saying that the Obama camp simply copied the Apple ad and and used it as a way to “borrow equity” from the Apple brand and that iconic launch spot… (i.e. Apple is a cool brand, I want to be a cool brand too). We do that crap all the time in marketing…you take who you think is cool and position yourself along with that. Which for me, I think was one of the first red flags when I started to suss out that the Obama thing was more of a brand campaign than a political reality.
Uppity, yeah, as far as Gabrielle Giffords, that was the point I was trying to make… calling her Gabby in a way makes her more personal and familiar, but it also subtly diminishes and marginalizes her at the same time…and given what she went through, she doesn’t deserve to be diminished in any way.
JWS, I don’t normally suffer from performance anxiety, I had a well reasoned,articulate question but as soon as you said “hi caller” it literally completely went out of my head and I felt like a dork and was all over the place, I felt like Peter Brady when his voice was changing, but I tried….and it was nice talking to you. Email me about that other thing because I have lots of ideas. Next time I call in, I will be calmer and well reasoned and not trying to rush a comment in at the last minute.
I didn’t get a chance to say so in comments, but I truly enjoyed the show! I’ve got my copy of the big and will begin digging in later this week.
copy of the book, not copy of the big. Sheesh…
Hey, Dan, the first time I called in to talk to Lou Dobbs, I had my heart in my mouth — and I’m an actor! You did fine — and it gets easier…
thank you for your support.
JohnSmart says:
May 8, 2012 at 8:06 pm
Anita,
Thank you. It was a terrific hour. yes we could have gone on but…leave ‘em wanting more…right? Maybe we can continue the conversation on a future show.
******************************
Anytime, John.
It would be my pleasure to come back…
I just finished listening to the recorded show. It was great. Let’s do it again!
Downloading the show now!
o/t, finally figured out a way to post my drone piece:
http://trueliberalnexus.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/murder-drone-2/
Yes! Yes, yes, yes, yes. Thank you Ani for putting into words our horror, disgust and fury from 2008. And YES!!!
Normally I don’t listen to radio shows, except in the car, but I had to tune in to this one after reading this thread. Glad I did. Excellent!
I agree with 99% of what Anita said in the show but take issue with two things.
The first might be something I misunderstood. I thought I heard you say a woman can only be successful in politics, in elected office, if she renounces Roe v Wade, or something like that, and I assume you mean if she’s not pro-choice or otherwise indicates to men that she’s willing to support the subjugation of women’s rights. But many women elected Democrats are pro-choice, along with Republicans Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. I think the media’s problem –many people’s problem, including in flyover states– with Hillary Clinton was specific to Hillary Clinton. (Ditto Bill.) Although it’s true there’s a glass ceiling, and that 2008 proved misogyny remains the most socially acceptable ancient prejudice, the animosity directed at Hillary Clinton and her supporters was more than that. What happened in 2008 is what we’d witnessed coming from Republicans for years now coming from Democrats. Although certainly there’s plenty of real misogyny, I think that like the racist charges against the Clintons, the misogynistic name calling had less to do with believing a woman less qualified than a black man than with it being a potent tool that could be used. Name calling Obama for being half black would be –rightly– completely unacceptable but misogyny was an acceptable tool against Hillary and racism an acceptable tool against both of them.
The second thing I take issue with is your derogatory mention of Fifty Shades of Grey. Two things about that. One, I’ve noticed that everybody I’ve talked to who’s criticized the book for its content hasn’t read it, and I always think that reveals more about preconceived notions than what’s in a book itself. I’ve read the book, the first of the trilogy anyway, and I think you’re wrong about what it says about young women finding power with men by subjugating themselves to men (sorry if my paraphrasing is awkward or slightly off). What the female author and female character are doing, in my opinion, is accessing their power on terms they’ve made a choice to use. Isn’t that what feminism was supposed to be about? Whether a woman chooses to work outside the home or as mother and wife, whether she chooses to carry a pregnancy to term or abort it, whether or not she wears make-up, glasses, her hair styled or dyed or natural, whether she prefers missionary position sex or oral sex or s&m, the point is about her power to choose, not what she chooses. I agree young women today, like young gays today and young blacks today, fail to recognize the actual work and sacrifices that went into making the rights and freedoms we enjoy today possible, and don’t really understand what it was like before the changes (knowing sound bites is not the same as knowing history), but I don’t agree that that 50 Shades of Grey is an indication of women giving up their power any more than Girl With the Dragon Tattoo was. I think the trilogy of 50 Shades of Grey, like Stieg Larson’s trilogy, is an example of how individual women of today discover for themselves what their power is and how to use it.
Anyway, that said, thank you both for a great show. For me it’s always exciting and uplifting listening to smart informed people.
If the flyover states had a “problem” with Hillary, it was BECAUSE of the sexism that they did. Hillary was/is a strong women and made no bones about it when she and Bill came on the scene in the early 90s. There was nothing WRONG with Hillary, she just represented what they hated. Your argument is the tired and overused, “We’re not against ALL women….just THAT woman!” Yeah…..sure.
There are a lot of people in flyover states and no doubt your take is the case for some. I’ve discussed the Clintons with many people over many years, including from flyover states, and assessing what I’ve heard my take is valid as well.
There are human beings, male and female, who are lightening rods for attack as well as appreciation. These are people whose foundation and life arc are built on authenticity, are forthright and have a solid grasp of their natural power and are highly motivated to use it; some are attracted to that and some are threatened by it. Clearly Hillary Rodham has always been one of those people. Attacks on these people often have to do with what the attackers can find that is effective (gender, race, sexual orientation, outward appearance, social status) more than whatever it is they actually disapprove of or feel threatened by in that person. I think the best evidence of this with Hillary is that suddenly in 2008 her detractors chose to use “racist” against her, and despite nary a whisper of that for decades it was easily accepted as legitimate, as well as whatever term could be used for the attacks that followed her comments about LBJ and RFK.
Zaladonis — thank you for listening to the interview and for your kind words, but I never said a pro-choice woman could not succeed. We were speaking specifically about why conservative women did better in the 2010 midterms. John asked if conservative men had less of a problem with conservative women succeeding than liberal men with liberal women succeeding given the “ready made,” shocking amount of sexism coming from the left. There are more conservative women Governors out there. I said that if a Conservative woman agrees with them on social issues, it is more likely she will succeed with her party. As to your other point, my book lays out the case for whether sexism was the motive or merely the method of discrediting a qualified candidate like Hillary Clinton. It is certainly a deliberate tool that worked…but you’ll have to read my book to find out the details on that one…:)
As far as 50 Shades of Grey, I was commenting about the Newsweek cover capitalizing on the theme of her book. It is interesting, given the events of 2008, that we have a ‘subjugate yourself to get power’ theme going on now in several different realms . There is a great deal more to unpack in the books you mention and I do not think they speak to a woman’s empowerment, but that is only my opinion.
Ani, thanks, as I suspected I misunderstood your comment about elected female officials and Roe v Wade.
As for Girl With the Dragon Tattoo and 50 Shades of Grey, I couldn’t disagree more. Whichever way one interprets the messages, it seems clear to me that both trilogies speak strongly about women’s empowerment. I’m curious: have you read the books?
One of my daughters and her husband have the same credentials from the same highly respected school. During a visit to her husband’s workplace [at his invitation] daughter made a professional observation, which brought an immediate put down in response from her husband.
That evening, my husband ‘had a word’ with the son in law, in which he called him a misogynist, and a few other not nice things.. I have never seem his so quietly angry.
I hate family spats, as does my daughter, son in law apologized, but I doubt he enjoyed it, as he has led a charmed life of professional recognition and praise. Our daughter took six years off from their mutual profession to stay home with her babies, but she is catching up to him quickly, and son in law seems to have grown up a bit.
I might add that son in law is one of those elite liberals, who are supposed to be on the side of women, until it costs them something, it seems.
This is none of my business, a family situation and my unsolicited opinion may be unwanted, or unhelpful, but you posted it on a public blog so I’m going to say this.
First of all, I think it’s a mistake for a parent to get involved in a disagreement between husband and wife unless it’s really a huge issue, and even then careful to not simply take their own offspring’s side. Big mistake IMO that can cause more problems than it solves. And secondly, I read your husband coming to his daughter’s aid in this way as patriarchal in a diminishing way to her own power. Is his daughter incapable of defending herself and her opinions, does she need dad to fight her battles for her? I’m reminded of Hillary’s story, in her memoir, of coming home crying because the little boys bullying her or wouldn’t let her play, and her mother turning her around, sending her back outside, saying there’s no room for cowards in this house and she had to go face her challenges. Dorothy Rodham didn’t go out and fight Hillary’s battles and neither did Hugh Rodham.
I don’t mean this to be harsh in a personal way, you know I have the highest respect for you. But you raised something I think is a big difference in the way our generation was raised and the way this younger one was.
Zal, I agree. dh should have stayed out of it, and he has not uttered a word since that incident. As an observer though, I grant that he had a point. However, they both have the exact same credentials, including nearly identical grades,and at that point, experience, and both should have had respect for that
My take was different, I did not think daughter should have raised a professional issue in our presence, an embarrassing situation for all involved. I absolutely cringe when couples criticize each other in public, for any reason. If you’ve been with people who do this, you’ll know what an awkward experience it can be. Having an audience, seems to give some people a nasty kind of courage. On another topic, as to ‘how we were raised’, you reminded me of the time when I was in probably third or fourth grade that my father said “please don’t ever come home and tell me you are having a ‘problem’ with a teacher, as I will always side with the teacher.” In his mind, teachers were deserving of the highest respect, and if anything went wrong, it must be my fault. While I always knew my father would defend me to the death from real harm, I never forgot what he said .It applied to most of my battles in life, no whining, no complaining, work it out or walk away, and take the consequences.. There are always choices. WordPress seems to have decided to prevent my use of paragraphs..I have no idea if this post even makes sense.
Makes perfect sense and we agree. Sometimes seems we were siblings separated at birth.
Rofl on the “siblings separated at birth” thing.
Good thing Mouse isn’t here to react to that…altho’, mind you, I think she’d agree.
Anita, Thank you for your research and committment to your book. Hillary and I are close in age, and have similar backgrounds. I have alway felt a kinship with her, from the first time I became aware of her. I think I Know a lot about her college days, and the attitudes formed during those turbulent times, as they reflect my own.It is beyond my literary power to describe what it was like to be on the cusp of so much new thinking and to strike a path so seemingly different from our parents’.. It was more than a few difficult Sunday dinners, it was feeling so estranged from everything familiar for a while.. A lot of the cliches from that period, became cliches’ because they were true. In the end, though, a glance through almost any family tree, will show generations of very strong women. Strength is strength, and theirs was the strength to survive, so their great granddaughters could find a new way to express their own power. Sometimes I look at my oh so free daughters, and want to shout “say thank you”..I resist this urge.
sorry for sounding like a presumptuous jerk, but many of my generation related to the Clintons, perhaps too much.
O’s interview with ABC is going to be aired at noon PDT. It’s rumored that he came out in favor of gay marriage. I think that’s probably right, but I’m sure he tried to weasel out of the full impact of his statement by noting that it’s a “states’ rights” issue. If I’m correct, it’ll be the only time the weasel has supported the 10th Amdmt.’s curbs on federal power.
Anyone else have a prediction?
Credit where credit’s due. O takes the plunge: http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/abc-teases-same-sex-marriage-should-be-legal
Let’s see if the devil lies in the details (see my comment prediction above).
It’s a totally weasel statement by carefully wording it, “for me personally,” rather than “my position as President, and the policy my administration is adopting and we’ll work with Congress to legislate …”
All he’s done is all he ever does: say something to garner support for himself personally while having no intention of doing anything to change Federal laws governing same sex marriage.
Gays are going nuts praising Obama’s statement.
There’s even already a nifty new banner all over my Facebook feed with a poignant Messiah picture of The One beside the word “Evolved” with his trademark “o” in the middle of the word.
Here we go again.
Give the credit to Joe Biden’s loose lips, then, for forcing barry into this. Otherwise, he would have never.
It still will not be a plank on his platform.
Weasel.
Yep, agreed with you, Zal and Tamer. It was a weasel statement. Knew he’d fall back on that Tenth Amendmt. canard (an amendment for which he otherwise has NO respect or time).
Here’s what I tweeted appx. an hour ago:
Tweeted by: @NoEmptySuits
Dear Mr. @BarackObama, if a state banned #interracial marriage, would you say that’s a “states-rights” issue? No, of course you wouldn’t.
May 09, 12:30 PM via web
No way, Tam.
Biden was the canary in the coal mine following much research, analysis and discussion. What he said was carefully worded, scheduled and delivered.
You’re right it won’t be a plank on his platform. That’s what the “for me personally” was about.
But that hasn’t dampened gays cheering and telling one another we have to have his back in 2012 because of this huge risk he took on our behalf.
I agree….Biden was the trial balloon…the canary in the coal mine.
Gay marriage is a Civil Right. I swear sometimes I think he got his law degree from one of those schools that used to advertise on matchbook covers. His ‘base’ must have polled better than expected on this issue. My question is; why don’t those who fought so hard for their civil rights, fight just as hard for others’ ?
I’ve wondered that for a long time, sophie. But the past few years I wonder why gays would rather cheer empty words than fight for the 1000+ rights that Federal recognition of same sex marriage would grant us.
Very good piece: http://gawker.com/5909002/barack-obamas-bullshit-gay-marriage-announcement
OT..but uh oh…http://ca.news.yahoo.com/3-big-chinese-banks-enter-us-banking-market-185200086.html
There is so much at stake here including; surviving spouse rights, estate planning, health care, property rights, and unfortunately, division of property in a divorce, I could go on, many here are far better versed than I on the subject..If there are children involved, etc.
How a just society gets away with punishing a whole bloc of it’s people over being who they are,, is the biggest question How is this different from the back of the bus ? .It’s as if at some point, the culture said ‘come out, come out.’, and just a few brave souls did at first. After a huge crowd emerged from the shadows, society is now saying ‘go back, go back.’ That bell cannot be un-rung by the anarchists. May they all drown in their camel’s spit.
WOW! I guess even puppy love (of the worst sort!) has its limits:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/05/obamas-creepy-emails-and-ads.html