- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm #599602
DPMemberPer elikapeka in another post:
I can remember one woman politician who had a sex scandal – US Rep Helen Chenoweth from Idaho. Other than that, can’t think of one.
I think these scandals at this level happen more often with men because as a general rule, women are attracted to powerful men. Men are not attracted to powerful women.
That got me thinking, and it was not too long ere I had come up with a few names of powerful women who were involved in a sex-related scandal of some kind.
First there was Eve. Granted, she was probably not real, and granted that the scandal she was involved in was not caused by sex. On the other hand, she was a powerful woman, and her scandalous behavior did eventually end in sex.
And what about Cleopatra? According to Bertolt Brecht’s “Song of Solomon,”
Two emperors died
to serve her lust.
She whored herself to death, yes she did
and withered into lovely dust.
And then there was Catherine the Great. Forget that nonsense about her and a horse. She had plenty of other lovers well qualified to satisfy her, including one who happened to be her Minister of War.
And don’t forget Amy Semple McPherson. McPherson was a politically astute and powerful radio evangelist of the 1920s. She disappeared one spring day in 1926 (while swimming) initiating a nationwide manhunt. McPherson later turned up in Mexico, claiming to have been drugged and kidnapped. However, evidence that emerged during a grand jury investigation strongly suggested that McPherson had spent the whole ordeal of her “kidnapping” shacked up with a man who was married to someone else.
So, although I agree with elikapeka that women in politics are the exception when it comes to sexual naughtiness, they are not absent from the rolls. Perhaps, as someone else has said, they lack only the opportunity. So just give them time. I am confident that they’ll catch up.
July 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm #728409
metrognomeParticipantDP — as there are conflicting opinions on whether women cheat as much or more than men, it may be more accurate to say that women in politics *getting caught* is the exception. Could be they are fooling around just as much or more and just aren’t as brazen (methinks men need to brag about their conquests even if it isn’t very smart) … or choose partners who can keep their mouths shut.
July 4, 2011 at 5:43 pm #728410
dobroParticipantInteresting that examples from your research include a mythological person, two historical women (how much of their story is fact or fiction we can’t know) and a media figure from almost a century ago. Kind of proving the point that we can’t point to any contemporary examples of female politicians engaging in the same kind of scandals that men do.
Maybe that was your point. If so, well done!
A thought: if we want to turn up some gender neutral scandal look for money, bribes, financial corruption. I’ll bet we can find some equal opportunity scandalizing there.
July 4, 2011 at 7:47 pm #728411
KBearParticipantHelen Chenoweth.
July 4, 2011 at 7:58 pm #728412
DPMemberScandal (sexual or otherwise) is not a major problem for women in politics. However, there still IS a problem with women in politics, as I see it, and that’s that most such women try too hard to be “one of the boys.”
When American women got the vote nationally, who did they help vote in as President. Warren G. Harding! —The most status quo candidate imaginable.
Hilary Clinton was supposed to be a strong, independent-minded woman, right? But after she became a Senator she hopped right onto the war wagon with George W. Bush. (Clinton was one of the biggest hawks in the Senate, in fact, castigating GWB for being insufficiently resolute against Saddam.)
Too, I find it interesting that some of the most prominent female politicians nowadays are actually on the Right. People like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachman, and Christine O’Donnell. What’s up with that?
Sure there are some women who, once they reach office, stick to what we would expect as a “female” agenda (e.g., peace, ecology, healthcare for children). But mostly what I see is the girls trying to out-boy the boys.
What does this tell us? One of three things:
1) That women are still too new (or too few) in Congress to carve out a feminist agenda and stick to it.
2) That there is no such thing as a feminist agenda.
3) That women are not natural politicians.
I don’t want to be tarred and feathered, so I’m going to go with #1. I say women are just too new at this politics thing to have adopted all the political trappings that we expect from men (including the sexual scandals). And I don’t think of this as a gender-specific phenomenon either. It seems to apply to all political minorities, in fact. New kids on the block always just seem to try extra hard to blend in.
Consider Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice. They both held extremely powerful positions in the Bush Cabinet. They could have charted their own course at the White House, and yet, in the end, all they really wanted to do was fit in. So much so that they were willing to go right along with the boss as he embarked on one of the cruellest follies of modern times.
Or consider President Obama. He’s spent most of his term giving away the store — and disillusioning millions of ardent fans in the process — just so his enemies won’t be able to impugn him as being too Black, too radical.
Maybe it all gets down to people at all levels of power just wanting to be part of a herd, regardless of any “defining” characteristics they might have. Somebody famous (Bertrand Russell? Eric Hoffer?) said that most people, when given the choice to do anything they want, will choose to follow others.
Starting with Adam.
July 4, 2011 at 9:24 pm #728413
dobroParticipantHow about Barbara Boxer? Nancy Pelosi? Kirsten Gillibrand? Just a few women in politics that have been out front for a progressive agenda. And I would argue a humanist rather than feminist agenda. (Humanism includes feminism in my view).
Calling Palin,Bachmann, and O’Donnell “prominent” politicians refers only to their media hype. None of them hold a candle to the hard working, get stuff done women I mentioned.
I agree with you on Hilary Clinton but I think she’s a special case having been First Lady and had to prove her “toughness” in a lot of ways other women in politics haven’t.
I disagree with you on Pres Obama. I don’t think he’s “given away the store”. I do think he’s faced the worst situations and the most virulent, hateful (I would say evil) opposition since the Civil War era and is, in many ways, pulling us thru it. That’s another subject tho.
July 4, 2011 at 10:27 pm #728414
DPMemberdobro:
Boxer I like.
Pelosi on the other hand, is a pretty average Democrat. She came up in the ranks slowly, and her stand on issues has reflected that.
True, Pelosi voted against the Iraq invasion.
She’s also been solidly pro-health care reform.
Marriage equality? –Check.
Abortion rights? –Check.
All good “humanist” stands.
However . . .
Pelosi’s also been a staunch supporter of Israel (looking the other way on settlements and other human rights abuses) and has voted for every single war appropriations bill.
Voted for the first USAPatriot Act.
Voted against impeaching George W. Bush.
Trusted the CIA on waterboarding, WMDs, etc. then said the CIA had lied to her. (As if that weren’t their whole raison d’etre.)
Does Pelosi’s overall record qualify her as being “out front for the progressive agenda”? Well if that’s out front, I’d hate to see what things are like back in the rear . . .
As to Obama, I agree with you that he’s up against some inhuman opposition. Personally, I like the guy. A lot. But that doesn’t stop me from calling it like I see it. He did give away the store.
Obama caved on green jobs (let Van Jones go for no good reason.)
Caved on Wall Street reform.
Caved on health care reform.
What’s he gotten so far? A couple of Supreme Court appointments and “Cash for Clunkers.” That’s about it.
Oh yeah, and he killed Bin Laden.
And he’s going to end the war in Afghanistan.
(Fingers crossed.)
July 4, 2011 at 11:24 pm #728415
dobroParticipantI think Pelosi’s overall record is pretty good. She passed more progressive bills thru the House (only to have them killed in the Senate) than any other Speaker I can think of. I don’t agree with everything she stands for but believing the same way I do on every single issue is not a requirement for me to support a politician. I realize that there are indeed political calculations that figure into some of that stuff. I’m willing to accept a preponderance of agreement.
BTW, those 2 Supreme Court appointments (and the one or more to come) are VERY important, not really to be sluffed off with Cash for Clunkers IMO.
July 4, 2011 at 11:54 pm #728416
DPMemberOh, I forgot . . . ending Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell.
Bu-uh-uh-ut . . . counterbalanced by failing to close Guantanamo Bay.
But yeah, SCOTUS appointments = important. And Obama got them right. On the other hand, the women Obama nominated were well-qualified and not polarizing, so there was no credible opposition to them. But what would he have done if he’d had to really fight for these people?
[Shudder]
Unlike many of my peacenik friends, I can’t say I’m disappointed in Obama on Afghanistan. After all, Obama never promised to end the war, and so I wasn’t really expecting him to. And yet, here he is, standing up to some of the generals who wanted to drag it out indefinitely. That’s a point in his favor in my book. His timing was excellent too, I might add.
If Obama looks like he’s going to make good on his commitment to pull out of Afghanistan by 2014, I may just vote for him the next time around. Peace is my big issue, and I will vote against any national candidate who isn’t working to bring it about through just means.
July 5, 2011 at 12:34 am #728417
Genesee HillParticipantI think if you all look at the number of women versus the number of men in Congress, this might shed some light on something. I will leave it to kootch to analyze it ad nauseum, however.
I won’t offer anymore thoughts on this subject, because I am certain kootch will cover every one of them.
Now, I will listen to the fireworks…..
July 5, 2011 at 12:47 am #728418
velo_nutParticipantHey… give women a break. They make less then us and we own more.
well… they own more yarn barns and throw pillows.
C’mon… kidding, kidding.
July 5, 2011 at 1:23 am #728419
DPMemberNote: Rwanda (!) is currently the only country where a majority of parliamentarians are women.
Here’s an interactive map of female representation in national government by country:
Next in line behind Rwanda are:
Sweden (46% women)
South Africa (44%)
Iceland (43%)
–and then a whole bunch of countries that come in between 20% and 40%.
At 16.8%, the U.S. ranks on the dim end of the scale. But cheer up, ladies. At least we’re still ahead of:
Saudi Arabia (0%)*
Mongolia (3.9%)
Brazil (8.8%)
**************************************************************************************
*Women in Saudi can’t drive anyway, and they can’t go in taxis with strange men, so if elected, how would they get to their jobs? Nobody there gets around by camel any more. Not even the camels.
July 5, 2011 at 3:20 am #728420
kootchmanMemberWhat’s to analyze? At 52% of the population, they hold the absolute voting majority. “New” to Congress… what time has to pass before “new” becomes old? 10 years? 1000 years?. There have been some very tough women in Congress for decades. Some I confess to being thrilled they are gone..but tough and capable legislators. What a dumbas comment t that they are the archangels of child welfare, peace, and if only they had control…the world would be a better place. Hilary was the head cheerleader for this last incursion into Libya. Funny thing is the right actually soooo far ahead in this area. Just ask the “Corpseman in Chief” who has his BVD’s in a bunch.
July 5, 2011 at 3:24 am #728421
kootchmanMemberI wonder… in which “57” states do women hold the voting majority…damn Obama ….just when the numbers looked reassuring…he goes off and conjours up another 7 states… is that fair?
July 5, 2011 at 3:37 am #728422
dobroParticipantHere’s an article on the first woman elected to the House of Reps.
http://theendlessfurther.com/?p=858
Something to cleanse your palette after that last blast of non-sequiters.
July 5, 2011 at 7:49 am #728423
angelescrestParticipantThank you, Dobro!
July 5, 2011 at 4:42 pm #728424
waynsterParticipanthmmm me thinks you best look up the state that gave women voting rights first under the suffrage act and the first female governor and the yr might surpise you. The State had lots of first when it came to women in politics……hint its the 44th state july 10th 1890.
July 6, 2011 at 12:25 pm #728425
JoBParticipantHilary’s greatest downfall has always been that she is a hawk…
i think it had something to do with Jimmy Carter’s “change of heart” during her formative political years…
she isn’t the only tough minded hawk who comes to mind when i think of political women… history is littered with recent examples.
but i would point out that being hawkish when it comes to military matters hasn’t been their only legacy.
not even hilary’s.
you might look up her Senate record.
July 8, 2011 at 7:53 am #728426
HMC RichParticipantSomeone on this blog once said to me that history doesn’t matter (if it supports a Republican point). Glad to see history suriviving again. Welcome Back History.
There was a little girl who mostly grew up in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. She was a great leader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golda_Meir
All good things lead back to Wisconsin. Just Kidding.
July 8, 2011 at 4:31 pm #728427
DPMemberRich: Golda Meir might have been great in some ways, but she had the same moral blemish that every leader of Israel has inherited since the state was founded — namely, a refusal to deal fairly with the Palestinians. In Meir’s case, she took it to the point of self-delusion, refusing to see what was right in front of her face:
There is no such thing as a Palestinian people… It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn’t exist.
–Golda Meir
************************************************************************************
For other telling quotes from Israeli leaders go here:
July 9, 2011 at 3:14 am #728428
JoBParticipantHMCRich…
I have always had an interest in History.
it’s those fractured fairy tales that Republicans peddle that I don’t have much use for.
DP…
Being a woman didn’t make Golda any smarter when it came to the Palestinian questions than any other leader of Israel.
In fact.. being a woman doesn’t guarantee wisdom at all:(
but it does increase the odds ;->
July 10, 2011 at 8:11 am #728429
SonomaParticipantI love it when my fellow “liberals” trash Israel but ignore the repression that Muslim nations inflict upon their own people. And while the Israeli people may not always agree with their government’s policies, they are free to speak out without fear for their lives. Oh, and by the way, a couple of women politicians I admire: Gabby Giffords and Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Bachman makes Palin look progressive in comparison. And the former needs to ease up on the Botox. She’s toxic enough as is.
July 10, 2011 at 2:35 pm #728430
JoBParticipantSonoma…
Have we reached a point as liberals where we can no longer disagree with a single policy without being labeled as trashing a nation?
the tragedy with Israel’s policy is that it has focused entirely on a them or us equation…
denying the existence of a nation doesn’t justify interning a people…
a lesson you would think they would understand all too well.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.