AOC and Republican misogynistic values

[mitsho]

So, has the gentleman representative of Florida reached his goal? Have his reelection chances grown? Or is that race lost anyways and he is angling for a position at Fox News?

Cause I can‘t find another rational reason to do such a thing...

 

[amadeus]

I thought he was in a relatively safe district. FL-3 last I checked voted GOP like +25?

 

[bernie14]

So, has the gentleman representative of Florida reached his goal? Have his reelection chances grown? Or is that race lost anyways and he is angling for a position at Fox News?

Cause I can‘t find another rational reason to do such a thing...

He's not running for reelection.

— during his first run, he pledged to limit himself to four terms in Washington.

He affirmed that pledge last year...

 

[amadeus]

On the one hand, principled. On the other, F’n B is not the language I’d use were I in Congress, and in public...

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Omfg the reporters wrote the original story without AOC pushing or asking them to, then it went viral, the Yoho "apologized", then AOC called him for fudging the apology. There is only one way to read this situation yet you insist on both sidesing it. It is befuddling. and maddening and I'm done trying

I'm still not even sure which "the original article" is, or if it's one I've seen. The one that seems to be the original one to me (at least from the stuff you've linked) is the one by Mike Lillis on the 21st of July. In this he mentions a reporter (singular) who overheard the "heated exchange". He doesn't say that the reporter was him, and the wording would seemingly imply it wasn't him. He doesn't say who the reporter was, or what they claimed to have heard (or not heard) in the heated exchange. The comment in question was also apparently not part of that heated exchange, but happened afterwards. And the account of the heated exchange contradicts AOC's own account of it. Maybe the entire account in that article is based on whatever the mystery reporter claims to have heard, but that's not really made clear. The only direct claim is that a reporter overheard a heated exchange. That doesn't tell me anything.

What I'm asking is:

a) Who is the reporter or reporters that overheard the exchange.
b) What, in their own words, do they say they heard. Specifically do they say if they heard the "f****** b****" comment.

I don't know why it's befuddling or maddening or why you can't work out what I'm asking. I've already said if you don't know if the above information is out there, or if you do know that it definitely isn't out there, then just say so. Then I can stop asking to be given links to it.

I'm not trying to pull a gotcha. I'm not saying that if that information isn't actually known publicly then it doesn't exist. I'm not saying that if you can't answer it then "you lose" or anything like that. I just want to know. I want to know because you're asking me to believe one side of a he said/she said story, and the only reason you're giving me to pick a side is the claim that there exists a witness to the events that can back up one side over the other. But all I've seen is an article that claims there was such a witness, but it doesn't say who they are or what version of events they back up.

hold up, let me mansplain how this situation I wasn't present for isn't actually misogynist

Isn't that kind of the key point? You weren't present for it either, but you're convinced it was.

Points for saying misogynist rather than misogynistic though.

 

[Hygro]

Not to me, but I have said some men are (2 words that both rhyme with "picks") which I would also think a gendered slur. After all, women don't have... picks.

I don't see a problem in those three words, but it sounds like other people do.

it backs women into a stereotyped corner more than men ever would be. For guys it’s “he’s insulting me!” For women it’s “he’s insulting me” + triggers to core identity. It’s a harder trip to the recipient for no more effort on the disher.


Look I’m not for moving the b word into the heinous words category even tho socially it’s possible. But I still know that contextually it’s bad in a similar efficacy so when that context comes up as it did we should treat it accordingly.

 

[Bugfatty300]

What if he is a Christian or a Mormon, a fan of Pink Floyd, the reader of Melville and Tolstoy and perhaps enjoys listening to Madonna? Should we abolish Christianity, incarcerate Madonna and burn all the vinyls and books we can get our hands on? He is just an *******, one out of many on every walk of life.

Yoho is a drop in the vast ocean of reasons why the GOP is an unsalvageable detriment to the nation.

 

[Crezth]

It does say something when quoted is the level of "argument" one resorts to, however.

I don’t know how someone can talk like this and not also be someone who gets the crap kicked out of them on a daily basis. Just speaking hypothetically.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Yoho is just a slimeball.

 

[Estebonrober]

Yoho is just a slimeball.

He has a history of being an ass which is why his defense is not believable. Everything about this story fits his character to a tee.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I don't know if it got lost in the noise but as soon as the Yoho story broke, Fox News made up a story about a reporter calling the White House press secretary a b-word during a press session and ran with it. It was completely fabricated but their talking heads (and the press secretary herself) kept talking about it as if it maybe happened. It turns out that projection can even work retroactively.

The Yoho incident also reminded me how toxic LinkedIn can be as someone posted a link to the story and the comments were bombarded with hate speech from old white dudes.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Yoho is just a slimeball.

He has a history of being an ass which is why his defense is not believable. Everything about this story fits his character to a tee.

I saw somewhere a mild defense of Yoho, on the order of, "He was misheard, he didn't actually say that", and my first thought was, "Aren't you, as a Republican and/or a Conservative, bothered that a story about one of your congresspeople being a [tool] is just so darned believable?" It just seems so plausible that a man would say something like that to a woman.* Yes, I know not all Republicans are misogynist, White Power thugs, but at what point do we say "our house is toxic, we need to do something about it"?

The Catholic Church, college fraternities and police departments are in the same boat. Of course not all priests are pedophiles, not all frat brothers are rapists, and not all cops are thugs, but so many of them have been that when I hear a new horror-story, I'm like "oh, another one - today must be a day that ends with a Y." The priests and cops that aren't pedophiles and thugs either need to do something to fix the problem or find another line of work, and when I hear that a college is closing down fraternities, I totally believe that the rot was so deep in the walls that knocking the building down was the least-bad option.

I know individualism is part of the conservative ethos, but so are loyalty and duty and allegiance. To anyone who says "Not all cops are thugs", I would say, "Well, good, then the ones who aren't can get rid of the ones who are, and everybody'll be happy." Instead, the "good" cops fight tooth-and-nail to prevent even an ounce of change.



* I mean, let's face it, a young, pretty, petite woman of color probably gets all kinds of [garbage] thrown at her, on a near-daily basis. The fact that this particular woman is also a famous, outspoken, Left-wing congressperson may just be icing on the cake. iirc, Ocasio-Cortez said that Yoho's parting shot didn't even register with her until she started reading about it later, and I totally believe that, too. I'd guess that if she got into it with every blowhard she meets, she wouldn't have time for anything else.

 

[Estebonrober]

I saw somewhere a mild defense of Yoho, on the order of, "He was misheard, he didn't actually say that", and my first thought was, "Aren't you, as a Republican and/or a Conservative, bothered that a story about one of your congresspeople being a [tool] is just so darned believable?" It just seems so plausible that a man would say something like that to a woman.* Yes, I know not all Republicans are misogynist, White Power thugs, but at what point do we say "our house is toxic, we need to do something about it"?

They tried to do this when Roger Stone said "why do I have to argue with this negro?" live on a radio show. The level of my disbelief is just surreal.

 

[EgonSpengler]

[...]at what point do we say "our house is toxic, we need to do something about it"?

*facepalm* It occurs to me that the Republican Party has already done this part. After Mitt Romney's loss to Barack Obama in 2012, the Republican National Committee commissioned and published a report, a kind of "post mortem" with the now-ironic title The Growth and Opportunity Project.

ABC News, 18 March 2013 - "RNC completes 'autopsy' on 2012 loss, calls for inclusion, not policy changes"

[Former RNC Chair Reince Priebus] noted that the party's policies are fundamentally sound but require a softer tone and broader outreach, include a stronger push for African-American, Latino, Asian, women and gay voters.

[...]

"Public perception of our party is at record lows," [Florida GOP strategist and project co-chair] Sally Bradshaw said. "Young voters are increasingly rolling their eyes at what the party represents and many minorities think Republicans don't like them or don't want them in our country. When someone rolls their eyes at us they aren't likely to open their ears to us."

[...]

The theme of inclusion continued with Glenn McColl, a national committeeman from South Carolina who insisted the party seems to some as "intolerant and unaccepting of differing points of view."

"If our party isn't welcoming and inclusive young people and increasingly other voters will continue to tune us out," McColl said. "The party should be proud of its conservative principles but just because someone disagrees with us on 20 percent of the issues does not mean we can't come together on the rest of the issues we do agree on."

So, yeah. My post above isn't saying anything about Republicans that they hadn't already figured out themselves, years ago. Their house was toxic. They needed to do something about it. And here we are, eight years later, with a GOP congressman calling a Latina congresswoman a [witch] in front of everybody. Great job, guys. Remind me to buy you a beer someday.

 

[GenMarshall]

So in essence the Republican Party has been holding off cleaning its house for years?!

 

[AmazonQueen]

So in essence the Republican Party has been holding off cleaning its house for years?!

And this is the party of decency and family values

 

[Lexicus]

So in essence the Republican Party has been holding off cleaning its house for years?!

Nope. It turns out the Republican Party is actually the dumpster where all the filth lives.

 

[GenMarshall]

Nope. It turns out the Republican Party is actually the dumpster where all the filth lives.

I was picturing more of a house overflowing with garbage coming out of the windows. A dumpster is too generous IMO.

And this is the party of decency and family values

Of course, not surprised they resort to false advertisement.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I don’t know how someone can talk like this and not also be someone who gets the crap kicked out of them on a daily basis. Just speaking hypothetically.

You're hypothesising about how you don't know something? Does that mean you do know how someone can talk like that and not also be someone who gets the crap kicked out of them on a daily basis?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

The fact that this particular woman is also a famous, outspoken, Left-wing congressperson may just be icing on the cake. iirc, Ocasio-Cortez said that Yoho's parting shot didn't even register with her until she started reading about it later, and I totally believe that, too.

Oh okay... so even she didn't hear it said? I was wondering about that because I hadn't been able to find any such claim from her directly.

So on the one hand we have an article that contains an account of the exchange that happened that already diverges from AOC's in other respects, and contains the claim that an unnamed (as far as I can tell) reporter "overheard the heated exchange", and then goes on the make the claim that Yoho said the B-word, which presumably must be based on the testimony of this unnamed reporter, but even that isn't made clear. Literally no-one else in the universe claims to have heard the slur. The guy accused of saying it denies it.

So it's not even he said/she said, it's he said/she didn't say, but some anonymous person did say, perhaps.

And yet somehow not being 100% convinced it happened is "wilful denial to hold a narrative" and also... "mansplaining"?!