Friday Feminist Fuck You: Regina Benjamin Fat-Haters

This week in the crusade against women of color in leadership positions we have people calling Regina Benjamin fat. Charming.

I haven’t done a video in a while (stage fright!) but I think the only way to reply to the fat-hate against Regina Benjamin is with a resounding “Fuck You!” Listen to me ramble. Transcript after the jump.


That last few weeks have shown us that when Conservatives are up against a wall they are very limited in their ability to combat with arguments so they focus on arguments that focus on characteristics and, when they can’t disqualify someone’s credit or merit, they make comments about them being fiery, as in the case of Sotomayor or they say they are fat which is the latest hee-haw over the appointee for Surgeon General Regina Benjamin who is by any accounts one of the most qualified people to be nominated for surgeon general. Given specifically the location that she has worked in and her personal and professional would make an amazing surgeon general and would definitely understand some of our most disenfranchised in need of healthcare and health advice.
So, naturally after her pic was posted multiple forums around the country have decried her body mass index as though this is somehow an indication of her lack of health and I think what is really sad about it is not necessarily that we have a superficial culture and we have a superficial online culture people say what they say, but there are news anchors that have also joined in on this..and they think that because she is overweight this disqualifies her for SG. Assuming that she is fat.
1. They have never met the woman, they have no idea.
2. Weight is something that is very subjective to a person. Alot of misinformation is out about what is considered obese, what is not considered obese and a lot of it is fat-hating and fat-shaming and it is to keep women complacent in hating their bodies and therefore not feeling good about themselves and not interacting with the world in effective ways. It is a means of social control and it is a means of emotional and psychological control that has wreaked havoc and terror on women across the country. So calling her fat is just an extension of this same sexist trajectory.
3. Finally, she is obviously extremely qualified and it is interesting because if she was a man no one would think to say she is fat because it is only women that are judged by what they look like and whether that is going to determine whether they are qualified to do the job, as opposed to men that are just evaluated in whether they can do the job.
So fuck you to everyone that has been fat-hating all week long on Regina Benjamin. She is awesome and I can’t wait to have her as part of this administration.

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

118 Comments

  1. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

    “it is only women that are judged by what they look like and whether that is going to determine whether they are qualified to do the job, as opposed to men that are just evaluated in whether they can do the job.”
    This is completely false. Stop making stuff up about what life is like for men.

  2. LalaReina
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

    Excellent entry Samhita (I always resist the urge to call you “Sammi” cuz I nickname everybody I like :) What makes my head hurt is no matter how ridiculous the gop charges are they still get treated as legitimate in the media, I like on time to hear a collective “get the fuck outta here” outside of the Daily Show.

  3. Samhita
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think I am making stuff up and I would never deny that there are pressures on men to look a certain way. I am talking specifically about women in the public eye, how women look wrt to work and to politics. They are always judged by the public and news media for how they look.

  4. Lynne C.
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

    She’s not making stuff up. Have you ever watched or payed attention to the news? When is the last time a man or male political figure was judged on his looks in terms of being able to perform at his job? And how often was that in comparison to female political figures, such as Hilary’s cleavage and “looking old or distressed”; Sotomayor’s being too “bitchy” or “hostile” (ok, maybe that’s not looks, but it IS a personal judgment), the fact that she’s Latina or Hispanic (as if that has ANYTHING to do with her performance); Michele Obama’s arms, fashion choices, weight; Sarah Palin’s looks, calling her a VPILF, etc; and now Regina Benjamin’s weight.
    Tell me, when does it stop? And how did it come about that we got such immature people making judgments about political issues to begin with?
    And you want to tell me Samhita is making stuff up? Are you serious?

  5. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

    Then why not articulate your perfectly legitimate critique of the way women are treated without the completely false, gratuitous and weird male-bashing thrown in? If you’d said that women are under more pressure no one reasonable would have argued, as that’s obviously true. Instead you decided to claim that men are judged “just” on qualifications and never on looks. If you want to know about being a man, ask. If you want to know how looks affect men’s careers on a societal level, there’s a ton of research. If you don’t care, fine, then just don’t write about it. But blanket claims like that are ridiculous according to common sense, men’s experiences, and research doesn’t strengthen your point any. It just contaminates your (ENTIRELY CORRECT) attack on Benjamin’s weight critics with a wholly unnecessary display of ignorance and contempt for men.

  6. Tara K.
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

    Excellent post.
    I think it’s high-fucking-time that we start realizing “thin” does not equal “natural.” For some people, thin is natural. For others, it is not. And it’s just silly to keep promoting this idea that it’s our default. As a girl who goes to the gym 3-4 times a week, avoids eating sugar and red meats, and tries really hard to make healthy food choices all the time, I’ve realized that my size 14/16 self is just natural for me. The only way I’ve ever been able to get below it is through very unhealthy eating habits of minimal intake (that was a long time ago), and that certainly wasn’t natural.
    Thank you, Samhita.
    I sometimes wonder how much the invention of video damned women to this kind of scrutiny. I know mass production enabled society to homogenize beauty ideals, but I think the video (and all of it’s afterthoughts) allowed all women to be known for their appearance as soon as anyone heard their names.

  7. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

    Ask someone who saw Kennedy and Nixon debate on TV if looks were a factor. Obama, McCain, Kerry, Gore and Pres. Clinton’s appearances all got a great deal of ridiculous attention. Was it on the same scale as the frivolous attention to Sen. Clinton or Sec of State Rice’s, or God help us Gov Palin’s? No, of course not, which is why you’ll notice I didn’t claim or imply or in any way indicated that I believe there’s any kind of parity.
    “And you want to tell me Samhita is making stuff up?”
    I wanted to tell her, not you. But yes, in saying that “only women that are judged by what they look like and whether that is going to determine whether they are qualified to do the job, as opposed to men that are just evaluated in whether they can do the job” she was “making stuff up”. Where do you think the insight came from?

  8. emmainfiniti.livejournal.com
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

    Irony: the advertisement beneath your post says “lose 25 pounds of stomach fat… in 3 weeks… as seen on ABC.”

  9. HoyaGuy
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    There’s a fairly high chance this will be calling ‘trolling’ and possibly deleted, but so be it.
    The position of Surgeon General is distinctly different from most being, say, a Senator.
    For all of those examples that you mentioned, the criticism was unrelated to the job. Whether Sarah Palin is attractive has nothing to do with her ability to govern a state.
    There is a big difference when the primary role of the position is to be the government’s primary spokesperson on public health. Whether or not she is obese IS actually relevant to her job.
    I don’t think you would be hearing this same nearly as often if she were nominated for, say, Solicitor General.
    Now, whether it should be a significant barrier is a slightly different matter, especially given what we do not know about her personal lifestyle and genetic makeup. I am of the opinion that she is most definitely qualified for the position and should be confirmed. But it is not entirely irrelevant in the way that most of your examples are.
    And yes, I would say the same thing about a male nominee.

  10. smiley
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    Aleks,
    We can also add Silvio Berlusconi’s hair transplant. Nicolas Sarkozy’s height. Francois Mitterand’s teeth.

  11. Ariel
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

    Methinks you have blown this out of proportion just a wee bit. I wouldn’t equate her statement with contempt and hatred of men. I do think she could have qualified her statement, but calling it a display of misandry is a bit over the top.

  12. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    Perhaps. I think her habit of throwing un-thought-through and fairly irrelevant comments about how utterly easy men have everything speaks to something pretty nasty.

  13. LalaReina
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

    Here’s what I hate: every time we raise an issue in terms of how women are treated as a whole in society one can always sidetrack the entire conversation with “men have that too”. We know it is not the same to any degree unless we are being disingenuous.

  14. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

    Edwards’ hair, although admittedly the man himself is a peacock.

  15. Qantaqa
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

    As a young woman who has hated her body to the point of illness (thank God that’s over), the fat-shaming is nothing new. However, awareness of it is increasing, thanks to people like you, Samhita.
    If you do a quick search for Dr. Benjamin, you will read a number of opinions, many of which agree with the viewpoint held in this post: why is it an issue, and aren’t critics missing the point? So, there is hope for public opinion yet.
    I also searched for C. Everett Koop (the only other S.G. I am aware of, thanks to the Simpsons), and I found a lot of people wondering why his weight wasn’t criticized, which may be a response to some of the comments here.

  16. DeafBrownTrash
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    nobody ever criticized Surgeon General Koop for being overweight. Oh, because he was a man… yep.

  17. Samhita
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    Did you just accuse me of “male-bashing?” What are you going to call me next? A woman’s libber?
    C’mon dude, I did one take…if it offended you so much, go do a video on your own. You can see how hard it is to post something and then get scrutinized over and over. I am not feeling you or your line of commenting. I won’t ban you, unless you give me reason to, but seriously stop staying I am “male-bashing..” or other things insinuating my inability to make accurate statements.
    The only people that generally cry, “what about the menz??” are MRA’s…imagine the difference if you had said, “actually Samhita I think you are overlooking the way men feel pressure..” verse “Samhita you lying male-basher!!!” It begets a different response.
    Let’s keep this thread about the actual point of the post. The way Regina Benjamin is being treated by the media.

  18. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

    Of course it’s not to the same degree. I said that it wasn’t. My issue was with Samhita’s claim that “it is only women that are judged by what they look like and whether that is going to determine whether they are qualified to do the job, as opposed to men that are just evaluated in whether they can do the job.” If the topic wasn’t men, why through that jab in there at all?

  19. Ariel
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

    I was wondering if anyone was going to mention him.

  20. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

    No, nor am I going to call you a Communist, a sorcerer or a German sympathizer. Any other hypotheticals to get out of the way?
    Whether you ban me is of course up to you. Before you do, can you tell me how you came to the conclusion that “it is only women that are judged by what they look like and whether that is going to determine whether they are qualified to do the job, as opposed to men that are just evaluated in whether they can do the job”?

  21. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

    Either I didn’t see the last two paragraphs of your comment or they were added after I hit reply. I didn’t accuse you of lying, I accused you of not knowing what you were talking about when you claimed that men are never judged by their appearances.

  22. Samhita
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

    Seen dude, men are judged too. But not nearly in the same way or to the same extent. Like I said, I did one take of the video. Give it a try.
    Let’s not distract the conversation to “what about the menz!!!??”
    The way she is being treated is a function of misogyny and sexism. The fact that men might also be judged for how they look doesn’t change that fact at all.

  23. BodyPart
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    VADM Koop pictured here:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/C_Everett_Koop.jpg
    He could be sucking in his beer belly!
    Nobody ragged on VADM Koop for being obese (doesn’t look like it, thought he could be overweight) because the national hysteria over obesity wasn’t there when he was Surgeon General. This hystera has come into being only over the last decade.

  24. aleks
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

    “The way she is being treated is a function of misogyny and sexism. The fact that men might also be judged for how they look doesn’t change that fact at all.”
    I didn’t challenge that fact at all, I agreed with it without reservation. I said that it was obviously true and that only unreasonable people would argue with it.
    “Let’s not distract the conversation to ‘what about the menz!!!??’”
    I’m the one who asked why those menz needed to be brought up at all. It’s the potshot I thought was both irrelevant and false, I complimented and agreed with the rest of the post. MRA? Really?

  25. BodyPart
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

    “Like I said, I did one take of the video. Give it a try.”
    Why don’t you polish your script and rehearse before going on camera? And maybe take whatever number of takes it takes until it is good enough? As far as I know the “Friday Fuck You”s are not live events. Am I right?

  26. Colette Wedding
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

    Nixon got “attention” for appearing sweating and incompetent, but was still eventually elected president. Clinton (Bill) at one point got jabs for his weight gain, but that was nurf and Obama’s one picture had people talking for a little while. There was NOT a huge stink about it and there certainly wasn’t a huge stink about whether it meant they could do the job or not (unfortunately for Nixon, it should have. SOMETHING should have…).

  27. Samhita
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:06 pm | Permalink

    Wow, you must think I have a lot of time on my hands. Again, what does this have to do with the OP. It was one word, one line. Frankly, I think you guys are trying to troll. Prove me wrong.

  28. BodyPart
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

    “Nixon got \”attention\” for appearing sweating and incompetent, but was still eventually elected president.”
    In fact people hearing the debate on the radio thought Nixon did better.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1960#Debates
    That you made the above statement shows that you yourself judged Nixon based on his appearance thus proving aleks’ point.
    Nixon learned from this the lesson that looks matter (even to men) and did not make the same mistakes in 1968 and 1972 (of course Watergate helped in 1972).

  29. BodyPart
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

    “Frankly, I think you guys are trying to troll. Prove me wrong.”
    Unfortunately the burden of proof falls on the accuser :)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
    “Wow, you must think I have a lot of time on my hands.”
    If you are serious and passionate about something, do it well. OK, I concede, taking more than two takes are maybe excessive for the purpose here but is asking for a rigorous, well written rant really all that much?
    “It was one word, one line.”
    That is what Joe Biden would have said.
    http://www.feministing.com/archives/016866.html

  30. Samhita
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

    I am so flattered that you would compare my influence to that of Joe Biden.

  31. puckalish
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

    It’s not a fucking jab, dude… it’s statement of fact… albeit, maybe a little too hyperbolic for you, but pretty damned true… I’ve sat on hiring committees and I’ve seen how public figures are treated… It’s pretty damn obvious that women are explicitly judged on appearance almost before all else and men, most certainly, are not, though it can, at times, figure into popular perception.
    Also, it’s really different to weigh in to the conversation saying, “Well, I think men do actually face different treatment based on appearance, though it may not be close to the sort women face by several orders of magnitude” than to start off the comment thread by saying “stop making stuff up.”
    I mean, come on! “completely false, gratuitous and weird male-bashing”??? All she said is that, if Benjamin were a man, this conversation wouldn’t be happening. Which, if you look at, say C. Everett Koop, you’d realize is completely accurate. For elected office, it’s totally different… it’s a fucking popularity contest – of course, appearance matters… but for an appointed position, it’s kind of unheard of for a man to catch flak for being fat.
    Even if Koop had been prevented from being SG because of his weight, Samhita may have been wrong, but certainly not committing a “gratuitous and weird male-bashing.” That’s just ridiculous. Get over yourself…
    Look, I’m sorry you feel so threatened by Samhita, but take a step back and realize that your troubles aren’t the most important thing in the world right now and then maybe that male-anxious defensiveness will slip away like muscle tension in a warm mineral salt bath.

  32. JustACommenter
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

    I bet in the world of Feministing you are atleast as influential as Joe Biden :)
    Am I not right?

  33. JustACommenter
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    “All she said is that, if Benjamin were a man, this conversation wouldn’t be happening. Which, if you look at, say C. Everett Koop, you’d realize is completely accurate.”
    Unfortunately for your logic VADM Koop was Surgeon General from 1982-1989. The anti-obesity hysteria was non-existent then. I am pretty sure that in today’s climate Michael Moore would not be appointed and/or confirmed as Surgeon General.

  34. Lynne C.
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

    Because this site is called “Feministing”, is a feminist website, and the whole premise of feminism is the equality of women. She was comparing how women are judged on their looks often, where men wouldn’t be, and she was emphasizing that point by stating a contrast. She did have a purpose and a reason to throw that comparison in her rant, and it was a legitimate and truthful comparison. There HAVE been surgeon generals, doctors, and health advisers that by today’s standards would be considered overweight, and yet they were not judged or scrutinized to the same degree that Regina Bejamin is. The fact that she’s a WOMAN makes her weight stick out more than a man’s.

  35. Lynne C.
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 7:44 pm | Permalink

    Maybe not Michael Moore, but a man the size of Regina Benjamin (who is not drastically overweight by any means) probably would not go under this kind of scrutiny at all.

  36. JustACommenter
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

    “There HAVE been surgeon generals, doctors, and health advisers that by today’s standards would be considered overweight, and yet they were not judged or scrutinized to the same degree that Regina Bejamin is.”
    You hit it on the head when you said “today’s standard”. Unfortunately by definition they were appointed according to the standards of their day when we did not have this anti-obesity, anti-fat hysteria. In fact I would be pretty sure that some of our previous Surgeons-General also partook of the pleasures of tobacco.
    Does that mean you would take up the cudgels and fight for a nominee to the position of Surgeon General if s/he was a smoker?

  37. Gexx
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

    What I think is most amazing is that people think that her not fitting into their view of “fit” means they can also choose to not consider of acknowledge that she:
    1 – has been awarded a Macarthur Genius Grant. GENIUS GRANT, PEOPLE!
    2 – rebuilt her clinic from scratch after hurricanes
    3 – accepts shellfish and fish instead of money from her poorer patients
    4 – after hurricanes she went door to door to check on certain patients
    If I was dealing with all of this, I doubt I would have the time for a daily aerobics class, bio-engineered diet food, surgically removing the “publicly offending body part,” or any other tactic to fit her critics’ idea of thin=healthy.
    I think that Regina Benjamin is exactly what we need. She has been a part of a health care system that has underserved portions of our population. Now she has a chance to be the country’s foremost spokesperson on public health.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if this weight issue is a tactic of the part of the population who is scared of *another* woman of color in *another* public office. But this way, they don’t “sound racist.”
    (copied from a comment I posted at http://community.feministing.com/2009/07/to-fat-to-be-surgeon-general.html)

  38. kinsella
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    I don’t know, I think if Samhita had just owned this one and admitted she overstated her claim instead of getting defensive, this wouldn’t have been a derail at all. We all know what she meant, she said it in a way someone took issue with (not without justification)- it was unnecessary for it to turn into an argument.

  39. puckalish
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 9:40 pm | Permalink

    I’d be willing to bet dollars to donuts that a man the size of Benjamin (or Koop) would have no problem getting appointed to that position today.
    Further, if the issue weren’t gendered why would this “No Chubbies” dude on Fox start off his rant stating “this is going to anger a lot of your female audience”? I mean, really… The same commentary, time and again, that shames Benjamin for her body is blatantly gendered. To suggest otherwise would require ignoring folks’ actual words. I mean, you don’t even have to read anything into this shit, ‘cos they come out and say it. Btw, I’m surprised at how pleased I was with Neil Cavuto in that interview: “if she’s 50-60 lbs overweight, then I’m another planet.”

  40. puckalish
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 10:05 pm | Permalink

    What potshot, though? She just said that men aren’t judged based on their appearance. That’s not a potshot, even if we assume it is inaccurate… It’s still really frickin’ hard to take that as an insult to or attack on men.

  41. SarahMC
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

    Dude, I think you and the other bros who’ve taken over this site need to start http://www.SamhitaMukhopadhyayWatch.com or something. It might make you feel better.

  42. rebekah
    Posted July 24, 2009 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

    go samhita!
    men do not have the same pressures from society placed on them when determining if they are qualifies for a position. It seems that as a society we have now become accepting of women in political positions if and only if they are also what society deems beautiful, confident, good mothers but at the same time shows no attempt at being outspoken ect. and then they tell girls while they are growing up that smart girls aren’t pretty and pretty girls can’t be smart, in effect continuing the women aren’t qualified position under the guise of accepting women. We saw the same thing with hilary clinton, and regardless of how anyone feels about her the amount of hate mongers in our media during the election were awful. As far as your supposed “ma-bashing” men need to get over themselves and learn that when a woman opens her mouth and criticizes men for their unacceptable behavior we are not “man-bashing” but sticking up for ourselves and the other women around us. Once again I jsut want to say go samhita for daring to say what so many wouldn’t and for not allowing this jerk to undermine what you said

  43. jane
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 12:10 am | Permalink

    Actually, if you look up thread, Samhita immediately agreed that men are pressured to look a certain way. Aleks has held on to it. It is plain and simple trolling.
    I wouldn’t have a problem with a smoker in a position they are qualified for, even Surgeon General.
    We also have a problem with eating disorders so would we complain if she were too thin?

  44. Ariel
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 12:44 am | Permalink

    Agreed! Not to mention Aleks made some unfounded accusations, like Samhita was a male-basher and a man-hater. It’s just as bad as that one commenter who said Samhita hates white people.
    I think it’s a shame that Samhita is one of the more scrutinized editors here at Feministing. I like her views because they aren’t always mainstream and they challenge the status quo. She does a lot about fat-hating and fat-phobia. Unfortunately, when she does all the fat-haters come out of the woodwork. Why else derail the comments?

  45. UnHingedHips
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 2:36 am | Permalink

    Why is it relevant to her job? Even if we assume she *is* obese, how is that different from having any other health condition? Can you not be the surgeon general unless your triglycerides fall in an appropriate range? What if you have a history of cancer?
    There’s no way you can argue that being overweight is relevant to her job unless you also argue that being fat is entirely her fault and means she is lazy and eats like crap. Is that really an argument you want to make?

  46. nikki#2
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 3:21 am | Permalink

    Your video was entirely spot on about the ridiculous attention the nominees weight has been receiving. Ridiculous.
    But that comment about how men are judged solely on their qualifications is completely false. I know you said you only did one take of the video so I can understand a slip of the tongue.
    However, how you have handled criticism of this comment is… not so cool.
    aleks was upset and pointed out the false, not to mention unnecesary, statement about men in your video. He agreed with everything else you said, “…your perfectly legitimate critique of the way women are treated…”, but warned in a later comment how one bit of false information can taint your entire argument.
    You said, and I quote, “…I would never deny that there are pressures on men to look a certain way.” Um, actually no. In your video you said, “…as opposed to men that are only evaluated for whether they can do the job.”
    Your response to continued criticism? Repeatedly talking about how women are judged more by their appearance. No one is arguing against that. Why do you keep bringing this up? Just because men are judged too doesn’t lessen womens experiences. I would expect you to understand that. This reminds me of the oppresion olympics that pops up from time to time in the comments here. It seems the most oppessed group gets to cry their situation until they are blue in the face. But if anyone else dares to speak up. If anyone else says, “I get such and such”, they are instantly attacked for complaning when they have so much privilege.
    You then said, “I won’t ban you, unless you give me reason to…” WTF. Saying “I won’t ban you”… Is a way off threatening to ban someone. Seriously not cool.
    Then implying that everyone that is calling you out on your comment is an MRA or trolling or this or that. I mean, seriously now. All this could have been avoided by owning up to your mistake. Something simple as, “Oops, my bad. I only did one take and that just slipped out. Men are judged too. Not as bad as women but men are judged too.” Then we could all be discussing the rest of your otherwise excellent video.

  47. nikki#2
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 4:13 am | Permalink

    I read over aleks’s comments and I did not see him accuse Samhita of being a man-hater anywhere. He did at one point say “weird male bashing” in reference to her comment that men are not judged by their appearance. I bring this up because I don’t like it when people put words in other peoples mouths. As this is a blog you can read everything that has been written.
    Why are you implying that he “derailed” the comments because he is a fat-hater? In all his comments he completly agreed with Samhita on her comments about how women are treated. You know, when he wrote things like, “…your perfectly legitimate critique of the way women are treated…” Those don’t sound like the words of a fat-hater to me.

  48. magdamuh
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    I do understand aleks’ objection but he totally blew it out of proportion.
    Thanks Samhita, very nice post! I was waiting for an intelligent post that responded to the fat-hating incidents of the last week.

  49. dan&danica
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    I really don’t get the comparisons to Koop as far as the discussion of weight goes. No blogs back then, no fat shaming obsession to the degree we have now. Of course people didnt talk about Koop as much. There werent 5 24-hour cable news networks and 5000 blogs to go over it with. If I remember right I think there some jokes made about his weight back then but all the late night jokes have kind of blended together in my mind. Anyone nowadays who was put up for the SG post would get a lot of static if they were “overweight”. Of course a woman would and is getting it worse than a man would but it would happen in any case. Seems to be some weird new sport we’ve all picked up on. When do the fat-shaming playoffs begin then?

  50. Brandi
    Posted July 25, 2009 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    I actually find that Samhita has a problem of not completely reading or thinking through everything here. I’m a writer by profession. I understand what it takes to keep websites and blogs running, but “how much time do you think I have” isn’t a legitimate excuse for making a false statement. In the marriage post a few weeks back, Samhita actually said the article she linked to said things when the author said the opposite.
    In a similar way, Miriam apparently posted a video she hadn’t watched this week. (I’ll conceded that I rarely agree with Cavuto, but in that particular video, he wasn’t the “asshole.”) It’s unfortunate because I see reference to Feministing as *the* source for young feminist commentary. Yet if I were a conservative, I could discredit this site pretty easily with those types of errors.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

235 queries. 1.125 seconds