sigh
i was so disappointed in cnn, but of course, not surprised.

The (pathetic) thing is, if Hilary keeps doing this well, the crazy sexist questions/remarks aren't going to stop, but they're only going to keep getting worse. Even if Hilary wins, there are going to be trolls in this world who will keep *pointing out* that she's a woman. As if we couldn't notice.

If I were asked such a thing, I think I would stare uncomprehendingly and ask, "What does that even mean?"

I saw that too. Why did they even allow that question? Why did it have to be the last thing in the debate? Wolfe offered to let the other candidates answer the question as well, and the girl who asked that turned him down. Because men don't like either (except Prince!).

I guess my (non-rhetorical) question is, what SHOULD she say to things like that? What would be an appropriate way to field that question and discourage others like it? I'm sure she's not happy that that woman asked it.

I suppose this was an attempt to play on the "boxers or briefs" question that Bill was asked, so why does it seem so much more offensive to me? Would I have been less offended if she had been asked "granny panties or thongs"? Or is it just more offensive because when non-serious questions are posed Hillary it seems to me like more of an attempt to make her look silly rather that to have a light moment with a candidate?

P.S. Who was moderating this damn thing and making sure people weren't asking stupid, pointless questions?

I was screaming at the tv when the debate ended. DIAMONDS OR PEARLS? for fuck's sake!!!
And she has to answer so we can feel like she's a less threatening "lady".

Was that a reference to something in particular? I have never heard that question before. And I instantly thought they were tricking her on the subject of blood diamonds. Imagine someone asking about social justice.

It's even more frustrating that they have time for frivolous questions like this but many of the other candidates couldn't get a word in edgewise. Can I hear from Kucinich or Dodd or Richardson please?

As a journalist myself (in college) and an avid watcher of CNN, I am terribly disappointed. How is it possible that a question like this was even allowed to be asked? Someone should have been moderating the questions being asked. This was a poor job on CNN's fault.

HOWEVER, I give Hillary a lot of credit for her answer. She didn't lose her cool. If anything, this whole fiasco just makes me like her even more!

what. the. fuck. That is so offensive! It sucks that she has to deal with this unnecessary bullshit. CNN should be ashamed of itself for even allowing that question to go through.

what. the. fuck. That is so offensive! It sucks that she has to deal with this unnecessary bullshit. CNN should be ashamed of itself for even allowing that question to go through.

This is the equivalent to the UFO question they answered Kucinich in the last debate. It is meant by the media to define a candidate around an issue that has nothing to do with the substance of their proposals.

When your own campaign, however, has out and out "played the gender card" (ie, Ferraro's statements, Mark Penn's statements)you cannot then cry foul when the question is about your jewelry preferences.

Good point, fatsweatybetty. The media completely leads the public and chooses which candidates will be taken seriously as contenders. We don't actually elect the person we most agree with; we elect the one from the small pool of folks the media chooses to focus upon.

Yeah, equityforbothgenders, it's a good thing that she didn't "play the gender card," then, huh? And if she did "say that the other democratic candidates were sexist" (which she didn't, nor did anyone who has official authority to make such statements for her campaign) I'm not sure how exactly that would be an excuse to use more sexism. Sorry, it just doesn't add up to me.

Isn't 'diamonds or pearls' a code question about homosexuality? As in, diamonds for heterosexual wedding rings or pearls to represent girly-parts? That was my thought.

Maybe I have a dirty mind.

Stupid, inappropriate question in any event. I thought the same about boxers or briefs way back when that came up too, but at least that was asked during an MTV debate. Not on a "serious" news channel.

I think Hillary handled that question--and the others, very well. I was pretty impressed with how all of the candidates were able to represent themselves within the short statements they gave. My only major complaint? Can we get Wolf Blitzer to shut up and let the candidates finish a sentence, please? There was definitely too much interfering from him as the moderator.

If they are trying to go with something along the lines of the "boxers or briefs" questions, shouldn't they go with "thong or bikini"? Or "push-up or demi"? When are lame questions like this one going to stop?

Cara,

This is a convenient deflection that is usually brought up by Senator Clinton's supporters, in that she herself hasn't made comments that played the other candidates attacking her at the last debate because she was a woman.

The comments have always come from someone else within her campaign staff, and she has indeed used the comments and what they imply to raise money. Check up on Ferraro's status within the campaign and the statements she has made on the topic. Check up on Mark Penn's statements to supporters on a call the day after the debate.

This behavior of Senator Clinton's campaign, by the way, of having others throw the mud while you stand above it, is a classic GWB trait. Definitely someone I want my next president to emulate...

Equityforbothgenders, huh? Why does that strike me as a troll-in-feminist's-clothing kind of sign off?

And frankly, sexist, idiotic questions like these make "playing the sexist card" the only logical response.

Our campaign system *is* sexist. They constantly emphasis Clinton's sex. It pops up every debate. Try to blame the victim all you like, because allies of her's are calling foul, but a spade is a spade.

And "diamonds or pearls" is a question meant to marginalize the professional aspect of the candidate. That is so not cool.

(My first thought: Hillary's into Prince?")

OMG! I am sooo glad to see you say that. That was exactly what the question made me think of. And I still have the damn song stuck in my head all morning!!!

ah, my favorite Feministing meme, anyone that disagrees with you is a troll.

The HRC campaign is the one that is "playing the victim". I, for one, am a feminist who doesn't subscribe to the "wounded-bird" branch of feminism, and believe that it is a disservice to the feminist movement for the HRC campaign to explicitly raise money and fight for news cycles by describing Hillary getting attacked because of her gender rather than her obfuscation of her political positions.

This blog and Thinkprogress are the two I read every day. Before coming here I read the Thinkprgress entry about this. And it says:

Marc Ambinder reports that Luisa actually wanted to ask a substantive question about the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository, but CNN urged her to go with “diamonds or pearls� instead.

Yes this was a VERY bad question, sexist and offensive. BUT I don't want to blame the girl. Sounds like her original question was well thought out and intelligent. But instead CNN made her look like a bimbo. The question was not fair to the girl, her school, or Hillary.

Shame on you CNN. Shame on you.

describing Hillary getting attacked because of her gender rather than her obfuscation of her political positions.

Why is this an "either/or" scenario? Is there a reason it can't be both?

Frankly, with questions like those, its pretty damn obvious its both, to anyone but the deliberately blind. Of course, maybe the percieved obfuscation is due to the extreme care any female politician has to take with public statements, especially one in a groundbreaking position like hillary. Oh, but wait, I forget that female politicians face no additional challenges nor existing prejudices. My bad.

I didn't call you a troll. I said that your sign off sounded suspiciously like one, and unfortunately that can color the perception of your arguments. What candidate do *you* support? Why?

When I heard this question I stopped breathing. I was seething. Not happy. The reason it's so horrid is that it can't be asked to any of the other candidates. When Bill Clinton was asked "Boxers or Briefs?" it was funny because George Bush Sr. would never have answered the same question. Are they going to ask that to Obama? It's as offensive as asking Obama "Do you prefer fried chicken from Popeye's or Church's?" I mean, seriously, come on. CNN should be asking questions that everyone can answer.

As for the gender card, I don't understand how some people will think that she's playing the gender card by answering this question. It's not like she sent out an email to all of her supporters saying "I like diamonds and pearls because I'm a woman!" Get over it.

If I was Hillary after being asked that question, I would have gestured to the male candidates and restated the question by asking,"well Edwards,(ect.) what do you prefer?" After they all answered the question (perhaps saying what they prefer to buy their wives)then I would either say "neither," or completetly refuse to answer the question. If the other candidates refused to answer then I would state that I refuse to answer because this is clearly a gendered question. Perhaps you could also add that because I dont play the gender card, I wont answer the question. What a skank for even asking that bullshit question. She makes herself look like an airhead. Shes probably one of the "Unlce Tom" women like Ann Coulter who plays up to the 'boys club' sexism to get ahead.

I think Campbell Brown had some sort of bias against Hillary. I dont think she should have been allowed at the debate. They couldve chosen a more qualified person.

The student offered THREE substantive questions and CNN rejected all of them, and railroaded her at the last minute into asking the "diamonds or pearls" one. I really feel for this woman who is getting skewered all over the internet. You can read the backs story about it and write to CNN to complain through the link. http://groundswell.typepad.com/groundswell/2007/11/cnn-forces-diam.html

This is actually even worse than it seems. Per the Atlantic, the female questioner "was a finalist for the Truman Scholarship" and had already been cleared to ask about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.

Every single question asked during the debate by the audience had to be approved by CNN. I was asked to submit questions including "lighthearted/fun" questions. ...CNN ran out of time and used me to "close" the debate with the pearls/diamonds question.

It was icky when I thought she chose to ask that on her own, but the reality is far worse: CNN clearly maneuvered the situation to make sure that an educated, articulate woman asked a question about cosmetics. DIsgusting.

disgusting. Because amidst political discussion we know Hill's really thinking about cute jewelery!

she was completely blind-sided I'm sure- so I'll let it slide, however i would have liked to hear pearls, because it's impossible to ensure that a diamond is not a) a blood diamond or b) been used to launder money by terrorist organizations

waaaaaaaaaaaaay in the future when i become engaged to whomever, I'm hoping for one of those 25 cent drug store rings