So, just to prove, yet again, that the sexist indignity of punishing women for having emotional responses is a universal phenomena not reserved for YouTube atheists, apparently Ann Romney is getting lambasted for crying – in private. This crying is being reported to the public, apparently in the spirit of Bradley Manning and Julian Assange, by her “close personal friends”.
I know, I know – this is such important news that all of us should talk about. The humanity!
Folks. Guess what. Making fun of a someone for having an emotional response (especially in private) and equating crying with being weak is still f’ed up. It’s always f’ed up. It will never not be f’ed up.
So, stop it.
I’m very happy with the fact that in the comment section of the Washington Post article about the Romneys and even in the facebook thread about the subject in “Can this poodle wearing a tinfoil hat get more fans than Glenn Beck?” a few voices of reason are pointing out how f’ed up it is.
PS: And, to top it off we have a Dear Mulisma fallacy!
“Marian, pardon me while I’m fresh out of sympathy for her emotional disappoint. Unlike the rest of us it doesn’t affect one bit of her life or those of her kids. They have more money than they can ever spend while the rest of us are barely scraping by. It’s tough on her?! Call me when she’s watching her kids going hungry literally and then we’ll talk.”
Ya know what, I have never gone hungry. Not once did I have to worry about starving. Does that mean I don’t have a right to be upset about something without a bunch of jerks laughing at me about it?
Look – every single one of the people commenting on this thread is doing so on a computer. There is very little probability (though there may be some exceptions) that ANYONE here has ever had to deal with the type of hardship that some groups of people face in other areas of the world. Almost all of us have homes, even CARS, food – and a reasonable social safety net if we loose our jobs. By your logic, unless we are running from genocidal rape squads while simultaneously starving to death and living on the street or in a refugee camp – being upset about anything in our lives is somehow morally repugnant.
There are MANY good reasons to be annoyed by the attitudes of the Romney family about a great many topics. Ann’s speech at the RNC was some of the most sexist patronizing bullshit on the face of the planet.
However, crying in private is NOT a valid avenue for ridicule of ANYONE. And the people saying – WELL – THOSE PEOPLE make fun of Obama’s family. Well, how about if you think that is wrong, that making fun of the Ann for crying is wrong too? (Trust me, the Obama’s aren’t hurting for dough either.) Perhaps, being a pack of hateful hyenas actually validates the ridiculous narrative that liberals are a bunch of rich-people hating mean-spirited class warfare brats that recognize the privilege of others but never their own? You know, who are against bullying unless they are doing it…that sort of stuff that the RIGHT writes up all the time.
The reason to admonish this sort of immature taunting is to give a counter-example to that hypothesis. I hate the Romneys’ attitudes toward the poor, their policy ideas, their dismissiveness, their sexism, their racism, and all those things – I do not, however, hate them as humans so strongly that I deny them the basic human dignity of privacy and their own damned emotional responses free from public ridicule.