'Progressives' aren't much better when it comes to sexism.

[CrowCity_Dem]

Over the last couple of days, there have been countless discussions and comments here castigating Senator Gillibrand for pushing Al Franken out of the Senate. There is one constant I have seen as I read these opinions; only the women are to blame. Gillibrand's name comes up every time, and often dripping with venom. Her political ambitions are used as proof she was acting dishonestly, even as Franken's name is still thrown out even today as a name that should run in 2020.

One comment in particular struck me, as someone said they had sent emails expressing their displeasure to every female Senator who called for Franken's resignation. Why only the women? What is it about Bernie Sanders, and the other male Senators, that exempted them from the lashing?

This is not new. In 2008, we were told we couldn't side with Hillary, because she voted for the Iraq war (even though John Kerry, the previous nominee, did). In 2016, we were told we couldn't side with Hillary, because she was too close to Wall Street (even though Obama got record amounts of money from that industry). And this as we're also told that Joe Biden might be our savior in 2020 (even though he voted for the Iraq war, and is cozy with big financial interests).

Enough is enough. We have to admit that even among the 'progressives' here, women don't get the same level of respect men do.

Between the hypocrisy, the singling out, and the despicable trend of slut-shaming certain accusers have gotten around here, we aren't any better than the Republicans were scream about. In fact, we might even be worse, because they don't bother pretending to be better people than they really are. They wallow in their sickness. We hide ours, and pretend it isn't there.

Not anymore.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. In before...

* At least we're better than Republicans! Maybe you'd like them better!

* Identity politics get us nowhere.

* So I guess we can't even hug/look at/speak to/say the name of women anymore, huh?

* Something-something the high road.

Truth hurts, though. Both parties have a lot of work to do internally, because our society as a whole has a lot of work to do on itself. Just because one group is "better" than another doesn't mean it can't keep improving.

[SHRED]

2. Al Franken handled this...

...with the utmost respect towards his accusers and was crucified anyway.

[CrowCity_Dem]

7. How?

The vast majority of commentary is that Franken is a good guy who slipped up, or didn't realize how his actions made others feel. I haven't seen anyone calling him a horrible person, or a serial predator. THAT would be crucifying him.

[SHRED]

10. He was forced out

If you think he resigned willingly then I absolutely disagree.

[dansolo]

49. Many people are calling him a sexual harasser

Almost every person, even most of his defenders, act as if every allegation against him is true, based on flimsy evidence by republican partisons or anonymous persons. Outside of the picture, which Al has apologized for, even though the circumstances may not be what was alleged, I have a hard time believing any of the other allegations. Al has gotten it much worse, because he was forced out. And yes, I am attacking Kirsten Gillebrand, not because she is a woman, but because she is a fake, political opportunist.

[pnwmom]

23. That doesn't answer the OP's question. 34/48 Democrats signed this, plus Bernie.

That means even more Democratic men than women signed this (who also might have Presidential ambitions) but it is the women who are blamed again and again.

[SHRED]

25. Not by me

I've repeatedly mentioned Perez, Schumer, and Bernie.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

31. Im disgusted by the lot of them.

Progressive Purity. Jump to accuse before there’s any proof.
#BelieveWomen doesn’t mean believe any accusation made by a woman without question, no matter how suspicious it is.

[tonedevil]

33. I agree there is...

the fragrant aroma of misogyny in holding the women more accountable than the men. The only mitigating thing is Senator Gillibrand worked really hard to make herself point on this. For my part I was more disheartened by Senator Sanders I thought him more deliberative than that.

[Hortensis]

58. :) Sen Sanders is a passionate and eloquent advocate

for his beliefs, but deliberative has not been a word I'd apply to him since learning that at age 70 he had very little knowledge about how he could use government to implement those beliefs. An astonishing, nearly quarter century in congress of skipped deliberation while passionate belief continued.

The OP said "even" capital-P Progressives, though, and I think that also points to a basic misunderstanding. It should have been "even" liberals, because liberal is the equality personality orientation. Liberals feel equality in their guts, the way conservatives' guts tell them a healthy degree of kiss up and kick down is natural and necessary for social order.

In any case, most of those on the left who mistrust and reject mainstream liberal politicians by nature are different from most liberals in some important respects, including Sanders himself, proudly. They tend to zealously support a narrower range of ideas at any one time, to the point that others not on their current list get elbowed aside. That can even include equality, as we saw in 2016 when Sanders refused to widen his battle for economic equality to satisfy the PoC bloc's demand battle for social justice equality. It's not that he was against it, far from, but he was a 70-year-old man from an intensely white state and just not flexible enough to widen his crusade at that particular time.

I think much the same thing is happening now in these issues. No imperfect, distracting shades of gray allowed.

[Loki Liesmith]

51. persecution complex

[malaise]

3. But but but we who

or is it b-t?
Oh Welcome to DU.

[gratuitous]

4. I've mentioned my disappointment with my own male Senators joining the dog pile on Franken

But Gillibrand put herself out there as the leading voice calling for Franken's resignation. If she's gotten a greater share of the castigation, that comes with the territory. Or aren't we supposed to treat women in leadership the same way men in leadership are treated? The rhetorical weapon you've picked up to advance your argument appears to have two edges.

[spooky3]

13. Exactly nt

[Egnever]

5. A woman led the charge are we supposed to ignore that?

My first letter was to Schummer btw.

It makes no sense to ignore the leader of this fiasco and go after the others first. They are all culpable and many of them have heard from me.

Pretending she is the target because she is a woman instead of because she was the ring leader is ridiculous.

[RandomAccess]

36. Well said

And worth repeating:

Pretending she is the target because she is a woman instead of because she was the ring leader is ridiculous.

[moriah]

64. But the post in question was attacking only our female Senators, en masse.

So because she's a woman only the women agreeing with her should be attacked? They've formed some scary girl pack and are all out to get the boys, and the men agreeing should be admonished but the women are the ones who should get the true vitriol?

That's what you're defending, but if you hadn't read the original comment in the other thread I can understand not groking the context. So no hard feelings, k?

We need to work together and not have a battle of the sexes.

[stonecutter357]

6. moore is a pedophile ............

[CrowCity_Dem]

9. Yes, but that has nothing to do with this discussion.

[LisaM]

8. I think you're right, but maybe....

this is because it's in stark contrast to the women who worked with him at SNL and clubbed together to make a written statement? Did he really behave that differently in two different jobs?

Gillibrand had also made some snarky comments about Bill Clinton earlier in the week, too (which would explain why she (not the others) seems to be singled out).

You are spot on regarding the comments about how Hillary was judged differently as a candidate.

[kcr]

11. Have you ever heard of benevolent sexism?

Because I find this notion that women are somehow above criticism because their motives are always pure to fit right in that category. And this post seems to go right up to that edge. Gillibrand made the choice to put herself in the forefront to lead the charge against Franken, or at least give the appearance of doing so. She led the push to oust Franken before an ethics probe could be completed in the name zero tolerance and there is nothing wrong with criticizing her for that or speculating on her motivations for doing so.

[CrowCity_Dem]

14. Women can certainly be criticized...

but what I'm seeing is yet another case where it's ONLY the women being harangued for their position. The male Senators who also called for Franken's resignation are barely even mentioned, let alone facing any real heat.

[spooky3]

16. Did you miss kcrs point about Gillilands leadership role?

And I have seen criticism here about Schumer and Sanders, among others.

[kcr]

22. Thank you. There's been plenty of criticism of the other Dems

I don't think anyone has said that it was all evil matermind Gillibrand, leading the other innocent Dems down a path of evil.

[kcr]

18. Well, no. Not according to your rules.

We can't criticize her for her choice, because then We're only criticizing the woman! Well, yeah, because she made a bad choice. Apparently, a woman can only be criticized if we pick some men to criticize along with her? They can never be addressed as autonomous individuals with free will to make bad decisions? That's ridiculous. See: Benevolent sexism.

[CrowCity_Dem]

26. The criticism is fine...

As long as it's consistent. The amount of hate here for the women who called for Franken's resignation versus the men is astronomical. The same act should receive the same response, no?

[kcr]

28. But it obviously isn't fine.

Why don't you accept the reason for the criticism? Are you arguing she didn't actually argue for zero tolerance and pushing Franken out? We're totally making them up because she's a woman? I don't understand your problem.

[CrowCity_Dem]

32. Again; the problem is she's the only one being blamed/hated.

[spooky3]

34. Not true, as I pointed out previously. And even if she were,

If she is the leader, then you can’t say that her being female alone is the reason why she’s criticized.

I’m beginning to wonder why you as a newcomer to DU would make unfounded criticisms of others here, and have so much apparent difficulty understanding what seem to be straightforward explanations.

[kcr]

39. But she isn't.

There are posts singling her out for her leadership role in this mess. That doesn't mean she's the only one being attacked. Far from it.

[SergeStorms]

43. People tend to go after.....

the person, male or female, who is making the most noise about an issue. Gillibrand certainly fits that description in this case. She asserted herself as the de facto leader of the drive to purge Franken from the Senate, and as such she opened herself up for the greatest share of criticism. It's not a sexist attack.
In the Democratic party there seems to be an unofficial contest to see who can be the most offended in any given situation. We're always eating our own, and I'm getting quite tired of it.
Before I'm accused of being sexist, no one was a bigger champion of Hillary, and condemned the treatment she received by an almost exclusively male contingent of her accusers. Please, give some of we males credit for knowing sexual injustice when we see it, and our loud, united stand against it. We're not all knuckle dragging neanderthals.

[treestar]

12. We don't know it is exactly the same people

asserting Biden/Kerry and dissing Hillary.

But I hate the idea we are worse because at least the Republicans admit it. It's better to admit being a sexist and be one that to try not to be one? BS.

And progressives are much, much better.

[CrowCity_Dem]

15. It's extreme, but there is something to be said for being honest about yourself.

[Skid Rogue]

17. I agree with your post, but...

I believe the nature of Franken's indiscretions made women's voices all the more powerful in their calling for him to step down. If they had stood with Franken it would have given him a "female seal of approval," from notably powerful feminist women. When they decided on mass not to give that approval, not only was it a huge show of muscle on their part, but it was the death nail to Franken's career. There's a lot of gender issue triggers in that scenario. Not surprising that it brings out the worst in some folks.

[kcr]

19. Holy crap! When was feminism about becoming some collective hive mind?

I guess I was never a feminist after all.

[Skid Rogue]

21. I don't think it was a hive mind thing...

I just believe it was their choice. If they had stood with Franken, he'd probably still be in office.

[kcr]

24. Maybe I misread your post

It just seemed like you were saying women had no choice to but to toss him over because it was the feminist thing to do. As if feminists somehow collectively decide things like this. It doesn't really work that way. But I apologize if I misread your post.

[Skid Rogue]

27. It's all good...

My point was that since Franken's victims were women, having 6 female Democratic senators call for his resignation, was a much more powerful act of public disapproval than the voices of his male colleagues who were calling for the same thing. A lot of the hostility in this case, comes from the sheer amount of influence these women had and, more importantly, used.

[kcr]

29. Ah, I see.

And yes, you have a point. A lot of my anger has to do with how I felt it was patronizing. It felt like a calculated maneuver to me.

[Skid Rogue]

38. Oh, I'm sure it was calculated...

but that doesn't mean it was a hasty, or ill willed decision. I am 100% certain they discussed it and knew the impact their opinions would have. I hope they all believed that this issue is so important to the future of the our party, that they had to make a principled stand. Right or wrong, I can understand that motive. I hate that it had to be used against Al Franken, because I've always loved the guy.

[LexVegas]

20. Rec. nt

[Bleacher Creature]

30. Agree. I was thinking the same thing.

There were a huge number of Democratic men who called on Franken to resign, and while I've seen criticism of them, it's nowhere near as intense as what has been directed at Gillibrand.

And the sexual assault jokes I've seen in post after post today are sickening.

[oasis]

47. "Sexual assault jokes"??? I've seen none posted on DU.

I doubt if any would be tolerated here.

[RandomAccess]

35. It's my understanding that Gillibrand led the charge, and

the next were other women senators. FINALLY, some of the men piled on, not to be left behind or criticized for their inaction. I don't believe Bernie ever did. I saw a report that he was asked about it yesterday and basically deflected the question.

It was also Gillibrand's (IMO) incredibly stupid -- or just terribly wrongheaded -- comments that were on all the news reports of it -- she became the face of the call for Franken to step down.

ONLY the women are to blame? I didn't see that AT ALL. And as a woman myself I'm particularly sensitive to it. I also spent the whole darned day here because I was so upset with the goings on myself.

I absolutely blame her for a lot of it because the difference between harassment, groping, assault and so forth ARE important and bit "the wrong conversation" at all -- just the wrong QUESTION. She, as I said, led the charge, and was too eager to throw a great Senator under the bus without sufficient credible evidence. I don't blame her because she's a woman, I blame her because she was so intemperate and unfair.

[CrowCity_Dem]

37. Bernie absolutely said he should step down.

[LisaL]

40. There is a thread going on about Bernie.

So it's not accurate that people are only blaming Gillibrand for making Franken resign.

[Ferrets are Cool]

41. Please dont paint me with that very broad brush

[sharedvalues]

42. Welcome to DU CrowCity!!!

[lamp_shade]

44. Amen and K&R

[LBM20]

45. EVERYONE here respects women and ALL people and does not tolerate sexual harassment. HOWEVER,

we also respect and value FAIRNESS and DUE PROCESS and that every case is DIFFERENT and must be taken INDIVIDUALLY.

The indisputable fact is that many of the Franken accusers are Trump-voting Republicans who put out THIN and WEAK allegations, mainly allegations claiming Franken "groped" them right there in PUBLIC for all to see while taking photos with them. Sorry, but in THIS CASE we have mostly VERY WEAK "evidence." One person has tried to claim that Franken "twice squeezed my waist" during a photo op which was "groping." That doesn't pass the straight face test. Another said he cupped her breast for five to ten seconds. Really? Right there in front of her husband and a camera for all to see? And the photo does not show anything close to that. It simply wreaks of BULLSHIT.

Yes, back in '06 he took ONE dumb photo on a USO comedy tour (the hands over the breasts) and he apologized profusely for that. He was not touching her, and that was obviously a staged gag gone bad. And the accuser in that case is a Trump and Fox news loving former nude model who was also acting "sexually" on that USO tour with service members.

Franken got swept up in a media frenzy, false equivalencies, and was railroaded out without a fair vetting by the ethics committee, something he welcomed.

This stinks. Gillibrand led the charge and she and others jumped the gun on this. And this is why people are upset about it. In the quest for a new absolute moral purity, they moved into political lynch mobbing, and that is WRONG.

[LisaL]

50. Impeachment is a process.

He'd get his due process if he were to be impeached.

[bagelsforbreakfast]

52. So now its about defending Trump? This thread has officially JUMPED THE SHARK! 😨😨😨

[dansolo]

55. Because Trump has violated his oath of office since day one

Are you really defending Trump here? I think you have just outed yoursef.

[Bibluca]

60. Someone was asking about O'Keefe on another thread.

It's a challenge to figure out who wants to have an honest discussion, and who just wants to sow discord.

[Bibluca]

56. Really? Who is "We?"

Please don't speak for any of us collectively.

[CentralMass]

57. Many people are saying that the ethics commitee hearing that he requested should have been granted.

Let the commitee look at the evidence and interview the accusers if possible and then take the appropriate action if any is called for.

People are suspicious of the claims made against him and based on what all of his female colleagues at SNL who worked with him for many years and those on his staff since he has been the senate have said about him, the man is not a predator or harrasser.

[CentralMass]

63. I have to call bs on that. If Franken is guilty of abusing or harrasing.

women, he should expelled.

I am a father of three daughters and i have zero tolerence for men who abuse women.

However the circumstances of the accusations against the Senator from Minnestia smell like a political hit job to many of us.

If Schumer Gillibrand Sanders and Warren know something thst we don't, lets hear it.
Are there details that we are not privy to ?

I stand by the need for a hearing.

[ismnotwasm]

62. You got THAT right

With the usual exception of reproductive rights.