“Respect (Just A Little Bit)” 🎶
I came across a site that piqued my interest in the vein of: Lefties-This-Is-Why-You-Are-Wrong, or Not-That-We-Are-Right-Wingers-But. My kind of clickbait. I can’t find a comfortable seat in the left/right, liberal/conservative, red/blue categories, so any offer of an explanation attracts me, if only to take it apart and set it back together again.
Yesterday, then, this: Do Conservative Women Deserve Respect Too? above a flattering image of Ann Coulter in a smiling, relaxed pose, a cut-out (but not too low so) dress, and a crucifix pendant, signaling Conservative Woman. That’s one source of my disorientation, by the way — the notion that one need identify as either Christian or Liberal, but fine. I also find the timing of the story a tad odd, given the international sexual discourse we’re having and that the author used as an opener, but I was game.
So, short answer: Of course.
Long answer: There’s the tiny matter of mutual respect. The referenced Ann Coulter roast was a while ago, and it was vile. But that Ann Coulter, and the likes of her (and I mean likes — why do conservative pundettes all look the same?) hasn’t “singled out anyone” is a strange thing to say in her defense. She has called Katie Couric Eva Braun, which doesn’t even make sense. She has been vicious to the late Elizabeth Edwards by mocking the death of her son with ex-senator John Edwards, whom Ann Coulter has called a “faggott.” That is not only an unacceptable slur, it’s also certifiably false, since Edwards was busy fathering another child with his mistress as his wife lay dying of cancer while defending him. So, I’d be okay if she called Edwards a cad, a tool, a scumbag or a turd, but not “faggott.”
But even if Coulter stayed away from face-to-face insults (class? courage? or cowardice), she more than makes up for it by wholesale nastiness. She has called people “retards,” “f*cking Jews,” ancient artifacts destroyed in Iraq “figurines,” and thinks hurricane Harvey was more likely to blame on a lesbian mayor than climate change. Anyone in need of proof can Google her quotes faster than I could link to them here, so please allow me to skim. No, I don’t believe she means all of it, and I’ve heard she was much more affable in private. Which begs another question: Why would a clearly intelligent, well-bred, highly educated, physically striking woman let herself be carted before the far right movement as one of their ugly pitbulls?
Why the author would cart Ann Coulter, who seems quite capable of speaking up, before the debate on sexual assault as the poster girl for the mistreatment of women is beyond me, too. As for missing media attacks against the Clinton women or Michelle Obama: Seriously? Vanity Fair (!) published an outrageous and very funny hatchet piece on Chelsea a few months back, as did, less surprisingly, the National Review (“Chelsea- Little Creep” is just the beginning), both occasioned by a children’s book bearing her name as an author. I’m not girl-crushing on Chelsea Clinton, either, but c’mon — a picture book? Still, that’s kiddie stuff compared to what Michelle Obama has been called. How would I, who’s not privy to these circles, know if not for the media? And the stuff that’s “just” hissed and snickered, does it not exist unless it’s reported in mainstream media?
If the point is that there’s Mean Girls going on in real life, I’ll take it. But don’t fashion gals like Ann Coulter into the injured ones when they’re Regina George, without the change of heart.
