(no subject)

[xenophanean]

I am currently wondering: If I think: "Louise Mensch: so attractive but so evil" is this misogynistic?

I would certainly be capable of thinking this of someone male, but does the fact that she's a politician mean that I'm inappropriately sexualizing her? She's certainly a very attractive woman, and clearly presents herself as one. I'm also perfectly capable of thinking men are evil, and I don't think the fact that she's good looking makes her in any way less dangerous, or a less serious politician. 

Comments

[xenophanean.livejournal.com]

Interesting, no, it's not:

"Cameron, Clegg, Theresa, Osbourne, Hunt" (Don't really know Alexander)

It's:

"Cameron, Clegg, Theresa May, Osbourne, Hunt"

Why not "May"? I've been thinking about this, and I don't think it's so much that I give her a different name-form because she's a woman, so much as it's that we pick up names from other people.

Theresa May is never called just "May", thus it's not her name. "Thatcher" is definitely "Thatcher" though.

This may be an example of the spreading of sexism, but that said, it's also definitely "Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone". I'd use "Boris and Ken" before "Johnson and Livingstone".

[red-phil.livejournal.com]

As so often is the case. It comes down to intent, conscious or otherwise.

for reference, if I was asked to name the top political movers and shakers I get

Cameron, Nick Clegg, Osama, Clinton, Thatcher, Tony Blair, Dubb'ya, umm, Salmond, umm, yeah, I'm not good with politicians.