The problem here is Maureen Dowd, the lone female columnist on the New York Times Op-Ed page, who was the first to patronize this political conflict as a catfight. It's one of her favorite words.

On Nov. 15, Dowd published a column that I found excerpted on SmirkingChimp -- I bolded the term:

Pouring Chardonnay Diplomacy

By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: November 15, 2006

Washington

The foreign affairs fur is flying.

I’m not talking about the catfight between two strong-willed, expensively dressed Democratic pols married to California gazillionaires, with Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi trying to yank Jane Harman from heading the House Intelligence Committee.

I’m talking about the catfight between the Idealists and the Realists.

After an election that spurned ideology, and the triumphant return of the Bush 41 pragmatists James Baker and Robert Gates, the self-proclaimed Idealists are reduced to hissing from the sidelines..."

Before you gain any comfort from her use of the term "catfight" to describe Messrs. Baker and Gates, read on. Dowd used the term again on Dec. 20, (Hat-tip: Portland Indymedia).

She wrote:

"After Nancy Pelosi and Jane Harman had their final catfight about who would lead the House Intelligence Committee, aptly enough at the Four Seasons' hair salon in Georgetown, the new speaker passed over the knowledgeable and camera-eager Ms. Harman and mystifyingly gave the consequential job to Sylvestre Reyes of Texas..."

This column apparently crossed the line for former Planned Parenthood President Gloria Feldt, who wrote this letter to the Times editors: No Catfight, Just Politics.

The term has a long history in Dowd's columns and public appearances -- as a taster, see the results of the Times' own search engine here. In a way, Post Columnist Lois Romano is just participating in a meme of Dowd's devising. And Ms. Romano is not alone -- look what happened at Salon's Broadsheet, where a reporter simply quoted Dowd accurately about her conflict with former Times reporter Judith Miller and unwittingly jumped on the catfight wagon: The Dowd-Miller catfight is not to be.

In fact, Dowd introduced the term into Howard Kurtz's column to describe her conflict with Ms. Miller, long before she managed to apply it to Speaker Pelosi. According to his piece, Sex & the Single Stiletto, Dowd said:

"Guys and women just love catfights," Dowd says. "I have to keep a sense of humor about it, even though it's irritating."

So Dowd's irritated when the term is applied to her, is she? Then it's a meme she should stop perpetuating in the press. She sounds more like Dick Morris than what she is: The only woman allowed to have a regular column on the Times op-ed page. From her I find the term fundamentally irresponsible.

I think you and Nancy Scola nailed it. Anyone who perhaps thinks we can take it back should go search on "Catfight" on Google.

Thanks for your post Morra.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

I do agree wholehearted with both of you that terms like this are a way to frame the actions of women in sexist terms and stereotypes we should do our best not to perpetuate. Great job picking up on this and reminding the rest of us (who are too busy reding food blogs to notice what Maureen Dowd and others are saying most of the time!)

Kalyn Denny
Kalyn's Kitchen

Because the NYT is so large, they don't have to be published first in order to get noticed first. I debunked the "catfight" theory in my article Jane Harman, The Manchurian Candidate on December 2nd

, and it's based on older sources. The link to the LA Weekly in this quote from my story details the favorable treatment Harman has received by the Democratic leadership during the past decade:

The reason why it should not be a surprise is that Nancy Pelosi never intended to "force Harman off the committee." As a matter of procedure established within the Democratic party, Harman was scheduled to resign. This was correctly reported by the LA Weekly on May 24, 2006. By the term limit rules the Democratic caucas has established, Harman's term as ranking Democrat on the intelligence committee ends this year. Her removal is not an act of malice by Pelosi. On the contrary, Harman has been treated favorably by the Democratic leadership as explained by the LA Weekly:

There are a few interesting sidelines about this story that I'd like to bitch about. I published it with an open source copyright on indybay.org, and as soon as it became popular a company by the name of EINNEWS/ IDG Group or alternately, IDGP group, descended upon it, got it listed in google as a headline on their non-existant newspapers. The link on it would take you to one of those order forms where you could sign up for a 7 day free subscription, after which you are billed US$30/month. Of course you have to give them your credit card number to get the free trial. Have you ever tried to have one of those "free trials" removed from your card or BANK ACCOUNT. That's another story. But, cutting to the chase, I went after them and they eventually removed my story from their site. This coincided with it's removal from google news - where it was highly listed. Google News is not the same as Google Web and I have stories that are newer and older listed, and some I think are not nearly as timely, well-written, or comprehensive. Additionally, my server was attacked from an IP block in Torrance Ca, home of Jane Harman's Web Site. I had to 403 all their IP addresses.

Let's hope Marcie Winograd has an easier time than I have had with this truly spooky member of the "Club of 100", sweatshop owner, Jane Harman, Manchurian Candidate.

David Roknich

Editor,
DOGSPOT