- Share This Post
- submit
- 3
-
Sparkle (0)
I picked this up from Nancy Scola's excellent blog on MyDD.
We've got powerful women in Congress. One of them is even the MOST powerful person in the House. She apparently had contentious dealings with another powerful woman in Congress. So, of course, CATFIGHT!!! This is such bullshit.
Scola points to a Washington Post article about tensions between Nancy Pelosi and Jane Harman. The Post article starts:
Catfight aftermath Rep. Jane Harman is still quite irked that House Speaker-designee Nancy Pelosi nixed her for chairman of the House intelligence committee -- and she's not exactly being stoic about it.
Friends and colleagues say Harman has openly complained that she was cut loose by her fellow California Democrat and one-time friend, Pelosi, who picked instead Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex.), a former Border Patrol agent.
That Pelosi must be some beatch!!
Scola rightfully points out that framing a political disagreement between two of our nation's leaders as a catfight is pathetic and harmful. Scola asks:
Is there a way to take terms like "catfight" lightheartedly, and not see them as means by which to make petty, vindictive, capricious and sexual what women do? I ask the question, but I'm fairly convinced that in the political context it's a way to trigger our latent feelings about the place and nature of women. I believe it enough, in fact, to fairly beg every reporter, pundit, and editor out there to actively train themselves out of relying upon such cheap and easy ways of framing powerful women.














