Listen to the audio version of this post here.
Bullying, name-calling, and childish insults.
Everybody and their mothers have weighed in by now on the barrage of presidential insults lobbed at reporters, especially female reporters.
Grateful as I am for those of you who’ve been asking for my take on the sexist spew, I wasn’t sure I had anything useful to add. Let’s face it, other than government employees paid to defend him and politicians who fear becoming targets themselves, very few have endorsed Donald Trump’s outbursts. Or his misogyny.
But now, after hearing what so many have had to say, I may have a twist or two to toss into the mix.
Mom, he hit me first!
Yes, the president’s attacks on reporters, his opponents, and sometimes even his supporters are appalling. You’re not surprised, are you, that I don’t favor political discourse calling people piggies, or slobs, or idiots.
It’s embarrassing that our national leader resorts to that kind of silliness. And meanness.
People’s ideas, votes, and job performance are fair game. I wish Trump would stop at that and skip the vile, personal attacks that are something of a trademark for him.
You might note that I have objected to some of his ideas, votes, and job performance. You won’t, however, hear me talking about his weight, hair style, or skin tone.
And if you follow the news at all, you know that over the years, there’ve been thousands of insults hurled his way about everything from hair color to hand size. I feel strongly that the president’s personal appearance should be off-limits.
Yes, I know, he says ugly things about all kinds of people. Many observers blame him for making our public discourse so nasty, and I’ll concede he does set a tone. Which is no excuse for what the rest of us say.
The whole conversation about Trump’s communication style reminds me of childhood battles with my brother. “He started it!”
Fine. He started it. What if we decided to end it?
And while we’re on the subject of ugly, sexist commentary …
This has been on my mind for weeks now. You know Lindsey Halligan, right?
She’s the Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Appointed by the president specifically to prosecute a couple of his political adversaries after professionals in the office declined to pursue the cases for lack of evidence.
She’s also beautiful.
If you listen to news shows, podcasts, and commentary you’ve heard it from men and women. Journalists, politicians, and academics. They’ve all dismissed this professional woman because of her appearance.
Story after story about Halligan’s appointment and her missteps in court make much of her history as a beauty pageant finalist. Headlines call her a “MAGA beauty queen.”
A piece in The New York Post is typical. It describes her as, “The former Florida insurance lawyer, who often looks runway-ready in designer suits with flawless hair…”
And it’s not just the media professionals making note of Halligan’s appearance. Facebook is full of comments like this one. “She looks like the lovely assistant on a television game show.”
I guess she’s lucky nobody’s calling her “Piggy,” but when you get down to it, the complimentary remarks are just as sexist.
Listen. I wish I could look in the mirror and see a face like Lindsey Halligan’s looking back at me. Regardless, I’m offended by all the critiques that focus on her appearance.
Take aim at her prosecutorial inexperience, her inarticulate presentation of her case, or for that matter her courtroom ethics. But lay off the looks. Beauty and brains can in fact go together, in spite of the age-old assumption that a pretty woman is a dim bulb.
You may have a different opinion, whatever you look like.
In fact, I think I’m in the minority on both of these issues. Which makes it all the more interesting to hear what you have to say. Please share with a comment below.
Your participation in this weekly exchange is one of many things I’m grateful for … even when it’s not Thanksgiving week. But especially now, know how much I appreciate you reading and responding to my thoughts about communication, confidence, and connection.
I completely agree with you. As much as I abhor T, I also cringe when these lowest level attacks are made from the other side. It does make it harder for everyone to calm down and think and act constructively.
Also, thank YOU for your columns. I never miss one; I forward to family and friends emphasizing your smart and practical points.
You are beautiful! Keep up the good work!
That is music to my ears, Catherine! I’m so glad you’re still reading and enjoying my weekly posts. Sometimes I wonder if anyone’s paying attention–then when I get a message like yours it makes me smile for days!
Oh, I’m paying attention. You earned that a long time ago. And I agree with everything Catherine Marquis said too.
Thanks, Bill. I read Catherine’s comment first thing this morning and it started my day right. Now you’re giving me a mid-afternoon boost!
Great article, Catherine.
The level of commentary and discourse is absolutely appalling and not something we will easy recover from. While Karoline Leavitt is always happy to justify everything her boss says, I would love to see her reaction if someone address her as “Piggy!”
You may be right about recovering, Conor. It’s not just Donald Trump–this ugliness has spread way beyond him now. He’ll ride into the sunset eventually, and I worry that we’ll be left with a political establishment that thinks nasty personal insults are a reasonable way to handle disagreements.
Couldn’t agree more! Thanks for once again, providing comment with helpful reminders to keep real concerns front and center.
😘
Absolutely! As Michelle Obama said,
“When they go low, we go high.”
Let’s all aim a little higher. No need to bring looks into the political discourse. We have enough to disagree about.
You know, Leslie, a lot of Democrats are disagreeing with Michelle these days. Going high didn’t work out so well for them. I do think, though that we can stick to critiquing policies and attitudes and behavior rather than getting into hair color and weight and all the rest of it. The president called J.B. Pritzker “a fat slob” the other day, and I just thought — that is SO unnecessary. J.B. can defend himself, I know, but it all seems so inappropriate.
Women just can’t win, can we? Look good and you get flack. Look your age, a little plump or a mite disheveled and you’ll hear about that too. When did our country get so mean?
Maybe it’s always been that way, Bobbie? I know I’ve often been critiqued for my appearance, that that goes WAY back. I think people are more public with their condemnations now, and there are more channels for all of us to see what someone says. And then, having the president lead the way doesn’t help …
Thank you so much for addressing the issue of personal attacks! Though I have much to say about members of the current administration, name calling is not part of my commentary. I stick to the facts and encourage any commenting on my posts to do the same. There is more than enough going in without ‘slinging dirt’.
This post really struck a nerve, Therese. It generated way more response than my usual articles, and of course I’m delighted about that. It also suggests a lot of us have strong feelings about the quality of our public conversations, and that makes me happy too.
I may be behind the 8-ball on this one…but I never saw the reporter Don called ‘piggy’.
I don’t know if the remark was predicated on her appearance or not.
What I do know is that the programming game is quite nefarious.
Whether one deserves the insult (or the compliment) is less important than the overall message that is delivered to everyone else.
The MESSAGE was clear…don’t cross me or you’ll surfer. Insults are the least of it.
It sets a tone on the instinct level. Do I stick with facts…or do I lean toward something that will protect me and my family.
Insults do much more harm than compliments but both deliver a covert message.
And, Don is a pubic figure who intentionally put himself in line for personal comments. The reporter did not.
In Hypnosis terms, the ‘piggy’ comment was a shock induction (not just to the reporter…but to all who heard) with the intended message to fall in line or suffer.
I actually looked for the reporter’s photo, Karen–she looked like a pretty typical female member of the Washington press corps. Nothing piggish about her! Not that it would have justified Trump’s attack in any event, but I was curious about how he chose that particular insult.
Anyway, you’re exactly right–he does this kind of thing not only to wound a particular person, but to send a message to everyone else that they can expect public humiliation if they challenge him. (Or maybe the name-calling has become a badge of honor instead of an embarrassment?)
Agreed, dear one. So grateful that you posted this,
It’s generated a surprising amount of vitriol on Facebook, Nancy. You’d think this would be something we could all agree on, but no. The Trump supporters are furious at me–again!