By Gene Lyons, Syndicated columnist
... Author Charlotte Allen's thesis was that Barack Obama appeared to be winning the Democratic contest because irrational women fell for him like teenaged Beatles fans circa 1964. Also because Hillary Clinton "has run one of the worst - and, yes, stupidest - presidential races in recent history, marred by every stereotypical flaw of the female sex." Specifically, whining, weeping, relying too much on her husband, and worst, hiring women staffers "chosen for loyalty rather than, say, brains or political savvy." ...
Chastened by reader reaction, "Outlook" editor John Pomfret alibied that Allen's article was "tongue-in-cheek." To paraphrase Eric Alterman, what's next at the Post? Satires about shiftless Negroes, greedy Jews, Irish drunks, Italian criminals and happy-go-lucky Mexicans?
Editorial advice: If you've got to tell people something's funny, it ain't. Pomfret's excuse was undercut by a companion piece by one Linda Hirshman, gravely examining the causes of Obama's support among female voters. "(I)t could just be that women with more education (and more money)," she opined "relate on a subconscious level to the young and handsome Barack and Michelle Obama, with their white-porticoed mansion in one of the cooler Chicago neighborhoods and her Jimmy Choo shoes." ...
A few thoughts: First, misogyny may be the last socially acceptable bigotry. On her blog, the inimitable Digby points out that supposedly respectable news networks such as MSNBC "think it's fine and dandy to repeatedly invite someone (GOP consultant Roger Stone) who runs an anti-Clinton organization" whose name is an acronym for the crudest slang for the female genitals. It's safe to say the network wouldn't host the founder of "C.O.O.N.," if such an organization existed ...
http://www.milforddailynews.com/opinion/x920987167