Sports show asks NFL receivers: Would you rather see Palin in the White House — or in Playboy?

posted at 9:30 pm on September 23, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via Sports Grid, no, it’s not ESPN but rather a ripoff from Comcast called Versus that I hadn’t heard of until today. And yes, believe it or not, they’re actually featuring this clip in the video section of their website. After all the phony cries of sexism aimed at Karl Rove et al. for criticizing Christine O’Donnell, consider this a useful reminder that the real thing is alive and well. And it hurts women politicians who are targets of it — a lot:

Calling a female candidate such sexist names as “ice queen” and “mean girl” significantly undercuts her political standing, a new study of voter attitudes finds, doing more harm than gender-neutral criticism based solely on her policy positions and actions…

Among the findings:

• The female candidate lost twice as much support when even the mild sexist language was added to the attack. Support for her initially measured at 43% fell to 33% after the policy-based attacks but to 21% after the sexist taunts. The drop was significant among both men and women, those under 50 and over 50, and those with college educations and without.

• The sexist language undermined favorable perceptions of the female candidate, leading voters to view her as less empathetic, trustworthy and effective.

Needless to say, as any Hillary Clinton fan would tell you, this is a bipartisan problem. (And intrapartisan too!) The only question now: Will this be shrugged off somehow on grounds that Palin was “asking for it”? Don’t laugh — that argument has been made before, and not always by hard-left liberals.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

I think I am beginning to see a wave of Rove rehabilitation posts. It is starting to look like Bloggers trying to rebuild Rove’s reputation one post at a time. It is starting to bore me almost as much as Rove does.

Done That on September 24, 2010 at 7:37 AM

feedback@versus.com

Versus_publicrelations@versus.com

Do it.

Jaibones on September 24, 2010 at 12:25 AM

I sent this email to both addresses:

Your host that interviewed Chad Ochocinco and Terrell Owens should be fired – after apologizing to Sarah Palin publicly.

I can’t believe you’d condone such sexism on national TV, especially after the fiasco with the Jets and Ines Sainz.

I’m never going to watch your little ESPN knockoff channel and I’m going to tell all my friends on Facebook to avoid it as well.

See how long you last.

fossten on September 24, 2010 at 8:06 AM

Just a reminder… Rove doesn’t suck because of “sexism” he sucks because he’s a squish and always has been. He the Great Architect of the Destruction of the GOP.

http://www.anncoulter.org/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=78

mankai on September 24, 2010 at 8:33 AM

Would this question ever be asked about Hillary Clinton?

darwin on September 24, 2010 at 8:58 AM

When you have Chad Ochonino and Terrell Owens on a second rate site like Versus you are appealing to the trash of the human race. If this is entertainment, God help us.

volsense on September 24, 2010 at 9:13 AM

Coming soon to BOR and his culture warriors.

Kissmygrits on September 24, 2010 at 9:23 AM

Meh. Calling reporters “limp” or telling a rival to “put his man pants on” probably drives up their negatives too. If you can’t take the heat don’t bake cookies.

Seth Halpern on September 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Bradky on September 24, 2010 at 5:58 AM

Who are you and what have you done with Bradky?

Seriously, that’s the first thing I’ve ever read of yours that I agreed with. Kudos.

alwaysfiredup on September 24, 2010 at 10:27 AM

Meh. Calling reporters “limp” or telling a rival to “put his man pants on” probably drives up their negatives too. If you can’t take the heat don’t bake cookies.

Seth Halpern on September 24, 2010 at 10:23 AM

As soon as you have data to back that up, I’ll buy it.

alwaysfiredup on September 24, 2010 at 10:28 AM

alwaysfiredup on September 24, 2010 at 10:27 AM

Thanks. Appreciate the comment.

Bradky on September 24, 2010 at 10:38 AM

Can she be prez and a centerfold?

angryed on September 24, 2010 at 10:48 AM

@alwaysfiredup: Btw I’m not endorsing vulgarity as a campaign tactic. But since plenty of commenters on this site routinely employ it against all sexes and orientations I assume they, at least, regard it as tried and true for both goose and gander.

Seth Halpern on September 24, 2010 at 10:57 AM

Yeah, the answers are tame, but the answers weren’t the point. The point was that the question was asked to begin with.

Allahpundit on September 23, 2010 at 10:10 PM

Kudos AP - you’re right – it is the fact that they would even ask that question is diminishing and sexist. The fact that they’re equating her to a Playboy model indicates implies that she – like all(?)women- should be measured by their T&A quoitent. Whether you like Palin or not, she has not used her physical body as a campaign tool.

katiejane on September 24, 2010 at 11:07 AM

• The female candidate lost twice as much support when even the mild sexist language was added to the attack. Support for her initially measured at 43% fell to 33% after the policy-based attacks but to 21% after the sexist taunts. The drop was significant among both men and women, those under 50 and over 50, and those with college educations and without.

-
So we can expect a steady barrage of sexist attacks against the best women for the job… and Hillary gets a pass. Is that sexist of me?
-
Nah. I think it’s the opposite of sexist, and helps keep lunch down too.

RalphyBoy on September 24, 2010 at 11:12 AM

We’re a long ways from the days when a woman assaulted or abused in the streets of New York City risked being confronted by angry men looking to teach him a lesson about respecting American women.

Has feminism led to less sexism? It seems to lead to more mistreatment of women, not less.

tom on September 24, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Slow news day, eh Hot Air?

SoulGlo on September 23, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Really? Not worth commenting on this, even with the timely study about sexism in politics, huh? Well, maybe they’ll fire me and hire you someday instead.

Allahpundit on September 23, 2010 at 9:44 PM

Between this and the story about abstinence, you’re at risk of being upgraded from RINO to “True Conservative.”

Don’t worry, though. I’m sure you’ll find a way around it.

tom on September 24, 2010 at 11:50 AM

In the meantime, apparently Ms. Behar and her guests get to say anything they want to.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/09/lovely-liberals-now-calling-christine-odonnell-a-whore-on-national-tv/

Cindy Munford on September 23, 2010 at 10:38 PM

The things liberals say:

BEHAR: You know, she’s only focusing on Delaware. Isn’t she running for the Senate? It’s the United States Senate, Christine, not the Delaware Senate.

Is Behar really so uninformed that she thinks senators are elected by the nation as a whole? Or does she know better, but is just so stupid that she can’t see that her criticism makes no sense?

Either way, she’s got no room to criticize anyone else.

tom on September 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Bradky on September 24, 2010 at 5:58 AM

Good post and I am glad you got kudos for it.

Cindy Munford on September 24, 2010 at 12:17 PM

tom on September 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM

It does add a certain laugh factor to their critiques doesn’t it? So I am considering voting on her in Florida 11/02/10, how about you? Can you imagine the ballot and how long it’s going to take?

Cindy Munford on September 24, 2010 at 12:21 PM

Both.

Emperor Norton on September 23, 2010 at 9:34 PM

I agree, can we get a poll going on this critical issue?

patch on September 24, 2010 at 3:57 PM

Seth Halpern on September 24, 2010 at 10:57 AM

I get that, and I don’t mind. It’s just I seriously doubt that those two insults do anywhere near the level of damage to a male candidate’s “electability” that gender-related slurs do to female candidates. I’m willing to review data if available.

alwaysfiredup on September 24, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3