Current mood:	Peckish
Entry tags:	sure we don't need no feminism

Keith Olbermann versus Twitter
It’s wanky, it’s unfunny, and it’s potentially TRIGGERING, so tread carefully.

Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, has been charged with rape by two women in Sweden. (Some misinformation has been floating around regarding the exact charges, but you can read the accurate list of charges here at the NYTimes or here at the Guardian.)

Someone recently leaked the names of the two accusers onto the internet, meaning that anyone in the world could track down their home addresses, social network identities, workplaces, etc.

Keith Olbermann contributed to this leak by retweeting a link to a piece written by a Holocaust-denier and Wikileaks representative, which names the accusers and suggests that one of them has ties to the CIA. Also, on a recent Countdown, Olbermann held an interview with Michael Moore during which both men were dismissive of the rape allegations.

Understandably, a few people were upset by this. Sady Doyle of Tiger Beatdown led a campaign on Twitter , using the hashtag #mooreandme, in an effort to get Olbermann and Moore to apologize.

Olbermann responded by banhammering Doyle and numerous others who disagreed with him, characterizing the whole campaign as a “frenzy,” and threatening to flounce, especially after one individual using the #mooreandme tag left a tweet suggesting that Olbermann kill himself.

Then he issued a pair of Heidipologies.

Heidipology the first:

I endorse, sympathize with, and empathize with, the rape consciousness goals of #mooreandme, and have already apologized accordingly. But I cannot defend and will not accept their tactics which mirror so many of the attitudes and threats they fight. I do not know of what Julian Assange is guilty, if anything, and neither does anybody else. But given the extraordinary efforts by Sweden to extradite him, to say he is benefiting from some form of rape apologism is not fact-based. It is also unfair to condemn as anti-feminist those who merely address the juxtaposition of this prosecution to the fact that Assange threatens the secret and nefarious activities of dozens of governments. And I will not engage those who suggest that those who do not prioritize one issue to the exclusion of all others should succumb to forced financial contributions, or should ‘kill themselves' (examples of each will be retweeted shortly, along with my previous apology). The #mooreandme attacks do not help those who fight against rape, they hurt them. And indeed they feature something larger than anti-feminist. This is, to use a clunky phrase, anti-personism.

Heidipology the second:

Previous Apology (12/16): Rape has touched my family, directly and savagely, and if anybody thinks I have addressed it without full sensitivity, then that assessment is the one that counts, and I apologize. But these accusations that I "revealed" an accuser's identity by retweeting Bianca Jagger's link, or that I 'shamed' an accuser by asking a question about the prosecution of a man governments are trying to bury, or that I do not 'understand' charges that have yet to be presented in their final form, reflect exactly the kind of rushing to judgment of which I'm accused, and merit the same kind of apology I have just given.

Some of the #mooreandme folks suggested that Olbermann and Moore apologize by donating funds to rape crisis organizations. Olbermann was disinterested in these suggestions, characterizing such a donation as being akin to “buying them off.”

Moore, on the other hand, issued an actual apology while on Rachel Maddow’s show.

Edit: My mistake, he didn't apologize; what he said was that "Every woman who claims to have been sexually assaulted or raped has to be, must be, taken seriously. Those charges have to be investigated to the fullest extent possible. For too long, and too many women have been abused in our society, because they were not listened to, and they just got shoved aside."

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

kookaburra
2010-12-23 08:39 am UTC (link)

I think one of the main reasons is that when she first came on the scene, so many people on the left were dismissive of her because of her class - (and because of her sex but they were more circumspect about that in the beginning, before the "Palin is a Cunt" level of rabidity was reached) that it really got many people very angry, because they saw themselves in her. They spoke like her, they had families like hers with problems and challenges, and they went to State schools on scholarships like her. When she was mocked and derided for these things, it only called more and more attention to the fact that the visible liberals and democrats were completely out of touch with the poor and working class (and women). The mockery plays right into the narrative she's marketed for herself (self-made woman, against the odds and challenging the elites that stand in her way, takes Washington by storm, next on the Lifetime Channel) , and it's one that's very appealing to people who still believe in The American DreamTM.

Of course, the Republicans aren't as out of touch with the poor and working class as most Dems and Libs like to think. They are very much in touch with us, but instead of using that knowledge to help, they use it to manipulate us for their own advantage.

I do think that our first woman president, if we get one, will be very, very conservative. I don't think it will be Palin, I think it will be someone who makes Palin look downright moderate. The right has shown that they will support a woman who toes their party line, while the left has shown that it will always be "not the right time."

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	silrana 2010-12-23 02:23 pm UTC (link)
	I think you've hit the nail on the head. When I was trying to explain to a friend back during the election why Palin was so popular with a lot of people, I said, "It's kind of nice to have a top ticket candidate who can find something in Walmart without having to send a dozen staffers in on a recon first." (Reply to this)(Parent)

eleutheria
2010-12-23 10:28 pm UTC (link)

Thank you for this, I'd really had no idea of any of it. To me Palin is as scary as Huckabee, because I am Pagan and she's made such a point of thinking that my religion shouldn't exist (and if you look at her favorite pastor there, shouldn't exist in the "should be killed" sense). Also, her views are not her own, she's a sockpuppet of her Dominionist church-- and as a former cult member, there's an extra level of scary about someone in power whose policies will be nothing more than whatever the leaders in the shadows work through her. My group was extra mild sauce compared to hers and I still shudder at the idea of voting for one of its members.

I'm not connected to the left blogosphere, I got most of my info on her from Dogemperor and Wild Hunt, and that was quite terrifying enough for me, thanks.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	darksumomo 2010-12-24 06:03 pm UTC (link)
	You may not be connected to the left blogosphere, but Dogemperor is. She used to blog regularly on Daily Kos. In fact, she is the reason I registered there. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -