6 Likes
12 Likes
She should have just said “you’re not the boss of me” and hung up.
1 Like
As usual, I’m a little late to the party, but I’ve got to say, the circling of wagons and reflexive scolding here doesn’t sit well with me. @bozarts raises a highly relevant point that @MotoGuzzi helps surface.
I get that this is a blog and not an AP affiliate as @anon61833566 states, but the point of ethical guidelines is the implication of universality, regardless of whether they’re at the behest of a governing body or self-employed. Maybe there truly was no intent to shame Conway for her appearance, but there’s really only one person who can answer for that. Everything else is just coming off as party line defensiveness and, yes… I’m a little disappointed.
I’d like to hear @xeni’s take on their intent.
10 Likes
Being a mouthpiece for a Fascist Regime / tRump Criminal Org. is hard work, but Kellyanne is oh so good at it. She, like all the tRump toadies deserve all they get.
Feigning butt hurt at this stage is not only laughable, it’s gaslighting at its highest form.
I point to the thousands, maybe millions of unfortunate souls that have suffered, will suffer at the hands of these tRumpian phychofants. Kellyanne supports this outlaw President, she is fair game.
13 Likes
Kellyanne’s response to this thread:
1 Like
Why would you insult Dennis Leary like that; what’d he ever do to you?
Bad photo aside, I don’t care about Conway’s appearance or what anyone else thinks of it; I care that she seems pretty fucking shameless about aiding and abetting ‘Chaotic Evil.’
I’ll save my concern for people who actually merit it.
19 Likes
Roger That!
12 Likes
I don’t find the photoshop filter making her already uglier Fourth Reich job any uglier. It’s the same as exaggerating Trump’s fatness. There was no criticism of her looks in the text of the post itself.
3 Likes
Looks like a mildly deep fried screen cap of her.
If that’s enough to make you set up an account just to express your Disappointment, I’m not sure how much you actually read the site.
17 Likes
Yeah, no. Being a blog doesn’t confer a magical immunity from criticism.
I’ll push back even on friend’s Facebook posts for crossing boundaries, and I certainly am not going to hold BoingBoing to a lower standard than I hold individuals to.
I think we need to be questioning whether anyone should be altering a photo of a woman to make her look less conventionally attractive to criticize her.
Here’s the difference:
I think Conway is a toxic liar, like her male colleagues. But I think she should be criticized for her horrible character, not for her age or appearance.
5 Likes
Yeah, how is what was done with Conway any different than the BB posts wherein Nostradumbass, Romney, Zuckerberg, or any other vile POS within this stupid timeline is also altered to intensify their inner disgustingness.
5 Likes
In part it’s different because sexism. Women in television and media, as a PR spokes person for example, are held to different standards of appearance than men. Men get to be older and more wrinkled than women yet still have careers. Making women ugly to criticize them is in line with that sexism, something that is pretty baked into our culture.
9 Likes
The difference is nobody here is criticizing Conway on the basis of her appearance or gender. Neither of these things was even a factor in this conversation as far as I’m aware until it was specifically brought up by what seemed to be some drive-by concern trolls. This could have just as easily been a male and it wouldn’t have changed the substance of the post.
Conway is a highly placed and very public spokesperson within the Trump regime. She opens herself up to criticism just by opening her mouth.
ETA Maybe I’m just overlooking something in the OP that really is sexist and if I am, that’s my bad and I’ll own up to it and try to do better next time.
9 Likes
The image does that. You don’t have to use words to send a message. Nobody criticized OJ for being black in the issue of Time magazine where they darkened the cover photo to make him look more menacing.
2 Likes
Not really the same thing. That’s perpetuating a racist trope. There’s plenty of baggage and context there - even if nothing is explicitly said.
What, exactly is being perpetuated by slightly bumping the saturation and contrast of a Trump spokesperson for comedic effect?
11 Likes
The thing that this illuminates is that both Kellyanne and her husband consider this mess to be some kind of game, something they are separate from, just a day job.
Honestly frightening.
11 Likes
