My reaction to the picture was genuine and not affected by concern trollies. The picture strikes me an gross. That said, the picture you posted up thread that is far more filtered and warped doesn’t. To me, one says, “this person warps your perception,” and the other says, “look how ugly she is.”
And I might be a little personally triggered by people asking women whether they have their husband’s permission to do their jobs. If a reporter said, “how do you sleep at night, you monster,” I’d think that was more than a fair question. But, “is your marriage breaking down?” is a crappy tabloid question that strikes me as sexist when asked if a woman. None of which should be surprising since the question came from the Washington examiner which is a crappy tabloid paper that would probably rather report on the Conways’ marriage than on impeachment.
If I were the next president Conway would be of to the Hague to answer for putting children in cages. I’m not defending Conway, I’m having a genuine personal reaction to both the image and the media’s* sexist interest in making this a celebrity-love-on-the-rocks story.
ETA: I shouldn’t say “the media’s” interest. A Washington Examiner reporter’s interest.
I’ve seen a few pictures on this site where I swear it looks like someone photoshopped some mouths where peoples eyes should be. Is that evil? Should we be outraged that some people have eyes that look like their shit-spewing mouths and someone skilled in photoshop made fun of them?
Oh, and Conway can go DIAF for all I care. I’ve never kidnapped children either, and if someone did that to my kids, I’d be either dead, in jail, or successful in getting them back.
Maybe you should examine your own reaction that a couple Photoshop filters makes you see her as less attractive? Because what most people here are saying is that Conway could look like a supermodel and be just as ugly a person.
I have. And my examination of own predjudices founded in our culture of prejudice are part of why I’m pushing back on this altered photo.
Back in media studies in college one of the tropes we examined was the trope of ugly as a stand in for evil. We see it in popular culture all the time. Ever since then I’ve been wary of that trope in fiction and in reporting.
There is no reason to over sharpen the photo of Conway so much other than to make her look less physically attractive. And that is because we as a culture associate attractiveness with credibility and goodness. And unattractiveness with evil.
Make no mistake: I do see Conway as evil on the merits of her actions. I don’t think we should be trying to digitally downgrade her appearance to support that conclusion though.
Also to add to that, how many deeply misogynist statements have this administration said. How many misogynistic policies have they rolled out to hurt women, not their feelings, but their had negative impacts on their actual lives!
I’m all for calling out shit like this, but the pearl clutching over this one seems deeply out of place given what’s actually happening, especially with regards to women’s rights and LBGQT+ rights.
Would you call her a force for good in the world?
But now we’re talking about her and her feelings instead of talking about how her actions are contributing to the degradation of our democracy. They have a sustained attack on an already weakened fourth estate. They are subverting democracy. they are subverting democracy. They are subverting democracy.
You keep trying to make this into you vs. a Conway apologist. That’s just not the case at all. I support all of your criticisms of Conway. She’s reprehensible.
No, we really aren’t. I don’t give a rat’s butt about here feelings. Nothing I’ve said is in defense of the odious Kellyanne Conway or her feelings.
I posted here to push back on quori’s attempt to invoke the “BB isn’t a news site it’s just a blog and can’t be held to any standards of behavior” trope.
I followed that up with a rejection of digitally degrading photos of women to make them less conventionally attractive as a way decreasing their credibility. Appearance should be a totally separate issue from character.
I think Conway lacks credibility of any kind based on the lack of merits of her actions and is a horrible human being for her mendacious support of Trump and racist GOP policies in the Administration that are literally killing people. Separately, I reject attacking her appearance as a woman, something I believe is implied by the altered photo.
I’m entirely opposed to Kellyanne Conway. There isn’t a single instance of defense or sympathy from me for Kellyanne Conway. So your sarcasm is entirely without justification.
That wasn’t sarcasm. I tend to signal when I’m being sarcastic. You should know that, as we’ve both been around these boards for a while.
I believe you when you say you oppose Conway. And if you believe that this is an important issue to focus on, then go for it. I’m too fucking tired to argue about this anymore, given everything else that’s going on in the world. If you want to keep arguing your point with others, by all means. I was merely trying to signal that I’m personally done with it.
here’s the thing. if you or I see Jack take a steaming dump on the sidewalk…we wouldn’t start ripping into and screaming at Sally, Dan, Mark, Catherine, and Shaniqua about the validity of shit-shaming Jack for taking a poo on the street.
