Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Feminists Unite to Combat Chris Matthews' Sexism

Posted by Sara Robinson, Group News Blog at 1:13 PM on January 17, 2008.


Hey Chris Matthews, any desperate hope you may have had that this whole ugly sexism business would just blow over, just give it up now.
Chris Matthews Hates Hillary Clinton

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

UPDATE: Chris Matthews has issued an apology for his sexist attacks on Hillary Clinton.

Note to Chris Matthews: Any desperate hope you may have had that this whole ugly sexism business would just blow over -- well, just give it up now. Because it's not going away. And if a lot of really angry and powerful women have their way, it won't go away until you do.

The presidents of Feminist Majority, NOW, The National Women's Political Caucus, and the Women's Media Center have teamed up to send a rather pointed letter to NBC president Steve Capus (the same guy, it turns out, who canned Imus just last April on similar grounds -- he's probably having deja vu all over again right now), which lays out the case that Matthews deserves nothing much more than the right to keep Imus company on the too-neanderthal-for-prime-time bench:

Dear Mr. Capus:

During the controversy surrounding Don Imus' racist and sexist remarks this past spring, you acknowledged that, with Imus, "there have been any number of other comments that have been enormously hurtful to far too many people. And my feeling is that ... there should not be a place for that on MSNBC. This is about trust. It's about reputation. It's about doing what's right."

We commend your acknowlegement that NBC has a responsibility to demand appropriate conduct and dialogue in its programming. That is why we are writing to you concerning comments made by Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC's Hardball, that demonstrate a larger pattern of overt sexism when discussing women.

During an appearance on the January 9 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, Matthews said of Senator Hillary Clinton, "the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around" and that "[s]he didn't win there [New York] on her merits." Matthews has referred to Clinton as a "she devil," compared her to a "strip-teaser" and called her "witchy." He has referred to men who support her as "castratos in the eunuch chorus." He has suggested Clinton is not "a convincing mom" and said "modern women" like Clinton are unacceptable to "Midwest guys."

Matthews' sexism is hardly limited to his comments about Clinton; such rhetoric is just the latest in a string of sexist attacks he has made against prominent female political figures.

-- During coverage of the New Hampshire primary, he said that Clinton is the only viable woman presidential candidate "on the horizon." He couldn't think of a single female governor eligible to run: "Where are the big-state women governors?" he asked. "Where are they? Name one." In fact, several of the states that currently have women governors are comparable in population to the states in which the male presidential candidates serve or have served as governor.

-- In November 2006, shortly after the Democrats took the majority in Congress, Matthews asked a guest if then-presumptive Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was "going to castrate Steny Hoyer" if Hoyer (D-MD) were elected House Majority Leader.

-- During coverage of a presidential debate last spring, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell was compelled to remind Matthews that Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) wife, Michelle, is a Harvard-educated lawyer after he focused obsessively on her physical appearance.

During the Imus controversy you expressed a hope that "we don't squander this remarkable opportunity that we have to continue this dialogue that has taken place, to continue the dialogue about what is appropriate conduct and speech, to continue the dialogue about what is happening in America. I think we have, as broadcasters, a responsibility to address those matters."

In the middle of a heated election season where, for the first time, we have both a female candidate and an African-American candidate vying for the Democratic nomination, "appropriate conduct and speech" is more important than ever. Matthews' history proves that when discussing prominent female figures, he is prone to overt sexism rather than civil political discourse.

We appreciate your taking the time to address our concerns and look forward to hearing from you soon.

Kim Gandy, National Organization of Women
Lulu Flores, National Women's Political Caucus
Carol Jenkins, Women's Media Center
Ellie Smeal, Feminist Majority

The NWPC is also holding a rally tomorrow in downtown Washington to make the point. (If you're in town, it's at 4:00 pm at NBC Studios, 4001 Nebraska Avenue N.W.)

Digg!

Tagged as: media, sexism, clinton, msnbc, matthews

Sara Robinson has worked as an editor or columnist for several national magazines, on beats as varied as sports, travel, and the Olympics; and has contributed to over 80 computer games for EA, Lucasfilm, Disney, and many other companies.


Fox, CNN, CBS Reaction Groups: Obama Won
Who won the debate? It's looking like a clean sweep for Obama.
Post by Sam Stein. October 7, 2008.
Obama Coolly Dispatches Punch-Drunk McCain
Tonight's winner is clear.
Post by Ian Welsh. October 7, 2008.
DEBATE ANALYSIS: A Minute by Minute Look at McCain vs. Obama
Here's what happened at tonight's debate.
Post by Staff. October 7, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
as we learned earlier this week...
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Jan 17, 2008 4:26 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
with MSNBC's abysmal treatment of presidential candidate dennis kucinich - MSNBC does not care about doing what's right or polite...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Poor Analogy
Posted by: corgyn on Jan 18, 2008 3:14 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To compare Matthew's commentary to Imus' Nappy-headed 'Ho is oversimplification.

No other woman candidate on the horizon - that is his and a hell of a lot of other people's opinion too

Michelle O's looks - neither the Harvard degree nor her appearance are relevant to whether we should trust her hubby as pres. and therefore both pointless trivia of the campaign but is not sexist to fail to comment on some spouse's degree

The rest of the points are pretty weak and surely not in nearly the same offense class as call college athletics team a bunch of nappy headed 'ho Imus got a fair punishment, Matthews is within acceptable limits

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Poor Analogy Posted by: Bibsi
Much ado about Nothing
Posted by: Sissy on Jan 18, 2008 5:15 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I watch "Hardball" just about every night. If I get aggravated with Mathews it isn't over his remarks some might perceive to be out of line about a woman running for president. Chris is tough and he is in a face like a fly on cow dung if he thinks a candidate is not forthright, being honest or is way out of line in any accusation they might make. I like that. I don't like constantly covering issues that don't mean a tinker's damn to the majority of American people or their everyday lives. Unfortunately, occsaionally Chris will do that and it makes me crazy but I have his e-mail address and I "tell him that". I get much more ticked off when he has the jackass Tom DeLay on pontificating than I do about making "insensitive remarks" about women candidates. Hey, its a tough world out there and if Hillary or her husband as well as the women's movement are going to whine and fuss about every little remark that is hurtful, then she is not where she should be....messing with the big boys.

But then I was a regular Imus viewer too and I'm still ticked he wasn't given a second chance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Much ado about Nothing Posted by: sliver
» RE: Much ado about Nothing Posted by: outsideagitator
Literal definition of "liberal" is free thinker..........
Posted by: cisc on Jan 18, 2008 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and I am as liberal as they come-BUT-I get my info from a variety of sources. Mathews is definately a right leaning alpha male but he at least tries to give his point of view with authenticity-something that is sorely lacking in most of the main stream media. This idea that honest open debate has to be an intricate dance of political correctness least we offend the tender sensibilities of the delicate does as much to smother discussion as having a "fair and balanced" network that gives one very narrow point of view and then bullies and threatens anyone who might think different. All of us lefties love Keith (had me at the 10cc and Monty Python references) but even he blogged at Kos on the subject of the personal attacks based on personal interpretation of points of view he may or may not have expressed. I want to hear what the rational right think. I want to try to understand their point of view. We need to quit telling people to shut up. We are not Bill O'Reilly. When someone make a point, they need to back it up, to be accepted or discarded as it deserves. When I hear the right say that Hillary did nothing in life to deserve this shot except have a husband that cheated on her-it makes me more inclined to vote for her. The woman went to law school, is an attorney and has worked as such for thirty years. She was a duly elected senator, twice. This insane hatred of Hillary leads me to think she isn't the only woman these people are disprespecting-and that is what I find most disturbing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is it true that Matthews and Limbaugh are kissing cousins?
Posted by: SackofWoe0 on Jan 18, 2008 8:14 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Have you heard about this new rumor? If it talks like a duck, walks like a duck, then it must be a duck! I say boycott Matthews, with his sexist remarks, his lilps are as thin as Cheney's and Bush, now think about that one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i can't even believe some of the comments here.
Posted by: MamaPantz on Jan 18, 2008 11:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why does someone have to say something as shocking and offensive as what Imus said, to get people to be brave enough to stand up for women's integrity in the public sphere? What this guy has said is not acceptable to a lot of people. If you're not bothered by comments that unfairly degrade people, then you obviously aren't of those people. If you think of it from your own perspective, then yeah why would it matter what some guy says about women, but if you try to think for a moment what it's like to be a woman and hear comments like this and see people accepting it, and try to make your way in this world; it would effect you and make you angry. As an adult woman, I've heard this kind of thinking all my life. It used to be in grade school and middle school, and then a little in high school, all places where it's somewhat expected. But on the news? I don't want to turn on the tv to find out what's up with the election and hear childish attacks on one of the candidates because they're a woman. People seem to forget that women are over half the population, so when you're on tv saying something, women are listening too. We have a right to be presented in our community with respect as human beings. We have a right to get news from people who don't hate us. If you want to talk to your friends or family like this, go ahead, but it's not acceptable in public anymore. Just like it's not acceptable to talk about minorities in such a negative way. And like it's not acceptable to pinch the cheek of an adult woman in a professional environment. Most people are done with middle school when it's over, and we don't have that much patience for people that are still having nightmares from that time in their life, so they need to share things that should never leave their minds, while expecting everyone else to agree and accept it. Sorry I don't accept bigots and most Americans don't either. That's why Imus got booted and why we were all supposed to talk about this and have that "dialogue" that we've been avoiding for centuries. People have to speak up for themselves too, but those who might not need to fight for their own rights still need to speak up for those who do. That's how it's always worked. I know it's not fun to face the truth sometimes, but it's just not funny anymore.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're right on the money Posted by: harpy
jonnierae
Posted by: jonnie rae on Jan 18, 2008 6:39 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, please. The feminist movement sold out on women's issues a long time ago. NOW and these other organizations that demand so much RESPECT don't give a damn about poor women or women of color. Look at Geraldine Ferraro. I don't think she ever mentioned the hardships single mothers are facing. Hilary and Bill shredded the safety net for women and children by getting rid of "welfare as we know it." 98% of the people on welfare were women and children. They got into minimum wage jobs, no daycare, their kids running the streets, getting into trouble, the cradle to jail syndrome. Hilary talks about the "glass ceiling>" For most of us women out here it is "Life ain't been no crystal stair." (L. Hughes) Hilary represents other women like herself, privileged, well-educated, protected. She did ride to prominence on the coattails of her husband. She is still doing that. She can sling the "s...t" but she just can't take it. Her women's group allies who have chastised Chris sent out flyers the night before the NH caucus lying about Obama's record on pro-choice, knowing it was a lie, telling women he would overturn Roe v. Wade, knowing he had a 100% positive rating from Planned Parenthood and NAREL (sp.?) Afterwards, Lasky said, "It's politics, get over it." Face it. Hilary lies, cries, uses her husband to shield her, and feels that she is entitled to be treated differently than all the other candidates, BECAUSE she is a woman. This is exactly the oppposite of what feminism means. I was part of the movement in the 60's and 70's so don't try to tell me differently. A woman is equal; that means on the job she doesn't cry or whine or use her sex to manipulate. She expects no favors. If she slings the s...t, she expects to be repaid in kind. Matthews sooner or later hits everyone. He called Rudy Dracula, for God's sake. Nobody is going to be taken in by this BS feminist crap by a lot of well-off, clueless,privleged white women who desperately want, in this election, to get back at the men who put up that glass ceiling. How petty. And wrong

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: jonnierae Posted by: Bibsi
What the hell's going on here, anyhow?
Posted by: willymack on Jan 18, 2008 7:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you can't love women, you can at least leave them alone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Unholy Triumvirate
Posted by: JDorsch on Jan 20, 2008 4:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have long ago concluded that Bill O'Reilly, Ross Limbaugh, and Chris Matthews are joined at the hip. They are no different than snake oil peddlers and thrive on saying outrageous, provocative things. If they didn't, their ratings would plummet. They represent shyster journalism, nothing more than blowholes.

Matthews is as sexist as they come, and he has no idea how offensive he is. I still recall him and Pat Buchanan on C-Span discussing gays on in the military right after Clinton became president. He said there were "absolutely" no gays in Africa when he was there with the Peace Corps, to me one of the dumbest remarks I've ever heard by any TV person/journalist. Until recently, they have been the NOTES FROM THE UNDERGROUND character in Dostoyevsky's Existential tract.

It reminds me of the Iranian president when in the U.S. a few months ago, and Russian leaders a few years back, said there were no Iranian gays. Disapproval is one thing; benightedness though is all-revealing as it demonstrates ignorance, tainting everything a person believes or says.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]