(no subject)

[thoreau]

What An Ogress You Are, Congresswoman Foxx

By Michael Rowe
Author and Journalist

Crossposted from www.huffingtonpost.com

The comments made today by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) during the House of Representatives debate on the expansion of hate crimes legislation to include, among other things, sexual orientation and gender identity, suggests that a new strain of swine flu is sweeping the Republican Party---a morally porcine variant. Thus far, its symptoms include a Tourette-like impulse to horrify, and a predilection for politically expedient revisionism at whatever the moral cost.

Addressing the House, Rep. Foxx announced that the murder of Matthew Shepard, widely perceived to be the most famous gay bashing hate crime in recent American history, was in fact a "hoax," perpetrated by activists eager to pass "these bills."

Politico reports that according to a senior Democratic aide, Matthew Shepard's mother, Judy Shepard, was in the gallery watching when Rep. Foxx said, "I also would like to point out that there was a bill -- the hate crimes bill that's called the Matthew Shepard bill is named after a very unfortunate incident that happened where a young man was killed, but we know that that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery. It wasn't because he was gay. This -- the bill was named for him, hate crimes bill was named for him, but it's really a hoax that that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills."

According to reports in the New York Times, Matthew Shepard was lured from a bar in the early hours of October 7th 1998 on the pretext of a seduction, then kidnapped, tortured, burned, beaten, then tied to a fence for 18 hours in near-freezing temperatures till a passing cyclist eventually spotted him. He died a lingering death a few days later on October 12th. His killers, Aaron J. McKinney and Russell A. Henderson, admitted that they targeted Shepard because was gay. At trial, McKinney's attempt to use the "homosexual panic" defense (essentially that Shepard's homosexuality so distressed and enraged his murderers that they had no choice but to kill him) was thrown out by the judge.

The two were sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole.

That Rep. Foxx (herself a mother and grandmother who, according to her gushing MySpace profile, "enjoy[s] gardening, attending church and spending high quality time with their two grandchildren") would, in 2009, refer to Matthew Shepard's murder as an "unfortunate incident" in the presence of his mother, or use this particular murder ---this internationally known and recognized murder --- as her personal fistful of offal flung on Matthew Shepard's memory during the House hate crimes debate, seems not only obscene, but also demonstrates the increasing desperation of the ultra-conservative wing of the GOP as their hold on what they think of as the moral high ground in America crumbles to dust.

It's as though Rep. Foxx and her colleagues don't understand that in the age of the Internet and mass media, people don't "forget" the facts of cases like the Shepard murder, and seems unaware that if she's is going to stand up in the House of Representatives and proclaim right-wing lunatic-fringe urban legends to be facts --- for instance calling Shepard's murder "a hoax" --- it will only serve to make her and her party look malevolent, clueless, and inbred. It suggests the scraping of the very bottom of a moral slop bucket, politically and personally. It suggests the transient nature of "family values," and that perhaps dragging Matthew Shepard's memory through the mud in front of his mother was somehow worth it in order to make sure that "immoral" people like Shepard and his kind don't receive posthumous "special rights" due to their "lifestyle choices."

And judging by the virulent opposition among the religious right to this expansion of the definition of a hate crime, it suggests, among other things, a by now sickeningly familiar potential for smug cruelty masquerading as Christian morality.

It hardly seems necessary to add that the Matthew Shepard murder and its outcome was a shot heard round the world, one which sparked debate and dialogue in several countries including the United States on the necessity of not only acknowledging, but also punishing, hate crimes.

The Matthew Shepard Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives today with a vote of 247 in favor to 175 against, ushering in yet another sign of the changing face of American society, one that suggests hope for an inclusive future. (emphasis mine)

I'd like to imagine the feelings of Judy Shepard as the hate crimes bill named after her murdered son passed the House in the presence of the woman whose contribution to the passage of that bill was to attempt to besmirch his memory with ugly distortions.

But judging by Congresswoman Foxx's preposterous comments earlier in the day, I doubt she herself felt much besides a peevish sense that her side lost one more battle in what they like to call "the culture war." I rather suspect that calling bigotry and hate by their proper names is still news in Mrs. Foxx's private, personal, dark corner of North Carolina, where it's clearly still a cold October night in Laramie in 1998.

Comments

[blithwulf.livejournal.com]

OMG, Michael Rowe used the O-word! *giggle*

[joebehrsandiego.livejournal.com]

What, exactly is there to giggle about here ... can I ask?

[blithwulf.livejournal.com]

Regarding the subject matter, nothing at all.

Regarding how some names seem to be OK and others aren't? That's a different story.

[joebehrsandiego.livejournal.com]

Robert - Thank you for posting this. It's the lashing she deserves ... at a minimum.

[joebehrsandiego.livejournal.com]

Got it. Well, I used the c-word myself earlier this evening.

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

meaning - Rowe lynched her without using gender specific inappropriate words. and blithwulf was teasing me about my post earlier (http://low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com/1090245.html) about the use of other words - like the grossly offensive C-bomb. (the lj version of our lengthy conversation on Facebook)

[blithwulf.livejournal.com]

So have I... I guess I was just struck by how words only have the power we each let them have.

[blithwulf.livejournal.com]

Thanks Bob, I can explain myself. Though... "ogress" by your provided definition is gender-specific.

Just sayin'.

It's about have a respectful dialogue - and using the CBomb is simply disrespectful.....

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

well - that is easy to say about a word like the C-bomb because it has no affect on us as a white gay man. We hear that word and it bounces off us like teflon.

As sierrabiker said in the earlier post, "if its one's intent to influence others, then its far more effective to appear to be on the sidewalk instead of in the gutter." Just like when Perez Hilton the blogger called Miss California on her stance on gay marriage - - he was right on - and in a position of power on the topic - until he decided to call her a bitch in a post-event press conference. In doing so - he lost all leverage or power he had - he'd stepped off the sidewalk into the gutter. Here he was in a position of real power on a topic - and just threw it all away by deciding to use disrespectful language.

The original comment was about using such language and words on public forums like Facebook or Livejournal. I don't think anyone - if in person - would have said to Congressman Fox "you're a cunt" - but would feel free to do so behind the relative safety of a keyboard thousands of miles away.

If you wouldn't find the term appropriate face to face - you shouldn't be typing it either.

Cunt is a derogatory, sexist, damaging word that is only used when it is meant to do harm to the target of the word. Like we'd never imagine calling an African American a 'nigger' in the 21st century - I don't think it's appropriate to call a woman a cunt... on LJ nor Facebook nor anywhere. It is such an offensive term that it renders anything else you say along with it unheard.

[zbear20.livejournal.com]

So to you Bob would my calling the Ogress Foxx a cunt be any more grossly offensive than my calling the Ogre Fred Phelps a dick?...cause he is a dick. I guess to be perfectly non-gender specific I should call them both assholes.

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

Honestly you are totally entitled to your opinion. My point was when we are writing in public forums like Facebook and Livejournal - using the word 'cunt' or other gender specific speech is inappropriate. It is sexist, unflattering, and rude.

We should be capable of discussing the matter without resorting to using slurs. I don't think it solves anything to call Phelps a dick. It falls of his back like water off a duck.

I think Congresswoman Foxx is a national embarrassment - but is it respectful dialogue to call her names and sexist slurs? no.

Do I think she was caring about whether she was respectful this afternoon on the House Floor. Of course not. But I can't control her speech (or yours for that matter) - I'm just trying to point out that if the first thing out of your mouth online is "what a cunt" - that it removes you from a position of power that you could have achieved had you kept the conversation above board and respectful.

To play devil's advocate:

[moved.livejournal.com]

"Ogress" is a gender-specific noun and is a form of gender marking in that it inflects the gender by suffix i.e. "ogre" to "ogress" and in a similar fashion "waiter" to "waitress".

"Cunt" is cheap vulgarity specific to the female gender.

Why argue semantics when you can come up with something far more clever and effective than "cunt"? ;)

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

i apologize for speaking for you - i did and didn't mean to. and yeah - ogress is gender specific. "a monstrously ugly, cruel, or barbarous woman" is pretty succinct. (yikes) I wonder how many other people looked it up.

Language is a tricky thing - and one I learned to think about when I was lobbying in the Idaho State legislature (2002-2006). Regardless of the language of your adversary - you have to keep a respectful dialogue in order for there to be a 2nd conversation and a 3rd. The moment you digress into words that border on gender specific hatespeech (thats how I know most of the women in my life regard that word in particular) -- you hand all the power over to your adversary.

Re: To play devil's advocate:

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

oh absolutely - it is a game of semantics. and I think the writer of the article I posted DID come up with something far more clever and effective than cunt. Using cunt is like going to a knife fight with a plastic bat. It renders you defenseless once you use it.

and to get back to blithwulf's original point about how some words have power and others don't. He makes a power point actually.

Language is always evolving - and words change. But 'cunt' (like 'nigger' or 'faggot') is still a highly charged word meant to harm its target; which clearly puts it in the realm of inappropriate in public forums like a friends Facebook wall or an LJ post.

Re: To play devil's advocate:

[moved.livejournal.com]

I think name calling in general is self defeating when trying to accomplish anything.

Not to say I'm above it though. :)

[zbear20.livejournal.com]

For what it's worth, I haven't called her a cunt, and I generally don't use that or dick as a perjortive. It's just I find her comments as below board and disrespectful as those words, and I find her hate in minimizing what happened to Matthew Shepard, and twisting things to promote an adgenda is hate, removes her from a position of power in any conversation.

My point is words are words, they have effect only if you let them and the fact that people find cunt sexist and don't think the same way about the word dick or prick is something I find sexist. Let them call me a faggot, I know they mean it with disrespect, but I embrace the word and it gives me power and robs them of the power they think it has.

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

i still think that respectful language is should the rule in public forums. Use any language you want in private - we all do. but if you want credibility when talking about someone publicly - regardless of their respect level - it seems like the right thing to do to come up with something more clever than "she's a fucking cunt" - that just seems self indulgent and unproductive.

I totally understand and dig your point about the power of language. The AfricanAmerican community to a large extent removed the stinging power of "nigger" by using widely on each other - and removing it's power as a provocative word. (I'd say it's clearly still inappropriate for a white person to use the term though.)

Cunt is just particularly powerful & provocative word - and all this started about using provocative words in public open spaces; not overall in our usage.

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

i really appreciate our dialogue on this subject, Steve. I like that we can disagree and talk through things without going at one another. That is awesome - and what makes being on LJ worth it.

[stivalineri.livejournal.com]

I don't know about that really. French people use that word all the time and it just means "idiot". I think it has a lot to say about run of the mill American misogyny that female genitalia is considered so "dirty" that the very old and probably original term for it is considered beyond the pale. I agree that using some words like "Nazi" or "fascist" or mere profanity ruins political discourse, but there's discourse and diatribe, and Foxx deserves diatribes, not discourse. What she's spouting is lies, and boldfaced liars don't deserve civil discourse. Granted using profanity isn't going to play in Peoria, but no one should argue with her, we should just call her a stupid hateful idiot to her face, to her constituents, and fellow North Carolinians.

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

I agree fundraise and make sure Congresswoman Foxx is serving her last term in Congress. AMEN TO THAT!

[pklexton.livejournal.com]

Thanks for drawing this story to my attention. When I first heard the soundbite version I hadn't realized Matthew Shepard's mother was in the gallery.

How ... umm ... Christian. Just like those born-agains who tried to recruit me to Jesus when I was a teen - it just didn't seem right that when they weren't talking about Jesus they were preaching hate about African Americans, only they didn't call them that of course. Around about Anita Bryant's time they decided racial animus was no longer publicly acceptable so they moved onto the faggots. I know these people - they're scared, ignorant, small minded and populate much of the South and - frankly - evil.

[broduke2000.livejournal.com]

Gee, she's sort of aligning with the Head Cheeze of Iran: "Gays? We don't have gays here."

RE: "Toerag"

[audrabaudra.livejournal.com]

That's a fantastic article. The end is heartbreakingly true.

As for my subject line, "toerag" is a good, non-gender-specific-name. "Syphilitic toerag" quite names Foxx's type of thought...

[budmassey.livejournal.com]

Robert, I am mindful of your prior admonition on this subject, but, clearly, politically incorrect invective notwithstanding, there is no amount of opprobrium, no matter how harsh, that can be heaped upon this woman that could be considered excessive.

[notdefined.livejournal.com]

I think the fact that she was not rebuked by her fellow house members for her crass attitude goes to say a lot about their true feelings on the subject. If a remark, reducing the abduction, rape and murder of a small child to an 'unfortunate incident' were made, the house would have been in an uproar. We have a very long way to go until we are looked upon as human beings and recognized as contributing members of society. For now, even at best, it is just surface politeness.

[nyrimmer.livejournal.com]

We should politely make her life both in public and in her home town a living hell ! No swear words or out of line behavior just a constant presence always there pointing the finger at her .You know, showing the world what she and her kind really are. We should make an example out of her! We should use her bullshit as an opportunity to focus on the need for equal rights for all human beings.

[kbearblog.livejournal.com]

Robert,I've been enjoying your thoughts on the use of derogatory words against others and the power they have to harm and hurt. Very well spoken as always!

I'll never forget the time I used cocksucker as a swear word in the presence of a young gay guy,he reacted as if I had slapped him. It embarrasses me whenever I think about it! Sometimes when the mouth opens the foot is inserted.

It's a shame that Congresswoman Foxx is so ignorant in her faith as to twist the truth and that she lacks compassion for the suffering of others. I guess she has never understood that love for all is the first and greatest commandment. Perhaps the uproar she has started will crack open a bit of that darkness....we can always hope so!

Anyway another battle won.......

[huladavid.livejournal.com]

Well, does using such words help to resolve the situation? Do they insure that the Sheppard Bill passes into law?

[huladavid.livejournal.com]

I don't think it solves anything to call Phelps a dick. It falls of his back like water off a duck.

Actually, he's after that sort of stuff. The more disrespect he earns from "heathens" like us, the more proof that his form of Christianity is correct.

Beside, name-calling is just a knee jerk (although an understandable) impulse. And it's the expected responce. It's better to respond in unexpected--and probably more productive--way.

Re: To play devil's advocate:

[hwynym.livejournal.com]

Language is always evolving - and words change. But 'cunt' (like 'nigger' or 'faggot') is still a highly charged word meant to harm its target; which clearly puts it in the realm of inappropriate in public forums like a friends Facebook wall or an LJ post.

I'm going to have to disagree with the inappropriate part there, at least for some LJ entries.

The fact is, LJ stands for LiveJournal. A personal journal is comparable to a diary. We are all free to write down our thoughts, using whatever words we choose, in our own journals. There is no standard to say what is or isn't appropriate to write. There is only a standard for those who choose to read - or choose not to read, what each of us writes.

One can argue that an unlocked LJ posting is the same as a newspaper editorial in this day and age. Clearly, the lines between private and public have been blurred by technology.

I haven't written anything about Ms. Foxx and I don't intend to. But as my LJ is restricted to "Friends-Only", I feel that I can use whatever language comes to my mind that I feel like writing down. I may regret using it later (and have) but nobody can tell me that anything I write in my own journal is "inappropriate".

If anyone finds it so, they are free to refrain from reading.

Re: To play devil's advocate:

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

LJ is searcheable and unless its locked is a public forum. It may read like a diary - but ANYONE can come read your stuff - and will find if your settings allow search engines to grab entries. as much as our opinions and what we post lets people form opinions about us (as people do through Live Journal) the use of language is important to keep in mind. Using words like Cunt or Nigger or other purposefully provocative words (in my experience) tend to diminish any power a writer has. LJ is not an excuse to say things in type we'd never say in person. Unless you'd call a U.S. Congresswoman a cunt to her face (which I doubt) - why would you write in your journal?

I'm sorry if I came off like the decency police - but using provocative language like the C-bomb - lessens your position in any argument or point you might be trying to make. and if someone's journal was laced with such references I would exercise my right not to read it. but it might still be found by search engines and other things.

I think we relinquish ownership over the material we post to LJ - its not like you are writing in a hardbound journal in your home. and if your point is to get other people to read and stay with you on the journey in your online journal - we should try and be respectful and not use words to hurt other people.

Thanks for your comment.

A troubling thought...

[bruinwi.livejournal.com]

Imagine how much credence Ms Foxx would have, had Ms Palin ascended to the Vice Presidency?

What other idiocy, passing as Truth, would be taken as Gospel (Bear in mind, Ms Palin doesn't believe in evolution...)?

Re: To play devil's advocate:

[hwynym.livejournal.com]

I still have to disagree, but I'll leave it at that, as this is your journal and you should feel free to write your truth.

[designerotter.livejournal.com]

Amen to that ! Excellent article ...without name-calling, Mr. Rowe admirably skewered Foxx & Co.
I realize the bigotry of such people (and remember, they are elected 'representatives' of a lot of other people)is probably blind, but neither their sincerity nor their cynicism can excuse this particular strain in the Republican party. History will probably not mete out to them what they deserve... but it'll be enough.
Thanks for posting, Robert.