Offender: Blogger Erick Erickson

Media Outlet: RedState.com and CNN

The Offense: The conservative blog Red State, of which Erickson is editor-in-chief, ran a piece posted by "The Directors" that said, in relation to the Roe v. Wade decision: ". . . once before, our nation was forced to repudiate the Supreme Court with mass bloodshed. We remain steadfast in our belief that this will not be necessary again, but only if those committed to justice do not waiver or compromise, and send a clear and unmistakable signal to their elected officials of what must be necessary to earn our support." (emphasis added)

NOW's Analysis: We do not find it the least bit surprising that right-wing websites run posts like this, using language like "mass bloodshed." Of course, that doesn't make it acceptable, just sadly predictable. Normally, we wouldn't spend time addressing the content on a conservative blog.

What makes this post relevant, however, is that Erick Erickson is a political contributor on CNN's John King, USA. And NOW believe that a mainstream media outlet like CNN has no business employing a radical propagandist like Erickson.

Let's count the ways in which this quote is scary: First of all, doctors, clinic workers, volunteer escorts, security guards and others have already been killed and injured in the name of protecting the "sanctity of human life." If there's an audience that doesn't need any riling up with allusions to violence, it's anti-abortion rights extremists.

And how about the careful phrasing that claims bloodshed won't be necessary, "but only if..."? The caveat that follows sounds quite difficult to measure. So, if those "committed to justice do not waiver or compromise" (what constitutes a waiver?) and they "send a clear and unmistakable signal to their elected officials" (what qualifies as a clear signal? how many representatives must be signaled?), only then is there no need for "mass bloodshed." Who is going to be measuring whether these conditions are met or not? Is there a time certain for the conditions to be met? If they aren't met, what form will the bloodshed take? Who will be the targets of the bloodshed, and will they be warned that it's about to commence? If this series of questions comes off sounding sarcastic or facetious, it's not meant to be. This is dead serious.

Erickson reportedly will offer analysis during CNN's State of the Union coverage. Imagine a liberal in charge of a website that suggests the terms under which "mass bloodshed" should or should not take place in the U.S. being given a prominent and regular position on a mainstream cable news network. Not likely. Why is it ok for a member of the radical right to be given such a platform? It's not.

Take Action: Tell CNN that Erick Erickson has got to go. NOW. Make sure to put Erick Erickson's name in the box that says "Anchor or reporter's name."

Thanks to our friends at Media Matters for alerting us to this outrage.

National Organization for Women, January 25, 2011

More offenders in : Violence Against Women, Television, Reproductive Rights, Internet, Harassment, Intimidation, Media Hall of Shame

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 2.04/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word:

Offender: Marc Ecko Enterprises

Media Outlet: GQ magazine's Oct 2010 issue and other publications; Marc Ecko Muse website

The Offense: Marc Ecko's "Cut and Sew" clothing line for men is promoted through the use of celebrity Lindsay Lohan, seen in provocative sketches and online fantasy scenarios.

NOW's Analysis: The print advertisement catches your attention with a realistic looking drawing of Lindsay Lohan pulling off her top while a man in a suit sits behind her holding a large bolt cutter tool. The purpose of the ad is to get you to go to the website, where you are greeted by another exploitative image of Lohan, this time wearing a ski mask and sitting on a stool with her legs spread open.

The basic concept of the website is that the male visitor should imagine himself in various scenarios where Lindsay Lohan serves as his "muse." These fantasy situations involve Lohan cutting off parts of her clothing, rolling around on a bed while "you" take pictures of her, and so on. (The actual clothing line is immaterial to these situations.)

Instructions on the website allow you to print out a "hologram glyph image" of Lohan that will "come to life" when a webcam is pointed at it. You are encouraged to "interact" with the image and record it for playback and sharing on the web. The site also includes behind the scenes video of the shooting of Lohan's "muse" images.

To say that this voyeuristic website is creepy is an understatement. This campaign is a striking example of what it means to sexually exploit, objectify and commodify women. That it incorporates the identity of a troubled young woman celebrity makes it even more sad.

Take Action: Contact Marc Ecko Enterprises and tell them what you think of the "Lindsay Lohan Muse" promotional campaign.

Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, October 20, 2010

More offenders in : Advertising, Objectification of Women, Print Publications, Internet

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 2.41/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word:

Offender: Political Cartoonist Brian Fairrington

Media Outlet: Available on Daryl Cagle's website on MSNBC.com and in publications across the U.S.

The Offense: Fairrington's depiction of current Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan includes her wearing buttons that say "Never Married," "No Kids," "Boys are icky!" and "Kill Baby Kill"

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Brian Fairrington - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

NOW's Analysis: Ever since President Obama announced Elena Kagan as his pick for the Supreme Court on May 10 (heck, even before, when she was on the short list), this impressive woman has been targeted with some seriously ridiculous speculation about her sexual orientation. Playing softball, not fitting into the traditional woman's role of married with children, and who knows what else, are leading the media to question whether or not Kagan is a lesbian.

As we should all know by now, it doesn't matter whether or not Kagan is a lesbian. Being a lesbian, repeat, being a lesbian is not an insult. And yet, so many in our culture still believe that it is. Lesbian-baiting is designed not only to harm the person being "smeared" but to send a warning to other women that it could happen to them, too. It's just another intimidation tactic. And the media, with it's love for all things titillating, goes along either dumbly or complicitly.

This cartoon is just one example of the kind of attacks a woman nominee, even in 2010, can expect. Kagan also has been taken to task for not looking like a supermodel, for daring to look like herself. Comments on Kagan's experience, qualifications, philosophy and ideology are fair game and should give the media plenty to talk about. But her appearance and sexual orientation should be out of bounds.

Take Action: Email Brian Fairrington and tell him what you think about his cartoon.

Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, May 17, 2010

More offenders in : Sexist Piggery, Print Publications, Internet, Harassment, Intimidation

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 3.12/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word: