Offender: Chris Matthews, Hardball

Media Outlet: MSNBC, 1/28/09

The Offense: Host Matthews had this to say about whether family planning provisions should be included in the economic stimulus plan: "I don't know. It sounds a little like China. . . . I think everybody should have family planning and everybody believes in birth control as a right. I'm for -- abortion is a right and all that. It's all right. But why should the federal government have a policy of reducing the number of births? I don't know why the federal government has an interest in that. . . . These decisions should be family decisions, not federal decisions."

NOW's Analysis: As usual, Chris Matthews just doesn't get it. The question is: Is Matthews just clueless, or is he intentionally playing the fool? The provision in question would help states extend coverage for family planning services to women who need and want it but can't afford it. There is no place in the provision ordering women what to do with their bodies. It simply helps women avoid unplanned pregnancies. This is nothing like China's one-child policy, and Matthews really should know better. His comments serve to demonize contraception and public funding of reproductive health care.

Take Action: Tell MSNBC what you think about Matthews' comments.

Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, January 29, 2009

More offenders in : Television, Reproductive Rights

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 2.91/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word:

Offender: Producers and writers of Nip/Tuck, "Roxy St. James" episode

Media Outlet: FX cable network, first aired 1/27/09

The Offense: On this fictional show, a woman fearful of developing breast cancer because she has lost multiple family members to the disease, asks the main characters, who are plastic surgeons, to perform pre-emptive surgery and remove her breasts. When they refuse to do so, she cuts off one of her breasts with an electric carving knife in a waiting room full of patients.

NOW's Analysis: The scene itself was unconscionable. It played into our society's fascination with violence against women (although they cynically made this woman inflict violence upon herself), while promoting the stereotype of the out-of-control, emotional, irrational woman.

Nip/Tuck's effort to tackle the issue of breast cancer this season was completely undercut by this exploitative episode. The show took the very serious, topical matter of at-risk women having pre-emptive surgery in an effort to avoid developing breast cancer and turned it into a gory spectacle.

The possibility that the character might be mentally ill was implicit, but was not addressed. The doctors initially did not take the woman's concerns seriously, but once she had maimed herself they proceeded to perform a full mastectomy on her without hesitation. A dangerous message was sent -- that women must do something horrible and extreme to themselves to get men (and/or the medical establishment) to listen to them. If the writers of Nip/Tuck were trying for insightful commentary, they missed the mark, achieving only shock and horror.

Take Action: Tell the FX Network what you think about this episode of Nip/Tuck.

Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, January 28, 2009

More offenders in : Violence Against Women, Television

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 4.01/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word:

Offender: Eli Saslow, "The Obama Speechwriter, Helping to Make History"

Media Outlet: Ran on the front page of The Washington Post (12/18/08)

The Offense: This 2,000+ word profile on Barack Obama's head speechwriter, Jon Favreau, made only brief mention of a photo that had recently surfaced of him at a party, posed with a cardboard cut-out of Hillary Clinton. Writer Saslow does not convey the fact that Favreau was posed as if groping Clinton's breast, and that another man was on the other side of the cut-out pretending to pour a beer down her throat.

NOW's Analysis: The article made light of Favreau's actions, calling the photo "silly" and saying he was "posed awkwardly." It failed to address Favreau's disregard for the next Secretary of State, the suggestion of sexual violence implicit in the men's poses, and the insult it represented to all women. The piece noted that Favreau would be responsible for hiring and managing staff in his new role, but failed to ask what his sexist conduct might say about his attitude toward women employees and how knowledge of the photo might affect their comfort in reporting to Favreau.

Take Action: Tell Michael Abramowitz, Washington Post National Editor, what you think about Saslow's article.

Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, December 18, 2008

More offenders in : Violence Against Women, Sexist Piggery, Print Publications

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 3.73/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word: