The only aspect of the Edwards affair that interests me* is the male privilege. Anglachel had a piece up looking at it from this angle and so, in her own way, did Brownfemipower. No woman would think she could get away with this and, if any of us ever did, the misogyny that spewed forth this election season should've made it clear that we will not be judged by the same standards men are.

There are so many cultural structures in place to punish women who are unfaithful or enjoy sex.** You need look no further than misogynist 'progressive' Keith Olbermann. I don't think he's ever run a video of Colin Farrell where he essentially calls him a slut. He saves that treatment for the starlets.

Of course, Sally Quinn would be totally uninterested in male privilege and only interested in how to blame women for the stupid shit men do. Because that's our job, to keep the men folk happy and in line. It's not like they're adults who are responsible for their own decisions or anything. Indeed, Sally seems happy to work within a system that, as BFP, put it:

limits women to two, maybe three major jobs (wife, mistress, bitchy politician). and within that system, women of color exist almost strictly within mistress (think sally hemmings and Carrie Butler, the woman who had a child with Strom Thurmond)/bitchy politician dichotomy (every black woman from condoleezza rice to cynthia mckinney to michelle obama has weathered varying degrees of heartless, cold, slightly off kilter, scary bitch rumors–white women have too, but oddly, it seems to be mostly democrat white women who get this shit, for example, you never hear any ’scary bitch’ shit being said about elizabeth dole).

BFP also noted that an awful lot of women in politics are known for who they fucked or got fucked by because, in many ways, that's women's role. And when they don't fit that role - like Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards - then it's their fault. Something is wrong with them - they're cold, they're frigid, they're gay. They don't control/satisfy their husbands.*** Moreover, as BFP discusses, the limited role women play has an especially pernicious effect on women of color, especially gay women of color, because of the need for women to have connections to men in power for them to be players in politics.

* The only other aspect that could interest me in the story is the money Edwards may have paid her from his campaign. Since I didn't donate to his campaign, I don't particularly care. If I had donated, I'd probably want some answers about whether my money was being used to pay off Hunter.

** Because, of course, women are naturally faithful and don't enjoy sex, unlike men. It's just that sometimes people need a shaming and punishment system to make sure they act in ways that come naturally.

*** In some ways, of course, Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards do fit the "fucked powerful men" role since part of their ability to be powerful in the D.C. system comes from their marriages. What they get criticized for is not being 'woman' enough because they have managed to carve out identities separate from their husbands.

Sally couldn't seem to remember the names of any Republicans that have committed adultery - say a Guillani, or a Gingrich or a Livingston or a Henry Hyde. Those names just didn't roll off her lips like say a Clinton, Spitzer or Edwards.

Funny how that happens...it's only the dems that have the really good sex scandals!

Fortunately, she managed to keep her sense of humor because she noted that "no thinks higher of Elizabeth Edwards than she does" Wow, who'd a thunk it?

No woman would think she could get away with this and, if any of us ever did, the misogyny that spewed forth this election season should’ve made it clear that we will not be judged by the same standards men are.

Former Virginia State Senator Jeanmarie Devolites Davis. The break up of her previous marraige and her subsequent marriage to Rep. Tom Davis are a matter of public record. There were stories of numerous other indiscretions. It is true all of this did contribute to her downfall in the 2007 election, but she almost got away with it.

And of course marriage to a powerful man had nothing to do with Quinn's prominence.

Actually, Hillary has got it on both ends - it's her fault that Bill roams, it's her fault for putting up with it, i.e, she's enabling him, but nothing she's accomplished isn't because of her marriage to Bill, which becomes a nice equation because it makes her look feckless, phony, ruthless, without values, and hungry for power.

Another aspect of the press coverage which shows the same ever-loving in favor of the right bias; how many times during the impeachment of Bill did you hear rightwing pundits and their SCLM puppets assail Hillary because she didn't up and pack her bags and presumably move out of the White House. You'll remember that Feminism and Feminists were constantly called out by the SCLM for being hypocritical about Bill's so-called predation of both Monica and Paula Jones.

However, how hypocritical and flip-flopping was it for the minions of the Independent Woman's Forum, who for years now have been harping on the evils of divorce, and that divorce has been made too easy, marriage undervalued in favor of selfish individualism, to suddenly become full-blown "feminists," insisting that Hillary was a phony because she didn't immediately file for divorce? And I'm leaving aside the fact that she was part of a governing administration and had responsibilities to the American people which she obviously put first, above what her own feelings might have been. But that kind of credit cannot be attributed to Hillary by law, I believe; seriously I do believe you can be arrested if you say anything like that in the mainstream media.

The one to whom her present husband was married when she started her notorious, social-climbing affair with dear Ben?

What is it about these Villagers that they think the moral clock resets every time they manage to get remarried?

Hillary couldn't win. Shocking that a strong, feminist woman was painted into such a corner by the media or the culture.

But then women have mouths for a reason and it's not to talk with.* If only Hillary and Elizabeth Edwards would learn their place, then we would be spared their husband's mistakes.

I've said this many times, but I really do think we're entering a time of great danger for women. There will also be great opportunity, but the misogynistic poison in the culture is running free and unfettered.

* I hate Rush Limbaugh, but I believe what he says can tell you a lot about the Village's (and in some respects the Country's) id.

If you think about it, Sally Quinn's perspective on the wives makes sense. If it's the wife's fault, it lets everyone else off the hook doesn't it?

This Limbaugh thinks he understands what a woman's mouth is for?

Hmm. Maybe, that's a CLUE to his need for a trip to a sex-tourist paradise and somebody else's prescription for those little blue helper pills?

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

I think he's an authority on how some men (emphasis on some) see women. And I think it's telling that he spews this stuff out with no consequences.

Or, hell, maybe I'm wrong and there will be a huge public outcry over it and he'll lose listeners and sponsors. But I bet not. The problem will be wtih those who complain for not having a "sense of humor." Because you know how feminists are.

to have the lowdown on the downlow.

Look, I will state it here and now, for the record. I hate the slimy lying motherless misbegotten houndspawn pseudo-star. K? He lies. He cheats. He pontificates endlessly for "entertainment purposes" with all the pusillanimity he ascribes to his political and philosophical foes (damn near anybody with enough common sense to pour water out of a boot with the directions on the bottom, which would explain why Limbaugh is so idolized among the GOP...whoops, I digress).

He's a jerk. He can't keep a real job. With all his money, he also can't stay married. (Gotta think there's something fishy there. Either he's useless around the house, or he mistreats women; maybe both, which would be my bet if I were a bettor -- but then again, I abhor gambling.) But for some unfathomable reason, Mr. and Mrs. U.S. A-butthat adore the blowhard.

Else he wouldn't make several million dollars a month by yapping on the radio, especially when his shtick consists of a pastiche of innuendo, falsehood, vulgarity, prejudice and simple dishonesty all fancied up with his jowly bonhomie.

Feminist is a label I don't much care for, because it limits what I want to see too narrowly. I think maybe what I really am is a humanist, and the system I want for my children's children is a meritocracy.

People should be valued 'cause they're people -- living breathing humans. It shouldn't count for more if you're a blastocyte than if you're the blastocyte's mother. It shouldn't count for more if you're the scion of a corporate dynasty than if your dad is a tomato picker. It shouldn't count for more if you're a third-generation Daughter of Plymouth Plantation than if you're a brand-new immigrant.

What should matter is your talent, your ability, your willingness to work. The rest of it's excuses for people like Limbaugh to feel superior, even when, as clearly as Loud Obbs, they're inferior. Showing off their inferiority complexes, even.

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

but then again, I abhor gambling

And you're a fellow Texan compatriot? This hurts.

Sarah, I'm from Texas too, and when I was quite young, I would have agreed with you that feminist was an undesirable label... I didn't want to adopt a victim mentality, either. I wanted to be an equal "citizen of the world". But when I got older and looked around me at the situation women faced: smaller pay packets, greater responsibilities at home, sexual objectification, less credance from others at work(including women), not being included in equal numbers in most professions...I realized that humanism without feminism has already been tried, and it hasn't worked. If you really believe in humanism for all you'll need to become feminist first.