Left attacks Rona Ambrose's *Best Hair*

[geoffrey]

I don't have a problem with either comment, dog or hair, you don't go into politics with an expectation that no one will call you a name.

Grow up and deal with it, both of them. Such children (am I going to get in trouble with that??).

[bradco]

stupid comment.....but sexist? Men have hair to and Harpers had his the subject of debate as well.

Really this hurts the environmental group more by questioning their legitmacy as they engage in this kind of behaviour. Bickering over insults when there is real problems to deal with...ie what will be one of the largest security threats, if not the largest, within 40 years, whether you think its man made (which it is) or natural. Anyone who doubts the seriousness of global warming and the security dimensions of it ought to read the literature, and I mean the academic literature not the junk you get from "popular" sources.

[normanchateau]

The silence on the left is deafening!!!

Very much reminiscent of the silence on the right when Darrel Reid was appointed Chief of Staff to Rona Ambrose.

Reid's claim to fame is comparing Canada to Nazi Germany for adding sexual orientation to hate crimes legislation. He predicted Christians would be imprisoned for condemning homosexuality when this legislation passed. Harper of course voted against the legislation and Darrel Reid is now rewarded with a position in Ambrose's ministry, defending the environment.

Why would Ambrose, who is not known to be a social conservative, pick a religious extremist like Reid as her Chief of Staff unless he was foisted upon her by so-con Harper?

The silence on the right is deafening!!!

[Ricki Bobbi]

Nice attempt at changing the topic. Any comment on this comment?

[scribblet]

Not worth it.

[normanchateau]

Nice attempt at changing the topic. Any comment on this comment?

I did yesterday...4:47 pm.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Nice attempt at changing the topic. Any comment on this comment?

I did yesterday...4:47 pm.

Here's your quote.

I'm not sure why the thread heading is "Left attacks..."

It was the Climate Action Network who made these outrageous and sexist comments. I've heard no support for these comments from anyone on the Left.

As far as I know, the Climate Action Network is merely an environmental group. Other than they're opposed to Harper and Ambrose's feeble environmental efforts, I'm not sure that it's fair to characterize this group as the Left.I'm not sure why the thread heading is "Left attacks..."

There is support for the comments from a Greenpeace representative. It is fair to say Greenpeace is from the left, isn't it?

[normanchateau]

Nice attempt at changing the topic. Any comment on this comment?

I did yesterday...4:47 pm.

Here's your quote.

I'm not sure why the thread heading is "Left attacks..."

It was the Climate Action Network who made these outrageous and sexist comments. I've heard no support for these comments from anyone on the Left.

As far as I know, the Climate Action Network is merely an environmental group. Other than they're opposed to Harper and Ambrose's feeble environmental efforts, I'm not sure that it's fair to characterize this group as the Left.I'm not sure why the thread heading is "Left attacks..."

There is support for the comments from a Greenpeace representative. It is fair to say Greenpeace is from the left, isn't it?

Again I'll repeat my earlier point. I think the comments about Ambrose were outrageous and sexist. Had those comments been made by a Member of Parliament, they would have deserved the same condemnation and derision as Peter MacKay's outrageous and sexist comments.

But Greenpeace and the Climate Action Network leftist? On what do you base this? I have never viewed environmental groups or political parties as necessarily leftist or rightist. They can be either. For example,

the Green Party of BC bitterly opposes the BC NDP on the grounds that the leftist NDP is concerned more with economic than environmental issues. The previous leader of the Green Party of Canada was formerly with the Progressive Conservatives and many right-leaning people can see reasons to vote Green but abhor the NDP.

I see Greenpeace and the Climate Action Network as environmental groups. If you seriously believe that being pro-environment means you must be "leftist", then you must think that being anti-environment defines you as a "rightist".

But to be fair to Harper, I never thought his failure to deal with environmental issues had any relationship

to his being a right-winger. I assumed he made Darrel Reid the Chief of Staff to Rona Ambrose because Reid and Harper are both Evangelical Christians and social conservatives, and that it had nothing to do with Harper's respect or lack thereof for the environment.

[Wilber]

I can't believe this crap. I guess anyone who says something about The Donald's hair in public is now sexist. Some people have far too much time on their hands. They should try to find something useful to do rather than spending their lives looking for offense and excuses to be outraged in everything that is said.

[Black Dog]

Sorry, BD, but I think you're missing the point.

First, a woman is still the weakest link in the chain. Ambrose, a woman, is the minister the opposition is going after. (It's interesting too that the Liberals/NDP are doing this. The Tories would feel uncomfortable going after a woman. Belinda? Belinda is a walking disaster area. If she'd been a man without money, she would already be out of politics and sitting in a UN post.)

Second, Ambrose has the unenviable task of telling a vast bureaucracy that the political master wants things done differently. Almost all of the civil servants working in the Department of Environment in Ottawa actively want to see the Tories defeated and truly believe Stephen Harper is a short interlude. In a normal world, these people would have quit but this being Ottawa, the civil servants get their salaries deposited every Wednesday without fail. They live in a parallel universe from the rest of us.

So, your point is women are weak and thus going after them on the basis of things like their hair is fair ball? No? What is your point?

The opposition smells blood and they're going after Ambrose. The opposition senses that the Tories are weak on the environment. Of course, it just happens that a woman is the environment minister.

You keep bringing teh opposition, civil servants into this. That's not the subject.

I can't believe this crap. I guess anyone who says something about The Donald's hair in public is now sexist. Some people have far too much time on their hands. They should try to find something useful to do rather than spending their lives looking for offense and excuses to be outraged in everything that is said.

Here's a handy standard to apply: can you envision a similar comment being levelled at a man? I'm gonna say no.

[normanchateau]

I can't believe this crap. I guess anyone who says something about The Donald's hair in public is now sexist.

I can't believe you're still missing the point. The criticism of Ambrose is sexist in that it implies her weakness as Environment Minister is due to her preoccupation with her hair. The preoccupation with her hair is a female stereotype, notwithstanding the fact that Trump is no doubt preoccupied with his. However no one has suggested a correlation, positive or negative, between the Donald's skills as an entrepreneur and his hair.

Far more interesting to me than irrelevant comments about her hair is the fact that Ambrose, who is not a social conservative nor a religious fanatic, would allow Harper's office to impose Darrel Reid on her as Chief of Staff.

[Wilber]

The point is, it is a big deal because people like you make it a big deal.

[Wilber]

Why is it that a cheap shot taken at a woman is always sexist but one taken at a man is just a cheap shot?

[normanchateau]

Why is it that a cheap shot taken at a woman is always sexist but one taken at a man is just a cheap shot?

A cheap shot taken at a woman is not always sexist. Cheap shots which perpetuate stereotypes about women probably are.

[Wilber]

Why is it that a cheap shot taken at a woman is always sexist but one taken at a man is just a cheap shot?

A cheap shot taken at a woman is not always sexist. Cheap shots which perpetuate stereotypes about women probably are.

It's people who take offense at everything and continually try to apply labels to those perceived offenses who perpetuate stereotypes more than the ignorant clods who take the shots. In an effort to avoid being sexist I use the word clod, generally applied to males.

[Who's Doing What?]

Has anybody bothered to loook at pictures of former ministers in her position?

It is quite possible she has the best hair ever.

Nice to see the Fem-bots have made commenting on a womans hair a "sexist" remark. Grow up.

Apparently I am not allowed to tell a woman she has nice hair. It's sexist.

Heaven forbid I would ever say a woman is looking good in her outfit. That's Harassment.

What a joke.

Personally I don't like her hair. I think it makes her look snobbish. But that is just my oppinion. Am I still allowed to have one when it comes to women?

[normanchateau]

Why is it that a cheap shot taken at a woman is always sexist but one taken at a man is just a cheap shot?

A cheap shot taken at a woman is not always sexist. Cheap shots which perpetuate stereotypes about women probably are.

It's people who take offense at everything and continually try to apply labels to those perceived offenses who perpetuate stereotypes more than the ignorant clods who take the shots. In an effort to avoid being sexist I use the word clod, generally applied to males.

I have no use for people who take offense at "everything" just as I have no use for those who are racist or sexist or homophobic.

[Wilber]

I have no use for people who take offense at "everything" just as I have no use for those who are racist or sexist or homophobic.

But by continually applying those labels you help perpetuate stereotypes. You apply different values to bad behavior according to whom it is directed rather than just condemning it for what it is, bad behavior.

[kimmy]

They said she cares more about her hair than her job. Would a male politician be attacked in similar way?

That's debateable. During the election there were plenty of derisive comments about Harper's shitty haircut, but I don't recall any of them being a judgment of his competence, just petty attacks. There were plenty of comments about his "fake looking smile", some of which cast doubt on his sincerity or personal character.

It's debateable. However, Stronach and Ambrose have often received a sort of media attention that they wouldn't get if they were 20 years older or 40 pounds fatter.

-k

[Wilber]

That's debateable. During the election there were plenty of derisive comments about Harper's shitty haircut, but I don't recall any of them being a judgment of his competence, just petty attacks. There were plenty of comments about his "fake looking smile", some of which cast doubt on his sincerity or personal character.

Come on, in politics almost all personal attacks are aimed at calling someones competency to govern into question, either directly or by association. Get real.

[southerncomfort]

Normie says: I have no use for people who take offense at "everything" just as I have no use for those who are racist or sexist or homophobic.

Any one can fit those terms normie defending on who you want to bash today.

[normanchateau]

However, Stronach and Ambrose have often received a sort of media attention that they wouldn't get if they were 20 years older or 40 pounds fatter.

Alas, sad but true.

[southerncomfort]

They said she cares more about her hair than her job. Would a male politician be attacked in similar way?

That's debateable. During the election there were plenty of derisive comments about Harper's shitty haircut, but I don't recall any of them being a judgment of his competence, just petty attacks. There were plenty of comments about his "fake looking smile", some of which cast doubt on his sincerity or personal character.

It's debateable. However, Stronach and Ambrose have often received a sort of media attention that they wouldn't get if they were 20 years older or 40 pounds fatter.

-k

Hey, all I can say is its mindless bashing shows no depth at all. If its all they can find to worry about we should be happy. You go Rona

[Wilber]

It's debateable. However, Stronach and Ambrose have often received a sort of media attention that they wouldn't get if they were 20 years older or 40 pounds fatter.

You mean kind of like when Doug Young called Deborah Grey a "slab of bacon"?