Eye Candy

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by citizenzen, Sep 26, 2017.

  1. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #1
    Dude. o_O

    It's amazing to me that he chose to sexualize his congressional colleagues. Instead of praising their intelligence, diligence, knowledge of policy, or how much they care about their constituents, he chose to comment on their looks.

    Idiot.
     
  2. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
  3. appleisking macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    #3
    "If I wasn't sexist." Clearly you're not :rolleyes:.
     
  4. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #4
    This could range from creepy to a humorous compliment depending on his relationship with the women. Depends on context really. I'd let the women decide if it was offensive or light humor.
     
  5. LizKat macrumors 601

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #5
    Heh, when I saw the thread title I had just read a news alert that the tax overhaul plan will be announced tomorrow. Talk about eye candy, this is the real deal but it's behind a glass wall like a fire extinguisher, and I think they're not supposed to break the glass until they pass ACA and cut Medicare. So the tax cut is maybe ONLY eye candy. Even Orrin Hatch promised to cast a somewhat skeptical eye on it, as opposed to just voting. Will be interesting to see how this goes.

    As far as Mark Walker and his remarks about his female colleagues, what is it with these former preachers anyway? Yeah, he's another former preacher.

     
  6. Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
  7. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #7
    Sorry, but the setting is a professional setting. Even worse, it was a public announcement. Therefore he isn’t just sharing a personal joke with a colleague, he sent this message out to the world.

    And he did apologize (somewhat) for his statement. So even he has admitted it was an inappropriate thing to say.
     
  8. Scepticalscribe, Sep 26, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2017

    Scepticalscribe macrumors Westmere

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #8
    Yeah, what is it with these former preachers?

    "Eye candy"? By the bleeding nails of Christ......

    Sigh.

    Seriously, would you expect that a male member of Congress - irrespective of sculpted musculature and elegantly proportional features - to be judged on his appearance or qualifications, experience, judgment?

    "Context"? In what context - as a member of Congress - should you be judged by your appearance?

    Of course, it is creepy, - and, in case the point is missed, in this context, it is entirely wrong to make such a remark; it demeans and belittles the women in question, making commentary about their appearance and presence in Congress, and not about their ability, qualifications, experience, and, critically, political judgment, the criteria on which they are judged.
     
  9. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #9
    If they know each other this could be little more than a compliment among friends. Unless the actual women there are coming out against it then I think you guys are just looking to get outraged.

    He also wasn't judging anyone. I don't know many people who get offended by a compliment on their looks.

    These women are adults, if they feel offended they can let us know without you doing it for them.
     
  10. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #10
    If you’re married, ask your wife. Maybe she could explain it to you.

    Have her read the link. Tell her you don’t see anything wrong with it, and see what her thoughts are on the matter.

    Then let us know what she said.
     
  11. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    I am married. I also understand that context matters. Could be an inside joke for all I know, pretty obvious that was the intention, not many models in congress of either gender.
    --- Post Merged, Sep 26, 2017 ---
    He admitted he meant it to be a flippant light hearted joke. Hang em high.
     
  12. Gutwrench Contributor

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #12
    How racist can you be?

    Hmmmm.

    Ahem. Sorry, I queued up the wrong pat Left argument. How misogynistic can you be?

    There, that’s better.
     
  13. LizKat macrumors 601

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #13
    It's not about whether they are offended. It's that Walker made the remarks at all. Those women are not beauty pageant contestants, they are members of Congress and doubtless have better resumés than he does (which wouldn't take a lot of effort, as one could tell by reading the Hill link I put up that has his CV in it).

    So to call his female colleagues "eye candy" wasn't flippant even if Walker meant that to be the case. It was just plaint unprofessional and disrespectful.

    Why not call Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell eye candy instead? After all, Congressman Walker's speech was basically chiding his own party's leadership for having failed to measure up to the will of the Republicans who elected the House majority and expected responsive governance in return. Those leaders are barely more than podium decorations at this point.

    Ryan has practically handed over the House to the GOP's House Freedom Caucus and in so doing, has also hobbled the power of the GOP majority in the Senate. And McConnell doesn't smile at the floor any more as he walks along. He may have managed to help rein in Trump on assorted privileges Trump was trying to stretch too far, but it's clear to ol' Mitch at this point that it's not Trump who's the only problem to solve if the GOP means to pass any key legislation this term. Meanwhile he doubtless views with alarm the fact that Trump's spending time with the Democratic leadership.

    Take the Dems and add some moderate Republicans and you might end up with some legislation doesn't exactly look like it came from a Republican administration. Trump couldn't care less about such details as long as he can claim he got something big done. But Ryan and McConnell can't take that to the Republican electorate in the 2018 midterm elections. They have some really big problems now trying to pass anything, and there might not be any purely Republican solutions to them.

    Bottom line no amount of posturing by the Republican Study Committee can disguise the fact that this government is gridlocked inside its own majority. Walker's so-called "flippant" crack about his female colleagues being eye candy is just the tip of the iceberg of what's wrong with the Republicans in the 115th Congress.
     
  14. citizenzen, Sep 26, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2017

    citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #14
    Not good enough for ZA. He'll only believe it's an issue if he hears publicly that the women had a problem with it.

    Nevermind that the statement was made by the chairman of a caucus they belong to. Nevermind that women make up about 8% of that 170-member caucus.

    No, they're supposed to forget about their legislative hopes and dreams and speak out against their own party leader, someone who could help them achieve their political goals.

    Luckily for them, those women have more self-control and dignity than the impulsive chairman they need to get along with.
     
  15. Scepticalscribe, Sep 27, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2017

    Scepticalscribe macrumors Westmere

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #15
    Agreed.

    It is deliberately disrespectful, patronising, insulting and belittling. This is not "a flippant light-hearted joke".

    Rather, it is meant to signal that no matter how qualified or experienced a female office-holder is, in the eyes of Mr Walker (and his misogynistic President) women are supposed to perform a function as none other than eye-candy and be purely decorative; their achievements and abilities count for little.
     
  16. niploteksi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    #16
    Remember that what they say is not what they mean. Isn't that the trademark of your current administration? Or was it that they mean what they are not saying...

    Anyway you have to remember it's all about context and in this context it's acceptable to say things like that.
     
  17. Scepticalscribe macrumors Westmere

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #17
    Context may well be everything, but the fact is, that as a result of his campaign, Mr Trump has normalised the use of such language and the clear and open expression of such attitudes in such contexts.
     
  18. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    #18
    That is certainly one way to look at it. Now please don't get me wrong, his comments were off the mark for sure (should not have been said) but it could have also simply meant that on top of thier achievments they were "eye candy" as well but you know, we have to go for the throat at evey opprotunity.

    Again, he is an idiot for saying it but it could have been said without having malace behind it.
     
  19. Scepticalscribe, Sep 27, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2017

    Scepticalscribe macrumors Westmere

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #19
    No.

    I beg to differ.

    Of course there is malice behind it - this whole administration is predicated on - and defined by - misogyny and racism.

    Nor will I accept the bona fides of a Republican legislator in a House where policies such as defunding Planned Parenthood are mooted. Such policies are merely the practical effect - in terms of policy implementation - of viewing women as "eye-candy" not deserving of rights and responsibilities.

    This is misogyny pure and simple. A lesson learned dutifully from the loathsome Mr Trump, who made a habit of giving voice to far worse during the presidential campaign.
     
  20. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    #20
    Got it, so we are going to judge all republican men by the one that was voted into office.

    People do make mistakes, I certainly hope you never do. He did apologize for it already but is an idiot for saying it in the first place
     
  21. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #21
    Honestly I wonder sometimes whether the concept of 'sexualised' makes sense. Heterosexual men will be attracted to women (and to a noticeable extent vice versa), so that affinity is always present and it is not created by stupid unprofessional remarks. The issue is how men treat women, and in the case of sexist remarks that boils down to lack of respect, impoliteness, and discrimination, not sex per se (although I recognise how tiresome it is when rude behaviour is always about unwanted sexual inuendo etc.).

    In any case, I would not want to be in Walker's shoes just now. What a buffoon.
     
  22. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #22
    None of these women are actually "eye candy", it seems to me that this was a light hearted remark that other people are wanting to get outraged over for the supposed victims.

    I work in a professional environment and if someone says the guys in our group were eye candy I'd take that as a compliment. It says nothing about my technical abilities which obviously stand on their own. Only someone extremely insecure with their abilities would take this as an attack, which may say something about some of the posters here more than the guy making the remark.
     
  23. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
  24. niploteksi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    #24
    The context being misogynist men in a misogynist setting. At least he didn't brag about how the US has the best prostitutes.

    I also think that one should keep in mind that even if it was

    one should take into consideration that they simply don't know any better. That's why it is explained away as a flippant remark or a friendly joke in poor taste.

    I see the only solution as speaking up every time it happens and hope that the next generation will know better.
     
  25. citizenzen, Sep 27, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2017

    citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #25
    One could consider that. However, Walker admits it's sexist before he makes the remark.
    So he knew better.
    --- Post Merged, Sep 27, 2017 ---
    How do you know? You must have looked them up and checked them out.

    That's another reason why Walker is wrong here.

    He invited you and countless other men to engage in a game of "Smash or Pass" over these Congresswomen.
     

Share This Page

62 September 26, 2017