<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: RNC:  Unconscious Sexism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.undiplomatic.net/2008/09/02/rnc-unconscious-sexism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.undiplomatic.net/2008/09/02/rnc-unconscious-sexism/</link>
	<description>Bringing diplomacy back, girl.  Those other countries don't know how to act.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:41:48 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: You're the Idiot, Not Charlie</title>
		<link>http://www.undiplomatic.net/2008/09/02/rnc-unconscious-sexism/#comment-1125</link>
		<dc:creator>You're the Idiot, Not Charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 05:53:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.undiplomatic.net/?p=653#comment-1125</guid>
		<description>DUH.  It's not that they're all WOMEN, timbo.  Remember the Sesame Street song, "One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong"?  Charlie means that the RNC unconsciously lumped all the women together as though they were the same when they're NOT.  What we have there is one candidate, 2 wives of.  So to be consistent in a pertinent way (political status) rather than a NON-pertinent way (sex), there should be a shot of all politicians (Sarah, George and John) or all spouses (Todd, Laura and Cindy).  That's why it's sexist.  Get it now?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUH.  It&#8217;s not that they&#8217;re all WOMEN, timbo.  Remember the Sesame Street song, &#8220;One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn&#8217;t belong&#8221;?  Charlie means that the RNC unconsciously lumped all the women together as though they were the same when they&#8217;re NOT.  What we have there is one candidate, 2 wives of.  So to be consistent in a pertinent way (political status) rather than a NON-pertinent way (sex), there should be a shot of all politicians (Sarah, George and John) or all spouses (Todd, Laura and Cindy).  That&#8217;s why it&#8217;s sexist.  Get it now?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jmm</title>
		<link>http://www.undiplomatic.net/2008/09/02/rnc-unconscious-sexism/#comment-979</link>
		<dc:creator>jmm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:52:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.undiplomatic.net/?p=653#comment-979</guid>
		<description>Have you read Susan Faludi's book, The Terror Dream.  This photo represents what America is compelled to protect--pretty white women.  It is sending a message right to the heart of the American psyche.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have you read Susan Faludi&#8217;s book, The Terror Dream.  This photo represents what America is compelled to protect&#8211;pretty white women.  It is sending a message right to the heart of the American psyche.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: You're an idiot.</title>
		<link>http://www.undiplomatic.net/2008/09/02/rnc-unconscious-sexism/#comment-978</link>
		<dc:creator>You're an idiot.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:19:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.undiplomatic.net/?p=653#comment-978</guid>
		<description>So a woman talking to two other women with no men present is automatically "sexist"? What about the right to same-sex conversation? Everything's sexist if you're trained to see sexism everywhere.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So a woman talking to two other women with no men present is automatically &#8220;sexist&#8221;? What about the right to same-sex conversation? Everything&#8217;s sexist if you&#8217;re trained to see sexism everywhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
