Lovelyish

Someone should have told her to look at the camera and actually smile.

Michelle Bachmann is a crazy woman who is afraid of her own shadow unless she’s quoting Bible verses at it. I don’t see anything sexist in this magazine cover or in my assessment of her. It’s true.

Biased, maybe. Of course it’s biased–anyone who’s ever read the magazine knows that Newsweek is liberal. And Bachman isn’t just a right-wing candidate. She’s so far right-wing she’s falling off the edge of the world she probably still thinks is flat. So I’d expect her to be portrayed unfavorably, and I’m sure she knew she would be, because the really scary part is she’s crazy but not completely idiotic.

HAHAHAHAHA SHE MUST HAVE HAD A MIGRAINE THAT DAY! CAN’T WAIT TO RECEIVE THIS ONE IN THE MAIL!!!!!!!!!! COLLECTORS ITEM!!!!!!

No, its not. I didnt look at this cover and think “Oh my god THATS SO SEXIST!” I just thought, wow thats a really unflattering picture of her -__-

there isn’t enough photoshop and good lighting in the world to hide the crazy in that women. 

Don’t let her look you in the eye. It’s a trap.

This should put to rest the notion that she is one hot conservative.  If this was the photo she approved, I don’t want to see the ones she rejected.

Sexist? No. Biased? Definitely. This lady (along with Sarah Palin) are incapable of running a country. Unfortunately, the female candidates this time around are total jokes, but it’s not because they’re women… it’s because they’re unfit for the position due to their radical (and sometimes ridiculous) ideals.

@vain_apathy@xanga - BAHAHAHA. Love it.

@shes_lump@xanga - LOLOLOL

@TheScienceOfChic - I agree with this so much.

Somehow everything on Lovelyish ends up racist or sexist. People need to calm down. The world wouldn’t be so overly sensitive if every minor (and often imagined) infraction was called out as discrimination.
She is the queen of rage. She is a totally unfit candidate. It doesn’t matter that she’s a woman, at all.

It’s not sexist- she IS crazy and she just happens to be a woman. 

I just get annoyed because people like her, who I agree with occasionally, make all republicans/conservatives look bad. Having leaders that so many people distrust also hurts the causes of free enterprise, laissez-faire capitalism, and the belief in smaller government.

It’s not sexist.  Do any of you actually look up words before jamming them in your titles?

Can we stop reducing everything to being sexist/raciest/and everything else that can possibly be conceived as insulting. They aren’t saying anything sexist they just don’t agree with her politics. She isn’t a very favorable person so it is kind of hard to write anything favorable about her. Have you ever heard this woman talk, do you keep up with what she holds as her ideals this woman is quite a bit unhinged. I think actually a lot of the Tea Party group is exceptionally bonkers. And as for Sarah Palin she seems like she wants to be perceived as this “attractive cougar” type at the very least she basks in the attention it gets her. I’m surprised she even knows what Newsweek is. Maybe we could view a Republican woman in a positive light if one that could hold her own against other candidates without sounding crazy or becoming a caricature of themselves.

OOF.

How is that cover sexist? 

its not newsweek’s fault she’s ugly.

I wouldn’t call it sexist, but it’s certainly not very flattering!  I’ll admit I don’t know a lot about what she stands for, but if she honestly believes that a woman’s job is to submit to her husband, then I don’t want her ruling a country. Would she then have to ask her husband’s permission every time she wanted to have a state dinner, let alone propose a new policy?

Sexist? It reminds me of the Exorcist.

she is a sexy nut

I have to agree with what Jon Stewart said on this one.   She already looks crazy by what she say, so it was wholly unnecessary to try to make her look crazy with a picture.   as a photogenic woman and with all the photo editting we have today this seems like someone obviously tried to make her look crazier than usual.

Who cares if it’s sexist? She’s a homophobic moron.

Unfortunately, it is, and we should not condone it.   As much as I dislike her, this is a disservice to her and to political women in general.  Feministing ran a good piece about it:
http://feministing.com/2011/08/09/bachmann-sexism-watch-crazy-eyed-queen-of-rage-edition/

from there:

“The trend of throwing around ableist language to dismiss political
extremists as “crazy” and the trend of labeling woman politicians as
“crazy” just for daring to have an opinion dovetails to heighten the
effect for conservative women. Look, I understand the urge to label a
party that’s willing to destroy the U.S. economy over a game of political brinkmanship as beyond the pale.

And, there’s no question that Bachmann’s views are as hateful, incoherent, and hypocritical
as they come. “Batshit crazy” has become the go-to short-hand during a
time when the right-wing is slipping farther from the mainstream than
ever before. But it’s ableist, counterproductive, and just lazy, and, as feminists and progressives, we need to do better–and better than we’ve previously done on this very blog.”

“If you’re trying to illustrate the extremism of a politician’s views and
find yourself relying on sexist, ableist tropes that have been used to
discredit women since they first started fighting their way into the
public sphere, just stop. The odds are good that Bachmann herself will
make your point for you.”

@alwaysforeversunny@xanga - LOL TRUE.

Unfortunately, bashing someone does neither side any good… and it detracts from other issues.  If we had a bit more respect, we might actually get something done. 

uhmmm see John Stewart to keep up on her republican chants I mean she is titled that way for a reason, she is fierce and she worked hard to get that title, which is not bad by the way.