quiet piggy (12. 963)

The misogynist rhetoric directed towards female politicians and journalists is nothing new and Trump does not have a monopoly on using disparaging words that translate into actual violence—and whilst wishing that the media would stop hanging on his every demented utterance and thus dignifying his addled, hateful invectives, we do hope that every reporter in the press pool is crafting their response of a colourful epithet, an insult to lob back that if it doesn’t get them arrested would at least result in a ban from the White House, something which the outlets have already signalled their willingness to give up (see previously) with what would be the most withering to these monsters by starving them of attention—and betrays a real weakness of character and a vulnerability to shield from the public at all costs. I’ve got my duly vulgar aspersion to cast on the non-zero chance that I would get called on to use it. What’s your prepared statement? Senator Mark Kelly has entered the chat. Not to psychoanalyse broken, small characters, but we suspect that Trump’s attacks against competent women—and their reception by his base, splintering as it is—is due in large part to the fact he’s only ever beaten female challengers for the presidency, those pyrrhic “victories” not without contention, so much winning, and feels denied the chance of a worthy opponent to trounce.