• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When women join the “fair and balanced” network, they get “Foxified”

SmokeAndMirrors said:
No. There's a jaw, nose, and eyebrow shape they seem to select for as well. There's also a limited spectrum of blonde that seems to be acceptable. There's also only one or two hair cuts, depending on how generous you feel like being; all straight with a slight body wave, lots of spray at the crown Texas-style, with layers, between neck and armpit length in accordance to age, or how much bleach damage they have to hide.

It's much, much more than that. It's a recipe, and it's quite precise, just like some other industries have. Look again.

Although, even taking the criteria you listed alone, it is still rather strange that they only seem to allow very certain things.

There's billions of us, and with a combination of strongly appearance-based selection and stringent preparation guidelines, you can make lots of people look virtually identical. And that's exactly what appears to be happening.
Click to expand...

Its always fascinating to see people who hate fox news find new reasons to continue the hate. Should they all look like that dude maddow? That dude is sour.
 
vesper said:
I don't know about that one, but pregnancy and celebrating life through the women on Fox is quite common. An example is Meg Kelly is in her 40's and a mother of four. She worked through her entire pregnancy on her afternoon show last year. Was off on maternity leave 6 weeks and came back to hosting a primetime show Kelly Files.
Click to expand...

I saw that, and frankly she looked great doing it. And she was still sharp. I can see why some would be threatened by that.
 
vesper said:
Bob you know what I think a lot of left leaning women hate about Fox women? These women celebrate being women. Femininity is not looked upon as a weakness. I have never seen another network where more female news anchors and commentators work through their entire pregnancies in front of the cameras not hiding their bellies than Fox. And at 8 months pregnant they still look lovely.
Click to expand...

Good morning, Vesper. :2wave:

Another poster summed it up well, when he stated that if he had to hear bad news he'd rather hear it from a pretty woman. :lol:
 
US Conservative said:
Its always fascinating to see people who hate fox news find new reasons to continue the hate. Should they all look like that dude maddow? That dude is sour.
Click to expand...

And this is why they do it. They're catering to people like you, who think a woman who doesn't fit your narrow standard of beauty is ugly, and think that is in some way relevant to anyone except yourself.
 
polgara said:
Good morning, Vesper. :2wave:

Another poster summed it up well, when he stated that if he had to hear bad news he'd rather hear it from a pretty woman. :lol:
Click to expand...
:lol: I missed that one. I like it! Morning Pol.
 
In fairness to the OP, it does seem like Faux News hires a disproportionate number of young, blonde, female anchors. But I'm pretty sure they're not the only ones who do this. Hell, networks such as CNN and even the Weather Channel seems to prefer looks over brains when it comes to their anchor jobs...
 
polgara said:
It's been stated so many times before, but I'll try again. Hillary, Kerry, and many other Democrat leaders made impassioned speeches in favor of going to war with Iraq! Just because they would now like us to forget that fact does not change history! Are you saying they are unpatriotic? Sheesh! Try something else! You're making the Democrats look bad! :doh:

Greetings, Verax. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Obama getting elected is more tragic than thousands of our soldiers dying and getting wounded in a stupid war? This is partisan madness of a sick population, that is unpatriotic and disgusting.

I'm well aware of what the left did in regards to Iraq. That is part of what I said earlier about the entire media coming together with Bush to promote and sell the Iraq war to the people, I remember it well.
 
Mason66 said:
Wow, it is usually men hating on women. Now it is women hating on women to pacify Obama.

What's next?
Click to expand...

I can have opinions.

I can even have opinions against some women.

Why - because I'm female I have to stick to all the other women? Bonded by breasts!

Bull****.

I can make jokes and poke fun all I want - and I can not like Fox News and their treatment of almost all their females like News-dolls all I please. The women, there, go along with whatever screwy things they have going on and dress the part - they can't expect absolutely no one to notice and make jokes, eh?
 
Verax said:
Obama getting elected is more tragic than thousands of our soldiers dying and getting wounded in a stupid war? This is partisan madness of a sick population, that is unpatriotic and disgusting.

I'm well aware of what the left did in regards to Iraq. That is part of what I said earlier about the entire media coming together with Bush to promote and sell the Iraq war to the people, I remember it well.
Click to expand...

I said nothing about Obama getting elected, and calling it a tragedy. Those are your words. He won twice, and that's also a fact. Further, Bush had an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw our troops, which Obama carried out when the time came. However, it's looking now like Maliki wishes that agreement had never been made, since Iraq is erupting in violence caused by religious differences. Hussein may have been an evil crackpot, but he did keep the lid on that pressure canner while he was in power. :sigh:
 
US Conservative said:
I saw that, and frankly she looked great doing it. And she was still sharp. I can see why some would be threatened by that.
Click to expand...
Another valid point I think should be made is a good percentage of the female commentators and anchors at Fox are married with children. You know that old adage behind every successful man is a good woman? That door swings both ways.
 
Verax said:
Obama getting elected is more tragic than thousands of our soldiers dying and getting wounded in a stupid war? This is partisan madness of a sick population, that is unpatriotic and disgusting.

I'm well aware of what the left did in regards to Iraq. That is part of what I said earlier about the entire media coming together with Bush to promote and sell the Iraq war to the people, I remember it well.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on how you look at it.

I could be argued that 4,500 KIA and 30,000 wounded is a small fraction of the electorate, and within a generation will be replaced.

It could also be argued that the policies put in place by the Obama administration will have muligenerational dire consequences for all of the electorate.

It really depends on your point of view and your political beliefs.
 
vesper said:
1) Oh for crying out loud. I happened to catch that segment of the new show on Fox in the afternoon which is a spinoff of The View. There are four very intelligent attractive women in the group daily and one guest male. The format includes one puff segment. That particular day it was on men's underwear designed to protect them from going sterile. The rest of the show delves into serious discussion on current affairs and issues.
2) You started your argument complaining about women at Fox all being Arian blondes.
3) And you were proved wrong.
4) When you went after their dress looking for pictures of those who have worn a plunging neckline as the norm and you were proved wrong.
5) Even though between the Renaissance and the 19th century, wearing low-cut dresses that exposed breasts was acceptable. Talk about backwardness.
6) Then the mocking of their intelligence when every one of the females on Fox have degrees and experience in previous professions that they bring to the table.
7) What's wrong? You think more women should look like Candy Crowley at CNN? A woman with a stripper's name, who doesn't give a flip about her appearance and looks like she should be standing behind the cash register at your local 7-11? :lol:
Click to expand...

`
`
1) Once again, I run up against a person who can't quite get their facts straights and worse, mixes things up. You would have come over much more coherent had you pointed out that my off-set quote lacked a "source", which I usually make a habit of supplying. Here's the source. The editor of that article was pointing out the sexist composition of the group. What they were talking about is irrelevant and immaterial.

2) Please quote where I said or implied that. Hint: you can't

3) Meh.

4) That sentence makes no sense. What exactly was said that was proved wrong? Hint: You can't.

5) Irrelevant to the topic....good attempt at a de-rail though.

6) The article never mentioned education, intelligence or awards. Those were troll questions that were not part of the article or discussion.

7) How many times has it been said this is about the sexist hiring practices Moreover, faux (which is a colloquial euphemism for Fox, least ways among us more literary types) actively engages in this standard to increase viewership among the least common denominator public.....which is OK....it's business, if that's the clientele you are after.
`.
 
Paxaeon said:
`
`
1) Once again, I run up against a person who can't quite get their facts straights and worse, mixes things up. You would have come over much more coherent had you pointed out that my off-set quote lacked a "source", which I usually make a habit of supplying. Here's the source. The editor of that article was pointing out the sexist composition of the group. What they were talking about is irrelevant and immaterial.

2) Please quote where I said or implied that. Hint: you can't

3) Meh.

4) That sentence makes no sense. What exactly was said that was proved wrong? Hint: You can't.

5) Irrelevant to the topic....good attempt at a de-rail though.

6) The article never mentioned education, intelligence or awards. Those were troll questions that were not part of the article or discussion.

7) How many times has it been said this is about the sexist hiring practices Moreover, faux (which is a colloquial euphemism for Fox, least ways among us more literary types) actively engages in this standard to increase viewership among the least common denominator public.....which is OK....it's business, if that's the clientele you are after.
`.
Click to expand...

You best go back and re-read your own comments when posting the original post on this as you yourself made it about the content of the show.

Your source came from an opinion blog that focused on the fluff segments of the program, a small time period amounting to minutes and hardly gives credence to the seriousness discussions through most of the entire show. So don't make the claim that it had nothing to do with content. You can't. And even during these fluff segments what the heck is wrong with pointing out how men and women view things differently? Geesh!

And so what if there are 4 women to one male? How many times do you find roundtable discussions in the MSM that have all males and one woman?
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I can have opinions.

I can even have opinions against some women.

Why - because I'm female I have to stick to all the other women? Bonded by breasts!

Bull****.

I can make jokes and poke fun all I want - and I can not like Fox News and their treatment of almost all their females like News-dolls all I please. The women, there, go along with whatever screwy things they have going on and dress the part - they can't expect absolutely no one to notice and make jokes, eh?
Click to expand...

Any excuse will do, we get it.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
And this is why they do it. They're catering to people like you, who think a woman who doesn't fit your narrow standard of beauty is ugly, and think that is in some way relevant to anyone except yourself.
Click to expand...

Oh for Pete's sake....:doh

Just because a woman doesn't look like Megyn Kelly doesn't mean guys think she's ugly. Do you really believe that guys are that shallow?

I'm not sure what's going on here but there is no way that you are so stupid as to be using sexist arguments to prove that men are sexist.
 
polgara said:
I said nothing about Obama getting elected, and calling it a tragedy. Those are your words. He won twice, and that's also a fact. Further, Bush had an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw our troops, which Obama carried out when the time came. However, it's looking now like Maliki wishes that agreement had never been made, since Iraq is erupting in violence caused by religious differences. Hussein may have been an evil crackpot, but he did keep the lid on that pressure canner while he was in power. :sigh:
Click to expand...

As I understand it, both Maliki and Obama's generals told him they needed to keep a small force (4K IIRC) in Iraq-Obama didnt want that-he wanted to be the person who "ended" the war. As an excuse-he blamed not getting legal protection for that force from the Iraqi govt. Fast forward to this ISIS silliness (which both Maliki and Obama's generals warned him about) and he got legal protection almost over night and sent our troops in. :roll:

Its almost like he's trying to satirize transparent and petty politics. And even worse, he's gearing up for a repeat in Afghanistan.
 
Last edited:
Paxaeon said:
`
That image includes faux guest females whom are not under contract to dye their hair, wear lots of make-up, show their legs and make cute comments.

`
Click to expand...

OHHH! I thought every one of those people were still presently under contract and on the air. NOT. And by the way, I'd much rather look at THEIR legs than Rachel Madcow's or Chrissy Matthews legs. Or the democrat, Bob Beckel's. Or even Shepard Smith's. Jealousy in action, right here on Debate Politics.
 
vesper said:
Another valid point I think should be made is a good percentage of the female commentators and anchors at Fox are married with children. You know that old adage behind every successful man is a good woman? That door swings both ways.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, the other networks have always loved the elitist ivy league crowd, and people want to see newscaster they can relate to, thats one way to do it.
 
polgara said:
I said nothing about Obama getting elected, and calling it a tragedy. Those are your words. He won twice, and that's also a fact. Further, Bush had an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw our troops, which Obama carried out when the time came. However, it's looking now like Maliki wishes that agreement had never been made, since Iraq is erupting in violence caused by religious differences. Hussein may have been an evil crackpot, but he did keep the lid on that pressure canner while he was in power. :sigh:
Click to expand...

You responded to a reply to US Conservative in which he claimed Obama getting elected was a tragedy which implied a comparison to the tragedy of the Iraq war. I found his statement offensive and thought you were defending it.

Yes Iraq is a disaster and we should never again intervene in such a manner unless we have a damn good reason. I don't care who was president after Bush, Iraq is going to end badly no matter what unless we want to continue to lose thousands more troops staying there. We lost the war in Iraq before we ever set foot there because it was a bad idea.
 
Paxaeon said:
6) The article never mentioned education, intelligence or awards. Those were troll questions that were not part of the article or discussion.
Click to expand...

Why dont you think this is a valid part of the discussion? And then in the NEXT line-you talk about being a "more literary type". :roll:
Why are libs constantly mugged by reality?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom