I don't really get it, either... I think he's implying that women are too busy in the kitchen, to bother supporting candidates.

I'm not getting it either but your two suggestions seem like the most likely bet(s) to me.

I like your icon.

Wait--I did think of a third possibility...

Perhaps the idea is that Republican strategists think women only favor Obama because we haven't been playing attention to politics? We stay "in the kitchen" and don't read the papers or watch the news or anything? And if we "came out of the kitchen" we'd discover why to vote for Romney instead?

I mean, it's a stretch, but I did think I should toss it out there.

I acquired it in the customers_suck community -- there was a post from a clerk at a formal-wear shop being pestered by a customer, or maybe not a customer, I don't remember, including the phrase, "Aw, come on, man, bless a brother with some socks."

Since Dumbledore mentioned that he always asked for socks and never got them, someone thought this would be a good icon.

I think it's saying that the Republicans want 'their' women, who are presumably in the kitchen, to emerge and vote and thus be counted against President Obama. Or something.


Edited at 2012-04-04 05:49 pm (UTC)

I think the joke is that Republicans are intent on keeping women in their traditional roles (e.g. 'in the kitchen') except when they're exhorting those women to aid in their own subjugation (by voting for Republicans).

Which I think is entirely too close to what the most visible Republicans in the news right now (Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, etc.) actually DO want to be a funny joke.

This is how I took it too.

Takei's point is that Republicans that hope to win by leveraging "the female vote" are unlikely to do so if they keep treating women like second class citizens.

I think it's less a joke and more about pointing out irony.

This. Republican women, presumably, would vote for a republican candidate (which Obama, obviously, is not). The crux of the joke is that most of the republican rhetoric at the moment is pretty deeply sexist, implying that the women are not allowed out of the kitchen to vote.

Admittedly the logic of the joke doesn't work, but that's probably because modern politics are inherently illogical.

(Disclaimer: Being a Brit, most of my knowledge of US politics comes from Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, both of whose shows are no longer broadcast here so we have to *ahem* download them.)

Or stream them directly from the Comedy Central website.

If only!

The content is not available to stream outside the US. Which is hugely annoying when they continue an interview on the website...

In response to the person who replied to this saying that streaming isn't available outside the US, then deleted the comment...

If that's true, how come I can stream The Daily Show and The Colbert Report in New Zealand? Because I can, and I do.

Sorry; the comment wasn't deleted. I have my journal set to screen anonymous comments, because for a while I was getting too much spam.

I wonder if perhaps whether Comedy Channel can be streamed varies from country to country?

The joke is about cluelessness. "What? Not enough women are supporting our candidate because of the rampant sexism they see coming from the Republican Party? Well, we better tell those darlings to get their pretty little heads out of the kitchen (and away from the clothing stores) and go to the polls! The problem clearly can't be us, it must be that all those silly girls just aren't aware of how important this is."

Yes, it's meant to imply that Republican strategists are just that out of touch.

Given 1) the incredibly condescending attitude toward women most of the Republican talking points have been, and 2) the incredibly illogical things the Republican candidates for president have been saying, the joke is fairly obvious. I mean, I actually would not be the slightest bit surprised if someone confronted, say, Santorum with a question like, "Polls indicate women favor Obama over any Republican candidate; do you think you should try harder to reach out to women voters?" that Mr Santorum would actually say "I urge patriotic women to get out of the kitchen and vote."

That's the joke - they are that clueless, they are that condescending, and they frequently answer questions with statements that don't make any internal logical sense.

Put simply, the joke/observation is this.

Republicans are so certain of being morally right in their treatment of women that it is completely beyond their comprehension that any woman other than an evil Nazi Godless feminist could ever be offended in any way by it.

Thus, they think their being behind in the female demographic is solely because not enough women are voting, because, after all, the REAL majority of women sides with THEM, if only they'd vote.

In their minds.

Thus Takei's quip, which is pithy and very accurate indeed.

basically, a good republican woman according to the rhetoric of the party would be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. but now that "those other women" are going to the polls and supporting obama, the republicans would very much like "their women" to go vote.

Obviously the Republicans only want the women who are good little Christian Republicans to vote. Hence why they're in the kitchen. I guess all the Obama-supporting women would be, in their minds, out having sex for money or getting abortions.

I read it as the common misconception that the entire Republican party is made up of far-right women-bashing conservatives who do everything only to maintain an 1950's-style mentality.

I feel the need to point out that not all Republicans, clearly, fit that mold.

True. But the ones who currently are bucking for visible, national prominence DO. Is it unfair to tar an entire community with the excesses of their worst examples? Well, yes. But it's difficult not to when the worst examples are not only claiming to speak for the entire group (as most worst examples do), but also being chosen for leadership positions thereof.

Granted, although it does get tiresome being painted with the same brush as the Santorums of the world.

Hey, if my junior Senator, Scott Brown, was a typical Republican, well, I STILL wouldn't vote for him, because he's too conservative for my tastes, but the country wouldn't be in bad shape.

To flesh that out a little more: when I hear that a person is a Republican, I imagine someone like Scott Brown: someone who is more conservative than I am, because, while they value the same things I do, they weigh the balances somewhat differently, and therefore come down more on the side of individual action over communal action. Perhaps someone who has a different belief-structure about the nature of property-as-a-right. Often a person who's more cautious than I am about making significant changes in how things are done in the country. Basically decent people with basically decent minds making basically reasonable choices about what should be done in the country -- somewhat different than the ones I'd made, but reasonable.

When I hear that someone is a Republican candidate on the national level, or is in a leadership position in the Republican party, I imagine someone who is either living in a fundamentally different universe than I am, such as Santorum, or is venal to the point of being willing to fake that they live in that fundamentally different universe, like Romney, or a little of both, like Gingrich.

That's a really nice distinction.

While I don't know you, I think I'd like to hug you.

When I picture someone saying they're a Republican, I generally assume they are either religious-right or fiscal-conservative or, in a few very rare cases (such as my spouse) both.

I'm about with you on the candidates (sigh) except that once in a while we get one of those fiscal conservatives.

But all too often people conflate the loudmouths with the party. Thus hugging you, or at least expressing the desire thereof, for NOT doing that.

I do know that not all Republicans fit that mold -- and I appreciate your pointing it out. Like xiphias, though, I think that most of the senior policymakers in the Republican party DO fit that mold.

"Senior," yes. sigh. I was not old enough to vote when most of them were voted in.

It's more complex than that, of course, but this is far further out of my political closet than I ever come, and it's drafty and uncomfortable out here.

Nod. But for me, it's a lot like "Christian".

It's possible that a good Christian is interested in helping those who need help, and is constantly struggling to be loving and compassionate.

But a great many people will claim to be a good Christian because they despise the idea of gay marriage, or think abortion should be considered first degree murder, or because they want to have more prayers in public, because didn't Jesus say something about that? (Yeah - he said "don't do that.")

It's not right, and it's not fair, but - one can't assume that any given Republican (or Christian) is "one of the good ones".

That said, I do hope that a strong collection of "the good ones" stick around and try to change. When times get bad, eventually there's a collapse and you need the good folks to form a basis for rebuilding.