The Internet Gets Its Slut-Shaming Kicks Over Paula Broadwell

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/isafmedia/4754465938/sizes/z/in/photostream/">isafmedia</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Hey, this story about General David Petraeus is pretty wild. And it seems like many writers covering it have used this as an opportunity to air some good, old-fashioned misogyny—because we all know it was the woman’s fault for having a vagina in the presence of a powerful man, right?

On Friday afternoon, before there was even any information available about the woman in question, Free Beacon writer Michael Goldfarb opined on unsubstantiated rumors that the still unidentified “homewrecker” had something to do with Senator-elect Elizabeth Warren:

After information came to light about Paula Broadwell, the alleged mistress, Business Insider posted a piece from writer Robert Johnson, who talks to an unnamed “senior military source.” The source praises Petraeus’ “honor” in admitting that he was having an affair with a woman who “got her claws—so to speak—in him.” From the article:

Let’s face it, everyone is human, and we all make mistakes. You’re a 60 year-old man and an attractive woman almost half your age makes herself available to you — that would be a test for anyone.

Here’s the Washington Post making sure you know that the affair was all Broadwell’s fault because, you know, she dressed like a marriage-destroying vixen:

Former aides say Broadwell’s attire—usually tight shirts and pants—prompted complaints in Afghanistan, where Western-style attire can offend local sensibilities. Her form-fitting clothes made a lasting impression on longtime Afghan hands, and Petraeus once admonished her, through a staffer, to “dress down,” a former aide recalled.

“She was seemingly immune to the notion of modesty in this part of the world,” said a general who served in Afghanistan while Petraeus was commander there.

Paleocon blogger Robert Stacy McCain doesn’t even bother to couch his feelings in euphemism, in his unsubtle blog post, “The Slut Paula Broadwell.”

Over at Buzzfeed, writer Jessica Testa does an admirable job of trying to criticize this developing media narrative about Broadwell as a manipulative strumpet. But then she does little to help the cause, writing of Broadwell: “A few months ago, she shared Katie Roiphe’s Newsweek story about powerful women who want to be sexually dominated.”

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate