Sunday, June 21, 2009

Sen Boxer: It’s “Senator”, not “Ma’am”

June 18, 2009

Senator Boxer lets Brigadier General Michael Walsh know she deserves the respect of the title she earned just as much as he does. I do wish the camera was on his face instead of hers. He looked taken aback that she dared to interrupt him. No one does that to a general, little lady. That is Sen Boxer’s office – he is testifying before her – yes, he is a genera,l but it is a non-military proceeding and she is the position of authority and she has every right to demand she be given it. As for her level of frustration, we have no idea how many times he has “Ma’am” — [A woman - title or not - can take only so many "ma'ams"], how many he has used that tone, how many non-verbal clues he missed or how many times she had asked him before. This is clearly not their initial exchange.

All you need to do is listen to the snickers or read the comments anywhere this is discussed and you will understand Sen Boxer’s frustration. You can not understand the condescension unless you’ve lived it. And from the comments it’s not going away soon.

An especially lovely one that proves her point:

She’s not even fit to scrub the shit off his boots.

I bet she could do a bang up job ironing his shirts.

And this that proves the point out of his own lips:

You don’t need to talk down to the man because he doesn’t know before hand, what title to use in addressing you.

Problem being it is his job to know that.

bigkurt25

SEN BOXER: Why has it been delayed?

GEN WALSH: Uh, Ma’am, the…

SEN BOXER: You know, do me a favor – could you say ’senator’ instead of ‘ma’am?’”

WALSH: Yes, ma’am.

[snickers]

SEN BOXER It’s just a thing, I worked so hard to get that title, so I’d appreciate it, yes, thank you.

That wasn’t a request – it was an order.

GEN WALSH: Yes, Senator.

Message received.

No comments: