Was Christie's takedown really sexist?
Was Christie making some sort of sexual reference in confronting a New Hampshire protester, or was he just using the crowd-pleasing confrontational language that America has come to expect?
Was Christie's takedown really sexist?
Matt Katz, Inquirer Staff Writer
Updated at 3:46 p.m. with comment from governor's office.
I was in the back of a cavernous gymnasium at a Mitt Romney rally in Exeter, New Hampshire on Sunday night when two female protesters interrupted a speech by Romney booster Gov. Christie. They yelled: "Christie kills jobs! Christie kills jobs!" Christie's response, which I wrote about here, became the news of the night:
"Really?" Christie asked.
The crowd roared; they knew what was coming.
And that's when he delivered a line destined for YouTube fame: "Something may go down tonight, but it ain't going to be jobs, sweetheart."
Was Christie making some sort of sexual reference? Was this in some way sexist and sexually inappropriate?
Sitting in the room, listening to it live, I didn't get that impression. As someone who used to write a column about gender relations, I'm pretty attuned to these things. And I'm also fully aware of Christie's history with confrontational remarks -- I even had an interview with Christie in the paper that very day about his pledge to start using his filter more before he says things.
I just heard "going down" as a reference to a rumble and a play off the false accusation that the number of jobs in Jersey were "going down." That's it.
The crowd didn't seem to hear anything untoward, either. No one I interviewed afterward - even two Democrats in the audience - heard the line as some sort of anti-female, sexually suggestive smear. The reporters I was sitting with didn't mention anything, either.
But shortly after the speech my colleague Monica Yant Kinney emailed me to say she most definitely heard a sexual reference. A Facebook friend posted a note saying she was appalled. And by the next morning, a female blogger on Slate kicked off what has now become a minor controversy with an article headlined: "N.J. Gov Chris Christie Responds to Female Hecklers With Offensive Oral Sex Joke."
A video of the statement, below, has more than 80,000 views.
A Washington Post opinion writer has even questioned why he would use the word "sweetheart." And the editorial board of the Star-Ledger wrote on Tuesday: "For a guy who's had problems with women in the past, Chris Christie sure doesn't choose his words too carefully." The paper criticized Christie for referencing "Jersey girls" in his speech, too. (It should be noted that he was talking about women who had actually written "Jersey girls" on their Romney For President signs.)
Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for the governor, said today in an email that the governor "doesn't think in those terms when addressing anyone, and he would never, ever give voice to such a thing. It's just a ridiculous interpretation and a wild stretch."
I've asked Monica to weigh in on this. Check out her blog post here. But also note that another Slate writer - who was also in the room Sunday - says he just thought that Christie was referencing the fact that the protesters were about to get busted by the cops. The backlash, though, has him changing his mind. He closed his post with this: "But now that I think about it..."
I imagine opinions on this will fall along party lines, but here goes anyway: What do you think? Was Christie making some sort of sexual reference in confronting a New Hampshire protester, or was he just using the crowd-pleasing confrontational language that America has come to expect?
Comment removed.
Of course he was making a sexually-charged remark. I don't know what you were listening to but the crowd obviously got it. A "reference to a rumble"? What is this, the modern GOP or West Side Story? Get a clue.— ahab- looks like a pig, talks like a pig— Speedqueen Mistress
- sweet non issue article— raynesrock
- People are way too sensitive now a days! If the hecklers were men would it have the same consequences? I suppose NOT!— avmjr
- Stop being obtuse. If the hecklers had been men, he wouldn't have said what he said. — wb2nd
- people are ridiculous they are just so quick to jump to conclusions and everything is negative! I am a woman and I thought nothing of that comment was sexual in nature but the media and people with too much time on their hands want to go negative! There are more pressing problems in the world than if what Christie said was negative! everyone needs to get off their high horse and deal with real issues! That matter instead of comments made by the governor! — avmjr
- Any wonder that a woman named Monica would take "going down" as a sexual reference? But I've seen Monica Yany Kinney. No thanks.— The Monk
- Really, but if you are the President and you got a “D” next to your name you can do what ever you want to your Intern, and you will get nothing but Crickets from Liberal Media. Nothing like Selective Moral Outrage!— CrashTestCorzine
- HAHA! The "Liberal Media" definitely never said a thing about Clinton's sleaziness? You've got to be f-ing kidding. Did you not read a single newspaper in the '90's?
- Come on, joker, do you actually think that GOP apologists ever read anything? If they did, they wouldn't be GOP apologists. — bbk713
- come on, now, for crying out loud. I've gotta stick up for the guy on this one and he's not even a favorite of mine. Grow up, Monica, et.al.
What struck me is how much weight he has seemed to gain recently.— pres - .— The Monk
- .— The Monk
- Matt Good Hit Job Buddy! The sky is the limit for you; you are going to be the Darling on the Liberal Cocktail Circuit… All of those brilliant talking heads will not be able to get enough of you.— CrashTestCorzine
Reach him at mkatz@phillynews.com or 609-217-8355.
Follow Matt on Twitter: @mattkatz00. Reach Matt at mkatz@phillynews.com or 609-217-8355.
