La cita sobre la tolerancia y las personas inteligentes esta erróneamente atribuida a Dostoyevsky

Lo que se dice: 

Se dice que Fedor Mijailovich Dostoyevsky dijo o escribió: “La tolerancia llegará a tal nivel que a las personas inteligentes se les prohibirá pensar para no ofender a los idiotas”.

De dónde salió?

Las publicaciones que atribuyen esta cita a Dostoyevsky comenzaron a circular en las redes sociales en julio de 2021.

Frase erróneamente atribuida a Fedor Dostoyevsky (Fuente: Misbar)

 

Fuente: Misbar

No se ha encontrado evidencia de que Dostoyevsky haya dicho o escrito alguna vez esta cita en particular. Dostoyevsky, un novelista ruso del siglo XIX, escribió varias obras famosas, incluidas “Crimen y castigo” y “Notas del subsuelo”. El novelista tuvo una profunda influencia en varios campos, incluida la crítica literaria, la teología, la psicología, el modernismo literario y el existencialismo literario.

Si bien hay muchas citas famosas que se pueden atribuir a Dostoyevsky, esta no es una de ellas. La misma cita apareció por primera vez años antes en los sitios de redes sociales con texto en ruso. Las primeras versiones comenzaron a aparecer en 2019 y no incluían ninguna atribución.

Un hilo de Reddit de 2019 pidió a los hablantes nativos de ruso que tradujeran la cita al inglés sin mencionar al famoso novelista ruso. En 2021, la cita resurgió en inglés y comenzó a incluir la falsa atribución a Dostoyevsky.

Conclusion:

Fedor Mijailovich Dostoyevsky nunca dijo o escribió: “La tolerancia llegará a tal nivel que a las personas inteligentes se les prohibirá pensar para no ofender a los idiotas”.

La fuente más relacionada con esta frase es la llamada “paradoja de la tolerancia” propuesta por el filosofo Karl Popper allá por 1945.

En: Misbar: Quote About Tolerance and Intelligent People is Misattributed to Dostoyevsky

Excelente Mensaje de Gillette: “The Best Men Can Be” (Pásenlo en Peru También!)

Este es un gran comercial lanzado hace unos días por la empresa Gillette. En este ad se incide en el significado de lo que implica ser un hombre, es decir, lo que debería ser la nueva fundación de la masculinidad, a saber, cultura de paz, entendimiento, comprensión y respeto por tod@s. Muchos Youtubers tipo far right, trump supporters, y conservadores están tratando de boicotear esta campaña indicando que esto ataca la masculinidad directamente, que esto ha sido pagado por MeeToo, que la agenda liberal esta desesperada, que esto no debe permitirse de ninguna manera, etc.

Lo cierto es que ninguna compañía va a cometer un suicidio comercial sin haber, por lo menos, hecho un estudio de mercado, focus group, encuestas, y demás herramientas de marketing antes de tomar una decisión como esta. Personalmente lo considero un avance en la sociedad y me parece genial que grandes empresas como Gillete se enfrenten al machismo, el sexismo, la intolerancia y la discriminación y la violencia en la sociedad. Buena Gillette!

Luego de varias escenas sexistas y la palabra “masculinidad”, el video comienza preguntándose: “Esto es lo mejor que un hombre puede conseguir?”…”Masculinidad” Y aparece un grupo de adolescentes corriendo en estampida persiguiendo a otro chico. “Bicho raro” (aparece una madre abrazando a su hijo porque este le confiesa que todos en la escuela le odian, le dicen que un perdedor y un “maricón”). La voz en off vuelve a preguntar: “Es eso solamente?”

“No lo podemos esconder porque ha venido ocurriendo desde hace muchísimo tiempo” (se muestran escenas de unas fiestas de fraternidad, chicas en bikini, alcohol en un anuncio de TV que unos jóvenes miran sobre un sofá, al parecer ya habituados a dichas escenas).

“Podemos reirnos de ello” (y aparece un hombre tocando el trasero de una mujer en un set de TV, el publico ríe, el la sigue acosando, el publico sigue riendo). En otra escena aparece un hombre haciendo “mansplaining” a la única compañera de trabajo frente a otros compañeros varones, prácticamente traduciendo lo que ella acaba de decir en el ámbito profesional (“Lo que ella ha intentado decir es…”).

“Haciendo siempre las mismas excusas”: “Los chicos siempre serán chicos” (En escena aparecen dos niños peleando con los puños en el patio de una casa frente a sus padres). Aparecen mas padres en una barbacoa, luego una interminable fila de padres diciendo al unísono: “Los chicos siempre serán así” (“Boys will be boys”) mientras siguen peleando frente a ellos.

“Pero algo finalmente ha cambiado” (aparece una comentarista de noticias reportando los recientes casos de asalto y acoso sexual a mujeres y hombres), “y ya no hay retorno, porque nosotros creemos en lo mejor de los hombres” (y aparece el actor Terry Crews en las audiencias para la implementación del “Sexual Assault Survivors’ Bill of Rights Act” cuando denuncio que “los hombres deben hacer que otros hombres también tengan responsabilidad”). Aparecen en escena dos chicos filmando a dos chicas en un pool party diciéndoles que tienen que sonreír, mientas otro chico se les acerca diciéndoles que no las molesten.

“Solo di lo correcto, actua de la manera correcta” (y otro hombre evita que un acosador callejero moleste a una transeúnte). “Algunos ya lo están haciendo” (aparece un padre caminando de la mano con su hijo, en contraposición a la manada de adolescentes corriendo como salvajes por la calles empujando a cualquiera que se cruce en su camino) “en grande” (aparece un hombre mediando entre dos pandillas y logrando que estrechen sus manos) “y en pequeño” (un padre diciéndole a su pequeña hija que ella es fuerte, mientras que uno de los padres de la barbacoa separa a los niños “asi no es como nos tratamos entre nosotros, ok”, y el padre que caminaba con su hijo de la mano interviene en la golpiza de la manada contra el chico que perseguían separándolos y preguntándole si se encuentra bien, mientras su mira su comportamiento con atención. “Pero eso no es suficiente, porque los chicos observando hoy seran los hombres de mañana”

El anuncia culmina indicando: “Es solo retándonos a nosotros mismos a hacer mas que podemos acercarnos a lo mejor de nosotros”.

 

Video: Gillette

Trump Moves to End DACA and Calls on Congress to Act

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Tuesday ordered an end to the Obama-era program that shields young undocumented immigrants from deportation, calling it an “amnesty-first approach” and urging Congress to pass a replacement before he begins phasing out its protections in six months.

As early as March, officials said, some of the 800,000 young adults brought to the United States illegally as children who qualify for the program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, will become eligible for deportation. The five-year-old policy allows them to remain without fear of immediate removal from the country and gives them the right to work legally.

Mr. Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who announced the change at the Justice Department, both used the aggrieved language of anti-immigrant activists, arguing that those in the country illegally are lawbreakers who hurt native-born Americans by usurping their jobs and pushing down wages.

Mr. Trump said in a statement that he was driven by a concern for “the millions of Americans victimized by this unfair system.” Mr. Sessions said the program had “denied jobs to hundreds of thousands of Americans by allowing those same illegal aliens to take those jobs.”

Protests broke out in front of the White House and the Justice Department and in cities across the country soon after Mr. Sessions’s announcement. Democrats and some Republicans, business executives, college presidents and immigration activists condemned the move as a coldhearted and shortsighted effort that was unfair to the young immigrants and could harm the economy.

“This is a sad day for our country,” Mark Zuckerberg, the Facebook founder, wrote on his personal page. “It is particularly cruel to offer young people the American dream, encourage them to come out of the shadows and trust our government, and then punish them for it.”

Former President Barack Obama, who had warned that any threat to the program would prompt him to speak out, called his successor’s decision “wrong,” “self-defeating” and “cruel.”

“Whatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us,” Mr. Obama wrote on Facebook.

Both he and Mr. Trump said the onus was now on lawmakers to protect the young immigrants as part of a broader overhaul of the immigration system that would also toughen enforcement.

But despite broad and longstanding bipartisan support for measures to legalize unauthorized immigrants brought to the United States as children, the odds of a sweeping immigration deal in a deeply divided Congress appeared long. Legislation to protect the “dreamers” has also repeatedly died in Congress.

Just hours after the angry reaction to Mr. Trump’s decision, the president appeared to have second thoughts. In a late-evening tweet, Mr. Trump specifically called on Congress to “legalize DACA,” something his administration’s officials had declined to do earlier in the day.

Mr. Trump also warned lawmakers that if they do not legislate a program similar to the one Mr. Obama created through executive authority, he will “revisit this issue!” — a statement sure to inject more uncertainty into the ultimate fate of the young, undocumented immigrants who have been benefiting from the program since 2012.

Conservatives praised Mr. Trump’s move, though some expressed frustration that he had taken so long to rescind the program and that the gradual phaseout could mean that some immigrants retained protection from deportation until October 2019.

The White House portrayed the decision as a matter of legal necessity, given that nine Republican state attorneys general had threatened to sue to halt the program immediately if Mr. Trump did not act.

Months of internal White House debate preceded the move, as did the president’s public display of his own conflicted feelings. He once referred to DACA recipients as “incredible kids.”

The president’s wavering was reflected in a day of conflicting messages from him and his team. Hours after his statement was released, Mr. Trump told reporters that he had “great love” for the beneficiaries of the program he had just ended.

“I have a love for these people, and hopefully now Congress will be able to help them and do it properly,” he said. But he notably did not endorse bipartisan legislation to codify the program’s protections, leaving it unclear whether he would back such a solution.

Mr. Trump’s aides were negotiating late into Monday evening with one another about precisely how the plan to wind down the program would be executed. Until Tuesday morning, some aides believed the president had settled on a plan that would be more generous, giving more of the program’s recipients the option to renew their protections.

But even taking into account Mr. Trump’s contradictory language, the rollout of his decision was smoother than his early moves to crack down on immigration, particularly the botched execution in January of his ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries.

In addition to the public statement from Mr. Sessions and a White House question-and-answer session, the president was ready on Tuesday with the lengthy written statement, and officials at the Justice and Homeland Security Departments provided detailed briefings and distributed information to reporters in advance.

Mr. Trump sought to portray his move as a compassionate effort to head off the expected legal challenge that White House officials said would have forced an immediate and highly disruptive end to the program. But he also denounced the policy, saying it helped spark a “massive surge” of immigrants from Central America, some of whom went on to become members of violent gangs like MS-13. Some immigration critics contend that programs like DACA, started under Mr. Obama, encouraged Central Americans to enter the United States, hoping to stay permanently. Tens of thousands of migrants surged across America’s southern border in the summer of 2014, many of them children fleeing dangerous gangs.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, indicated that Mr. Trump would support legislation to “fix” the DACA program, as long as Congress passed it as part of a broader immigration overhaul to strengthen the border, protect American jobs and enhance enforcement.

“The president wants to see responsible immigration reform, and he wants that to be part of it,” Ms. Sanders said, referring to a permanent solution for the young immigrants. “Something needs to be done. It’s Congress’s job to do that. And we want to be part of that process.”

Later on Tuesday, Marc Short, Mr. Trump’s top legislative official, told reporters on Capitol Hill that the White House would release principles for such a plan in the coming days, input that at least one key member of Congress indicated would be crucial.

“It is important that the White House clearly outline what kind of legislation the president is willing to sign,” Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, said in a statement. “We have no time to waste on ideas that do not have the votes to pass or that the president won’t sign.”

The announcement was an effort by Mr. Trump to honor the law-and-order message of his campaign, which included a repeated pledge to end Mr. Obama’s immigration policy, while seeking to avoid the emotionally charged and politically perilous consequences of targeting a sympathetic group of immigrants.

Mr. Trump’s decision came less than two weeks after he pardoned Joe Arpaio, the former Arizona sheriff who drew intense criticism for his aggressive pursuit of unauthorized immigrants, which earned him a criminal contempt conviction.

The blame-averse president told a confidante over the past few days that he realized that he had gotten himself into a politically untenable position. As late as one hour before the decision was to be announced, administration officials privately expressed concern that Mr. Trump might not fully grasp the details of the steps he was about to take, and when he discovered their full impact, would change his mind, according to a person familiar with their thinking who was not authorized to comment on it and spoke on condition of anonymity.

But ultimately, the president followed through on his campaign pledge at the urging of Mr. Sessions and other hard-line members inside his White House, including Stephen Miller, his top domestic policy adviser.

The announcement started the clock on revoking legal status from those protected under the program.

Officials said DACA recipients whose legal status expires on or before March 5 would be able to renew their two-year period of legal status as long as they apply by Oct. 5. But the announcement means that if Congress fails to act, immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children could face deportation as early as March 6 to countries where many left at such young ages that they have no memory of them.

Immigration officials said they did not intend to actively target the young immigrants as priorities for deportation, though without the program’s protection, they would be considered subject to removal from the United States and would no longer be able to work legally.

Officials said some of the young immigrants could be prevented from returning to the United States if they traveled abroad.

Immigration advocates took little comfort from the administration’s assurances, describing the president’s decision as deeply disturbing and vowing to shift their demands for protections to Capitol Hill.

Marielena Hincapié, the executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, called Mr. Trump’s decision “nothing short of hypocrisy, cruelty and cowardice.” Maria Praeli, a recipient of protection under the program, criticized Mr. Sessions and Mr. Trump for talking “about us as if we don’t matter and as if this isn’t our home.”

The Mexican foreign ministry issued a statement saying the “Mexican government deeply regrets” Mr. Trump’s decision.

As recently as July, Mr. Trump expressed skepticism about the prospect of a broad legislative deal.

“What I’d like to do is a comprehensive immigration plan,” he told reporters. “But our country and political forces are not ready yet.”

As for DACA, he said: “There are two sides of a story. It’s always tough.”

In: nytimes

Law prof’s exam question on Brazilian wax is deemed harassment; is academic freedom threatened?

Image: http://pensamientocolombia.org/AllUploads/ExternalColumns/ExternalCol_6_2015-03-30.jpg

A Howard University law professor says academics everywhere should be concerned by his school’s response to a 2015 exam question about a Brazilian bikini wax.

The school determined in May that the question by Professor Reginald Robinson constituted sexual harassment under school policy, report Law.com (sub. req.) and Inside Higher Ed in a story noted by TaxProf Blog.

The school placed a letter of reprimand in Robinson’s file, ordered him to attend sensitivity training and required him to submit future exam questions for advance review, according to a letter written on Robinson’s behalf by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

The exam question, part of Robinson’s agency law course, asked whether the owner of a day spa would win a demurrer motion in a suit filed by a customer who claimed improper touching by the licensed aesthetician who performed the procedure. The exam question asserted that the customer had slept through the wax, but thought something improper had occurred upon awakening.

The aesthetician had warned the customer about touching that would take place during the procedure, and the customer acknowledged in writing having received the aesthetician’s information, according to the exam hypothetical. (The correct answer was that a court would not find in favor of the customer.)

After the exam, Robinson asked volunteers to discuss the test questions. One volunteer said the customer would not sleep through a Brazilian wax. Robinson switched focus, and when the volunteer declined to explain her answer choice, Robinson sought answers from another volunteer, according to FIRE’s letter.

Two students filed a complaint. An administrator who found the question constituted sexual harassment cited use of the word “genital,” the students’ suspicion that the question was crafted to reveal personal details about themselves, their belief the revelations had a negative impact on them, and the administrator’s belief that the exam scenario wasn’t necessary to teach the subject.

In its June 16 letter, FIRE asked Howard University to rescind the sanctions and to respond to its request by June 30. Howard did not respond by the deadline, according to a FIRE press release.

Howard’s punishment “does not comport with its own definition of sexual harassment or its promises of academic freedom,” FIRE wrote in its letter. “It poses a severe threat not only to professors’ rights but also to students’ ability to learn all areas of the law, including learning how to analyze situations that may make some students uncomfortable.”

Robinson released a statement about his case through FIRE.

“My case should worry every faculty member at Howard University, and perhaps elsewhere, who teaches in substantive areas like law, medicine, history, and literature,” Robinson stated. “Why? None of these academic areas can be taught without evaluating and discussing contextual facts, especially unsavory and emotionally charged ones.”

In: abajournal

White House offers unapologetic defense of Trump tweets

The White House offered an unapologetic defense Thursday of President Trump’s tweets attacking MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski during a contentious televised press briefing.

Spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders was grilled over whether Trump’s inflammatory tweet was beneath the dignity of the presidency, fueled a hostile political environment and set a bad example of how women should be treated by powerful men.

She responded by defending Trump and berating reporters for ignoring the president’s policy agenda on taxes, healthcare and infrastructure.

“The only person I see a war on is this president and everybody that works for him,” she said. “I don’t think you can expect someone to be personally attacked, day after day, minute by minute, and sit back. The American people elected a fighter.”

Sanders said Trump shows the dignity of his office “every day in the decisions he’s making, the focus and the priorities he’s laid out in his agenda.

“He’s not going to sit back and be attacked by the liberal media, Hollywood elites — and when they hit him, he’s going to hit back,” she said.

Trump’s outburst at Brzezinski escalated his long-running feud with the news media, a fight in which he appeared to gain the upper hand this week after CNN was forced to retract a story about the Russia probe.

But Trump’s decision to take aim at her looks, saying that the “Morning Joe” co-host had been “bleeding badly” from a “face-lift,” sparked bipartisan outrage in Washington.

“Mr. President, your tweet was beneath the office and represents what is wrong with American politics, not the greatness of America,” GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) tweeted.

Critics on both side of the aisle took specific issue with Trump’s attack on a female reporter — Trump faced repeated allegations of sexism and harassment that bubbled up during his presidential campaign.

Kansas Republican Rep. Lynn Jenkins tweeted Thursday that Trump’s comments were “not okay,” adding that “we should be working to empower women.”

But Sanders pushed aside the notion that Trump’s tweets were sexist or a bad example for how to treat women.

“Everybody wants to make this an attack on a woman — what about the constant attacks that he receives or the rest of us?” she said.

“I’m a woman, I’ve been attacked by that show multiple times, but I don’t cry foul because of it.”

When another reporter followed up by asking if Sanders felt that the tweet set a good example for her children, she deflected by saying that God is the “one perfect role model.”

The spokesperson chided reporters for not focusing more on policy questions and the White House’s legislative agenda, saying that reporters are more consumed by investigations related to Russia election interference and possible collusion between Trump campaign aides and Moscow.

“The media’s focus on priorities don’t line up with the rest of America,” she said. “America is winning, and that is what we like to talk about, but you guys constantly ignore that narrative.”

But critics say Trump’s Twitter broadsides against the media and the Russia investigation are distractions from his policy message.

In addition to the healthcare debate on Capitol Hill, Trump’s staff planned out a series of messaging events called “Energy Week,” featuring a presidential speech about energy development later Thursday. Those events have been overshadowed by the president’s attack.

It also undercut his call for unity after this month’s shooting at a congressional baseball practice that left House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) and others injured.

“We may have our differences, but we do well in times like these to remember everyone who serves in our nation’s capital is here because, above all, they love our country,” Trump said at the White House on June 14, the day of the shooting.

In: thehill 

Trump Mocks Mika Brzezinski; Says She Was ‘Bleeding Badly From a Face-Lift’

WASHINGTON — President Trump lashed out Thursday at the appearance and intellect of Mika Brzezinski, a co-host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” drawing condemnation from his fellow Republicans and reigniting the controversy over his attitudes toward women that nearly derailed his candidacy last year.

Mika Brzezinski in Trump Tower in November. Credit Evan Vucci/Associated Press. Image: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/30/business/30trumpmedia1/30trumpmedia1-master768-v2.jpg

Mr. Trump’s invective threatened to further erode his support from Republican women and independents, both among voters and on Capitol Hill, where he needs negotiating leverage for the stalled Senate health care bill.

The president described Ms. Brzezinski as “low I.Q. Crazy Mika” and claimed in a series of Twitter posts that she had been “bleeding badly from a face-lift” during a social gathering at Mr. Trump’s resort in Florida around New Year’s Eve. The White House did not explain what had prompted the outburst, but a spokeswoman said Ms. Brzezinski deserved a rebuke because of her show’s harsh stance on Mr. Trump.

The tweets ended five months of relative silence from the president on the volatile subject of gender, reintroducing a political vulnerability: his history of demeaning women for their age, appearance and mental capacity.

“My first reaction was that this just has to stop, and I was disheartened because I had hoped the personal, ad hominem attacks had been left behind, that we were past that,” Senator Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine who is a crucial holdout on the effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act, said in an interview.

“I don’t think it directly affects the negotiation on the health care bill, but it is undignified — it’s beneath a president of the United States and just so contrary to the way we expect a president to act,” she said. “People may say things during a campaign, but it’s different when you become a public servant. I don’t see it as undermining his ability to negotiate legislation, necessarily, but I see it as embarrassing to our country.”

A slew of Republicans echoed her sentiments. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who, like Ms. Collins, holds a pivotal and undecided vote on the health care bill, tweeted: “Stop it! The presidential platform should be used for more than bringing people down.”

Senator Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican who opposed Mr. Trump’s nomination during the presidential primaries, also implored him to stop, writing on Twitter that making such comments “isn’t normal and it’s beneath the dignity of your office.”

Senator James Lankford, Republican of Oklahoma, added, “The president’s tweets today don’t help our political or national discourse and do not provide a positive role model for our national dialogue.”

Ms. Brzezinski responded by posting on Twitter a photograph of a box of Cheerios with the words “Made for Little Hands,” a reference to a longstanding insult about the size of the president’s hands. MSNBC said in a statement, “It’s a sad day for America when the president spends his time bullying, lying and spewing petty personal attacks instead of doing his job.”

Mr. Trump’s attack injected even more negativity into a capital marinating in partisanship and reminded weary Republicans of a political fact they would rather forget: Mr. Trump has a problem with the half of the population more likely to vote.

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas and others in the House criticized President Trump’s remarks on Thursday. Credit Stephen Crowley/The New York Times. Image: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/30/us/30dc-trumpwomen-3/30dc-trumpwomen-3-master675.jpg

Christine Matthews, a Republican pollster who specializes in the views of female voters, said the president’s use of Twitter to target a prominent woman was particularly striking, noting that he had used only one derogatory word — “psycho” — to describe the show’s other co-host, Joe Scarborough, and the remainder of his limited characters to hit upon damaging stereotypes of women.

“He included dumb, crazy, old, unattractive and desperate,” Ms. Matthews said.

“The continued tweeting, the fact that he is so outrageous, so unpresidential, is becoming a huge problem for him,” she added. “And it is particularly unhelpful in terms of building relationships with female Republican members of Congress, whose votes he needs for health care, tax reform and infrastructure.”

But it was unclear whether the vehemence of the president’s latest attack would embolden members of his party to turn disdain into defiance.

Senior Republicans, including Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, cycled through what has become a familiar series of emotions and calculations after the Twitter posts, according to staff members: a flash of anger, reckoning of possible damage and, finally, a determination to push past the controversy to pursue their agenda.

“Obviously, I don’t see that as an appropriate comment,” the House speaker, Paul D. Ryan, said during a Capitol Hill news conference. Then he told reporters he wanted to talk about something else.

Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, demanded an apology, calling the president’s Twitter posts “sexist, an assault on the freedom of the press and an insult to all women.”

A spokeswoman for the president, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, urged the news media to move on, arguing during the daily White House briefing that Mr. Trump was “fighting fire with fire” by attacking a longtime critic.

Ms. Brzezinski had called the president “a liar” and suggested he was “mentally ill,” added Ms. Sanders, who defended Mr. Trump’s tweets as appropriate for a president.

Melania Trump, the president’s wife — who has said that, as first lady, she will embark on a campaign against cyberbullying — also rejected claims that her husband had done what she is charged with undoing.

“As the first lady has stated publicly in the past, when her husband gets attacked, he will punch back 10 times harder,” Mrs. Trump’s spokeswoman wrote in a statement, referring to the first lady’s remarks during the campaign.

Current and former aides say that Mr. Trump was chastened by the furor over the “Access Hollywood” tape that emerged in October, which showed him bragging about forcing himself on women, and that he had exhibited self-restraint during the first few months of his administration. But in the past week, the sense that he had become the victim of a liberal media conspiracy against him loosened those tethers.

Moreover, Mr. Trump’s oldest friends say it is difficult for him to distinguish between large and small slights — or to recognize that his office comes with the expectation that he moderate his behavior.

And his fiercest, most savage responses have almost always been to what he has seen on television.

”Morning Joe,” once a friendly bastion on left-leaning MSNBC, has become a forum for fiery criticism of Mr. Trump. One adviser to the president accused the hosts of trying to “destroy” the administration over several months.

After lashing out at Mr. Scarborough and Ms. Brzezinski at one point last summer, Mr. Trump told an adviser, “It felt good.”

Even before he began his campaign two years ago, Mr. Trump showed a disregard for civility when he made critical remarks on television and on social media, particularly about women.

He took aim at the actress Kim Novak, a star of 1950s cinema, as she presented during the 2014 Academy Awards, taking note of her plastic surgeries. Chagrined, Ms. Novak later said she had gone home to Oregon and not left her house for days. She accused Mr. Trump of bullying her, and he later apologized.

As a candidate, Mr. Trump was insensitive to perceptions that he was making sexist statements, arguing that he had a right to defend himself, an assertion Ms. Sanders echoed on Thursday.

After the first primary debate, hosted by Fox News in August 2015, Mr. Trump trained his focus on the only female moderator, Megyn Kelly, who pressed him on his history of making derogatory comments about women.

He told a CNN host that Ms. Kelly had “blood coming out of her wherever,” leaving Republicans squeamish and many thinking he was suggesting that Ms. Kelly had been menstruating. He refused to apologize and kept up the attacks.

Later, he urged his millions of Twitter followers to watch a nonexistent graphic video of a former Miss Universe contestant, Alicia Machado, whose weight gain he had parlayed into a media spectacle while he was promoting the pageant.

Mr. Trump went on to describe female journalists as “crazy” and “neurotic” on his Twitter feed at various points during the race. He derided reporters covering his campaign, Katy Tur of NBC and Sara Murray of CNN, in terms he rarely used about men.

His tweets on Thursday added strain to the already combative daily briefing, as reporters interrupted Ms. Sanders’s defense of the president to ask how she felt about them as a woman and a mother.

She responded that she had only “one perfect role model”: God.

“None of us are perfect,” she said.

 —

One of the reporters on this story, Glenn Thrush, has a contract for regular appearances on MSNBC.

1 2