When the Leader of the Free World Calls a Woman "Piggy"

Right, so let me give you the context…but also, let me be honest about where I’m coming from.

I’m British. I watch all of this from across the pond, which means I’m both an outsider and someone who feels the aftershocks. Because here’s the thing: when the President of the United States does something like this, it doesn’t stay neatly contained within American borders. It ripples. It shifts the global conversation. It emboldens certain voices and silences others. And whether we like it or not, it recalibrates what feels “normal” in political discourse everywhere.

I’m also aware that a significant chunk of the American population genuinely believes Donald Trump is doing the right thing…that he’s sealing off the USA as some kind of fortress of prosperity, making hard decisions that weak-willed politicians won’t touch. I get that there’s a worldview in which his bluntness is refreshing, his defiance is strength, and his rejection of “political correctness” is a feature, not a bug.

But here’s what happened…and why it matters beyond any single political tribe.

What Actually Happened

Trump was on Air Force One, taking questions from reporters. Catherine Lucey, a journalist from Bloomberg, asked him about the release of Justice Department documents related to Jeffrey Epstein. When she followed up, Trump cut across her with: “Quiet. Quiet, piggy.”

It’s on video. Multiple outlets have confirmed it. There’s no ambiguity about what was said.

The White House’s response? That Trump is simply “frank” and “straightforward” with the press—that he speaks plainly when he feels misrepresented.

Why People Are Angry (and Why It’s Not Just “Wokeness”)

Here’s where I want to tread carefully, because I know some people will roll their eyes at this and think, “Oh, here we go…another pearl-clutching lecture about feelings.”

But stick with me.

“Piggy” isn’t just a bit of rough banter. It’s not the same as calling someone a “clown” or an “idiot.” It’s a gendered insult, historically weaponised to humiliate women by reducing them to their bodies…implying they’re greedy, dirty, unattractive, less-than. Coupled with “Quiet,” it’s both an insult and an instruction to shut up. To know your place.

And look, I’m not saying Trump invented misogyny. I’m not even saying he’s uniquely terrible in this regard. What I am saying is that when a sitting President…arguably the most powerful person on the planet…publicly addresses a woman doing her job that way, and there are no meaningful consequences, it tells us something.

It tells us what we’re willing to tolerate. It tells us how far the line has moved.

The Global Ripple

Here’s where my British perspective kicks in.

When Trump does something like this, it doesn’t just play out in American living rooms or cable news studios. It becomes a data point in a much bigger conversation about power, respect, and what kind of behaviour is acceptable from leaders. It emboldens certain politicians in the UK, in Europe, in Australia, to push boundaries they might not have pushed before. It gives permission.

And yes, I know…some of you reading this think that’s good. That we’ve been too soft, too worried about offending people, too shackled by performative politeness. That Trump is simply saying what others are too cowardly to say.

But here’s my counter: there’s a difference between being direct and being cruel. There’s a difference between rejecting empty rhetoric and degrading someone for asking a question.

I can respect a leader who speaks plainly. I can’t respect one who uses his platform to humiliate a woman for doing her job…and then wraps it in the language of “frankness.”

What the Social Media Post Is Really About

The post you saw/I saw…“Quiet, Piggy!” Just think about that for a minute, and what it means to live in a time when a President can assault a woman in public like that without any consequences…isn’t just about this one comment.

It’s about the creeping normalisation of something that, not so long ago, would have been universally condemned. It’s about the sense that we’ve collectively shrugged and decided that certain kinds of behaviour are just “how he is,” and that anyone who objects is being oversensitive or politically motivated.

And maybe you think that’s fine. Maybe you think the trade-off is worth it for the policies you believe in, or the enemies you want to see brought down.

But as someone watching from the outside, I can tell you this: the world is paying attention. And the narrative being written isn’t just about one man or one presidency. It’s about what we’re all willing to accept from the people we give power to.

And that, whether you’re American or British or anywhere else, should matter.

Until Next Time