Daily Kos: GOP Women Couldn't Possibly Be Pro-Women
Kaili Joy Gray at the Daily Kos obviously subscribes to the tired old theory of DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz that the Republicans are waging a "war on women." On Thursday, she mocked the idea that GOP women like Rep. Kristi Noem of South Dakota could speak for the fairer sex.
Noem told the AP "The Republican agenda is indeed pro-woman. It is pro-woman because it is pro-small business, pro-entrepreneur, pro-family and pro-economic growth." Gray wouldn't tolerate that:
Since Republican women are fairly new to this whole feminist thing, only recently having traded in "feminazi" for "mama grizzly" and Phyllis Schlafly for Susan B. Anthony, it's understandable that they'd be confused about how this pro-woman thing works.
Like, for example, that contrary to Rep. Sandy Adams' apparent belief, a vagina is not, ipso facto, a feminist credential.
Or that the Republican Party's agenda of tax cuts for the rich and screw everyone else doesn't actually benefit women...
Or that redefining rape, defunding health care, and even fighting against tax incentives for breastfeeding is pro-woman.
Or that remaining silent when a woman is physically assaulted at a Republican rally is pro-woman.
Or insisting that feminist organizations are only allowed to call out sexism when it's leveraged against someone who shares their political ideology is pro-woman.
Of course, these newly minted feminists of the Republican Party want us to know that Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann don't speak for them, so maybe it's unfair to hold them accountable for the insanity spewed by the dueling queen bees of the conservative fauxminist movement.
On the other hand, these women haven't exactly taken any stands against their party's blatantly anti-woman agenda, or against the lipsticked figureheads of their "We can be feminists too!" movement. They haven't signed on to any of the proposed legislation that would actually help women, like H.R.894, the Maternal Health Accountability Act of 2011. Not a single Republican woman has signed on to H.R.1519, the Paycheck Fairness Act. And as for their all-too-eager endorsement of denying health care to women, well, sorry, girls, but that's not very pro-woman either.
The Democratic Party doesn't exactly have a flawless pro-woman record either, of course. But, unlike the Republican Party, sending women back to the 18th century isn't part of its official agenda. Every pro-woman piece of legislation, even if it doesn't pass, is introduced and co-sponsored by Democrats. Just about every anti-woman piece of legislation, on the other hand, comes from Republicans.
So, Republican women, if you're serious about showing how pro-woman you really are, here's a suggestion: switch parties.
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Awww, poor thing!
Submitted by Djinn1975 on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 9:05am.
She's making that whole mixing up feminism with pro-woman mistake. Common misconception with our generation. Born in '78 and no doubt raised by feminist, PC parents.
Pop quiz Ms. Gray:
1) Do you support a movement that indoctrinates girls and women to abandon two parent families so that they can shoulder the burden of a meager existence with the likelihood of government assistance?
2) Is your statement, 'The Democratic Party doesn't exactly have a flawless pro-woman record...' a sign that you possess a guilty conscience to the fact that the Democratic Party, at it's core, has revealed itself to be vehemently anti-woman by relegating conservative women to a sub-class of women open to relentless degradation?
Perhaps this just out of academia and into her 30's progressive idealist should pick up one of the many books that will open her eyes. My first suggestion is the legendary Phyllis Schlafly's Feminist Fantasies, a must read for women and men.
The feminist movement is not and has never been pro-woman. It is anti-family.
The feminist movement is not
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 9:30am.
The feminist movement is not and has never been pro-woman.
I would say it is pro-selfish woman.
It's all for women putting themselves first, even to the detriment of the family.
As Tim Graham commented in another thread today, there is a reason people say "My mother was a saint."
Hint: it's not because she "fulfilled herself" as a woman.
No one is saying that men doen't make sacrifices for their families, but the difference is in the way it's treated: a man is praised for putting his family first, whereas a woman who does it is made to feel "used."
motherbelt
Submitted by Kat Outta the Bag on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 5:18pm.
Hear, hear!
Daily Kos: If You Don't Pander
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 9:41am.
To women then you are anti-women. If you don't pander to XXXXX then you are anti-XXXXX where
XXXXX = Blacks, Gays, Lesbians, Hispanics, Muslims, The Poor, The Middle Class, Immigrants, or any other component of society that the left has successfully Balkanized.
Nice point MB
Submitted by Djinn1975 on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 9:47am.
A man is preordained to provide and sacrifice for his family. A woman is considered enslaved and marginalized when she does the same. Another one of feminism's oft overlooked gifts is the tearing down of the differences between boys and girls, men and women. I truly believe that it is to perpetuate the main goal of creating MINOs (men in name only) that can easily be replaced, once he has exhausted his usefulness, by the only real man in a feminist's life, the U.S. government.
Jealousy
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:00am.
They're just jealous because GOP women are so much better looking, even aging gracefully.
Liberal women are so damn spiteful at times(more often than not) when they aren't so self-centered or so pro-government intervention.
-Jon
Pro-Woman?
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:01am.
Conservative women are not anti-male.
__________________________________________________________________________
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
Feminist vs woman.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:24am.
I have observed that feminists are really ill-tempered surly bewitches who most of the time look like they have been sucking lemons. (Pretty much describes liberals in general)
Women, on the other hand, appear to be much happier, laughing and smiling and enjoying their life and kids and family.
Women are sexy and attractive. Feminists don't produce enough pheromone to attract Anthony Weiner or Bill Clinton, and that ain't much!
Last but not least, there are a lot of feminists who are a lot like Mr. Rachel Maddow. I don't think that they even like women, but view them as deviant in some way. They just want to bring them down and make them as miserable as they themselves are. For the life of them, they can't see why a woman would want to have sex with an (ugh) man!
Personally I like women. Liberal wimps can keep the feminists.
WTF
Submitted by jessieH on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:16am.
With liberal women like Pelosi, McCaskill, Watters, ect., I can see why they are confused. Honest, intelligent, beautifull women are a new concept to the left. I have been pro-women since I hit puberty. The liberal women in office caused me temporary blindness, but, thanks to women like Palin, Bachmann and Noem, I can see beauty, again.
Who speaks for "women?"
Submitted by Galvanic on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:48am.
I am not a woman, so I would never claim to speak for all women.
But as I understand the messages of civil rights giants like Martin Luther King Jr. and Susan B. Anthony, our goal isn't to classify people according to skin color or gender and ascribe to them a fixed set of values and aspirations. That's what they were fighting against.
On the contrary, the true goal of civil rights is to look past physical traits and stereotypes and recognize the individual.
Feminism as practiced by Gray has nothing to do with liberating the individual woman by opening doors to opportunities and offering real choices. It's what Ann Coulter would describe as mob-thinking; it's angry, it's orthodox, and any woman who chooses not to buy into its entire ideological agenda is an enemy to be ridiculed and scorned in the Alinsky-style. Noem should be celebrated by feminists for being successful, but she isn't because she didn't make the choices they proscribe. Consequently, she owes them nothing, and therein lies the threat.
Palin, Bachmann, and Noem -- successful conservative women with families -- are highly visible threats to their movement and will continue to be attacked, but they have proven to be strong enough to withstand the assault, making them even bigger threats.
Galvanic
Submitted by well99 on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:49am.
Excellent post.
funny thing, every time I
Submitted by jkwtrading on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 12:48pm.
funny thing, every time I think liberal woman, I also think "coyote ugly"
By Jove, I Think She's Wrong!
Submitted by rammingspeed on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:09pm.
This scumbag bitch speaks for Marxism, and Marxism alone. When the government controls everything - even your vagina, tootsie pie, as Al Gore spoke not-so-obliquely about controlling the population, part of a purely communist agenda - you'll see how you've been had. Screwed. Blue-d. Tattooed. You wouldn't know true freedom or the notion of allowing people to make choices - choices that go against your statist agenda - if an election ever did go against you. Oh, one did go against you, in November 2010. You're a creep. A Miscreant. A turd.
Go to hell.
Who needs tax incentives to breast feed?
Submitted by CobraMan on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 4:16pm.
"Or that redefining rape, defunding health care, and even fighting against tax incentives for breastfeeding is pro-woman."
Who needs tax incentives to breast feed? That's just stupid!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
. . . and it's Liberals who
Submitted by Free Stinker on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 5:34pm.
. . . and it's Liberals who are trying to redefine rape:
Whoopi Goldberg: "It wasn't Rape rape"
And then there are the rape "jokes" made by Letterman and Bernhardt against Sarah and Bristol Palin
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
How interesting
Submitted by CobraMan on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 4:25pm.
It's interesting to note that the 19th amendment (granting women the right to vote) was passed when Republicans had the majority in the Senate and the House, something that President Wilson, a democrat, initially opposed. Tell me again how anti-women those Republicans are?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
What the hell is "pro-woman?"
Submitted by Morganfrost on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 12:27pm.
Is someone seriously arguing that Republicans (male or female) might possibly be opposed to the very concept of "women?" If not, is the idea that, although women make up about half the population, their political interests are so thoroughly monolithic as to be capable of being represented by one-- and only one-- party?
Honestly, this stuff is just too stupid to be believed.
Morgan....
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 12:32pm.
Honestly, this stuff is just too stupid to be believed.
It's DKos, of course it's too stupid to be believed!
Don't forget to tip your waitress. :)
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)