« Obligatory Voting Day Post | Main | The Comeback Kid Stays Out Of The Picture »

Gloria Steinem and Oprah Winfrey can both go "bye-bye"

Everyone's already heard Gloria Steinem's pigheaded remarks about John McCain:

"Suppose John McCain had been Joan McCain and Joan McCain had got captured, shot down and been a POW for eight years. [The media would ask], 'What did you do wrong to get captured? What terrible things did you do while you were there as a captive for eight years?'" Steinem said, to laughter from the audience.

McCain was, in fact, a prisoner of war for around five-and-a-half years, during which time he was tortured repeatedly. Referring to his time in captivity, Steinem said with bewilderment, "I mean, hello? This is supposed to be a qualification to be president? I don't think so."...

"I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn't been trained to kill anybody. And she probably didn't even play war games as a kid. It's a great relief from Bush in his jump suit and from Kerry saluting."


Disgusting, eh?

Oprah Winfrey jumped into the political ring a while ago, coming out for Obama. In a recent interview with USA Today, though, she threatens to hang up at the mere mention of John McCain:

What about John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee? "Oh, please," she replies. "Bye-bye."

She doesn't hang up -- but the threat has been made.


Gloria Steinem and Oprah Winfrey can both go "bye-bye" as far as I'm concerned. Both women pretty overrated as far as I'm concerned anyways, and neither of them have done anything in their piddling little lives to compare to what McCain has done. Being a TV personality doesn't hold a candle to being a POW for five years; being at the forefront of the hysterical, man-hating new wave of feminism does not make her worthy to so much as kiss McCain's combat boots.

Here's a video from an A&E "Biography", showing details of John McCain's torture and captivity in Vietnam. McCain's been getting a lot of flak lately, and understandably so. I hate where he stands on certain issues as much as most conservatives do. But let's not completely tarnish his reputation; let's still remember the sacrifice he made for his country. Agree or disagree with his policies, I will always be thankful and respectful to John McCain for what he went through. The man's a war hero, and we shouldn't forget that just because we disagree with him on certain political issues.

Hat Tip: Debbie Schlussel


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/28296.

Comments (45)

I think I now have it figur... (Below threshold)
GianiD:

I think I now have it figured out.

McCain didnt want special treatment.

Libtards want nothing but special treatment, a different set of rules, all the way through life.

We can can this hypocrisy the Wm Jefferson theory of lib double standards.

I do salute John McCain for... (Below threshold)
Ryan:

I do salute John McCain for being a PoW, but, I also believe that this is irrelevant for a presidential candidate. Just because he was a prisoner doesn't mean that his chances to run the world should be increased. The man knows nothing about the economy.

As if Hillary or Obama know... (Below threshold)
sam:

As if Hillary or Obama know anything about anything.

Empty Suit vs. Empty Pant-Suit.

Cassy, you completely took ... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Cassy, you completely took Oprah's comment out of context. What did it have to to do with McCain tortured as a POW?

There's a campaign slogan j... (Below threshold)

There's a campaign slogan just in time for Hillary in TX and OH -

"Vote for Hillary! At least she's not *ick* a veteran!"

True, McCain probably doesn... (Below threshold)
Jeff:

True, McCain probably doesn't know much about the economy. He probably doesn't know alot about generating electricity either, or designing buildings or bridges. Fortunately the President is not tasked with any of those jobs. Any time Presidents have tried to micro manage the economy they have done much more harm than good.
Remember NAFTA ? There is an example of the Government getting OUT OF THE WAY of the economy vs. the liberal nanny state meddling with everything mindset.

I think McCain has done a few other things besides get the sh*t beat out of him for 5 years. A Naval career, a business career and, oh yeah that Congressional and Senate career thing he's been playing at for a couple of decades.

I think the point about Opr... (Below threshold)
Jeff:

I think the point about Oprah's attitude is that she dislikes or hates McCain. She can't even have a reasonable discussion about the man ...

An all too typical liberal response to an offer of political debate. Believe me, my wife does the same thing everytime there is the slightest chance of a political discussion. No facts are allowed because she says that I'm just bulling her until she gives in. What she means is that she can't counter with facts so she feels helpless. Instead of re-evaluating her beliefs she just shuts down the debate. Needless to say not alot of political debates in our household. :)

Mainstream feminism has mov... (Below threshold)
matthew:

Mainstream feminism has moved past hysterical man-hating, Cassy. The current wave is about autonomy and choice, and holds that a woman's choice to raise a family in a nuclear household is a worthy one so long as the choice is completely hers. Please adjust your stereotype accordingly, even though it will certainly be more difficult for you to rail against proponents of thoughtfulness and autonomy.

But for now, sh... (Below threshold)
Context matters:
But for now, she can't be drawn into a discussion about politics, other than saying, "I'm feeling pretty hopeful about Tuesday," when Obama faces Hillary Clinton in key contests in Ohio and Texas.

Winfrey says she's not sure yet whether she'll have a role in the fall campaign. Asked about Clinton, Winfrey says, "I'm sticking to books today."

What about John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee? "Oh, please," she replies. "Bye-bye."

She doesn't hang up -- but the threat has been made.

So it's back to books -- and the future of Oprah's Book Club, which in 1999 earned her a gold medal and a standing ovation at the National Book Awards for her "magical quality to create best sellers."

Quote looks a bit different now, doesn't it? Was Oprah denigrating Hillary Clinton's time as a POW by refusing to talk about her as well?

I don't think Oprah's "Bye ... (Below threshold)
Jayemay:

I don't think Oprah's "Bye bye" represents a threat to hang up rather than discuss his candidacy. Rather I think it reflects the mindset amongst many on the left that (much like any election in Chicago) the winner of the Dem primary will effectively be the next president, and that the general election is a mere formality.

This is why the Dem's are going to be willing to go all the way to the convention, by the way, because they honestly don't believe they can possibly lose this time around. This is especially true of supporters of Obamessiah.

You know, I couldn't care l... (Below threshold)
newton:

You know, I couldn't care less about what Oprah thinks. She doesn't direct my thinking.

I didn't intend to vote in the TX primary today. But after I read and heard Steinem's remarks on John McCain's time as a POW, I felt I had to act. You see, Steinem is a women's college grad, and so am I. (Both in the Northeast.) But today, the Kings Point wife in me won over the women's college grad. How dare she trash his service? He felt in the flesh the pure consequences of the ideology she herself supports by definition and implication.

I voted McCain.

Will Steinem and Hildebeast... (Below threshold)
GianiD:

Will Steinem and Hildebeast ever 'man up' and come out of the closet?

If they are so proud to be women, shouldnt they also be proud they prefer women?

Senator McCain, we honor yo... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

Senator McCain, we honor you and your service.

Damn good thing you were never waterboarded or made to form a human pyramid naked.

"...and neither of them hav... (Below threshold)
jp2:

"...and neither of them have done anything in their piddling little lives to compare to what McCain has done."

I don't watch or like her show, but she has had far more of a positive impact than McCain has. Every single person in Africa and the Middle East knows her name - and apparently, she is watched daily by the large numbers of Iraqis.

And yes, being a POW does not qualify nor disqualify anyone from service.

And yes, you took Oprah out of context to make a weak point.

Next up: "Cassy ... (Below threshold)
dr lava:

Next up: "Cassy Mad at Stupid Retarded Air"

Hints from Heloise:<p... (Below threshold)
Heloise:

Hints from Heloise:

Save Time!

Read "Hat Tip" before reading the posting. If it says "Debbie Schlussel" just can just skip the whole thing.

Tomorrow we will begin our new four part series on Washing Your Hands Before Exiting a Restroom.

jp2 - "Every single per... (Below threshold)
marc:

jp2 - "Every single person in Africa and the Middle East knows her name - and apparently, she is watched daily by the large numbers of Iraqis."

Good thing too jp2, because they will have all learned of the abuse at her 40 million dollar boondoggle in Johannesburg.

The DING BAT and the CRACK-... (Below threshold)
Spurwing Plover:

The DING BAT and the CRACK-POT two who should get along since their both as nutty as almond tree at harvest time

"Mainstream feminism has mo... (Below threshold)

"Mainstream feminism has moved past hysterical man-hating, Cassy."

Bwaa haa haa haa haa.

Oh, man, Oh, the tears, oh my lungs which the laughter, which caused a coughing fit, just dumped up on my keyboard.

Oh man, oh sweet baby, oh turnips and pizza.

"I am so grateful that she ... (Below threshold)

"I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn't been trained to kill anybody."

That's because she isn't a WOMYN'S Doctor, MORON!

Synova, what do you base yo... (Below threshold)
matthew:

Synova, what do you base your understanding of the contemporary women's movement on? Talk radio? Laughing at people who know more than you do sure beats reading books, don't it!

Mainstream feminism is relevant, thoughtful, and provocative; whereas with the hysterical man-hating variety, nobody pays attention except far-left academics with no political clout and wing nuts hunting for strawwomen.

By being a woman, Matthew.<... (Below threshold)

By being a woman, Matthew.

And I would suggest that a *movement* that is unknown to the general public is not a *movement*.

My opinions are based on personal experience of being denigrated and insulted by people like you, who suggest that I don't read books. Or perhaps that I get my opinion from a man named Rush Limbaugh.

The truth, the ugly truth, of the modern women's *movement* is that anyone who is concerned enough to be part of the *movement* is essentially living a fantasy based on a colossal "straw woman" because if they were to declare and *appreciate* the victory won by their mothers and grandmothers they would no longer have something to hype into a *movement*.

I'm not interested in the women's movement. I'm interested in the world. I'm interested in politics. I'm interested in people. I'm interested in human systems. I'm interested in space and science and the future.

I'm not interested in the women's movement. I'm not interested in being put in that box. Of being grouped with that group of people who are not individuals *before* they are women and I'm not interested in being told that something called "women's issues" exist at all. I'm a person and *my* issues are quite exactly the same as the issues that belong to any man (with the possible exception of you). Human issues.

Don't think so small and don't you dare try to tell me that human issues aren't what should concern me most, that I'm supposed to spend my time and effort on some narrower subset, so poorly envisioned, of things with which it is proper for women to be concerned.

But by all means, accuse me of not reading and accuse me of getting my opinions given me by a man.

Trust me, dear boy. I've heard it before. Because if there is something that "feminists" are highly skilled at, it is insults based on gender and belittlement.

Never in my entire life have I heard from "chauvinists" what I've heard from "feminists."

I really am curious, Matthe... (Below threshold)

I really am curious, Matthew, why you think that Cassie or I do not live in this world? The man-hating is real and pervasive. Commonplace.

Accepted.

I'd suggest that if you want to reclaim the term "feminist" that scolding Cassie isn't the most effective way to do so.

Probably getting rid of productions such as the Vagina Monologues or University sex workers expos would be a better plan. (Because sex work is just soooo liberating.)

That's nice. Anyway, we agr... (Below threshold)
matthew:

That's nice. Anyway, we agree, as there's no way that you deny that women in this day and age are discriminated against by chauvinistic bosses or insecure partners. That the same or similar difficulties are experienced by my gender almost all of who are not intentionally responsible for gender stratification in western society doesn't make your gender any less the brunt of cultural and institutional prejudice. And admitting that doesn't commit you to the belief that women are weaker than men. Relative gains in the previous few generations show the opposite to be the case, actually.

"Synova, what do you bas... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

"Synova, what do you base your understanding of the contemporary women's movement on? Talk radio? Laughing at people who know more than you do sure beats reading books, don't it!"

Oh, books, matthew! And where in the hell did you get this from reading the above post?! Do you feel oppressed by Cassy, Matthew? ;) "Mainstream feminism has moved past hysterical man-hating, Cassy." (Loud Guffaw) Every man's woman, which I definitely am, thinks Gloria Steinem is one of the biggest feminista thugs to appear in the 20th century. When a woman goes on a national talk show to diminish the crediblity of a presidential candidate, and does so with a false scenario just to get a laugh from the audience, you know to turn the station right away.

P.S. Matthew, you can actua... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

P.S. Matthew, you can actually learn a lot from both Cassy and Synova, as they are quite intelligent.

I think you should be the o... (Below threshold)
matthew:

I think you should be the one who tells women that they're too stupid to make the choice whether to sell their bodies as prostitutes or pornographic actors. That shows great respect for women's judgment.

What's wrong with the Vagina Monologues? I can't stand Eve Ensler, or whatever her name is, but the production is good harmless fun.

...which speaks to somethin... (Below threshold)
matthew:

...which speaks to something I mentioned earlier, LaMedusa, that the wingnutosphere pays way more attention to far-left feminists than people who might vote for Hillary Clinton.

I'm sure Cassy and Synova are very bright. However, as a 21st century heterosexual male, I'm threatened by women with good grammar. The women's movement has simply gone too far.

"I'm sure Cassy and Syno... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

"I'm sure Cassy and Synova are very bright. However, as a 21st century heterosexual male, I'm threatened by women with good grammar. The women's movement has simply gone too far."

I hope you're kidding, there, matthew. But in case you aren't, good grammar has nothing to do with how compassionate and caring women can be. Your fears are imaginary unless you have a specific example, like some really smart girl you liked that made you feel less than what you are.

How has the women's movement gone too far? There are plenty of women that like to stay home and take care of their families without holding down a job as well. There are women that do both and more power to them. So, what do you mean?

Grammar! It is *my* servan... (Below threshold)

Grammar! It is *my* servant to be used or ignored at will. Language is my slave to be abused as *I* wish. Ha!

That men are subject to the same inequities as women IS the point.

I've heard some silly-talk that "feminism" is pro-male, too. That it's pro-person.

I shall now make up a word, nay, a *sound* to express my feeling on this. (You'll have to imagine I made it just now!)

The word "feminism" to describe ALL GOOD THINGS is offensive because it is simply not possible to escape the foundations of the word itself any more than one can do so with the word "hysterical." Feminism as ALL GOOD THINGS simply must, by necessity, place one gender as good and the other gender as not-good, otherwise known as the SOURCE OF BADNESS.

So chose a new word.

Leave "feminist" for those mothers and grandmothers who fought the good fight.

And let us heap scorn on Steinem for her fatuous anti-military statements, as if women have not always had a bloody hand along side those of men, and let us sneer at the notion that we should kill our babies, and let us be honest that being used is being used, even when it's with permission and an exchange of cash.

Or perhaps you've never seen someone accept being treated as less than human for a coin or two.

I have.

Seems like only Matthew is ... (Below threshold)
epador:

Seems like only Matthew is voting negatively here. Bravo Synova and LaMedusa.

You are making a point that is hard to take by your opposition if given by a male, and even harder by a female, without the opposition throwing back extremely bigoted jibes that reveal their true misogynistic and misandrogenistic [there I go abusing the language too] prejudices.

Umm, I was joking, LaMedusa... (Below threshold)
matthew:

Umm, I was joking, LaMedusa. I like smart girls. I wouldn't date someone that I couldn't argue or have serious conversations with.

I think my point was that "feminism" is a broad movement, and very much alive, active, and important to this day; that 3rd wave feminism (or whatever it's being called in sociology classrooms) respects women who choose to become wives and have families; and that the fringe cases that conservatives fixate themselves upon really aren't very important within the overall social zeitgeist, or even in academia. They're very loud, but they're like Ward Churchill: if Michelle Malkin doesn't hear them, do they really make sounds?

Also, who said you should kill your babies, Synova? What person has claimed that abortion is a good thing? Isn't it more about rights and autonomy than the positive value in killing a fetus/baby?

3rd wave feminism ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
3rd wave feminism (or whatever it's being called in sociology classrooms) respects women who choose to become wives and have families; and that the fringe cases that conservatives fixate themselves upon really aren't very important within the overall social zeitgeist, or even in academia.

Feminism has finally accepted that some women choose traditional roles and respects those choices. If that's all modern feminism were about then you would have a valid point. However, modern feminism has some of the same anti-man underpinnings it had from day one. After all, every "movement" needs a common enemy.

Steinem's comment that "I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn't been trained to kill anybody." Is exactly the wrong message voter's want to hear about a future Commander in chief. Hillary doesn't make that statement about herself and even runs an ad that suggests she could make the hard choice of using military force if needed. Like Bill, Steinem is not helping Hillary.

Mac Lorry, which authors/mo... (Below threshold)
matthew:

Mac Lorry, which authors/movement figures are you referring to? What is the size of their audience? How much do they contribute to which campaigns? What percentage of journal articles/books within their respective disciplines do they publish? These are questions that you'd want to answer before talking about modern feminism. I don't know all of those answers, but when I look around me, I don't see Gloria Steinems--not a lot of them in universities I've worked/studied at, and basically none outside of them. Almost every woman I date claims to be a feminist, and none of them think that skyscrapers are phallic projections, for instance. Feminism has always been a threat to conservativism, and thus it's no surprise that the conception of feminism that conservatives carry around with them is a caricature, and a strawperson.

And for the love of Jeeeeeebus, it's not an "anti-man" movement; rather, it's a movement that recognizes fundamental discrepancies in gender equity, which is not any one man's fault. Men and women are part of the same system that reinforces gender norms, some of which prevent people (especially girls and women, but also boys and men) from flourishing to the fullest extent possible. If a feminist wants to tell me that it's my fault, I'd kindly tell her to piss off; but if someone were to assert that our society affords men no particular competitive advantage, and that women make 80% as much as men because they're 25% stupider/lazier (or men are 25% more intelligent/more hard-working--same difference), then they would be equally full of shit.

"Isn't it more about rights... (Below threshold)

"Isn't it more about rights and autonomy than the positive value in killing a fetus/baby?"

No, it's not. If you haven't been paying attention. Killing a fetus or baby... the right and autonomy to KILL your fetus or baby is essentially and inescapably tied to the fact that babies NOT MEN are the source of female oppression.

The ultimate GOOD is to escape that oppression. It's ALL ABOUT reproduction and the biological unfairness of biology itself. The right to KILL your baby or fetus is the definition of freedom and autonomy.

Or you haven't been paying attention.

Or else show me the pro-life feminists. Show me the acceptance of pro-life sentiments. Show me someone who doesn't get kicked out of the "movement" if she suggests that women should be the masters of their own reproduction and responsible for the consequences of their *choices* when they make them.

Autonomy, to an honest person, does not in any way require the legal right to kill a baby or fetus.

Thus, it is not about autonomy.

"...and that women make 80%... (Below threshold)

"...and that women make 80% as much as men because they're..."

...likely to make different choices and value different things.

They're likely to be less impressed with the idea that wages define their worth. They are more likely to chose flexibility over a few extra bucks. They are, in fact, more accustomed to asserting themselves over the issue of workplace conditions than men who are more accustomed to putting up with institutional abuse, long hours, and dirty bathrooms.

Supposedly, someone said this, feminists support women who chose their family over their career.

I suspect that's not true.

Know anybody who's been kno... (Below threshold)
matthew:

Know anybody who's been knocked up by a baby? I'm pretty sure the "source" of unwanted pregnancies is men, not fetuses, unless we've evolved to the point where we can retroactively fertilize our mother's own eggs... Woah. :)

Anyway, you couch abortion in terms of the right to kill a baby, whereas I think it's more reasonable and felicitous to the issue (women's rights) to describe it in terms of the right to not be pregnant. I have that right, why shouldn't you?

Apparently there are pro-life feminists. I guess woman who played Ray's wife on Everybody Loves Raymond is a pro-life Catholic feminist. I suppose I'd describe my mother as the same. Feminists are allowed to disagree with one another, you know. They often do.

As for whether a reasonable feminist would support a particular decision to become a housewife as opposed to pursuing a career, that decision is respectable but with a caveat: it must be made from within, and not motivated by a desire to fit into a socially determined role. If you think being a housewife is your greatest path to fulfillment and flourishing, then go do it. If you become one because you feel like that's what you should do, then that's not a wholehearted, autonomous decision--it's coerced. Similarly, if I denied myself the right to be a stay-at-home dad because people at work would think I'm effeminate (I have no idea if people think that, but let's pretend), despite having an aching desire to be the primary caregiver in my family, then I'm also a victim of the same gender-based normativity.

Mac Lorry, which a... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Mac Lorry, which authors/movement figures are you referring to? What is the size of their audience? How much do they contribute to which campaigns? What percentage of journal articles/books within their respective disciplines do they publish?

The feminists movement didn't start in academia, it started in the working world and politics and finally got into academia. That's the order it still follows today. What you know from your academic environment is old news and only valued in academia. If you want to know what's going on today in the real-world feminist movement you need to tune in to women in politics.

but if someone were to assert that our society affords men no particular competitive advantage, and that women make 80% as much as men because they're 25% stupider/lazier (or men are 25% more intelligent/more hard-working--same difference), then they would be equally full of shit.

First the statistic is provided by a feminist group. On closer examination you'll find that women work less hours a year then men and that's a major reason they earn less. The hourly rate in most hourly jobs is and has been gender neutral for a long time, but men tend to stay in one job longer and gain seniority.

If there's no substative differences between men and women why is the white male poison population more than 3.5 times higher than that of white females. Social economics can't explain the difference between prisoner rates within the same race because the prisoners come from the same backgrounds. The studies I have read point to two causes. On average men are more aggressive and far more willing to take risks. When that combination is not directed properly the individual ends up in jail, but when it is directed in productive ways individuals often have greater success in their carrier. That's why most large corporations have men in the top position. It has nothing to do with a glass ceiling. The scramble to the top often requires aggressive and risky moves, the vary traits women are adverse to.

Feminism seeks to offset the male advantages of aggression and risk taking in the marketplace without addressing the disadvantage these traits have for men. In fact, feminism increasingly seeks to punish various aspects of male aggression and risk taking. The rise in feminism and the rise in the male prison population go hand in hand. That's anti-man.

"No, its not.If You have... (Below threshold)
914:

"No, its not.If You havent been paying attention. Killing a fetus or baby...(God forbid) the right and autonomy to kill Your fetus or baby is essentially and inescapably tied to the fact that babies NOT MEN are the source for female oppression">

RIGHT!! ITS ALL ABOUT YOU..SO KILL YOURSELF IN REBELLION.

Are you serious?! What was ... (Below threshold)
matthew:

Are you serious?! What was the percentage of men vs. women in prisons before Harriet Taylor Mill kicked off the movement?

And anyway, social statistics will reinforce the way you qualitatively differentiate men from women, because social statistics reflect society. The point of what I'm saying is, society is the problem. (Not that I'd rather live in another one, I'd just like this one to get better.) The crux of the matter is whether differences that statistics track are a result of biology (and are innate/intrinsic), or if 10,000 years (give or take) of the way our civilization is organized have in some way stultified the nurturing instincts of men, and the competitive instincts of women.

As for feminism predating academic feminism, that's false. There are threads of it in Plato, who lived in patriarchal Greece, and the aforementioned H.T. Mill (John Stuart Mill's wife, who was responsible for much of her husband's enormously important work) wrote The Subjection of Women (published posthumously) in the 1850s. With philosophy, it often takes a few hundred years for the best ideas to come to fruition. Of course you're right that academia wasn't solely responsible for the progression of women's rights; the closet misogynists who have controlled our best academies have been one of the biggest obstacles to women's substantive equality, and it's shameful.

Are you serious?! ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Are you serious?! What was the percentage of men vs. women in prisons before Harriet Taylor Mill kicked off the movement?

Are you saying the ratio was lower before the feminist movement?

The crux of the matter is whether differences that statistics track are a result of biology (and are innate/intrinsic), or if 10,000 years (give or take) of the way our civilization is organized have in some way stultified the nurturing instincts of men, and the competitive instincts of women.

The gender ratio of prisoners is more than just a social statistic, it's the result of gender differences which are also at play in all areas of society. A recent study of new hires within various white collar jobs found that men's starting salary was higher than that of women even where the women had better academic records. On the surface that looks like gender discrimination, but the study found the real reason. The men were more than twice as likely as the women to turn down the initial offer and ask for a higher wage. That simple risk taking tactic trumped higher academic performance, which demonstrates again that academic programs fail to prepare students for the real-world of business. Society's organization reflects biology and only academics are confused about that.

You credit Harriet Taylor Mill with kicked off the feminist movement in the U.S., but the pioneers of the real-world feminist movement were women like Lydia Chapin Taft, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony. Their legacy is CAWP, the real-world feminist movement.

I believe that Matthew is t... (Below threshold)
alex:

I believe that Matthew is the only person who seems to really know what they are talking about. As a woman, feminist, single mother, and student, I must confess that Cassy, Synova and Mac Lorry make me fear for the future of women's rights. It seems okay to say that we are all individuals, and that as a woman you expect to be treated as an individual, but one must remember that feminism has allowed for this. Patriarchy has dominated centuries of thought and education, and women choosing whether they would like to work or stay home is a right that was fought for by feminists who were able to see the larger picture. Synova and Mac Lorry are taking the patriarchal superstructure and turning it into biology. Can you really say it is a mans nature to be aggressive, biology dictating him to be thus, or is it nurture. Do we not immediately dress our boys in blue and buy them baseball mitts?

By the way, I love men, AND... (Below threshold)
alex:

By the way, I love men, AND will be soon performing in the vagina monologues. We will raise money for the local women's shelter. I know this is horribly oppressive and should be banned. (grin)

Can you really say... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Can you really say it is a mans nature to be aggressive, biology dictating him to be thus, or is it nurture.

Within the white race there are about 3.5 men in prison for every women in prison and this is due to a greater propensity for aggression and risk taking in men as compared to women. This same propensity for aggression and risk taking, when productively directed, propels men to the top in business and politics. The academic feminists can't accept there's a biological difference that explains men's greater success, and thus they want to confuse the issue by injecting the question of nurture.

However, If it's not biology then the fact that, within the white race there are about 3.5 men in prison for every women in prison must be the result of gender bias and an injustice of biblical proportions that needs to be addressed immediately. The yawn that comes from society when confronted with this fact demonstrates conclusively that apart from a few easily confused academics it's apparent that biology results in men being more aggressive and willing risk takers as compared to women (on average).

Yes, Matthew is well versed in the feminists delusion that there are no substantive biological differences between men and women, but neither is there a plan to correct the gender bias that imprisons men at a rate 3.5 times higher than women. Apparently feminists don't care if their sons face such drastic discrimination, either that or they know the truth deep down that boys will be boys.

alex, consider Matthew's mo... (Below threshold)

alex, consider Matthew's mocking of the notion that biology... having babies is what "oppresses" women. That women are "knocked up" by men not babies. Sex doesn't oppress women. The fact is that if women chose to reproduce it means limits on mobility and hormone issues (aka. brain death) that are an inescapable biological reality. Biology is why it makes sense to divide work into jobs that facilitate childcare and nursing and jobs that do not. Pretending that it's men deciding that mothers should stay close enough to home to nurse every couple hours while they go off and do "fun" stuff is... willfully delusional.

"Anyway, you couch abortion in terms of the right to kill a baby, whereas I think it's more reasonable and felicitous to the issue (women's rights) to describe it in terms of the right to not be pregnant. I have that right, why shouldn't you?"

I do, Matthew, you ass.

I have absolutely as much right as you not to get pregnant. Why do you think women are too stupid to manage their own reproduction?

This is why abortion is not about autonomy. Because it is not about having the right to reproduce or not reproduce. It's about the right to destroy a fetus.

As it is... I actually have MORE right than you do. MORE right than any man does. Because I can decide after the fact that I don't want to be responsible for my choices.

I do appreciate you explaining under just what conditions my choices to stay at home with children are legitimate, however. It would be a crying shame if I just, you know, figured I had the right to arrange my life the way I see fit because it was my life, even if I didn't have the proper opinions about gender roles.

And nice of you to explain when it's proper for a man to stay at home with kids or not, too. As someone who homeschools I probably know more stay at home Dads than usual. Somehow I never noticed them worry about the perception of their masculinity. I've never noticed any Dad's working shifts with Mom in order to take care of babies, worried about female gender cooties from changing diapers, either.

But then I tend to hang around men *and* women who value reproduction, babies, and children as a central purpose of life rather than a perk, a hobby, for when their careers are settled and condition is financially comfortable.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy