Archive for Feminism

Feminism’s Third Rail

There’s got to be a joke in that title somewhere, but until one suggests itself, we’ll stick with tragedy:

Narinder is one of four sons and only one of his brothers has managed to get married. In his district in the state of Uttar Pradesh, there are only 858 girls born for every 1,000 boys, a ratio that doesn’t occur naturally without medical intervention. The northwestern state of Uttar Pradesh is home to one of the largest skewed sex ratios in India.

“Only the rich and men with government jobs manage to get a bride these days,” he says. “Anyone who earns less cannot find a bride here anymore.”

To be fair, the job doesn’t have a lot to recommend it:

A new bride would help his parents, he says. “They would have had an easier life. They would have had someone to cook and to take care of them.”

She should clean. She should run the household. She should bear children. And Narinder plans to share her with his two unmarried brothers, who live in the same house.

Where do I sign?

On the one hand, they’re snuffing around 15% of unborn girls; on the other, the girls who are permitted to be born grow up to marry rich men, rather than shmoes like Narinder, and his brothers, and his parents, and his children. That’s a decent trade.

Isn’t it?

Decades of sex-selective abortion have created an acute lack of women in certain parts of India. Traffickers capitalize on the shortage by recruiting or kidnapping women ensnared in poverty to sell as brides. It’s a cycle influenced by poverty and medical technologies, but one that ultimately is perpetuated by India’s attitude towards women.

The National Crime Records Bureau estimated in 2012 that about 10 women are kidnapped in Assam every day. Some of these women are found again. Some go missing forever.

Eastern Indian states like Assam, Jharkhand, West Bengal and Odisha turn into source areas for bride trafficking, because they have much more balanced sex ratios. Meanwhile, India’s northwestern states are more conservative and also more affluent, meaning they’re able to afford ultrasound scans and selective abortions.

So, abortion in India effects girl babies overwhelmingly, and leads to such an imbalance between the sexes that teenage girls are routinely kidnapped from their homes and sold as child brides.

Hello? Betty Friedan? Gloria Steinem?

I went to NOW’s website and looked up India. I confess I expected nothing, but I was wrong.

There was one entry on this topic:

Jim Yardley reports for The New York Times: “India’s increasing wealth and improving literacy are apparently contributing to a national crisis of ‘missing girls,’ with the number of sex-selective abortions up sharply among more affluent, educated families during the past two decades, according to a new study.”

Read the original source

That was more than three years ago, and that was it. No comment, no discussion, no nothing. In the meantime, 11,980 girls have been abducted in Assam alone (if the rate is accurate and consistent). I don’t think I can count how many girls were terminated before birth.

To repeat for the thousandth time, I don’t oppose abortion. Though less and less can I morally justify even my limited pro-choice position. Abortion leads to massive abuse against women in India (China’s little better, if not worse) and genocide among African Americans. In a sane world (a fanciful construct if there ever was one), feminists would oppose abortion with every fibroid of their being. Organizations like NOW and Planned Parenthood would be exposed as the brainwashers that they really are.

“Women’s reproductive health”? That’s a locution worthy of Stalin, Mao, or Goebbels. I guess that’s the joke.

Comments

War on Women Update

With all the bloodshed and carnage Muslims are inflicting (mostly) on each other across the world, it’s easy to forget the savagery (mostly) women are putting themselves through. But we have WBTL ace reporter on the scene.

Whaddya got, Scoop?

The Ohio Department of Health has taken action against two Northeast Ohio abortion clinics for staffing problems and other infractions.

The Northeast Ohio Women’s Center in Cuyahoga Falls was denied a license to perform surgical abortions by interim health department director Lance Himes, the agency said Friday. Himes also imposed a $25,000 fine on Planned Parenthood of Bedford Heights.

What sort of health violations, Scoop?

At each of the facilities, health inspectors found expired medical supplies and discovered neither had a director of nursing, as required by the state, according to health department notification letters sent to the clinics on Wednesday.

At the Planned Parenthood clinic, inspectors also reported finding improperly refrigerated tissue specimens, containers of urine in a cupboard and bathroom, and incomplete documentation about patients sent to the hospital.

Scoop, I understand that this is not their first brush with the law:

A northeastern Ohio abortion provider has closed after failing a state health and safety inspection.

The Ohio Department of Health ordered abortion provider Capital Care Network of Cuyahoga Falls to stop operations in an April 16 letter and says it soon will revoke the clinic’s license.

The health department says inspectors found numerous violations during a Feb. 21 inspection, including undertrained staff, failure to maintain a safe and sanitary environment and failure to maintain patient documentation.

The health department gave the clinic a chance to request a hearing about a proposal to revoke its license, but says the clinic did not reply.

Why should they reply, Scoop, when they can just fold up their tents under cover of darkness and reopen somewhere else with their unfrozen tissue samples and plastic cups of stale urine? Scoop…Scoop? I guess we’ve lost contact.

Let’s get comment from the other side of the issue:

“We’re deeply concerned, though admittedly unsurprised, that multiple abortion facilities are jeopardizing the lives and health of women,” said Mike Gonidakis, president of Ohio Right to Life. “The real war on women is being waged everyday in these unsafe and unsanitary abortion mills. These reports shock the conscience and reaffirm our resolve to protect life from Ohio’s abortion industry.”

“The abortion industry”: how apt a word.

I’m a big believer in women’s reproduction and in women’s health. But the minute you start talking about women’s reproductive health, you lose me. Just imagine if women were treated this shabbily in any other setting, the Obama administration, say. You’d never hear the end of it. (Oh wait…they are, and you barely hear a peep.)

Comments

Beverly Shill-Billy

I would have thought that for a person with national political ambitions, languishing in a state senate would feel like exile. But a young political organizer named Barry Sotero, whose “presence” in Springfield, IL for an eternity of eight years must have felt like Elba, showed those with inflated opinions of themselves that state government offered more opportunity than first met the eye.

All you need, beside the outsized ego, is… well, that’s about all you need:

Sandra Fluke has moved on to the general election in the race to represent California’s 26th District in the state Senate, the Associated Press reports.

Fluke finished second in the open primary, following rival Ben Allen. Both will compete in November for the seat being vacated by state Sen. Ted Lieu (D), who’s running for Congress this year.

Fluke came to national prominence in 2012 after testifying before Congress in favor of mandatory contraception coverage. She became the target of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who called the then-Georgetown Law student a “slut.”

The attorney and activist, who spoke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention following Limbaugh’s attacks, briefly weighed running for outgoing Rep. Henry Waxman’s (D-Calif.) House seat before deciding to run for the state Senate instead.

That’s the Georgetown Law (and Cornell undergrad) mind on display. Her sister in Socialism, Cindy Sheehan (an ugly step-sister, if I may rudely and honestly observe), shot too high, the California Governorship, but got no closer to that office than her lean-to in Crawford, TX. Sandra knew it wasn’t the office, but the ambition, that defined the office holder—especially when that office represents Beverly Hills and Hollywood.

Forget streetlights, pot holes, and pot dispensaries, Sandra Fluke—Senator Fluke to you, Rush—has higher (or lower) aims:

Protect women’s health care rights!

Any day now, the Supreme Court will announce its decision in the Hobby Lobby case. The case could have far-reaching implications for whether private companies can refuse to offer their employees’ health insurance with contraception coverage.

Plain and simple — A woman’s boss should not have a say in her health care decisions. No one’s boss should. The stakes are too high for us to be silent.

Please join Sandra Fluke and the DCCC and sign this petition declaring that a woman’s boss should not have a say in her health care decisions.

A woman’s boss should not have a say in her health care decisions.

Agreed. But we’re not talking about setting broken bones or treating breast cancer. That’s health care, and irrelevant to an employer. Abortion and contraception (two radically different things, in my view) might also be health care, but hardly irrelevant to an employer being asked to pay for them. Especially an employer with religious objections. Does a woman have a say in her boss’s morality?

The law has to find common sense middle ground between absurd extremes. Could a Christian Science employer withhold insurance that used medicine? Could an employee require his or her employer to add or subtract certain body parts? To mutilate or decorate those remaining?

It’s dishonest of Sandra to disguise abortion as “women’s health care rights”—hence her bright future in politics. I won’t predict what the Supreme Court will say, beyond guessing that it will be a split decision, with strong sentiments on both sides. One side will “win”, without exactly being “right”.

And Sandra Fluke will have gone from “slut” to Senator (albeit State Senator, in Sacramento) in this great nation of ours. Though the difference is less than you might imagine.

Comments

Are the Clintons the Waltons?

Both families may have been dirt poor, but at least the Waltons had a mountain named after them:


Which one’s Roger?

Chelsea Clinton lives a charmed life, but don’t be fooled: secretly, she’s not attached to the oodles of money she and her hedge fund manager husband make each year, the former first daughter said in an interview published over the weekend.

Philanthropy is her true passion, Clinton said, and that’s why she permanently left Wall Street to join the Clinton Foundation, which she runs with her parents, former first couple Bill and Hillary Clinton.

‘I was curious if I could care about [money] on some fundamental level, and I couldn’t,’ Clinton told The Telegraph. ‘That wasn’t the metric of success I wanted in my life.’

Despite Chelsea’s self-proclaimed disinterest in money-making, a report last week surfaced that she was paid $600,000 by NBC last year to do a smattering of reporting.

NBC News has aired two stories by Chelsea Clinton so far in 2014, both on education programs targeting the underprivileged that were shown on Nightly News in January.

By comparison, her salary is higher than both of the last two editors of the New York Times.

The paycheck from her NBC contract has helped Chelsea and her husband Marc Mezvinsky buy a $10.5 million apartment next to New York’s Madison Square Park last spring.

Where does this dingbat get the idea that a $600k no-show job and a mega-millionaire husband is “not caring” about money?

Oh, that’s where:

‘We came out of the White House not only dead broke but in debt. We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to piece together the resources for mortgages for houses, for Chelsea’s education. You know, it was not easy,’ Hillary said.

Thanks to eight years in the White House and lucrative speaking gigs and book deals afterward, Bill and Hillary were able to pay for Chelsea to attend Sidwell Friends private school as a teenager and Stanford and Oxford universities.

She graduated from Columbia in the spring of 2010 and married Mezvinsky that summer.

A smart and capable woman furthers her own ambitions by marrying an enterprising guy—just like her mom! That’s what makes America great. Who would have heard of Dolly if she hadn’t married James Madison? Eleanor without Franklin? Just about the only historic American woman who earned her renown on her own was Betsy Ross. For sewing.

But that’s not really my point. This is my point:

For starters, she and her husband were obviously well positioned to quickly capitalize on the post-presidential custom of cashing in.
She left that part out.

Hillary Clinton had a massive book advance in the works and, along with the former president, the prospect of making millions. This is what fueled cries of hypocrisy.

After quickly trying to clean up the comments, though, Clinton swung and missed again on Sunday when questioned about her own financial standing and wealth inequality in an interview with The Guardian.

Clinton compared herself to others and noted her situation is different, too.

“We pay ordinary income tax, unlike a lot of people who are truly well off, not to name names; and we’ve done it through dint of hard work,” she said.

One reason Clinton’s two missteps on wealth are surprising is that questions about the issue are not new and shouldn’t have come as a surprise.

Liberal websites like Mother Jones began asking questions about her speaking fees — upwards of $200,000 — in early May.

Again, America the Beautiful. You don’t want to pay Hillary $200 Gs? You don’t have to. But if you want to hear the Heroine of Herzegovina tell war stories from Tuzla, it’s going to cost you.

But to hear these gold-diggers (and God bless ‘em for it!) claim to be flat busted from their Manhattan penthouses and Scarsdale manses is a bit…rich.

Comments

Dispatches From the Frontlines of the War on Women

Well, girls, actually:

A shocking new video Live Action released today catches the Planned Parenthood abortion business teaching teenagers about S&M-based sexual relationships and concepts such as gagging, whipping and asphyxiation.

In a series of undercover audits, Live Action investigators documented Planned Parenthood counselors and nurses advising our investigators, who the Planned Parenthood staffers thought were minors, on how to practice torture sex.

In the videos, Planned Parenthood counselors encourage undercover investigators posting as 15 and 16-year-old teens, to engage in the sadomasochistic practices, telling the underage teens “if it’s consensual, it’s OK… it’s totally OK.”

The official Planned Parenthood website lists BD (bondage and discipline) and SM (sadomasochism) under its Sex & Sexuality – “Understanding Sexual Activity — at a Glance” page without any warnings or safety objections: “Here are some examples of less common sexual behaviors: SM (sadomasochism) — the use of domination and/or pain for sexual arousal. BD (bondage and discipline) — sexual role play that includes elements of SM.”

I tend to draw the line at the interrogation practices of Uday and Qusay Hussein. But don’t let me stop you. Susie.

“What we’re about to release shows a systemic, institutional problem in America’s largest abortion corporation,” Lila Rose, Live Action’s president, stated. “It’s not a matter of ‘don’t judge,’ but rather explicit endorsement of violent and harmful sexual practices to boys and girls as young as fifteen years old.”

The group complains: “Planned Parenthood consistently fights any law requiring parental consent or involvement for minors seeking sexual and reproductive health care, including abortions. PP’s website encourages teens to circumvent their parents and the law.”

“Taxpayers, and especially parents, need to know where their money is going,” Rose said. “This funding is not optional – it’s a compulsory, government-enforced extraction going toward extremely questionable programs and dangerous advice for our nation’s teens.”

Planned Parenthood receives over $500 million a year from taxpayers, in the name of so-called sex education and health. Furthermore, under ObamaCare, Planned Parenthood has announced that it will receive undisclosed funds through the $75-million-a-year PREP (Personal Responsibility and Education Program), with 15 affiliates already having received grants.

This is how they talk to 15-year-olds, remember. A little whipping, a touch of asphyxiation—don’t knock it till you’ve tried it. Missy.

Comments

Rape is Wrong

That’s about all from this story we can all agree on:

‘We shouldn’t teach women self-defense so they can avoid being raped, rather we should only teach men it is bad to rape.’

That’s the logic coming from leftist feminists in response to Miss Nevada Nia Sanchez, now Miss USA, suggesting last night that women should learn self-defense in order to prevent or avoid being sexually assaulted. Sanchez is a fourth degree black belt in taekwondo.

“Myself, as a fourth-degree black belt, I learned from a young age that you need to be confident and be able to defend yourself. And I think that’s something that we should start to really implement for a lot of women.”

A strong woman, confident, independent, beautiful—who won Miss USA last night, by the way—a poster woman for feminists, right? Not on this planet:

Elisabeth Jasina
@Jasina
Miss Nevada might be gorgeous, but needs to realize teaching self defense to women isn’t the solution for ending sexual assault #YesAllWomen
10:42 PM – 8 Jun 2014

Bergen N. Baucom
@BergenNBaucom
Miss Iowa says today’s youth are narcissistic followed by Miss Nevada who wants to end rape with self defense classes Really? Sick #MissUSA

Anna Beth West
@annabethwest
Women shouldn’t need to learn to protect themselves against rape #missnevada educate and respect yourself as a woman #rapeculture
10:55 PM – 8 Jun 2014

Elisa Benson
@elisabenson
I get that the college sexual assault problem can’t be solved in 30 secs but still icky to pretend like self defense is the answer. #MissUSA
10:40 PM – 8 Jun 2014

RB
@RBPundit
“Teach men not to rape.” – because it’s not universally understood that rape is wrong. #morons

I’m a little out of touch, but in my collegiate days, we men were told rape was a crime of violence, not sex. So, while we’re teaching men not to rape (which lesson I learned early, but I’m precocious), can we also teach them not to assault, rob, stab, shoot, etc.? Then none of us will have to defend ourselves, except from the few women who commit those crimes.

Or wait: teach men no means no and that rape is wrong, while you teach women to knee such men in the nuts who just won’t learn. That’s just me all over: bringing people together.

Another contestant, Miss Pennsylvania (Valerie Gatto), claimed to be the product of rape. Lord knows what the feminists made out of her.

“When my mother was 19 years old and a college student, she was walking outside of work. A man all dressed in black and disguised brutally attacked her at knife-point,” said Gatto. “He raped her and he almost killed her, but she managed to get away. My mom became pregnant and I’m the product of that.”

Gatto said her mom wanted to give her up for adoption as soon as she was born, but was convinced by her grandmother to keep her.

“I really hope to make a difference with my story and my message, just showing that your circumstances do not define your life,” said Gatto. “And it doesn’t matter where you come from. You can do anything you want.”

One contestant could leave a potential rapist a crumpled blob on the sidewalk; another who was born of a rape still celebrates her life. That cloud of smoke you see is emanating from the ears of those few feminists still around. They would rather that this smart beautiful woman never had been born.

Comments

Bigoted Broads

I went to a feminist gathering and a pogrom broke out.

Well, not me, but Phyllis Chesler:

The next National Women’s Studies Association annual meeting will take place in San Juan, Puerto Rico on November 13-16, 2014 and is aptly named “Feminist Transgressions.” Indeed, the conference itself is “transgressive” in that it minimizes the cause of women to focus, yet again, on the cause of Palestine, aka the destruction of Israel.

This is only the latest, among many other examples, of the way in which Women’s Studies—an idea which I pioneered so long ago–has been Stalinized and Palestinianized.

This point can’t be made strongly enough. The so-called Palestinian movement is a creation—a creation of the Soviet Union (hence the Left, which follows sheep-like Stalin and his heirs) to undermine Western influence in the Middle East, and a creation of Arab nationalists (also Stalin-influneced) to create a state for a people they never acknowledged or empowered when they ran the place. Therefore, all disciplines occupied by the Left (feminism, academia, human rights and social justice, etc.—even American Jewry!) are infected with antisemitism at their very core. A sheep may not believe it has anthrax, may fervently wish that it didn’t, may try to blame the victim of its deadly disease for suffering from it and blowing the whole thing out of proportion—but it doesn’t change the truth.

The sheep (literal and metaphoric) are diseased, mangy, and decrepit. Sorry, Phyllis honey, where were you? (There’s irony for you—a guy interrupting a dame!)

The Plenary is titled: “The Imperial Politics of Nation-States: U.S., Israel, and Palestine.” The speakers are Brandeis graduate Angela Davis, the well-known (former) communist, former associate of the Black Panther Party, and recipient of the Lenin Peace Prize.

Again with the butting in, but it’s my blog. How many lies and oxymorons are there in that one tiny paragraph? Lenin “Peace” Prize? How can you award someone a nullity? And what is that fictitious entity, “Palestine” doing among the actual nation-states of America and Israel? Not to mention I very much doubt she’s a former Communist. I even very much doubt she’s still alive.

How many other feminists did it take to screw in a light bulb?

Next up at the Plenary is Dr. Islah Jad of Birzeit University. Dr. Jad may be a true feminist, but she is mainly dedicated to the development of Palestinian women and Palestinian nationalism. She does not study or advocate for non-Arab or non-Muslim women in the region. Further, her work does not seem to focus on honor killings, honor related violence, forced marriage, forced face veiling, polygamy, arranged marriage, feminist development under an Islamist totalitarian and apartheid regime—all burning issues on the “West Bank” and in Gaza. Instead, some of her articles are titled: “The Conundrums of Post-Oslo Palestine: Gendering Palestinian Citizenship” and “Islamist Women of Hamas: Between Nationalism and Feminism.”

“Gendering Palestinian Citizenship” might be the most nonsensical non-sequitur I’ve ever read. “Plucking Venusian Crockpots” has more meaning.

But that can’t be all the anti-Hebreic hotties we have to hear from. In feminism, two’s company, three’s a symposium:

Finally, we come to none other than Rebecca Wilkomerson, who is the executive director of the infamous anti-Israel “peace” group, the Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP). This is a U.S. based organization which views itself as the “Jewish wing” of the Palestinian Solidarity Movement.

According to the NGO Monitor, the JVP has “actively promoted the central dimensions of the political warfare strategy against Israel which was adopted at the 2001 Durban NGO Forum. This ‘Durban strategy’ includes the tactics of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS), a sustained campaign of demonization such as accusations of ‘apartheid’ and ‘racism,’ and support of a ‘Palestinian right of return’ with the ultimate goal of dismantling Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.”

Well, isn’t that special? And what do all these women’s libbers have in common (besides a big mouth)?

These three speakers–Davis, Jad, and Wilkomerson–and their organizations are not interested in women, per se, nor are they interested in real gender and religious apartheid as practiced in the Arab and Muslim world. They are not really interested in racism, at least not if anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are also considered racism, which they surely are.

For years, my people–the Women’s Studies professors, students, and programs–have been more concerned with the alleged occupation of Palestine than with the occupation, world-wide, of women’s bodies. Israel has been falsely accused, non-stop, of precisely those crimes that are endemic to the Arab and Muslim worlds: barbaric misogyny, gender and religious apartheid, female genital mutilation, honor killings, and a host of other crimes.

Long-time readers will recognize Bloodthirsty Liberal’s Law: Israel is invariably accused of the very crimes of which it is in fact a victim.

And now the frosting on the cake:

When feminist and anti-Islamist hero Ayaan Hirsi Ali had to leave Holland, not a single Women’s Studies program offered her a perch. Only the conservative American Enterprise Institute did so. Most recently, the drive to dis-invite Hirsi Ali at Brandeis was spearheaded by the Women’s and Gender Studies Department.

For some time, some feminist marchers have waved the Palestinian flag and worn Arab headdresses in various demonstrations. (They don’t have it right, though, because they wear Arab male keffiyahs. Were they marching anywhere between Cairo and Kabul, they’d be wearing burqas, headscarves, veils.)

There’s more at the link, obviously, but that’s more than enough out of them. As Bill Clinton whispered to Ted Kennedy of Barack Obama, they should be getting us coffee.

Comments

Wanted

Very much so:

Legendary feminist scholar bell hooks ripped into Beyoncé during a panel discussion in New York this week, branding her ‘anti-Feminist’ and even a ‘terrorist.’

Ain’t I a Woman? author Gloria Jean Watkins – who goes by pen name ‘bell hooks’ was at a New School panel discussing the subject ‘liberating the black female body’ when she tackled the famous singer and her effect on young girls.

The subject was broached initially by Janet Mock, a transgendered activist and author, who wanted to discuss how inspirational she found the 32-year-old singer to be when writing her own book.

While noting she has issues with the controversial lyrics in Drunk in Love that refer to the domestic abuse between Ike and Tina Turner, for example, Mock lauded Mrs Carter for ‘owning her body and claiming that space.’

But hooks disagreed: ‘I see a part of Beyonce that is, in fact, anti-feminist – that is a terrorist, especially in terms of the impact on young girls.

She added that she was adding to the ‘construction of herself as a slave.’

bell then added that she believes it’s Bey’s money that talks.

She explained: ‘Wealthy is what so many young people fantasize, dream about, sexualize, eroticize…and one could argue even more than her body is what that body stands for…wealth, fame, celebrity – all the things that so many people in our culture are lusting for, wanting.’

The radical voice continued: ‘Let’s say if Beyonce was a homeless woman who looked the same way, or a poor, down-and-out woman who looked the same way -would people be enchanted by her?

‘Or is it the combination of all of those things that are at the heart of imperialist, white supremacist, capitalist patriarchy?’

What’d ya say, honey? I wasn’t listening.

May I ask all women and any men evolved beyond the stage of Australopithecus to log off the site for a moment, so we knuckle-draggers can settle the debate?

OK. Gentlemen?

That’s what I thought.

Seriously, though, Ms. hooks seems to fantasize about (“dream about, sexualize, eroticize”) Beyoncé more than I do—”terrorist”, “slave”, “homeless”. Stop giving this “imperialist, white supremacist, capitalist” ideas!

Comments

Dingbats for Dhimmi

I wasn’t sure there was more to say about the shameful, degrading climbdown by Brandeis University over their invitation to Ayaan Hirsi Ali—but that if there was, Phyllis Chesler would be the one to say it:

The Brandeis professors who demanded that Ayaan Hirsi Ali be “immediately” dis-invited wrote that “we are filled with shame at the suggestion that (Hirsi Ali’s) above-quoted sentiments express Brandeis’s values.”

Eight[y] seven professors or 29% of the Brandeis faculty signed this letter. These professors teach Physics, Anthropology, Near Eastern and Jewish Studies, English, Economics, Music, Film, Computer Science, Math, Sociology, Education—and Women and Gender Studies. Four percent of the signatories teach Anthropology, 6% teach Near Eastern and Jewish Studies, 9% teach Physics—and 21% teach Women and Gender Studies.

In my 2005 book, The Death of Feminism, this is precisely what I was talking about, namely, the feminist departure from universal human rights, a greater focus on anti-racism than on anti-sexism, and a deadly multi-cultural relativism. These Brandeis feminists, both male and female, are defending Islamist supremacism, (which is not a race), and attacking an African Somali women, who happens to be a feminist hero.

Feminists have called Hirsi Ali an “Islamophobe” and a “racist” many times for defending Western values such as women’s rights, gay rights, human rights, freedom of religion, the importance of intellectual diversity, etc.

The 1960s-early 1970s feminism I once championed — and still do — was first taken over by Marxists and ideologically “Stalinized.” It was then conquered again by Islamists and ideologically “Palestinianized.”

Feminists became multi-cultural relativists and as such, refused to criticize other cultures, including misogyny within those other cultures.

To be fair to the libbers, the same psychosis came to afflict many leftists. Liberal Jews have been similarly “Stalinized” and “Palestinianized”. Just as Stalin (and, later, the Palestinians) intended (Lenin’s “useful idiots”). Stalin and the Arabs were so successful, feminists at Brandeis turned on a feminist victim of Islamofascism, Jews have turned on Israeli victims of Islamic terrorism, and the Obama Left has turned on the nation that is greatest defender of liberty in the world.

Heckuva job, Uncle Joe!

Comments

Why Was Martin Bashir Permitted To Resign?

Why didn’t MSNBC fire him?

Just over two weeks ago, MSNBC host Martin Bashir delivered a harsh piece of commentary that culminated in the suggestion that someone should “s-h-i-t” in former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin‘s (R-AK) mouth. Bashir offered an abject apology on his next broadcast, but a chorus of critics continued to demand action against the host. After a reported “vacation” for the host earlier this week, Bashir announced, in a statement to Mediaite Wednesday afternoon, that MSNBC and Martin Bashir are parting ways.

Here’s the statement to Mediaite, from Martin Bashir, via email:

After making an on-air apology, I asked for permission to take some additional time out around the Thanksgiving holiday.
Upon further reflection, and after meeting with the President of MSNBC, I have tendered my resignation. It is my sincere hope that all of my colleagues, at this special network, will be allowed to focus on the issues that matter without the distraction of myself or my ill-judged comments.
I deeply regret what was said, will endeavor to work hard at making constructive contributions in the future and will always have a deep appreciation for our viewers – who are the smartest, most compassionate and discerning of all television audiences. I would also wish to express deepest gratitude to my immediate colleagues, and our contributors, all of whom have given so much of themselves to our broadcast.’

MSNBC released Bashir’s statement, plus the following statement from MSNBC President Phil Griffin:

“Martin Bashir resigned today, effective immediately. I understand his decision and I thank him for three great years with msnbc. Martin is a good man and respected colleague – we wish him only the best.”

Seriously, why is it ok to suggest that someone piss and shit into a woman’s mouth, just because she has the gall to be a conservative woman? Why is this ok? Why did it take this long for him to go, and why was he allowed to resign?

- Aggie

Comments (3)

The War on Women… By Women

Cathy Young takes down Gloria Steinem:

How does Steinem represent modern feminism’s worst features? Let me count the ways.

Dogmatic denial of sex differences. There is a perfectly legitimate argument (to which I myself am sympathetic) that male/female differences are culturally influenced and less important than individual differences. There is certainly widespread support for the loosening of traditional gender-based restrictions. But Steinem takes the anti-difference view to fanatical extremes of what dissident feminists Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge have dubbed “biodenial.” In 1997, interviewed for John Stossel’s ABC News special, “Boys and Girls Are Different: Men, Women and the Sex Difference,” Steinem derided scientific research on sex differences in brain functioning as “anti-American crazy thinking.” She also suggested that upper-body strength tests requiring firefighters to lift heavy loads were sexist. What about situations when firefighters have to carry injured or unconscious people out of burning buildings? Steinem insisted, with a straight face, that it was better to drag them, since “there’s less smoke down there.” While I thought the ABC special leaned too much toward generalizations about difference, Steinem made the worst possible spokesperson for the skeptics.

Fixation on male villainy. Like many in the sisterhood, Steinem does not let her belief in absolute equality interfere with a focus on men as perpetrators of violence and evil. In theory, she blames “the patriarchy,” asserting that it has robbed men as well as women of full humanity; she has even said (rightly) that we won’t have real equality until we recognize men’s capacity for care and nurture just as we have recognized women’s capacity for strength and achievement. Alas, actual, unreconstructed men usually appear in Steinem’s writings as dangerous brutes.

In her 1992 book, Revolution from Within: A Book of Self-Esteem, Steinem writes, “The most dangerous situation for a woman is not an unknown man in the street, or even the enemy in wartime, but a husband or lover in the isolation of their own home.” She has also touted the long-discredited notion of a long prehistoric period of peaceful, benevolent, egalitarian “gynocentric” societies later displaced by violent, oppressive male rule.

Junk scholarship. Steinem’s talk of peace-loving prehistoric matriarchies is just one example of her penchant for peddling pseudo-scholarly nonsense — often on college campuses, where she is a popular speaker. Thus, in a 1993 speech at Salem State College, Steinem rehashed not only the matriarchy theory but the myth that the witch-hunts in Europe were an effort to exterminate still-existing pagan religion and killed as many as nine million women. She also spun a fanciful “revisionist” history of Joan of Arc as a pagan worshipper who led French armies to victory but was executed as a witch once the war was won because she had grown too powerful. (In fact, Joan, by all available evidence a devout Catholic, was executed for heresy after being taken prisoner in the still-ongoing war.) While Steinem is not an academic, equally shoddy pseudo-scholarship is all too common in women’s studies classrooms.

Misinformation. Steinem’s dissemination of faux facts is not limited to distant history. In Revolution from Within, she asserts that 150,000 women and girls in the United States die from anorexia every year — multiplying the actual number by about 1,000. (As Christina Hoff Sommers documented in her 1994 book, Who Stole Feminism?, the claim of a 150,000 death toll was based on a feminist professor’s mangling of a statistic referring to anorexia sufferers.) The same book discusses an alleged crisis in girls’ self-esteem based on a single shoddy study from the American Association of University Women.

There’s plenty more, but she concludes:

Steinem is an undeniably talented and charismatic woman; her message is often couched in appealing terms of female empowerment, freedom, and basic fairness. But in practice, her advocacy promotes far less positive values. This is a Medal of Freedom recipient who has backed attacked [sic] on free speech and colluded in the imprisonment of innocent people.

We subscribed to Ms. Magazine for a while. I can’t remember a single redeeming article, but they did perform a public service with their No Comment section at the back of the magazine. Sexually suggestive and degrading—or just plain sexist—advertisements, thusly:

Of course, sometimes you just have to lighten up:

Comments

Obama’s War on Women [UPDATED---TWICE!!]

Redux:

A sexually suggestive advertising campaign in support of Colorado’s health insurance exchange is taking heat, after the latest ad featured a woman boasting about her birth control while wondering how to get her man “between the covers.”

The ad, by ProgressNow Colorado and the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative, is being hammered as demeaning to women. It follows a prior ad from the same campaign featuring young men doing keg stands, under the banner “Got Insurance?”

“It’s degrading to women, and it says a lot about what they think of America’s youth today,” Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., said of the latest ad.

These are the same “American youth” who turned out to vote for this dumbass—so is the government wrong?

Gardner told Fox News they’re “making a joke of the whole process.” Further, he said the ads are changing the subject at a time when the law’s rollout is running into serious problems.

“They’ve turned ObamaCare into a story about pills and pilsners just trying to make a failed program work,” he said.

Pills, pilsners, and pot:

It’s no more degrading than the average beer commercial during a football game—which is to say pretty degrading.

UPDATE
I used a special app to magnify one of the pills the girl is all set to swallow (at least, I think that’s what she’s all set to swallow). I hope you’re as unsurprised as I was:

UPPERDATE: Planned Parenthood got punked!!!

PPVC didn’t take kindly to the ad, apparently mistaking it for conservative satire of the world’s Sandra Fluke types, and labeled it “#slutshaming.”

Of course, the advertisement was nothing of the sort—but it still took PPVC over two hours to catch on.

Slutshaming! Love it!

Comments (4)

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »