HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » What Is the Biggest Angry...

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 02:54 PM

What Is the Biggest Angry Voting Block in the US----Women! Because We are ALL Oppressed.

You can slice and dice the US electorate in many ways. Rural versus urban. Old versus young. Black versus white. Immigrant versus native born. However, there is one demographic that transcends age, race, birth status, economic status. That is gender. If you are a woman in the United States, you are a second class citizen.

We have all been there. We are denied promotions. We are forced to train the newly hired men who will become our bosses. We are paid a fraction of what men make for doing the same work. Our ideas are ignored in meetings. Our ambition is treated as shameful--unfeminine.

Our bodies are kicked around like footballs by men trying to score ideological points---why protect the already born when you can protect the unborn to show your "family values"? We are denied birth control then condemned for trying to raise children we "cannot afford." We are condemned if we ask the fathers of our children to help in their care---"That whore probably got pregnant to collect child support," say the woman haters.

If we speak up to question our lot in life we are called "bitch", "witch", "castrating." We are told that issues which affect us are less important than issues which affect men---our concerns are just "women's and children's issues." We are told that we can have our equality after our men have their equality. We are supposed to be happy with "trickle down" equality---if our men get ahead, then we will get ahead. In this last respect, we are treated like children, who derive their social status from that of their parents---

Fifty years into the new feminist movement that started in the later 1960s, women are still treated as infants. Well, this "dumb blond" stopped being a child many decades ago. She is a grown up, and she expects to be treated as a grown up.

It is not my job to make men feel better about themselves by hiding my intelligence, agreeing with them when they are wrong or apologizing before I (reluctantly) have to set them straight in order to keep them from making fools of themselves and steering our organizations into disaster. I expect to take part in a dialogue about the policies which will guide my company, my country, my world. I expect to have my voice heard. And I don't think it's right that in order to do this, I have to assume a gender neutral name, so that trolls will not flame me for being female.

I am not smart in spite of being a woman. I am smart, in large part, because of the shit I have been forced to endure because I am a woman. The oppression which I have suffered (and yes, even a physician in this country suffers oppression, if the doc is a woman) has taught me a lot. I have learned to value my own opinions, to distrust social dictum. I am willing to cast off the old and look for a new, better way, if the new, better way will make life better for all of us, especially the children, who---as the dependents of adult women who have been turned into children themselves----are doubly disenfranchised and doubly oppressed.

How did sexism affect my life? Let me count the ways. It started before I was born. My mother, an Emory grad, could not go to medical school because she got married and had a child. Having a spouse and child would not have been a barrier to a young male pre-med back in the 1950s, but it was an absolute barrier for a woman. And guess what? Twenty years later, when I applied to medical school, I was told by several interviewers to reconsider my career choice. My sin? I had married an engineer. I was told that if I wanted to keep my husband, I would have to rethink being a doctor, because he would never be able to stand the shame of having a wife who made more money than him. By the way, we recently celebrated our 35th wedding anniversary.

As a child, we moved from apartment to apartment. Even though my mother was a computer scientist for NASA contractors and later NASA, she could never get a home loan, because she was divorced. In the 1960s, banks would not write a mortgage unless there was a man's signature attached. Oh, and speaking of computer science jobs, my mother was interviewed and hired by one firm in the 1960s. Then the real boss got back to town. He summoned his secretary into his office. He had her sit on his lap. He told my mother that his firm only hired women to be secretaries---

We have come a long way, baby, but we still have far to go. And one of the hurdles we need to overcome is the myth that a woman president is unnatural. That a woman who wants to be president must be some kind of freak. That a woman as president can not keep us safe. That she will be too easily swayed by the men around her. That she will not be able to accept campaign contributions without repaying that money in quid pro quo, because women are weak, puppets, devoid of ideas, fueled only by a single desire---the desire to please the men around them, meaning that we do not judge women on their own worth, we judge them by the worth of their men.

86 replies, 5056 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 86 replies Author Time Post
Reply What Is the Biggest Angry Voting Block in the US----Women! Because We are ALL Oppressed. (Original post)
McCamy Taylor Apr 2015 OP
djean111 Apr 2015 #1
BlueCaliDem Apr 2015 #2
RobertEarl Apr 2015 #3
NoJusticeNoPeace Apr 2015 #28
djean111 Apr 2015 #4
BlueCaliDem Apr 2015 #23
djean111 Apr 2015 #41
Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #51
djean111 Apr 2015 #67
Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #70
ND-Dem Apr 2015 #78
still_one Apr 2015 #77
djean111 Apr 2015 #80
still_one Apr 2015 #82
djean111 Apr 2015 #83
erronis Apr 2015 #19
sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #58
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #10
leftofcool Apr 2015 #26
treestar Apr 2015 #61
still_one Apr 2015 #76
djean111 Apr 2015 #79
virgogal Apr 2015 #85
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #5
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2015 #32
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #35
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2015 #36
Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #38
freshwest Apr 2015 #6
Novara Apr 2015 #7
Seeking Serenity Apr 2015 #8
F4lconF16 Apr 2015 #13
calimary Apr 2015 #22
freshwest Apr 2015 #57
beam me up scottie Apr 2015 #30
Duppers Apr 2015 #34
NaturalHigh Apr 2015 #39
Seeking Serenity Apr 2015 #46
NaturalHigh Apr 2015 #47
Seeking Serenity Apr 2015 #48
sufrommich Apr 2015 #43
McCamy Taylor Apr 2015 #53
treestar Apr 2015 #63
Duppers Apr 2015 #33
Seeking Serenity Apr 2015 #44
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2015 #37
Seeking Serenity Apr 2015 #45
McCamy Taylor Apr 2015 #55
F4lconF16 Apr 2015 #71
PotatoChip Apr 2015 #84
treestar Apr 2015 #62
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #9
Major Nikon Apr 2015 #11
Major Hogwash Apr 2015 #16
bettyellen Apr 2015 #21
Major Nikon Apr 2015 #25
erronis Apr 2015 #20
Major Nikon Apr 2015 #24
Dont call me Shirley Apr 2015 #12
F4lconF16 Apr 2015 #14
backwoodsbob Apr 2015 #15
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #17
mcar Apr 2015 #18
leftofcool Apr 2015 #27
maindawg Apr 2015 #29
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2015 #31
NaturalHigh Apr 2015 #40
Name removed Apr 2015 #42
niyad Apr 2015 #49
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #50
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #52
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2015 #69
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #72
Zorra Apr 2015 #54
McCamy Taylor Apr 2015 #56
Zorra Apr 2015 #59
joshcryer Apr 2015 #64
raccoon Apr 2015 #60
NM_Birder Apr 2015 #75
raccoon Apr 2015 #86
meaculpa2011 Apr 2015 #65
Oktober Apr 2015 #66
LineLineReply .
JTFrog Apr 2015 #68
Arugula Latte Apr 2015 #73
seabeyond Apr 2015 #74
Faux pas Apr 2015 #81

Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 02:58 PM

1. Sexism fucked my life up, but Hillary is not the president I want. Has not a damned

 

thing to do with her gender. She is a neoliberal war-mongering Third Way Wall Street Corporatist, and I cannot vote for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 03:21 PM

2. I'll be missing your anti-Hillary posts after the primaries.

NOT.

People change, as you should know. Even Elizabeth Warren and Charlie Crist became Democrats when they realized that their Party was veering too much to the (always wrong) Right. Even a Tea Party Charter Member has said he'll be voting for her. They showed that they can change. I'm certain you can see and accept that that's not impossible for SoS Clinton.

She might have been all those things way back then, but I'm certain now that she's a grandma, she's going to be a helluva lot more progressive as she looks to the future of her grandchild.

I might not vote for her in the primaries (if my candidate finally gets to running), but if she wins it even without my vote, I will cast my vote for her in the general. I hope you will, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 03:25 PM

3. Hopefully

 

We have a chance to vote for Warren come November 2016?

Keep hope alive!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:27 PM

28. Or Bernie, but if not, then I know what I am going to do

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 03:29 PM

4. Yup. I already have stated I will be out of here!

 

No, I don't believe Clinton can change, I see she is still looking to people like Larry Summers.
And, as a grandma myself, please do not insult me by "playing the grandma card". As a grandma, I feel more fierce than ever about trying to make sure my grandson does not have to go get killed in a useless war, and has a chance at a good life and a good job. I do not trust Hillary on those things. She is a one-percenter, and I have read elsewhere today that Wall Street knows she is just politickin' when she waxes liberal or progressive.

In any event, the TPP has pretty much sealed my deal. And so it goes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:12 PM

23. Unfair to judge Hillary Clinton by the fact that she's a "1-percenter". Elizabeth Warren is a

1-percenter, too. Does that make her eveel? Of course not. After all, Senator Warren is the "darling of the Left".

And I wasn't trying to insult you and I wasn't playing the "grandma card". You'd know that if you reread my post. However, you appear to be a bit too touchy and defensive, and there's absolutely NO need for that.

FWIW, I trust President Obama over Vice President Joe Biden, and Joe Biden over Hillary Clinton. In turn, I trust Hillary Clinton over any Republican, and if my candidate doesn't run or doesn't win the Democratic nomination, I will vote for whoever does because by not voting, in my most humble opinion, I'm handing an easy victory to the Party that least deserves more power in our Government and my and my family's lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #23)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:45 PM

41. You misunderstand - I don't care if she IS a 1-percenter herself - I feel she

 

will be more helpful to the 1%. I don't think she really cares enough about the middle and lower classes to really help them.
Not touchy and defensive, just answering you, using your points.
I think the TPP will finish off the middle class, anyway.
That being said, I am sick of seeing social issues cast as needing to take the place of economic issues. There is no reason both cannot be addressed. And when a Democrat requests fast track and secrecy for cutting Social Security, that is a big sea change - I do not think the Democratic Party is a party I can belong to. It makes me sad and angry. Reading that things like social security are PONIES, from HRC supporters, also makes me believe the Democratic Party, as it used to be is dead. Wall Street and the Third Way bought it.

Looks like the GOP has been and will be running the show, complicit with the Dems, for a while now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #41)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 10:57 PM

51. This sounds like a Rove talking point which is baseless. To believe Hillary is going

To be more helpful to the 1% has the same base in which EW will help the 1%. I don't know who got this started and at times I have ask for proof it has not been produce to back up this statement. Getting paid for speeches to Wall Street groups is not proof she is helping the 1%. If you have some valid proof please provide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #51)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 10:12 AM

67. I did not mention the money from speeches. And, I did not say I cared that she, herself, is a 1%.

 

I do not care about those things at all. Looks like the new HRC support will consist of misstating comments, and then labeling anything negative as Rovian.
Which, funnily enough, is Rovian.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #67)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 10:42 AM

70. You did mention the 1% talking point, I am looking for evidence she is intent on helping the 1%.

I mentioned the speeches since this is the reason others uses to say she only helps the 1%, I am open to other information indicating she is for the 1%. This does not really fit her record since she has advocated for civil rights, gay rights, education and women's and children's rights for many many years. Yes, I still consider statements such as 1% RW, Rove, etc talking points when I hear the same coming from RW sources.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #41)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:08 PM

78. +1,000,000

 

I am sick of seeing social issues cast as needing to take the place of economic issues. There is no reason both cannot be addressed. And when a Democrat requests fast track and secrecy for cutting Social Security, that is a big sea change - I do not think the Democratic Party is a party I can belong to.

Reading that things like social security are PONIES, from HRC supporters, also makes me believe the Democratic Party, as it used to be is dead. Wall Street and the Third Way bought it.

Looks like the GOP has been and will be running the show, complicit with the Dems, for a while now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #4)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:05 PM

77. Well if you do not see the difference between republicans and Democrats, especially in regard to

Issues affecting women, then if the republicans win because of the cut your nose off to spite your face, America deserves exacatly what it will get, and the SC will be your legacy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #77)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:13 PM

80. Ah, that old crap. Sure I see a difference. Nowhere did I say there is no difference.

 

I just do not think Hillary is The Democrat, and you believe Hillary is The Democrat.
Done with this ridiculous "conversation", it just devolves into Rovian jibber-jabber from you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #80)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:23 PM

82. You say I use RovIan tactics. What a judgmental snob.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #82)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:28 PM

83. Hey, I get accused of using RW tactics when I criticize HRC.

 

I don't see how returning the favor makes me a "judgmental snob", though - that's kind of a weird comment. A non sequitur. As usual. Bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:59 PM

19. Is there a nice graphic that shows when each candidate "started" caring about issues?

I admit I'm a bit of a visual/showme type of person.

It's not just HRC but EW and each/every other candidate.

I'd like to see something that showed a timeline that pointed out when each one made a significant pronouncement about things that now seem to matter.

It's OK to have black-out periods on the timeline (like when HRC was SoS) as long as they are annotated. It's even better to show where they've flipped (I like pragmatists) and when they've actually switched parties.

Maybe it's just me but I'm worried about lotsa people (uglies and dems and paulies) that jump into the race with new-found mottos, slogans, marketing teams - but they have no history about ever caring about the issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:36 AM

58. It's not 'way back when'. She was SOS not so long ago, she has admitted to being advised on FP by

Henry Kissinger. I haven't heard her say that using Nixon's War Criminal as an adviser was a mistake.

And frankly, I want a leader who gets these kinds of very important things right the first time. Making mistakes, like supporting Bush's wars, gets a lot of people killed. It's a costly mistake for those who end up dead.

Leaders who have made such mistakes, and I just learned she has finally admitted that it was a mistake, a bit late, 12 years later and a million dead human beings, and the ME roiling as the Neocons wanted 'we'll turn the ME into a glass parking lot', THAT should have been when she 'changed'.

I want a leader who got it right back then. I am afraid that those who make such massive 'mistakes' might do so again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:06 PM

10. Is that what you took from that fine piece ...

 

maybe, she will be kind enough ... patient enough ... to start again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:21 PM

26. So don't. No need to remind us 3000 times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:38 AM

61. One vote does not make her a "war monger"

And what votes make her a "corporatist?" Is there only one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:00 PM

76. Please enlighten us how Hillary is not supportive of the issues that affect women?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #76)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:10 PM

79. Please enlighten me as to why I should accept that these issues preclude

 

economic issues. Why I should accept a Sophie's Choice, as if politicians were required to pick on or the other, as if being president came with such restrictions. I know some GOPers who vote GOP every time - just because of social issues like choice and gay marriage. They get fucked financially, because gay marriage will be decided by states no matter who they vote for, for president. Wall Street could care less about social issues, except, perhaps, they want to get their hands on the social security money. They succeeded in getting their hands on health care money, through mandated private insurance. And if anyone points that out, they are told about how many people (a whole lot have been left out, though) now have health insurance. Not necessarily health care, due to co-pays and such, but health insurance.

And if this happened because Wall Street runs the show - then admit Wall Street runs the show, and the issues about women and children, etc. are nothing to them. The TPP will affect men, women, and children equally badly, I fear. But Yay!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:57 PM

85. Some of that article makes no sense.

 

Who is denying women birth control?????????????????

I was using it in the 60s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 03:31 PM

5. I voted for a woman presidential candidate in 2012.

 

Jill Stein. And, since she may run again, she'll probably get my vote again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:48 PM

32. What brings you to Democratic Underground? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:55 PM

35. I'm a Democrat.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #35)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:23 PM

36. I guess some general election votes against the D candidate are more acceptable than others.

 

If not Obama, are there any democratic candidates that might compel you to actually vote for them in the general election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #36)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:29 PM

38. Sure. But, Hillary seems to be the annointed one at this time.

 

Chaffee looks interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 03:32 PM

6. Yes, McCamy, we've seen it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 03:51 PM

7. Excellent OP

Thank you.

And, DAMN RIGHT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 04:07 PM

8. We're all oppressed? I'm not

Oh, I get inconvenienced a lot: people cutting me off in traffic, people in the express lane with clearly more than 15 items, school administrators who refuse to understand that adolescent boys aren't gonna just sit down and shut up all the time, etc., etc.

But in a society where I can basically go where I want and do what I want, as far as my resources will let me, have a wonderful, albeit conservative, husband and two wonderful boys, had the choice to not work while my boys were little and am now reentering the workforce?

No, I'm not oppressed. Not at all. In fact, I'm pretty darn privileged (not the rich kind of privileged, but the fortunate to have choices and be happy with them kind of privileged).

Not oppressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seeking Serenity (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:28 PM

13. smh


Yes, I have read every one of these articles. I keep them around for people like you. Just because YOU are not oppressed (which I sincerely doubt) does not mean that women aren't. It's people like you that sit by saying, "I'm good, don't talk for me" while people get their lives fucked up that are half of the problem. Pisses me off.

Sexism, misogyny, and gender discrimination are real and they are alive and well in the United States.

And this isn't even touching on intersectionality. Black women are oppressed, and differently than black men. LGBT people still suffer greatly in this country, and much of that is due to sexism. There is so much shit going on out there, it is not okay to deny it or minimize it just because you've got it good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to F4lconF16 (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:09 PM

22. GREAT list, F4alconF16! Part of the reason I'm replying here is so I can keep this post of yours!

Just because one woman somewhere might feel comfy-cozy in her own life doesn't mean all the other women she knows are relaxing in the same nice comfy-cozy boat. If one woman feels like she's on safe ground and that it's not her problem, then maybe SHE should become the one who gets off her behind and helps those who aren't. If YOU'RE in good shape, yourself, shouldn't you want to see your fellows get there, too? And maybe do something to help or otherwise have their backs? Seems to me those who enjoy a life without these hurdles to jump are uniquely positioned to be able to help someone else, or fight for someone else, who would give ANYTHING to be in that same position.

Hillary Clinton comes to mind. She doesn't need this. She doesn't need ANY of this. She has all the fame and money and prominence and the kind of VERY comfortable future that anyone could want. She's set for life, financially. She's got a family she loves and a happy healthy grandchild, as well as her own still-good health and vitality, and she still looks pretty great, too. She has a resume as long as Pacific Coast Highway and the same lengthy list of accomplishments. She could coast for the rest of her life! Sit by and relax. She's old enough to have earned that. But she's still in there fighting. For causes. Like women's issues and women's rights across the globe. So many of the women we see, at least on our side of the aisle, in Congress and the Senate - they don't need this, either! They've got a good life spread out ahead of them whenever they want to pack it in and enjoy retirement. Plenty of money. Fame, access to a nice cushy lecture circuit and publishing deals and all kinds of great perks they've earned for themselves by now, if they want. They don't need this work and wear 'n' tear and grief and the crap they have to put up with in their jobs. But they deal with it anyway. They suit up every day and go press ahead and fight the good fight. ANYWAY.

I'm in good shape in my own life in that regard, but when I was younger and trying to break in, I had to fight, too. I had to deal with all that office politics shit and sexist shit and stuff I knew was done to me that would NEVER be done to my male colleagues. I would say to those who claim to be in comfortable positions and all their friends are, too, and they really don't see any problem here - maybe it's simply that they don't get out much.

NO IGMFU (I Got Mine, F-U) for me, though!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #22)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:28 AM

57. Another aspect is that unforeseen things happen. Losing one's comfy lifestyle can happen.

I'd paid off my home, car, had the appropriate net worth per age, with stocks, savings, and a steady paying job and thought I had it made raising my kid after losing my spouse, even though he wasn't the prime bread winner so he didn't make me well off.

Then several calamities struck, one after another after another. None of these things were deemed by any person to be my fault. Yet I was wiped out and lost all I had worked for. I'd done everything 'right' too. Yes, we are all eligible for trouble.

That's why we must look out for others as the day may come that we may be one of those others!

Not sure if that deals with the sexist aspects, but I've fought that all my life. Then when calamity strikes, it hits even harder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to F4lconF16 (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:37 PM

30. Holy crap, what an excellent response to those who speak from ignorance and privilege!



I'd ask you to start a rebuttal thread but that one would get locked too.

Nice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to F4lconF16 (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:54 PM

34. Bookmarking

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to F4lconF16 (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:40 PM

39. It's sad that you're pissed that Seeking Serenity...

doesn't want you speaking for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #39)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:57 PM

46. I don't, and she doesn't.

Neither does Jessica Valenti, or Amanda Marcotte, or Anita Sarkeesian.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seeking Serenity (Reply #46)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 08:05 PM

47. My wife feels the same way.

She has certainly dealt with sexism in her life, but she doesn't go in for the whole philosophy that she should feel angry and victimized all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #47)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 08:12 PM

48. Ditto, right down the line. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to F4lconF16 (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:46 PM

43. Awesome post is awesome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to F4lconF16 (Reply #13)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:05 AM

53. Great bibliography. Thanks for sharing it. I'm gonna bookmark your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to F4lconF16 (Reply #13)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:44 AM

63. Thank you!

I was going to say, a lot of women are right wing, and others in denial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seeking Serenity (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:50 PM

33. ...



My ultra-conservative, ultra-religious, unaware Republican mother talks like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duppers (Reply #33)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:47 PM

44. And yet, I'm a Democrat. Go figure. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seeking Serenity (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:27 PM

37. Given the choice between people who agree with you and vote for Democrats

 

And people who agree with the OP and vote for Greens or Socialists, I prefer you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:54 PM

45. Thank you.

I do think the word "oppression" -- noun -- 1. the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner -- is way too overused, especially to refer to western culture, much like the word "treason" gets bandied about with such a cavalier manner to mean "your policies are disagreeable to me and opposed to my party, thus that's treason."

Women are oppressed in many parts of the world, horribly so (those living under the threat of Boko Harum come immediately to mind). But we are not "oppressed."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seeking Serenity (Reply #45)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:20 AM

55. Women who are raped are asked how long their skirts were. Women have to prove they were not "asking

for it." While rape affects both genders, women are disproportionately the victims. Why do women in this country have be afraid to walk alone at night in places where men feel safe? Why do women have a big target on them that says "Victim"?

Our popular music is still full of references to women as "whores" and "bitches" at a time when the other -isms---even homophobia---have moved outside the realm of what is tolerated.

Girls in school are shamed into keeping their mouths shut and their weight down. Women's magazines hold up anorexic teenage hormone cases as models that real women are supposed to emulate. Women's intelligence is judged by their beauty, not their performance. Their worth is calculated by their beauty, not their talents. They are ornamental.

A woman CEO is still treated like a freak. If she fails, it was because she was a woman. When was the last time a male CEO was accused of failing because he was a man?

If you post online as a woman, you are treated like a sex object. Post the same thing online as a man or as gender neutral, and you are treated as a human being.

A man who stays in his kids lives is treated like some kind of saint. A woman whose kids are troubled is treated like a she-devil for not giving them perfect lives.

Remember how "Heart of Darkness" ends? Marlowe decides to uphold the colonial system. He does it for "the women." Bullshit on that. The system upholds itself for its own sake---and then claims that it is killing and lynching and oppressing in order to protect the women and children. If they don't keep women down, they won't have any raison d'etre for their brutal colonialism abroad and iron boot oppression at home.

Plus, we are the fall back under paid work force for when they run out of immigrants to exploit.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Reply #55)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 11:18 AM

71. "Plus, we are the fall back under paid work force for when they run out of immigrants to exploit."

I'd argue that women are not the fall-back work force, but the constantly oppressed unpaid work-force. Women's unpaid labor in the home provides massive economic stimulus to a capitalist society. Our economic system is entirely dependent on many hours a week of that labor.

A couple of links if you're interested:


And from an anti-capitalist perspective (and my preferred article here, as it really delves into the issue):



I've read a fair bit of this, but not the entire thing--quite a bit worth considering if you have the time, it's a long paper:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Reply #55)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:38 PM

84. The first point you made, regarding rape, brought to mind this video:



Sad that it takes another absurdity to illustrate what rape victims go through in order to report the crime.

Btw, thanks for both the above post and the OP. You make many very good points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seeking Serenity (Reply #8)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:40 AM

62. What my comment to OP was going to be

Women are more than half the people, but a lot of them are all for their own oppression.

Sexism has not got in my way either that I can tell, though it may have subtly, but that doesn't mean it is not there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:04 PM

9. Yes ... Yes ... Yes ...

 

Now, drop the mic and walk off the stage!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:07 PM

11. Biggest voting block period since 1980

With the advent of women's suffrage in 1920 many women were off to the polls. But in recent history women have exceeded men in voter turnout. From 1976 to 2008 women have steadily spread the gap. For more than 60 years after women’s suffrage the female population turned out less often than men. This was true from 1920 to 1980. However, after 1980 a reversal occurred and a gender gap in voting between men and women has been evident ever since. The range is from a low of 4 points in 1988, to a high of 10 percentage points in 1996.[1] In many countries across the world, women have shown the same pattern as women in the U.S. Recent studies have shown women throughout advanced industrial societies are voting as much as men and with the same voting behaviors as women in the U.S.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_gender_gap

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:37 PM

16. But, not the biggest ANGRY voting block.

That would be the Hispanic voting block.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #16)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:08 PM

21. I think by the time the primaries are over, they'll

 

Have seen enough sexist slime to get plenty angry. Even here, one of the first criticisms here I saw was regarding her marriage! Dude was silly enough to think women want their careers impacted by their personal private relationships. I has to laugh. Women are fed up with having their worth judged by what sort of man they have at home.

privacy to is ain't the NSA, it's stop guessing if we'll have babies, and stop trying to second guess our choices and take them away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #16)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:16 PM

25. I'm not sure I'd agree

The problem is much of the anger cancels each other out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:02 PM

20. And maybe their votes aren't counted?

You only need to "fix" the machines (people or mechanical) in a few voting districts that are have a large liberal female population (read well-educated) to throw a greasy monkey-wrench into the idea of democracy. And I bet those greasy fingers aren't female.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erronis (Reply #20)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:12 PM

24. It's also possible that the almighty creator is manipulating free will

Or it's possible that aliens from outer space are beaming instructions directly into the minds of voters.

But absent any tangible evidence of a massive undetected conspiracy to disenfranchise those born without a penis, I'm going to remain skeptical of the issue. YMMV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:21 PM

12. Women are the original victims of original sin, we are still the target of that 1st act of bigotry,

still the receiving end of the shifting blame for their misogyny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:30 PM

14. K&R nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:34 PM

15. My first three real jobs...not teenage while in school jobs

 

Cousins Windows...Home Window...and Framatome Connectors Interlock....I had a female supervisor.

I am sure thats not typical but in all three cases no one ever blinked an eye that a female was supervisor...no one cared

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:42 PM

17. I'm another woman who agrees with you, McCamy Taylor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 05:46 PM

18. Well said McCamy

And happy anniversary! SO and I just celebrated our 30th.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:22 PM

27. One of the best OP's I have ever read!

I am keeping this one in a folder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:35 PM

29. 100 % behind you!

 

Women are going to be highly motivated. The more the rethugs bash Hillary, the more motivated women will be. Along with men like myself. I would rather vote for Elizebeth Warren, but I am very comfortable voting for Hillary. I think she is very smart, and I think she will get people who dont ordinarily pay attention to politics , to notice. That is the most important thing that Hillary or any strong female candidate can do for America and the world as a leader right now.
We have a very intelligent electorate out here who just dont vote because they think the system is the system.And anyone who has ever dealt with the system knows what that means.
With a candidate who they think can win, a candidate who can win, all hell is going to break loose. If you thought they were irate when we elected a man of color , well, that was just a warm up. And when they are thrown out of the Senate too, at the same time.....expect them to not go quietly.
We are stuck with the gerrymandered insane clown congress for another 4 years and beyond so, the only hope we have there is if the newly awakened electorate carries the day.
And thats why its going to be open season on Women.
Get ready for the most insane election ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:44 PM

31. Both white and married women voted Republican in 2012.

 

The key isn't to get them to vote, they are 54% of voters after all. The key is to find a way to get them to reliably vote D.

Much the same approach we should take toward men.

http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/11/women-are-not-a-unified-voting-bloc/265007/

Compared to the race, education and marital status gaps in election results, the gender gap is subtle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 07:42 PM

40. "Because We are ALL Oppressed."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 10:31 PM

49. k and r+ gazillion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 10:35 PM

50. I'm a woman and would have to say that the 99% that suffer economically are the biggest

angry voting block, and women are in that group. I would vote for a woman for President if she would fight for economic equality. Unfortunately, I do not believe Hillary will do that. I do believe Elizabeth Warren would fight for economic equality and I would vote for her, but I will not vote for Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #50)

Thu Apr 16, 2015, 10:58 PM

52. Maybe; but, don't they have to vote to be considered a voting block? ...

 

Just saying ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #52)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 10:28 AM

69. Women are 54% of voters.

 

Unfortunately, their voting behavior is, like men, more influenced by other factors such as race, income and marital status.

Married women vote like married men. White women vote like white men. High income women vote like high income men.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #69)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:27 PM

72. That's not what I was responding to ...

 

the poster I responded to indicated that the Biggester, angrierer, voting block are the 99%. While there are, certainly, more in the 99%, their record of non-voting/non-strategic voting results in, "So what!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:13 AM

54. Regardless, married Republican women will vote for the Republican that their male husband tells them

to vote for.

Republican women are totally submissive, obedient airhead wimps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #54)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:26 AM

56. Not true. GOP women are very alarmed at loss of choice. They are very concerned

about how sexism affects their own careers and those of their daughters. They are called "soccer moms" for a reason. They want to be safe but they also want respect and pay parity . GOP women will cross party lines to vote for a woman. The real issue is how many Democratic men will cross the other way to vote for a man--assuming the GOP does not nominate its own woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Reply #56)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:39 AM

59. I'll always trust Democrats over Republicans, regardless of what gender they are. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #54)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:45 AM

64. Wrong, Clinton would get 35% of the Republican women vote.

As opposed to just 3% or so that Obama got.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:25 AM

60. Great post. Anyone who thinks a woman can't be president simply because she's

a woman needs to read up on Elizabeth I. One of the best monarchs the Brits ever had.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raccoon (Reply #60)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:51 PM

75. "Hillary Clinton, The Best Monarch the United States ever had"

 

There is the new campaign slogan...

"Monarchy worked in 1500's England, it will surely work today for the US" .......there is the new bumper sticker

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Clinton ......... getting pretty close.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NM_Birder (Reply #75)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 04:58 PM

86. I'm not saying Hillary would necessarily be a good president. I'm saying

that women can be good leaders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:54 AM

65. In the 1970s the bank would not accept my signature...

for a mortgage or a car loan.

I was a freelance writer (still am).

My wife had to sign.

Happened again a few months ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 06:59 AM

66. Phew... Take a breath...

 

The world isn't out to get you... At most it is indifferent...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oktober (Reply #66)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 10:15 AM

68. .

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oktober (Reply #66)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:36 PM

73. Gee, thanks for mansplaining it all away.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 12:41 PM

74. the republican women do not think there is oppression or sexism, too. doesnt make them right. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Original post)

Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:14 PM

81. ki ki ki kickin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread