Selective Feminism

[thereisnospoon]

Secondly, "Feminism" isn't about defending all women from attacks. I don't know why you keep using that term.

If a feminist claims to be for all women, but fails to stand up for one when she is denigrated by someone, if a feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women, why does she not support that for all women? Should that not translate into defending them regardless of that they believe as well? How can they say "we represent all women" but sit idly by while certain women are degraded and treated with utter contempt?

"For all women" doesn't really mean anything.

Feminism is about women's rights, and equality. It's not about getting outraged on behalf of every individual woman in the world, every time they are insulted.

There is no "right" to not be insulted.

Doubling down a bad argument does not validate the argument

 

[thereisnospoon]

If a feminist claims to be for all women, but fails to stand up for one when she is denigrated by someone, if a feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women, why does she not support that for all women? Should that not translate into defending them regardless of that they believe as well? How can they say "we represent all women" but sit idly by while certain women are degraded and treated with utter contempt?

"For all women" doesn't really mean anything.

Feminism is about women's rights, and equality. It's not about getting outraged on behalf of every individual woman in the world, every time they are insulted.

There is no "right" to not be insulted.

Then, may I ask, why do Feminists get outraged when a liberal woman, any liberal woman, is denigrated or is broken upon an injustice, but not a conservative one? I never said that people should be protected from insults. I'm merely saying that the outrage over those insults should be applied equally. I have seen examples of such behavior. Also, women are treated terribly in the Middle East, where are these feminists? Nowhere to be seen, they at the sight of a crescent moon disappearing, evaporating into thin air like fairies in the mist.

When Democratic Representative John Salazar instructed women to instead of defending themselves with firearms, "fake a disease" or "vomit" or "soil themselves" to avoid being raped, no feminists spoke out against this perpetuation of ignorance. What did he know of what being raped felt like? Where was the outrage that man was telling women not to exercise the right to defend themselves? Yeah, that type of hypocrisy from liberal feminists is what I'm addressing.

The doctor is frantically reaching for the edge of the pool here.

 

[thereisnospoon]

"For all women" doesn't really mean anything.

Feminism is about women's rights, and equality. It's not about getting outraged on behalf of every individual woman in the world, every time they are insulted.

There is no "right" to not be insulted.

Then, may I ask, why do Feminists get outraged when a liberal woman, any liberal woman, is denigrated or is broken upon an injustice, but not a conservative one? I never said that people should be protected from insults. I'm merely saying that the outrage over those insults should be applied equally. I have seen examples of such behavior. Also, women are treated terribly in the Middle East, where are these feminists? Nowhere to be seen, they at the sight of a crescent moon disappear, evaporate like fairies in the mist.

When Democratic Representative Joe Salazar instructed women to instead of defending themselves with firearms, to "fake a disease" or "vomit" or "soil themselves" to avoid being raped, no feminists spoke out against this perpetuation of ignorance. What did he know of what being raped felt like? Where was the outrage that man was telling women not to exercise the right to defend themselves? Yeah, that type of hypocrisy from liberal feminists is what I'm addressing.

Most feminists are liberals - they get selectively outraged for the same reason that Conservatives do. It's defending the tribe.

There are also hundreds of women's groups that focus all of their attention on the rights of women in the middle east, by the way.

Stop the excuses.
Liberal feminists got busted for not defending Palin is the SAME manner as they would any liberal woman.
It shows their hypocrisy in that they are not "for women's issues" but only those women THEY deem worth of their support.
That excludes conservative women. That invalidates the entire premise of the feminist movement. And that is why feminism is essentially dead.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Feminism is about beliefs and ideals, not defending all women. That's the whole point of it.

I can't believe what I'm hearing. You say it's about women's rights and beliefs, yet you contend in the same breath that "it's not about defending women." So, which one is it?

Can you really not understand the difference between defending the rights of women, and defending individual women from personal insults?

That is NOT the point.
You are not going to derail the topic of the thread by introducing your own individual reality. It will not be tolerated.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why would a feminist defend Sarah Palin? She opposes abortion. She opposes women's rights, although she has benefitted greatly from the women's movement herself.

But yet, she's still a woman. Why would what she believes make her any different? Thanks for making my point for me, Dragonlady.

Feminism is not about defending women, it's about promoting equality for women. Women, like Sandra Fluke, who stand up for women's rights, and are attacked for doing so, should be defended. Sarah Pallin has sought to overturn hard won rights for women. Why would feminists defend such a person?

I have not proven your point. I've proven that you have no basis to expect feminists to defend Pallin

So are you saying that his being a comedian absolves him from any consequences resulting from the jokes he tells in bad taste? Do you hear yourself?

No, I'm saying that tasteless jokes made by comedians have no importance to the political process. Bill Maher says really disgusting things about women, not just Sarah Pallin. But he's not a political leader.

I have never heard of any Democratic leader calling Pallin a bitch but I've heard Republican leaders call Hillary Clinton a bitch and the audience of Republican faithful, cheered them for it.

So, should taxpayers be paying for her contraception? Is that it? Yeah about that. We already have religious groups suing over something similar in Obamacare, are you willing to make the same mistake?

Tax payers aren't being asked to pay for her contraception. Fluke is asking that the health care insurance which SHE pays for, out of her own pocket, covers her costs for contraception, especially since her school requires her to purchase their health care package as a condition of enrollment.

As for you comment on votes: Religious institutions don't vote. People vote. And since the vast majority of Catholic women in the US oppose the Church's stance on birth control, I don't think the Democrats are too worried about losing the Catholic vote on this issue.

WHAT? Fuck Sandra Fluke....Oh wait, a few other guys are already doing that..It's why she needs the pill, right?
So tell me, which 'rights' were Palin targeting for termination?
If A student wants a particular coverage on their health INSURANCE, which may not be provided for any number of reasons, that student should practice their due diligence.
Fluke was charged with the duty to research her choice of school. She CHOSE to attend a Jesuit University. She CHOSE to live by their code of conduct. Now she wants THEM to kowtow to her 'needs'? I don't think so. She made a CHOICE. She knew what she was getting into.
Fluke is not standing up for anything. She was used by liberals as a prop for another one of their causes.
BTW, notice how Fluke's story dried up and blew away in the wind.
Nobody cares.
I hope she screws her brains out to her heart's content. But as long as she attends G'Town Law, she is paying for her OWN pills. Period. Done. End of story.

 

[candycorn]

But yet, she's still a woman. Why would what she believes make her any different? Thanks for making my point for me, Dragonlady.

Feminism is not about defending women, it's about promoting equality for women. Women, like Sandra Fluke, who stand up for women's rights, and are attacked for doing so, should be defended. Sarah Pallin has sought to overturn hard won rights for women. Why would feminists defend such a person?

I have not proven your point. I've proven that you have no basis to expect feminists to defend Pallin



No, I'm saying that tasteless jokes made by comedians have no importance to the political process. Bill Maher says really disgusting things about women, not just Sarah Pallin. But he's not a political leader.

I have never heard of any Democratic leader calling Pallin a bitch but I've heard Republican leaders call Hillary Clinton a bitch and the audience of Republican faithful, cheered them for it.

So, should taxpayers be paying for her contraception? Is that it? Yeah about that. We already have religious groups suing over something similar in Obamacare, are you willing to make the same mistake?

Tax payers aren't being asked to pay for her contraception. Fluke is asking that the health care insurance which SHE pays for, out of her own pocket, covers her costs for contraception, especially since her school requires her to purchase their health care package as a condition of enrollment.

As for you comment on votes: Religious institutions don't vote. People vote. And since the vast majority of Catholic women in the US oppose the Church's stance on birth control, I don't think the Democrats are too worried about losing the Catholic vote on this issue.

WHAT? Fuck Sandra Fluke....Oh wait, a few other guys are already doing that..It's why she needs the pill, right?
So tell me, which 'rights' were Palin targeting for termination?
If A student wants a particular coverage on their health INSURANCE, which may not be provided for any number of reasons, that student should practice their due diligence.
Fluke was charged with the duty to research her choice of school. She CHOSE to attend a Jesuit University. She CHOSE to live by their code of conduct. Now she wants THEM to kowtow to her 'needs'? I don't think so. She made a CHOICE. She knew what she was getting into.
Fluke is not standing up for anything. She was used by liberals as a prop for another one of their causes.
BTW, notice how Fluke's story dried up and blew away in the wind.
Nobody cares.
I hope she screws her brains out to her heart's content. But as long as she attends G'Town Law, she is paying for her OWN pills. Period. Done. End of story.

Ahh, Sandra...for someone who was "forgotten" you guys keep bringing her up. Since the electorate in 2016 will be 52% female...it would be a good idea to come up with a strategy for those pesky feminist.

Actually, I think Georgetown came around to the correct way of thinking eventually.

Quick question, I assume you live in the US. When your State university fields a football team or basketball team and the player needs a surgery or cortisone shot to perform, YOU are directly paying for that. Most NCAA Div 1 football programs lose money as do nearly all basketball teams so it is more than likely they are not self-sustaining....YOU are paying for it.
Most NCAA Division I athletic departments take subsidies

Do you have a problem with paying for it since the medicine and surgeries are the result of elective behavior.

 

[candycorn]

"Feminism" doesn't mean "defending women from attacks".

As to your theme, liberals don't rush to the defense of Palin for the same reason that Conservatives didn't rush to the defense of Fluke.

Cut the bullshit and obfuscation.
Palin was vilified by the main stream media for months.

A lot of it was piling on because she was no-where-near ready for prime-time politics; true but the charade that she was somehow ready didn't help matters.

One guy, Limbaugh, called her a nasty name.

That many here agree with though they never met Ms. Fluke.

Palin was trying to get the second highest office in the land.
Big difference. You side was so shit scared of Palin, you pilloried this woman and her family relentlessly.

Nobody, but nobody was, is, or ever will be scared of Sarah Palin in a political sense. She's flat out stupid.

One person hung a mannequin done up to resemble Palin, from a window of his apartment. When people complained, the local law enforcement claimed it was art, covered by free speech. Had that been a likeness of Obama, all hell would have broken loose. The lefty double standard is saved.

Several have done similar things to Obama. Some of it has stood, some of it has not.

The point made by the OP is that not one single left wing feminist stepped up to say "wait a minute. While we disagree with Palin's politics, she is a woman, wife and mother. We don't tolerate this kind of thing."....NOT ONE...

So if a 6'7" guy is beaten up, it's up to basketball players to stand up for him simply because they share a physical characteristic?

Palin's anti-feminist stances (opposing the LLFPA, Roe decision, supporting TEA party candidates who oppose Roe etc...) speak for themselves so few feminists spoke for her.

 

[Dragonlady]

Sexual intercourse is not a right.

Then why are men able to get Viagara through their health insurance plans? Shouldn't men have to take responsibility for their own erections and pay for their own Viagara instead of asking their health insurance plans to cover it?

Incredible double standard here.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Sexual intercourse is not a right.

Then why are men able to get Viagara through their health insurance plans? Shouldn't men have to take responsibility for their own erections and pay for their own Viagara instead of asking their health insurance plans to cover it?

Incredible double standard here.

I agree that it is a double standard, It's not the government's job to make sure grandpa gets a woody. Everybody wants government out of their bedroom unless the government can give them an erection or free contraception.

 

[JoeB131]

Erroneous repetition is not argument. Your moral relativism and hyper-partisanship has obviously gone as far as it can.

It really burns you that Ayers was no only exonerated of "Terrorism", but is a respected Professor of Urban Planning who rubs elbows with the powerful.

While you are reduced to ranting on a message board about how America doesn't respect your values.

It is to laugh.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Ayers was exonerated of terrorism? Was this before or after he admitted that he was guilty as sin?
You live in a far left terrorist sympathizing, anti-semitic, conspiracy riddled, moral relativistic bubble and I'm the one ranting about America not appreciating my values? LOL!
Seriously, take a nap!

 

[BDBoop]

Erroneous repetition is not argument. Your moral relativism and hyper-partisanship has obviously gone as far as it can.

It really burns you that Ayers was no only exonerated of "Terrorism", but is a respected Professor of Urban Planning who rubs elbows with the powerful.

While you are reduced to ranting on a message board about how America doesn't respect your values.

It is to laugh.

To laugh, perchance to howl.

 

[JoeB131]

Ayers was exonerated of terrorism? Was this before or after he admitted that he was guilty as sin?
You live in a far left terrorist sympathizing, anti-semitic, conspiracy riddled, moral relativistic bubble and I'm the one ranting about America not appreciating my values? LOL!
Seriously, take a nap!

Guy, morals are always relative...

Just asked the Aztecs.

The Holy Book of the Right Wing advocated slavery, genocide, and witch-burning.

And you all thought it was good.


Now, to put it in perspective.

Bill Ayers blew up ugly statues and government buildings, no one was hurt by his actions other than his own followers.

The government he was protesting killed millions in a war that they pretty much admitted was pointless.

And while you crazy wingnuts go crying about it, most of us have a real bead on things.

The GOP and Conservatives fucked it up for everyone. That's what I give a shit about. Not some ugly ass statue getting blown up 40 years ago.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Ayers was exonerated of terrorism? Was this before or after he admitted that he was guilty as sin?
You live in a far left terrorist sympathizing, anti-semitic, conspiracy riddled, moral relativistic bubble and I'm the one ranting about America not appreciating my values? LOL!
Seriously, take a nap!

Guy, morals are always relative...

Just asked the Aztecs.

The Holy Book of the Right Wing advocated slavery, genocide, and witch-burning.

And you all thought it was good.


Now, to put it in perspective.

Bill Ayers blew up ugly statues and government buildings, no one was hurt by his actions other than his own followers.

The government he was protesting killed millions in a war that they pretty much admitted was pointless.

And while you crazy wingnuts go crying about it, most of us have a real bead on things.

The GOP and Conservatives fucked it up for everyone. That's what I give a shit about. Not some ugly ass statue getting blown up 40 years ago.

The Holy book of the right wing advocated slavery, genocide and witch burning? Was this the same book that instituted liberal projects such as Jim Crow laws and slavery? Was this the same book that made the KKK the action enforcement arm of the democratic party?
So no one was hurt by Bill Ayers actions. Look, I'm thankful that Bill Ayers was an incompetent domestic terrorist bomber but I'm still not going to pat him on the back.
Are you referring to Vietnam when you say the GOP and Conservatives fucked it up for everyone? Vietnam started under Kennedy and reached its highest pitch under Johnson. A republican president ended the war.
Here's the thing though. You defend domestic terrorists who's causes you believe in. I don't. That's pretty much our discussion in a nut shell. There is really no more need for your obfuscation and odd disjointed diatribes.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The Holy book of the right wing advocated slavery, genocide and witch burning? Was this the same book that instituted liberal projects such as Jim Crow laws and slavery? Was this the same book that made the KKK the action enforcement arm of the democratic party?
So no one was hurt by Bill Ayers actions. Look, I'm thankful that Bill Ayers was an incompetent domestic terrorist bomber but I'm still not going to pat him on the back.
Are you referring to Vietnam when you say the GOP and Conservatives fucked it up for everyone? Vietnam started under Kennedy and reached its highest pitch under Johnson. A republican president ended the war.
Here's the thing though. You defend domestic terrorists who's causes you believe in. I don't. That's pretty much our discussion in a nut shell. There is really no more need for your obfuscation and odd disjointed diatribes.

Again, guy, you thought BIn Laden was a "Freedom Fighter" when he killed Russians, and a "Terrorist" when he killed American Plutocrats.

Oh, Vietnam started under Ike. But we won't go there, I was referring to how you guys, starting with the Senile Actor, slowly dismantled the middle class, Keynesian economic system we built up under FDR, on the theory that, the wealth will "Trickle down".

Well, something trickled down, and it wasn't wealth.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Oh lordy! Another unhinged historical revisionist diatribe of liberal nonsense. Yet, Bill Ayers is still a terrorist. No amount of extremist Orwellian doublespeak or progressive conspiratorial ranting is going to change that fact. On the other hand, I finally had you admit that Ayers didn't "just" blow up a statue. Helen Keller's teacher would be proud of me.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh lordy! Another unhinged historical revisionist diatribe of liberal nonsense. Yet, Bill Ayers is still a terrorist. No amount of extremist Orwellian doublespeak or progressive conspiratorial ranting is going to change that fact. On the other hand, I finally had you admit that Ayers didn't "just" blow up a statue. Helen Keller's teacher would be proud of me.

Yawn, guy...

If you want to try to paint your artificial lines around Professor Ayers, have at it.

No one else is really buying it outside the nutter bubble.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Oh lordy! Another unhinged historical revisionist diatribe of liberal nonsense. Yet, Bill Ayers is still a terrorist. No amount of extremist Orwellian doublespeak or progressive conspiratorial ranting is going to change that fact. On the other hand, I finally had you admit that Ayers didn't "just" blow up a statue. Helen Keller's teacher would be proud of me.

Yawn, guy...

If you want to try to paint your artificial lines around Professor Ayers, have at it.

No one else is really buying it outside the nutter bubble.

You're defending a domestic terrorist because you agree with his cause and I'm the one painting artificial lines? Would you like me to tuck you in till the fever passes?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Women and Men are biologically different, and God clearly had different roles intended for both!

"different" is not the question.

Actually, the sexes have much more in common that they have differences but, "feminism is the radical notion that women are people." (Rebecca West)

AND, equal.

WHY must we always fight the right for equality?

Whether its women, blacks, gays and on and on ... Its always the right that is against our Constitution.

Always.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh lordy! Another unhinged historical revisionist diatribe of liberal nonsense. Yet, Bill Ayers is still a terrorist. No amount of extremist Orwellian doublespeak or progressive conspiratorial ranting is going to change that fact. On the other hand, I finally had you admit that Ayers didn't "just" blow up a statue. Helen Keller's teacher would be proud of me.

Yawn, guy...

If you want to try to paint your artificial lines around Professor Ayers, have at it.

No one else is really buying it outside the nutter bubble.

You're defending a domestic terrorist because you agree with his cause and I'm the one painting artificial lines? Would you like me to tuck you in till the fever passes?

Guy, 'Terrorist' is a bullshit word.

And obviously, most of the country agreed with Ayers, which is why he's a distinguished professor and Nixon had to resign in disgrace.