Will stated on ABC’s This Week that “professional women with college degrees” resent the “condescension of the Obama campaign, which says” to women: “don’t you trouble your pretty little heads about these men’s issues like unemployment and all the rest, worry about contraception, which has been a constitutional right for 47 years.” Will continued: “It’s a distraction. The entire war on women trope, and I think professional, educated women find it offensive.”
What this professional educated woman finds offensive is the existence of stupid creatures like this Will fellow who dare to open their idiotic mouths to take her name in vain.
Go stick your opinions about what women want up your ugly ass, Will. “Unemployment and all the rest” of economic issues for women, you stupid, stupid idiot, begin precisely when women cannot control their own reproductive systems.
Fucking idiot.
Clarissa's Blog 
@Clarissa, exactly! It is not easy (And in most cases not possible) to get a degree if your pregnant or nursing a baby.
LikeLike
I especially like the condescension of a guy who knows exactly what women should or should not care about. Jeez.
LikeLike
I think you are being deliberately obtuse here. Do you seriously believe that a Pres. Romney will expend political capital to attempt overturning something that’s been a constitutional right for 47 years, given the range of serious issues facing the country? I think it is fairly rational to assume that Romney was successful managing the Olympics, Bain, etc. because he doesn’t spend time/resources on issues that are unsolvable, irrelevant, or doesn’t pass a cost/benefit analysis. The country is heading for a fiscal disaster, senate democrats (contrary to law) have not passed a budget in more than three years, the entire population will pay significantly higher taxes in perpetuity because there are not enough rich people to pay for all the entitlements. Or (as seems to be happening through inflation) the purchasing power of a dollar will shrink so you will pay higher prices for all consumption in perpetuity. Any way you look at it: Everyone will pay.
This is why Will suggests the contraception issue is a completely irrelevant distraction. The Obama campaign has managed to convince a fair number of women that this should be a high priority. Like a magician that draws your attention away so you don’t discover the sleight of hand, Obama has been successful in getting women to not care that your future looks increasingly like Greece. Let us all get ready to embrace an ever increasing Value-Added Tax. It is the easiest way for politicians to avoid accountability for their spending decisions.
An even greater achievement, however, is getting women that want to control their own bodies to support the Affordable Care Act, which gives government bureaucrats control over health care decisions through ACOs, the IPAB, etc. But that will be too much to cover here.
Just some thoughts from a European that became a US citizen two years ago.
I enjoy your blog.
Thanks,
Eivind
LikeLike
“Do you seriously believe that a Pres. Romney will expend political capital to attempt overturning something that’s been a constitutional right for 47 years, given the range of serious issues facing the country”
– I’m very sorry that you don’t follow the US politics yet believe you are entitled to opine on it anyways. Do check out the amount of anti-choice measures the GOp has been trying to pass in these tough economic times. Then you will discover that the Republicans don;t care about the economy. They just care about their hatred of women. Romney hates women to the point where he foams at the mouth. Haven;t you heard his remarks about how “delighted” this vicious loser would be to sign a bill outlawing abortion in all cases?
“The Obama campaign has managed to convince a fair number of women that this should be a high priority. . . Obama has been successful in getting women to not care that your future looks increasingly like Greece”
– Wow, you really despise women, too. Your Momma must have been a housewife.
“Just some thoughts from a European that became a US citizen two years ago.”
– It’s sad you didn;t even try to educate yourself about what is happening in the US in those years.
LikeLike
“I enjoy your blog.”
– And I will enjoy seeing Obama whoop Romney’s ugly woman-hating ass next week. That will be fun!
LikeLike
Yes, indeed. And nothing that is said by the current English-speaking right wing parties is any different from what the metaphysics of patriarchy has already installed in our consciousness for eons.
The above statement draws on the presupposition that women’s issues are necessarily trivial, indeed in some sense not REAL at all.
So, if you want to complain you were raped, that is trivial.
If you want to equal pay, you are asking for something that the fabric of reality can’t accommodate.
If you disagree with misogyny, it is because you can’t get your pretty little head around the way REALITY NECESSARILY WORKS
If you talk about women’s health, you are trying to bring into the public sphere a measure of unreality.
Consequently, there is no war on women and never has been one. There have only been rational people — namely men — avoiding trivial and unreal things.
LikeLike
I am male, so probably don’t necessarily get every level of what is happening, but I view it a bit like George Orwell’s Newspeak concept. Where the language is such that some concepts are not even possible to express. I think part of the reason why many men don’t see the inequity is because they don’t have the language to even think there is a problem.
LikeLike
Thanks for your response. It’s not so much that they don’t have the language to think there is a problem, although that describes half of the issue.
Rather, though, they DO have the language to dismiss what women have to say as being irrelevant.
For instance, if I am a woman speaking about women’s issues, a man may stand up and say, “Let’s try to be rational about all this.”
On the surface that statement would be impossible to disagree with. It’s good to be rational. Everyone should be rational. Let’s progress rationally.
However, beneath the surface, it has the opposite meaning. The way most people will hear it, because our ears are attuned to patriarchal symbolism, and because the issues being discussed concern gender, will be: “She’s going on and on, in an emotional and irrelevant way, and it’s time someone put a stop to this, so we can focus on what’s important.”
That’s what makes for the confusing aspect of the situation. The words have the opposite meanings to what they seem to have. Yes, in that sense it’s about like Orwellian language, because patriarchal metaphysics is like The Ministry of Peace. And, unless you have been exposed to its reverse logic, you won’t quite believe it. You will think that patriarchy is all about promoting rationality and aiding progress. I notice, though, that many women in the Labor party, Nicola Roxon. Penny Wong and Julia Gillard, all have a very shrewd understanding of how this game is played.
The booby trap in the patriarchal construct is that always, if try to oppose it’s method of silencing, you end up looking like you’re opposed to rationality — like you desire chaos to reign.
Gillard and others have done a remarkable job in side-stepping many of the patriarchal booby traps.
LikeLike
Call such a guy “a little angel ” and tell him he is as cute as a tiny pink piglet. It takes them days to process it. 🙂
LikeLike
Yeah, yeah. That’s true it does. I also like the way Gillard gives backhanded compliments. When asked about her feelings about opposition leader, Tony Abbott, she said, “I have nothing against him. I hope he remains opposition leader for the rest of his life.”
So, she can also work the double entendre.
LikeLike
Hee hee hee. I think I love her.
LikeLike
She’s smart.
LikeLike
Yes, I think you are unfortunately right. Even very good, reasonable men ask me, “But if you will never suffer because of this legislation, then why do you care so much?”
LikeLike
Clarissa,
With the exception of rape (which is illegal), women have had control of their own reproductive systems in both the US and Canada pretty much since the countries began. The fact that such control meant keeping your legs closed may not sit well with you, Clarissa, but it remains a FACT.
What you mistakenly refer to as “control of her reproductive system” is no such thing. It’s partial control of the CONSEQUENCES of having sex whenever one chooses. I say “partial” because it’s merely an illusion of control. In the cheery fantasy world assumed by most modern Western women (especially of an explicitly feminist bent), the ability to prevent pregnancy at any time through the myriad paths of contraception and abortion also equates to being able to have a child at any time as well…. something that many women find out, to their great dismay, just ain’t so.
As for “this Will fellow” being an idiot by daring to declare “what women want”, so are you. Undoubtedly, you can declare with greater precision than others what YOU, a singular woman, want, and you can probably declare what those women in your own circle want with a fair degree of accuracy, but even as a rank generalization, “what women want” breaks down as poorly as “what men want.”
When I see women being painted as potential sex offenders merely because they’re women, when I see women being thrown in jail for the offense of being unemployed, when I see women mocked relentlessly in popular culture, then maybe there will be some validity to the “war on women.”
LikeLike
Poor insane loser who can’t get laid for any amount of money. Of course, nobody wants to have sex with you when you stink as bad as that. Have you tried taking a shower, ugly creep insect?
And now fuck off my blog, cockroach.
LikeLike