Tears of Gratitude

Feminists who are a lot more popular than yours truly were “on the verge of tears with gratitude” when Obama made his extremely offensive comments that

These are not just women’s issues. These are family issues; these are economic issues

and that

In my health care bill, I said insurance companies need to provide contraceptive coverage to everybody who is insured, because this is not just a health issue—it’s an economic issue for women. It makes a difference. This is money out of that family’s pocket.

Given the palpable contempt for “just women’s issues”, I have to wonder what it is that such feminists are so grateful for. The idea that a woman has no value and no interests of her own outside of the patriarchal family that consumes her entirely is not new.

I don’t feel like any of these comments were addressed to me. They sound like they were addressed to men who needed to be reassured that those useless womenfolks would not cost their male owners too much.

I also wonder what the deal is on “just women’s issues”. Women represent 52% of all inhabitants of this country. When Romney dismisses 47%, we are all appalled, and rightfully so. But where is the same outrage when Romney’s opponent tells us that the interests of 52% of the population do not merit to be addressed unless they affect somebody else’s interests, too?

No, I’m not getting over this any time soon. If there is somebody who is as incensed about this as I am, please let me know. I’m getting to feel too lonely here.

Rate this:

38 responses to “Tears of Gratitude”

David Bellamy

October 17, 2012

I think calling equal pay for equal work “not just a women’s issue” is an attempt to get men to support it. Many men do not think it is important. and so dismiss it. This is President Obama’s wakeup call to those men. This approach, like almost anything else, has unintended consequences, but I understand why he took that viewpoint. If he had taken a more reasonable view that all people should be paid what their work is worth, he would, sadly, have driven many men to support the governor, which he cannot afford. I have heard this view from men all my life, and all my life I have been horrified by it; but it is pervasive.

I thought what he said about wanting his daughters to have good opportunities was quite powerful and reasonable.

LikeLike

the twisted spinster

October 17, 2012

Who cares what men think or want? I’m sick of hearing all the time “what about the menz?” I don’t give a shit about men’s wants and needs.

LikeLike

Reply
1. titfortat
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  @twisted
  
  I guess you are not too surprised when they dont give a shit about your’s either.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
2. the twisted spinster
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  Yeah no, I’m not surprised, because men are raised to care only about themselves and their needs (and I’ll just cut out the expected bullshit about how men are always looking out for others to “protect” them and whatnot — this sort of “looking out for others” is based on patriarchal society’s need to keep men in power, and one way that is done is making sure men are primed to see themselves as the primary caretakers and protectors of humanity, which means, of course, they need weaker, “lesser” people to take care of, which would be women and children). So to repeat, I’m not the least bit surprised that “men,” in general, don’t care about me or my needs, except in so far as they serve to make them look and feel good. By the way, the petty, petulant tone of your response (“Well, I don’t care about YOU either!” & flounces off in a huff), is obviously supposed to make me feel guilty and chagrined that I hurt your male feelings, but I am sitting here at my desk typing this with not a care in the world that you were stung by my words. In fact, your discomfiture gives me pleasure.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    October 17, 2012
    
    “Yeah no, I’m not surprised, because men are raised to care only about themselves and their needs (and I’ll just cut out the expected bullshit about how men are always looking out for others to “protect” them and whatnot — this sort of “looking out for others” is based on patriarchal society’s need to keep men in power, and one way that is done is making sure men are primed to see themselves as the primary caretakers and protectors of humanity, which means, of course, they need weaker, “lesser” people to take care of, which would be women and children).”
    
    – Exactly. I couldn’t agree more. “Lesser people” is precisely what I’m talking about. Nobody cares about the rights of the “lesser people” unless it can be demonstrated that “real people” are affected when these “lesser creatures” suffer. This is why I’m so incensed by these comments and by Obama’s need to prove that women’s issues are only important inasmuch as they impact the family unit.
    
    At the same time, Obama’s approach presents the women who choose not to have families as completely unimportant. This is so wrong that I have no words to describe it. I do not remember a single instance of any politician being so obsessed with “men and families.” Men have a value outside of a family. Women, for Obama, don’t. And that upsets me.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
3. Titfortat
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  @Twisted
  
  Dont flatter yourself. I dont know you well enough to know whether I would give a shit about you or not. I was making reference to the likelihood of the men who are already in your life not giving a shit.
  
  * Interesting side note in regards to the questions the other night. It seems the young woman who made reference to women only making 72% of what men make didnt realize that single, childless women of her age make more than single, childless men of her age. Go figure.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
4. el
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  //didnt realize that single, childless women of her age make more than single, childless men of her age.
  
  Not true.
  
  This survey was done in 1 city AND didn’t control for education. Once you control for ed, it’s untrue even for that city.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
5. Titfortat
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  Once you control for ed, it’s untrue even for that city.(el)
  
  Considering that women are likely to have more education(stats show that to be true) I can easily see it being true.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
6. el
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  //Considering that women are likely to have more education(stats show that to be true) I can easily see it being true.
  
  “women only making 72% of what men make” refers to people working on the same jobs. I doubt many feminist-minded people would say “A female uni prof outearns a male janitor, thus the days of gender equality have come”.
  
  Also, from what I read, on average women still earn less. They may get more education on average, but also much more likely to get it in poorly paid for fields, and less likely to be present on many well paid for faculties, like exact sciences & engineering. The thing that bothers me about it is not that some jobs pay better than others, but:
  
  1. Girls are socialized since birth to be less “hard” science & engineering oriented than boys. Even looking at toys for small kids & at for “For Girls” (cooking, clothes, make up) vs “For Boys” (building staff) books shows it.
  
  2. Studies done on people working at the same job still show a difference. Even controlling for education and job experience. Largely since kids are seen as “women’s job” by bosses & society in general.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
7. el
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  \\ “women only making 72% of what men make” refers to people working on the same jobs.
  
  Typo, sorry. It refers to averages.
  
  I wanted to say that the measure of equality considers people working on the same jobs.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
8. titfortat
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  I wanted to say that the measure of equality considers people working on the same jobs.(el)
  
  I imagine the measure of equality would need to include the ability to get the same jobs. If the stats show that women are more likely to obtain higher educations than men then I would imagine they would have a greater ability to obtain jobs that the less educated men could not. I wonder how that happens in the patriarchy?
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    October 17, 2012
    
    “If the stats show that women are more likely to obtain higher educations than men then I would imagine they would have a greater ability to obtain jobs that the less educated men could not.”
    
    – Maybe you should stop imagining because everything you imagine is completely wrong.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
9. titfortat
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  No Clarissa Im not. Let me give you a small example. I recently watched my 18yr. old son at his graduation. The school was giving awards to the students who had grades in 3 divisions. 80-85, 85-90, 90-95. In each division it was 75% female dominated. I think your imagination is much more active than mine.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    October 17, 2012
    
    “The school was giving awards to the students who had grades in 3 divisions. 80-85, 85-90, 90-95. In each division it was 75% female dominated.”
    
    – None of this leads to better-paying jobs. High school grades don’t even translate to college grades, let alone to better-paying jobs.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
10. titfortat
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  Thats just the beginning. To get in to colleges and universities you need to have the marks. More and more the stats are showing women are fairing better in universities and colleges also. To think that this wont translate into better paying jobs is delusional. If the patriarchy is so strong this just wouldnt be happening, in fact, the reverse would be happening. But the reality is very different from what you are suggesting.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
11. el
  
  October 18, 2012
  
  // In each division it was 75% female dominated
  
  I think it has been thus for decades already without leading to results you describe.
  
  Another thought: if American high school students choose subjects to study in depth, like it’s done in Israel, then how many boys vs girls choose to study history vs physics / chemistry / programming ?
  
  // High school grades don’t even translate to college grades
  
  +1
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
12. titfortat
  
  October 18, 2012
  
  @el
  
  I think it is somewhat different for us both. I live in Canada and I believe you live in the USA. Mind you, the idea that high school grades dont translate to college grades is somewhat short sighted. The reality is, if you dont have the right high school grades you dont even get into college or university. I will agree that that good high school grades dont translate into good college or university grades. As far as change happening, it is pretty obvious that it is. Think of it from this perspective. What are the odds that Clarissa, a female who has Autism, would be a Professor 25 to 30yrs. ago?
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply

Pub Editor

October 17, 2012

Wow, politics makes for strange company. See here: “The president defended equal pay, as well he should have, but he spoke as if its being a women’s issue was not on its own sufficient to justify much attention. … He’d have done better to explain why equal pay is a women’s issue and why that alone is important before he tied it to social and economic structures like the family and the middle class.”

LikeLike

David Bellamy

October 17, 2012

“He’d have done better to explain why equal pay is a women’s issue and why that alone is important before he tied it to social and economic structures like the family and the middle class.”

And, if he had had an hour instead of two minutes, he almost certainly would have done so. The environment constricts what one can say.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Pub Editor
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  How long does it take to say, “52%”? How long would it take to read out, verbatim, the penultimate paragraph of Clarissa’s post?
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
2. David Bellamy
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  Pub Editor, that is not the point. It would have taken a lot of explanation and clarification to say that without turning a lot of men against him. Certainly white men and maybe even black men. saying something which will gain you 500 votes and lose you 1000 votes is not helpful, even if it is the proper thing to say.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    October 17, 2012
    
    From what I understand, the male vote is all decided by now. The majority of undecided voters are female. And I don’t think there is anything Obama can possibly say or do to give him the white male vote. Just like Romney can say nothing to get any part of the black vote.
    
    It is harder for women to pick a candidate precisely because no candidate is even trying to address women. This is why it shocks me that, once again, Obama courted white male voters and disregarded female voters altogether.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
3. David Bellamy
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  Fair enough. Obama has this white male’s vote, unless I decide to vote for the Green candidate. Romney will not get my vote for anything, ever. Expressing my opinion of Romney has been banned from this blog, IIRC.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    October 17, 2012
    
    “Expressing my opinion of Romney has been banned from this blog”
    
    – ???????
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
4. David Bellamy
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  Yes, you said we should not compare American politicians to a certain German leader from the 1930’s and 1940’s.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    October 17, 2012
    
    I don’t think Romney is nearly as bad as Hitler. Even Bush was not nearly as bad as Hitler.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
5. David Bellamy
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  I do not want to do the experiment and try to find out who his scapegoat group would be.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
6. David Bellamy
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  I think Romney is worse than Bush. He is promising economic prosperity which is not possible, although it may be sustained for a little while by expliting a scapegoat group.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
7. David Bellamy
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  ‘exploiting’…sorry!
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply

the twisted spinster

October 17, 2012

Anyway, I’m with you, Clarissa. I’m a single woman, I have always been completely uninterested in anything to do with “family” — especially the American idea of “family.” I simply don’t care what these globs of persons who are somehow a symbiotic mass of protoplasm do or feel or want.

LikeLike

musteryou

October 17, 2012

Well, “woman” is encoded as “low class” and I suppose the other terms, like “family”, but especially anything implying “male” is interpreted as high class. So, what those feminists heard was, “These are not just the issues of the lowly class, but the issues of those who have status.”

American feminists do totally reason in this way, in terms of patriarchal values. That is why they are different to relate to for me, as an African feminist.

LikeLike

bloggerclarissa

October 17, 2012

“American feminists do totally reason in this way, in terms of patriarchal values. That is why they are different to relate to for me, as an African feminist.”

– They seem to be sincere in their celebration of this. I feel completely alone in that I don’t see anybody else feeling even remotely bothered by this.

LikeLike

Reply
1. musteryou
  
  October 17, 2012
  
  Perhaps America women have been battered by ideological idiocies for so long that a small concession like this now seems great indeed. He does promise that if they’re insured they can get what they need out of their insurance. Hm.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    October 17, 2012
    
    “Perhaps America women have been battered by ideological idiocies for so long that a small concession like this now seems great indeed.”
    
    – Yes, I know. But will we ever get more if we never ask for more?
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. musteryou
      
      October 17, 2012
      
      No, I don’t think you will. The ideological current there is too strong. Let me give you an example. I am uninsured but received the Mirena device and insertion here in Australia for $30. It lasts four to five years. In the USA, you would pay around one thousand dollars for the device, plus extra for the insertion.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
    2. musteryou
      
      October 17, 2012
      
      Although, seriously I could have wept tears of gratitude at the idea of not having extremely painful menstrual cramping for over four years. It’s working well so far. I did balloon up a little for three weeks just recently, but now my belly seems to have returned to almost normal.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply

Egalitarian

October 17, 2012

No, contraception is not a women’s issue. I am a man and I do not want to have a child, so it is very important to me. That’s why I’m disappointed that Obamacare doesn’t require vasectomies to be free, like it does for female sterilization. Contraception is a human issue, not a women’s issue.

LikeLike

October 18, 2012

Re equal pay issue – remember the bullying Sandra Fluke got? Another woman asked a question about equal pay and:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/18/you-dont-react-like-this-to-a-simple-question-without-being-an-outrageous-misogynist/

LikeLike

Clarissa's Blog