Certain male commentators are peeing themselves with joy over Obama’s put-down of women in the recent debate:
It also bears saying that Obama’s answer that connected women’s health issues with economic and family issues was beautiful. In a night of truly strong answers, it was nearly everything anyone concerned with the real lives of real women could have asked for.
I especially dig the “real women” bit. I’ve been sitting here with bated breath, waiting for some guy to tell me what real women should ask for. Because God forbid a woman should want something without a man telling her what it should be. That will probably make her an “unreal woman.”
Such is the unconscious chauvinism of Liberal men. Just imagine what the conscious, self-congratulating sexism of the non-Liberal is like.
Clarissa's Blog 
This reminds me of a married couple that we’re friends with. The husband is African-American. The wife is Caucasian. The wife, who is a liberal, said to me one time, “You know what I hate? Well-meaning liberals say to me all the time, ‘It must be so hard to be married to a black man. Ignorant people must look at you funny all the time.'” To her, the people who were supposedly “on her side” were just as offensive, if not more so, than the people who “looked at her funny” because the well-meaning liberals were showing just how unknowingly racist they were themselves by assuming that people thought her relationship was somehow invalid or “less than” other relationships or “harder” than other relationships. It’s color-blind racism at its finest.
I think that many liberals are well-meaning, but they aren’t self-aware enough OR culturally aware enough to realize what asses they are making of themselves. This goes for race and for women.
I actually showed some of the second debate in my class yesterday. (I work at a private school, and we haven’t been told to not talk about politics in class, so I’m happy to do so.) We picked apart some of the answers of both candidates. My only fear is that the students were left so dissatisfied with BOTH candidates’ idiotic commentary that they won’t vote at all. But I did point out what you said — that treating women as if all they care about is family is really sexist and undermines every woman’s goals and dreams outside of being a child producer. Your influence is hitting the heartland!! 🙂
LikeLike
The writer is an Australian, and perhaps not all that bright. Also, maybe when he said “strong answers” he meant “strange answers”.
LikeLike
I’ve just been reading this blog, so my condescension levels are retributively high:
http://mansplained.tumblr.com/
LikeLike
I love this site!! I will contribute a few examples. 🙂
LikeLike
I am a man and I do not classify myself as liberal in the American sense. So you may worry about my views on women. I view men and women from exactly the same perspective. Each is an individual. each is born with free will and with an endowment of natural talents. Those talents differ from individual to individual. The good society ensures that institutions provide an equality of opportunity for each individual. Outcomes will be constrained by talents, including the talent for hard and productive work. There is no guarantee of equality of outcomes, nor should there be.
In societies where there are deeply embedded preferences in favor of men – and that embraces most Asian countries, all Arab countries, and most African countries – women find it hard to flourish as human beings. And that is a tragedy. In most Western countries, traces of such preferences remain, though they have been significantly eroded. Good people speak out against such handicaps, but good people do not pander in order to secure votes.
Most women in the United States live full and flourishing lives when they utilize their talents, whatever those may be. They are not to be judsged badly if they decide to become housewives and spend much time with their offspring. That is a noble choixe. Equally they are not to be judged badly if they choose to work and to allow others significantly to assume responsibility for their children.
Both presidential candidates currently pander yo women as a collective. To me that is completely disgusting. I put it down, not to their short-comings as human beings, but as to their craving for office at any price. That tells me that they are both unfit for the high office that they seek.
LikeLike
“Both presidential candidates currently pander yo women as a collective. To me that is completely disgusting. I put it down, not to their short-comings as human beings, but as to their craving for office at any price. That tells me that they are both unfit for the high office that they seek.”
If you create legislation that limits women’s health options, you have created a collective, which it then seems logical to address as such.
LikeLike
Right. And well put.
LikeLike
“Both presidential candidates currently pander yo women as a collective. To me that is completely disgusting. I put it down, not to their short-comings as human beings, but as to their craving for office at any price. That tells me that they are both unfit for the high office that they seek.”
– I agree completely.
LikeLike
“Just imagine what the conscious, self-congratulating sexism of the non-Liberal is like.”
How about Romney’s comment in the debate that he has “binders full of women.”
LikeLike
To be honest, I see the Liberal outrage over the “binders full” as profoundly hypocritical when accompanied by a complete lack of concern over “women and families” and “this is not a women’s issue.”
LikeLike
Not really. It’s just something to laugh about.
LikeLike
Liberal outrage? Liberal satire, more likely!
LikeLike