Archive for misogyny

Women Are Doing It for Ourselves, Voice a Pair of First Ladies

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Tried-to-Vote

As much as Laura Bush is tied to a fervent anchor in her horrible choice of a Bush spouse, on occasion she pops out in public to remind us that she may have thrice the brains W possesses (or more).

This week she and current First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama, came together for some great causes involving the modern plight of women. Here and abroad … but disgraceful in the purported leadership of the Free World. And they were, pitifully ironically at the U.S. and Africa Summit.

Women of both parties can sling shame exceptionally well, and it is desperately need right now. From first chorus to coda, it is a worthy cause to set to voice. Loudly voice.

Some footage about women's rights and voting by the good Reverend, Al Sharpton and guest Barbaar Arnwine, from the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights.

Image, LasVegasTribune

From ProPublica via The Everlasting GopStoppers.com:

When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a key part of the Voting Rights Act last June, justices left it to Congress to decide how to fix the law. But while Congress deliberates, activists are turning again to the courts: At least 10 lawsuits have the potential to bring states and some local jurisdictions back under federal oversight - essentially doing an end-run around the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Voting-suppression-Block-the-vote

A quick refresher: The Voting Rights Act outlaws racial discrimination against voters. But the law’s real strength comes from its “preclearance” provision, which forces jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination to submit new voting measures to the federal government for approval.

MSNBC ran some fabulous footage on the matter this week, and a rare glimpse of Laura and FLOTUS Michelle - we don't see them together terribly often; and particularly having elucidating speech on a needful cause. Laura has a uterus and a somewhat-working knowledge of this country and Britain's suffragette triumphs. Have a gander and I'll see you on the other side.

Just last summer, SCOTUS nullified the section of the Voting Rights Act that allowed sensible federal oversight.

Bush-meme

And we all know how much the Regressive Right adores oversight, non? New restrictions on anything  Federal or oversight related generally gives the GOP and the Lipton Brigade a collective woody.

Not to mention living in the pre-Mad Men area, barefoot, preggers and disinclined to vote at all or hell bent on doing everything their GOP.Tea Idjot fool husbands tell them to.

It took American women decades of protest, blood, sweat, tears and rage to get the damned vote … we are not going to have it suppressed, threatened or refused to be part of a legitimate count.  Check out recent stats:

voter-id-stats1

In last summer’s Shelby County v. Holder ruling, the Supreme Court threw out the part of the law that spelled out when states were automatically subject to federal oversight. States that have been released from preclearance have already passed a rash of new restrictive voting measures.

The Founding Father's must already be lined up to scowl and possibly 'spit like they mean' it at Dubbayuh Bush. Along with herds of liberal alpacas. A pissed off alpaca can hawk a loogie as famously well as an annoyed camel, and they have no compunction whatsoever. Can speak with experience with both four-legged wonders of sarcasm.

Image, HartfordCourant.com

Image, HartfordCourant.com

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

A Lot of Smart Women Swear, Tricky Dick Nixon!

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

gop fail streetcar named we're always wrong
The odds were that in some of the newly released Nixonian audio trove, he'd let fly with one fine misogynistic remark to mark the occasion with.

Richard Millhouse, you did not disappoint.

Because it also includes an informative Vanity Fair segment, and a Morning Joe Schmoe segment that brings Vanity Fair to the table is always worth a peek … have a Nixon listen.

Mark Halperin was there to try to destroy the experience, but we are all used to auto-tuning Halperin out.

Talk amongst yourselves about the Christie freshness, but can I get a WTH?! On Nixon?!? Bella Abzug must have sent him into fits. From the Vanity Fair piece, linked above, an excerpt that covers Dick's incredulity about females and language.

Nixon: I mean, you’ve got to stop at a certain point. Why is it that the girls don’t swear? Because a man, when he swears, people can’t tolerate a girl who is a—

Haldeman: Girls do swear.

Nixon: Huh?

Haldeman: They do now.

Peace, I'mOut

Nixon: Oh, they do now? But, nevertheless, it removes something from them. They don’t even realize it. A man drunk, and a man who swears, people will tolerate and say that’s a sign of masculinity or some other damn thing. We all do it. We all swear. But you show me a girl that swears and I’ll show you an awful unattractive person. . . . I mean, all femininity is gone. And none of the smart girls do swear, incidentally.

It was almost worse that he doubled down on the judgment at the end, there … as if he was giving the matter due process of thought, then said, "Naah - I'm Dick Nixon and I'm right" and did away with generations of intelligence in a casually arrogant sentence; man to man.

We met Pat. Something tells me she was a Nixon with a vocabulary tailored to match her voluble husband's.

richard-nixon-not-crook

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

And now … the GOP War On Women Turns To Verified Rape Victims

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

femfist
What would Maya Angelou say?

George Will coming out of the closet as a rape apologist should have been warning that the camo is coming off the old white male faces. Have a listen to his latest thoughts on sexual violence on college campuses, catch up at Raw Story.

Will asserts that making the leap from “forcible sexual penetration” to “nonconsensual touching” is too broad of a definition for sexual assault, and denigrates the “doctrine that the consent of a female who has been drinking might not protect a male from being found guilty of rape,” worrying about the costs of litigation for the universities and the reputations of college men accused of assault.

Pick-Favorite-Republican

Worse?!? The existence of a backlog of rape kits that should humiliate SCROTUS itself. The offensive, unjust, rapidly-accumulating numbers and the systemic devaluation of finding justice for one of the most heinous crimes man can commit are shocking.

regulate-full-480x360

Anyone who has seen an episode of Law & Order S.V.U. knows how critical a rape kit is to a case.

And underneath that legal case is a woman, a rawly, recently broken woman, who knows that the precious shreds of DNA taken from her in painful, violating ways may be the only clues a jury will take seriously enough for her to find justice. And any hopes of knitting that shattered life back together.

war_on_women1

You're 24 years old and in Tennessee, far as can be from a Hollywood set and that much more embarrassing because you know everyone in that little town and they know you. Collecting leftover semen and skin scrapings from under your raw, torn fingernails all happened in a fog, but you were repeatedly told by someone like Detective Olivia (goddess forfend as kind and a female at all) that this was EVIDENCE.

Your body is a crime scene. That is a reality that has been experienced by far too many women to ponder without a rage response. Girls and women of all ages, brought in by police of family, or having somehow gathered the inner strength to commit to doing the ultimate Walk of Shame and report a sexual assault with the intent to prosecute.

With great relief you watch the technicians finish your rape kit, and are congratulated for having chosen to stand up and fight back.

IforgotIonlyexist

Then, crickets. The big cricket chorale of We Don't Care. The young Ronan Farrow of MSNBC afternoon earnestness, gave the absurd and disgusting rape kit backlog story a slot in his 'Call To Action' series this summer, a worthy cause.

don'tMakeMe

Prepare to be more outraged that usual, and there's more in a shocking second segment.

And he then he and guests tell us of The Hundreds Of Thousands, yes I said Hundreds Of Thousands of backlogged rape kits lying around in storage.

GOP: shock and rage would be the appropriate response. Not cutting, cutting cutting every service that might help anyone other than the 1%. Not making women invisible and their justice meaningless.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

SCOTUS rules for Freedom of Tyranny

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

women's rights vote 2014 scotus decision freedom of religion

Freedom, freedom, freedom schmeedom. The concept is losing its meaning, especially in light of the Supreme Court's warped perception of the word. My reaction to their ruling on contraception and "freedom" of religion is still hampered by my inability to respond with anything but sputtering noises and involuntary twitches, bursts of banging my head against the wall, and convulsing into tears of outrage. Freedom my ass. What about our freedom to not have your damned religion shoved up our atheist and/or non-Christian hineys?  Bam! And that was just a hiccup. I'm shutting up now.

By the way, conservatives, how's that outreach thing going for ya these days?

Anyway, instead of ranting, which would be nothing more than stream-of-consciousness outbursts at this point, I'll leave it to the Los Angeles Times letters to the editor, because, despite evidence to the contrary, our voices still matter. The Times headline for this batch of letters is, notably, "Don't want more Hobby Lobby decisions? Then don't elect conservative presidents":

The U.S. Supreme Court's distressingly improvident 5-4 decisions in this year's religious rights cases should surprise no one. They are the price we have paid for suffering disproportionate conservative appointments to the high court from 1980 to 2008, when Republicans occupied the White House for 20 of those 28 years. ("Supreme Court, citing religious liberty, limits contraceptive coverage in Obamacare," June 30)

All who despair over the Supreme Court's unseemly bowing to religious zealots — especially when certain faiths' tenets are allowed to trump enlightened medical care — should remember this in 2016: If a Republican is elected our next president, look for the court's conservative judicial activism to endure far beyond his or her term of office.

Robin Groves, Pacific Palisades

***

I am losing confidence in our system of three branches of government. Two of them seem no longer to be working for us.

The Supreme Court increasingly seems to be operating as a political body, rendering decisions that make questionable judicial sense unless one happens to be a corporation that has taken on "person" status or a religious group that wishes to impose its specific beliefs on its employees. These decisions are becoming more questionable as our do-nothing Congress functions less like an elected body responsible to the people and more like a robot body created and manipulated by wealthy donors.

As long as our lethargic electorate keeps reelecting these legislators, our president is left to act alone and the court decides in an increasingly predictable way, we will see the continued eroding of our beloved constitutional form of government.

Bette Mason, Corona del Mar

***

If there's a silver lining to the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby ruling, it's that the decision will energize progressive voters to flood the polls for the foreseeable future as well as fuel boycotts against businesses that use religion as an excuse to discriminate.

Jerry Weil, Seal Beach

***

Will someone please explain to me how forcing your religious beliefs on others, who may or may not agree, is freedom of religion? Sounds more like tyranny to me.

Barbara Buckner, Laguna Niguel

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Years of Living Misogynistically

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

 

misogyny

Syllabification: mi·sog·y·ny

Pronunciation: /məˈsäjənē

NOUN

Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women: she felt she was struggling against thinly disguised misogyny

Welcome to 2014 - the year Misogyny went mainstream. Yesterday, the highest court in the land codified women's place as second class citizens into law with its misdirected and horribly wrong decision in the Hobby Lobby case. But the five Christian men on the court took it even a further step by saying that corporations religious rights trump the rights of said corporations' actual living, breathing female employees'!

And this isn't the first time the Roberts-Alito-Scalia-Thomas-Kennedy court has ruled against women's rights, but it just might be the straw that broke the misogynistic camel's back.

Jessica Mason Pieklo, senior legal analyst at RH Reality Check, who joined me on the show this morning to talk about the mansplaining from the bench yesterday wrote about it:

Having firmly established that closely held corporations (and probably publicly traded ones as well) can assert religious objections under the RFRA, the Court turns its attention to the birth control benefit specifically.

And here is where the Court’s deeply ingrained misogyny shines brightest.

Justice Alito writes that the Hahns and the Greensthe families who, respectively, own Conestoga Wood Specialties and Hobby Lobbyhave a sincere religious belief that life begins at conception and that their religious beliefs provide both that they offer insurance coverage for their employees, but only insurance coverage that conforms to those religious beliefs. Justice Alito takes this as an opportunity to misstate the coverage requirements of the ACA. “Before the advent of the ACA, they were not legally compelled to provide insurance,” wrote Alito, “but they nevertheless did soin part, no doubt, for conventional business reasons but also in part because their religious beliefs govern their relations with their employees.”

Of course, the ACA does not require employers to provide any health insurance coverage for their employees. Instead, the law requires those employers that do provide health insurance coverage offer that coverage equally for both men and women.

This a la carte  type of coverage, where employers maintain ultimate veto authority over the scope of employee benefits, is of course the endgame to all these contraception challenges, and by opening the door to religious objections like Hobby Lobby the Court has set the stage for just that. The parties in Hobby Lobby sincerely, and wrongly, believe that emergency contraception and some forms of intrauterine devices (IUDs) act as abortifacients. But according to Alito, it doesn’t  matter that the Greens and Hahns are wrong. All that matters is that they sincerely believe they are right.

We don't have to go back any further than Thursday of last week to find another anti-female ruling from this court. Unfortunately, in McCullen v Coakely, a unanimous out-of-touch bench found that the first amendment rights of anti-choice protesters to harass, accost and assault any woman attempting to visit the doctor of her choice to have a constitutionally permitted procedure trumps that woman's first amendment rights. Brazenly misogynistic, even if the female members of the court went along with the insanity.

As Jessica Mason Pieklo also wrote, it's as if the women seeking medical care in question didn't exist at all!

The trope of anti-choice protesters as “plump grandmas” helped the media and the U.S. Supreme Court not just gloss over the very real threats of violence that abortion providers and patients face, but also erase providers and patients from the Supreme Court’s analysis almost entirely.

Since 1977, the National Abortion Federation (NAF) has documented eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, 181 arson cases, 399 invasions, 100 acid attacks, and 663 bioterrorism threats targeting abortion providers and their facilities. A September 2013 survey of U.S. NAF members found that nearly 90 percent of providers had a patient entering their facility express concerns about their personal safety. At the Daily Beast, Sally Kohn reminds us that within an hour of the 1994 murders of abortion clinic workers in Massachusetts, which led to the eventual creation of clinic buffer zones, a woman called one of the clinics attacked and told the staff person who answered, “You got what you deserved.” Meanwhile, Donald Spitz, the director of Pro-Life Virginia, thanked John C. Salvi publicly for his murders as throngs of supporters cheered along enthusiastically outside the prison holding Salvi.

On Thursday, a unanimous Supreme Court looked past all that history—because, as Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the majority pointed out, the violent face of the anti-choice movement was not before the Court in McCullen. The “gentle” grandmas were.

It's enough to make you want to scream!

There are just two (among, unfortunately, many) examples of  misogyny coming down from the highest court in the land, both with the backdrop of religion- the oldest bastion of misogyny in the world. And it's not only good old Amerikkan Christianity. Just last week, we saw some good old-fashioned Biblical-type anti-woman action from the M&M's - Mormons and Muslims.

One of the great problems in our world is patriarchy. The late James Brown, the Godfather of Soul, put best in song, “It’s a Man’s, Man’s, Man’s World.”

Patriarchy assumes that men are made to lead and women are simply cooperative and reproductive subordinates.

These assumptions come to light in all kinds of ways, but especially through religion — the various faiths that treat women as though they are not equal to men.

(...)  There is a direct link between Kate Kelly, a lifelong member of the Church of Jesus Christ Latter day-Saints, who was excommunicated on charges of apostasy, and Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman sentenced to death for her supposed apostasy.

And the link is deeper than the charge of abandoning one's faith.

(...)  One dared to say that women could exercise religious authority where men are the “elders” and keepers of the Kingdom.

The other, standing before an all-male court, refused to renounce her faith.

In both cases, men were the judges and held the keys to life and death - literally, in Ibrahim’s case.

I invite you to read the entire article - "Hey religion, your misogyny is showing," written by Randal Maurice Jelks,  a professor of American and African-American studies at the University of Kansas and co-editor of the blog The Black Bottom, and published at CNN.com.

Of course, misogyny in American isn't only limited to the Supreme Court and the world's religions. It's apparently ingrained into the sick minds of mass murderers as we learned from the Isla Vista- Santa Barbara massacre  just over a month ago. At least in the aftermath of that sickening tragedy, we had some pushback with the #YesAllWomen hashtag campaign.

Global misogyny is on display in Nigeria, where hundreds of school girls were kidnapped by the militant group Boko Haram who believe that girls should not be educated, but are to be used as cooks or sex slaves. Just this week, to little if any fanfare, it was announced that the missing girls may never be found due to the lack of immediate action to find them.

Of course, we need look no further than Washington DC to find the most egregious example of misogyny. It's based on inaction. The fact that women, to this day, have no constitutional right to equality. The Equal Rights Amendment has still not been ratified!

Although on her She's History segment on Thursday mornings Amy Simon has told us the history of the ERA, it's worth reviewing, so I hope you will.

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Those are the few simple words that could change things here for we, the women of the United States of America. It's long past time to do this already.

Also on the show today to discuss this and more, the fabulous female known as GottaLaff of The Political Carnival.

We also checked in on the action outside the FCC, where some street theater was taking place this morning to call attention to the proposed assault on Net Neutrality. I discussed it with FreePress.net's Craig Aaron. BTW, you can still submit your comments on these proposed changes. Just visit SaveTheInternet.com.

Tomorrow, we'll delve into the other decision the Court got wrong yesterday, dealing with public service unions, as AFT president Randi Weingarten guests. We'll also talk with Crooks & Liars' Susie Madrak...  radio or not!

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Tucker Carlson Claims Underage Student Rape Depends On Child's Sex

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Sexy Teacher

Okay, I'm a guy. And as a teen, I spent many an hour thinking about sex. A lot of virgins do. And I've heard from many guys my age at that time how much they wished they could experience the pleasures of a woman's company -- nice way of saying going all the way. Actually that's a nice way of saying f**king a hot chick.  We wanted our "cherry" popped, so to speak.

Now one of the "holy grails" of the experience was to"do it" with a woman with curves. To enjoy the anticipated warmth of an ample pair of well-endowed breasts was something that was only enhanced by pictures we got from stolen copies of Playboy or Penthouse. We knew our time would ultimately come, but until then, we just had our imaginations and our right hand to keep us company. And truthfully, that was much safer than the alternative, actually having an encounter.

Every school had one, or if you were lucky, a few young, attractive teachers that were, for lack of a better word, hot. The wet dream fantasy fodder. But in  most cases, the teacher wasn't going to be interested in some pimply faced 15 or 16 year old with raging hormones and not much more to back it up. On that rare occasion you'd hear rumors that some kid "got some" from an older woman, but the truth is it was usually rumors spread to make the kid's popularity rise, if not another part of their anatomy. It was nothing more than fantasy fulfillment -- unless, in those rarest of rare circumstances, "it" happened. Then, as the law likes to call it, it was rape.

Now truthfully, if it was a male teacher and a female student, it was called rape. If it was a female teacher and a male student, it was generally called contributing to the delinquency of a minor. But rape is rape unless you're one of those shallow thinkers like Fox's own, Tucker Carlson, the sexually perverse boy who never grew up. He just got older, but never matured.

tucker carlson

Reported on Raw Story:

Carlson, who has previously  stated that sexual situations between male students with teachers would be, in the student’s mind, “the greatest thing that ever happened,”  said the notion of statutory rape  with a male student defied “common sense.”

Just recently he went on Fox News, his home, and told a panel of female coworkers that not only was a 16 year old boy, who was "enticed" into having sex 30 times in a 6 week span with his young, married female teacher NOT RAPE, but that it was wrong of the boy to report it. Carlson obviously lives in the Mad Hatter world of fantasy. Tucker the F**ker says the real victim of this "escapade" was the female teacher, not the boy student because he got the better of the deal. He got his cherry popped with a hottie.

Outrageous? You bet. But don't take my word for it. Here's Tucker Carlson, twisted fool. His totally sexist view is a boy "getting some" isn't a crime because there's no victim here. And if there is victim here, it's the poor female teacher because she got squealed on.

I wonder if Tucker would feel if when he was 16 he had a teacher who was a male hunk. Let's say this hottie teacher decided to bust Carlson's effeminate ass, taking Carlson's, cherry after school 30 times over a six week period. Should he blame Tucker because maybe it's something he fantasized over? I'm not saying Tucker has those thoughts. I'm just saying, "what if?" Rape is rape. It's about time Carlson took some responsibility for what he says to the public.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Afternoon-Evening Links

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

links  Santa Barbara

By The Numbers: How The Santa Barbara Shooting Reflects A Culture Of Violence Against Women

Sandy Hook 'Truther' Apprehended In Virginia For Stealing Memorial Signs

House Republicans Vote Down Amendment Aimed At Curbing Wage Theft

It’s Time To Call Out The Real Villains

Flip-Flopper Cruz Claims 2013 Government Shutdown Is Winning Strategy To Reclaim Senate

NSA Is Collecting Gazillions Of Faces From Websites

Even The NRA Thinks Open Carry Texas Is Off Its Rocker

Norfolk police shooter was previously convicted for assaulting officer, carrying loaded weapon

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare