Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46
  1. #1 Why Liberal Feminists Hate Sarah Palin 
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Why Feminists Hate Sarah Palin

    Left-wing feminists have a hard time dealing with strong, successful conservative women in politics such as Margaret Thatcher. Sarah Palin seems to have truly unhinged more than a few, eliciting a stream of vicious, often misogynist invective. On Salon.com last week,

    Cintra Wilson branded her a "Christian Stepford Wife" and a "Republican blow-up doll."


    Wendy Doniger, religion professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School, added on the Washington Post blog, "Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

    You'd think that, whether or not they agree with her politics, feminists would at least applaud Mrs. Palin as a living example of one of their core principles: a woman's right to have a career and a family.

    Yet some feminists unabashedly suggest that her decision to seek the vice presidency makes her a bad and selfish mother. Others argue that she is bad for working mothers because she's just too good at having it all.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1221...s_opinion_main
     

  2. #2  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    The feminists dislike her because of her views on abortion
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member marinejcksn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Penn State
    Posts
    1,820
    Not to be mean either, because God knows I love females but has anyone else noticed the majority of women against Palin are homely as a mule? Looks aren't everything but lets be honest, nothing's better then a beautiful looking female and these feminists look like they dove from the ugly tree hitting every branch before landing in a tub full of lard. Just sayin':p
    "Don't vote. It only encourages the bastards." -PJ O'Roarke
     

  4. #4  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    The feminists dislike her because of her views on abortion
    Partially, but the real reason is because she's not a crying liberal whining bitch who hates all of the oppressive men unless they are on their knees and kissing their PC butts ! Paulin is the real thing and that drives them crazy .
     

  5. #5  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by marinejcksn View Post
    Not to be mean either, because God knows I love females but has anyone else noticed the majority of women against Palin are homely as a mule? Looks aren't everything but lets be honest, nothing's better then a beautiful looking female and these feminists look like they dove from the ugly tree hitting every branch before landing in a tub full of lard. Just sayin':p
    Rush Limbaugh quotes “Feminism was established to allow unattractive/"Fat/Ugly" women easier access to the mainstream.”
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The West
    Posts
    1,618
    Camille Paglia is a gay feminist who also writes for Salon. She has an interesting take on this.

    Now that's the Sarah Palin brand of can-do, no-excuses, moose-hunting feminism -- a world away from the whining, sniping, wearily ironic mode of the establishment feminism represented by Gloria Steinem, a Hillary Clinton supporter whose shameless Democratic partisanship over the past four decades has severely limited American feminism and not allowed it to become the big tent it can and should be. Sarah Palin, if her reputation survives the punishing next two months, may be breaking down those barriers. Feminism, which should be about equal rights and equal opportunity, should not be a closed club requiring an ideological litmus test for membership.
    This is an interesting thought she has about their tying their whole philosophy to one issue and one stand on that issue -- abortion.

    Let's take the issue of abortion rights, of which I am a firm supporter. As an atheist and libertarian, I believe that government must stay completely out of the sphere of personal choice. Every individual has an absolute right to control his or her body. (Hence I favor the legalization of drugs, though I do not take them.) Nevertheless, I have criticized the way that abortion became the obsessive idée fixe of the post-1960s women's movement -- leading to feminists' McCarthyite tactics in pitting Anita Hill with her flimsy charges against conservative Clarence Thomas (admittedly not the most qualified candidate possible) during his nomination hearings for the Supreme Court. Similarly, Bill Clinton's support for abortion rights gave him a free pass among leading feminists for his serial exploitation of women -- an abusive pattern that would scream misogyny to any neutral observer.

    But the pro-life position, whether or not it is based on religious orthodoxy, is more ethically highly evolved than my own tenet of unconstrained access to abortion on demand. My argument has always been that nature has a master plan pushing every species toward procreation and that it is our right and even obligation as rational human beings to defy nature's fascism. Nature herself is a mass murderer, making casual, cruel experiments and condemning 10,000 to die so that one more fit will live and thrive.

    ...Hence I have always frankly admitted that abortion is murder, the extermination of the powerless by the powerful. Liberals for the most part have shrunk from facing the ethical consequences of their embrace of abortion, which results in the annihilation of concrete individuals and not just clumps of insensate tissue.

    It is nonsensical and counterproductive for Democrats to imagine that pro-life values can be defeated by maliciously destroying their proponents. And it is equally foolish to expect that feminism must for all time be inextricably wed to the pro-choice agenda. There is plenty of room in modern thought for a pro-life feminism -- one in fact that would have far more appeal to third-world cultures where motherhood is still honored and where the Western model of the hard-driving, self-absorbed career woman is less admired.
    link: http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/...in/index3.html

    Feminists of the left have let the goal of electing dem candidates usurp the integrity of what they once claimed to have stood for. Hence, it's not surprising why Palin worries them.
    Last edited by Lager; 09-15-2008 at 10:28 AM.
     

  7. #7  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by Lager View Post
    Camille Paglia is a gay feminist who also writes for Salon. She has an interesting take on this.



    This is an interesting thought she has about their tying their whole philosophy to one issue and one stand on that issue -- abortion.



    link: http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/...in/index3.html

    Feminists of the left have let the goal of electing dem candidates usurp the integrity of what they once claimed to have stood for. Hence, it's not surprising why Palin worries them.

    Camille Paglia is a gay feminist,atheist and libertarian what more could any man want in a woman ?
    She is an interesting sounding woman and not your average 'knee jerker' !

    Paglia challenged what she saw as the "liberal establishment", including academics, feminist advocacy groups such as National Organization for Women (NOW), and AIDS activists ACT UP.

    Paglia describes herself as a feminist and as a Democrat who campaigned for John F. Kennedy as an adolescent and later voted for Bill Clinton and Ralph Nader.

    She has broken with liberal orthodoxy by taking controversial stances such as rejecting the idea that homosexuality is an inborn trait ."Not Genetic,could it be a simple choice then ?"

    She has expressed admiration for U.S. Presidential candidate John McCain's running mate Sarah Palin."Hopefully an non sexual admiration ?"
     

  8. #8  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by marinejcksn View Post
    Not to be mean either, because God knows I love females but has anyone else noticed the majority of women against Palin are homely as a mule? Looks aren't everything but lets be honest, nothing's better then a beautiful looking female and these feminists look like they dove from the ugly tree hitting every branch before landing in a tub full of lard. Just sayin':p
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    Partially, but the real reason is because she's not a crying liberal whining bitch who hates all of the oppressive men unless they are on their knees and kissing their PC butts ! Paulin is the real thing and that drives them crazy .
    Quote Originally Posted by Lager View Post
    Camille Paglia is a gay feminist who also writes for Salon. She has an interesting take on this.
    This is an interesting thought she has about their tying their whole philosophy to one issue and one stand on that issue -- abortion.
    link: http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/...in/index3.html
    Feminists of the left have let the goal of electing dem candidates usurp the integrity of what they once claimed to have stood for. Hence, it's not surprising why Palin worries them.
    You're all engaging the target, but no one's hit the bullseye yet. Feminism, like every other -ism in the Democratic Party, started out as a legitimate movement with a grain of truth, but rapidly devolved into a power clique within the party. Every group within the Democratic Party has three missions, to get their cliques to the polls in large enough numbers to elect Democrats, to advance their pet issues and a third one, which I will get to in a second. For feminists, the pet issue is abortion. For unions, it's trade and compulsory union membership. For teachers, it's perpetuation and expansion of the public monopoly on education. For trial lawyers, it's all about maintaining high settlements and judgements. For the various ethnic grievance groups, it's about affirmative action. For PETA, it's not a pet issue so much as an animal companion issue, and for gays, it's the normalization and validation of their lifestyle. Now, the third mission of each of these groups is to maintain a monopoly on public debate within their spheres of influence, both through offense against nominal members of their clique who speak heresies, and defense of their own who run afoul of the system. If a woman is a conservative, the feminists will take her on and deny that she speaks for any woman, but if a Democrat actually attacks a woman, they will defend him. If it's a conservative African-American, then Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton will be trucked out to deny his/her racial bostemnafides, and spring to defend any member of their coalition who actually does do something that shouldn't have been done. Trial lawyers can be counted on to attack conservative judicial nominees, etc. This was most obvious during the Clinton impeachment, when feminists attacked his victims, racial hucksters declared him one of their own and implied that the attacks on him were racist and the various legal groups attacked the constitutionality of the procedures.

    Feminists are attacking Palin because, as a woman, she is in their lane. Their weapon is to delegitimize her as a woman. In order to do this, they will truck out their main agenda item, abortion, and try to make the case that a woman who disagrees with them cannot be a real woman, just as Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice are attacked as not being authentically black. Obviously, only a woman can attack Palin this way, just as only an African-American can attack Thomas or Rice with that argument. A man who questioned Palin's femininity would be denounced as a sexist and a boor, and a white liberal who attacked Thomas and Rice on their ethnicity would be opening himself up to charges of racism. Of course, the feminists and racial hucksters would defend them, but that would take them off message and dilute the effect of their attacks.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member cat714's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    TAXifornia
    Posts
    650
    I don't even try to figure what is going on in the head of a liberal feminist...it's just a big mess.
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Betwixt Member Bubba Dawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In my own private Alamo on The Mountain in Georgia
    Posts
    13,581
    I think many feminists who have been in their own brand of political struggle for most of their lives saw their hopes dashed when their candidate (Hillary) was beaten. Anger and bitterness at that defeat became rage when Palin was selected.

    Not only is she someone who opposed many of their political positions, she is also attractive and capable, and mainly, she's on the ticket, and Hillary isn't.
    Hey careful man! There's a beverage here!
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •