Carey Roberts
Politicians tweaking the nose of radical feminism
By Carey Roberts
Two weeks ago Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Committee chair, met her match in one Rep. Allen West. It seems that Wasserman Schultz waited until West left the House floor, then cut loose with a liberal jeremiad for the congressman's support of the GOP-supported Cut, Cap, and Balance Act.
Apprised of the incident, the former Lieutenant Colonel fired back, calling her "the most vile, unprofessional, and despicable member of the House of Representatives...If you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to my face."
It wasn't the first time the libber-turned-congresswoman saw her grandstanding tactics backfire.
A couple months ago Wasserman Schultz accused House Republicans seeking to cut off taxpayer abortion funds with waging a "war on women."
In the past, the slightest suggestion of a GOP "war on women" would be enough to bring out the white flag a-flutter. But this time the stiff-spined GOP refused to be buffaloed by the high-octane rhetoric. Within days a group of Republican women fired back, calling Wasserman Schultz's demagoguery "baseless" and "inaccurate."
For years, feminists have succeeded in dictating the parameters and vocabulary of the gender debate. By trotting out a sympathetic victim, playing on lawmaker chivalry, or resorting to outright falsehoods, feminists have been able to maintain hegemony over the public discourse. Politicians, newspaper editors, even university presidents learned to toe the feminist line, or else become tagged with the "anti-woman" moniker.
All that changed on February 18. That's the day the U.S. House of Representatives' continuing resolution bill scrapped the funding for Planned Parenthood's abortion business.
In short order, revenue-pinched state legislatures took up the same refrain. Planned Parenthood funding cuts were approved in Indiana, Kansas, and North Carolina. Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed HB 1210, prohibiting abortion providers from receiving state funds.
Another sacred cow of radical feminism is the near-automatic award of child custody to a divorcing woman. The fact that children who lose contact with their loving fathers are far more likely to drop out of school and get in trouble with the law doesn't seem to register with feminist logic (forgive the oxymoron, if you will).
But in recent weeks, a bevy of Republican presidential candidates, including Herman Cain and Gary Johnson, lined up to pronounce the current system deeply flawed. Newt Gingrich castigated the "extreme anti-male bias" of family courts.
Another gem in the feminist diadem is the Violence Against Women Act, which is used as a slush fund by domestic violence groups to support lobbying efforts for a broad array of radical causes. But two weeks ago, House Judiciary Committee member Ted Poe vowed to make the law gender neutral. "I certainly agree with equal protection under the law. And maybe a name change is in order," the Texas congressman explained.
And it's not just politicians who are poking holes in the feminist catechism of gender victimhood.
Following its embarrassing overtime loss to the Japanese women's soccer team, Bryant Gumbel of HBO Sports revealed the double-standard that permeates sports reporting these days. "Had a men's team turned in a similar performance," Gumbel commented, "papers and pundits nationwide would have had a field day assailing the players, criticizing the coach, and demanding widespread changes to a men's national team that flat-out choked."
Then the cheeky "Everything I Do Is Wrong" campaign by the California Milk Processor Board that lampooned clueless men and hormone-addled women. The campaign triggered the wrath of the feminist Politburo, with Ms. Magazine demanding an immediate end to the "sexist" campaign.
The Ms. Magazine antics elicited this rejoinder from columnist Jenn Taylor: "What better way to expose portrayals of women as irrational whiners and hysterical bitches than by whining irrationally and bitching hysterically?"
It gets worse.
It's one thing when conservative knuckle-draggers delight in the excesses of feminism. But when a fellow liberal debunks a feminist sacred cow, that's hitting below the belt!
That's exactly what the current issue of Time magazine does — it puts to the lie the shibboleth that working women pull a second shift when they come home, facing a pile of dirty laundry and shrieking kids, as dad lounges on the porch to watch the Dodgers game. According to Ruth Davis Konigsberg, "Quantitatively speaking, we have no grounds to stand on. And it's time that women — myself included — admit it and move on."
It's getting harder and harder for the gender guerillas to play the victim card. Things are looking grim.
© Carey Roberts
August 5, 2011
Two weeks ago Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Committee chair, met her match in one Rep. Allen West. It seems that Wasserman Schultz waited until West left the House floor, then cut loose with a liberal jeremiad for the congressman's support of the GOP-supported Cut, Cap, and Balance Act.
Apprised of the incident, the former Lieutenant Colonel fired back, calling her "the most vile, unprofessional, and despicable member of the House of Representatives...If you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to my face."
It wasn't the first time the libber-turned-congresswoman saw her grandstanding tactics backfire.
A couple months ago Wasserman Schultz accused House Republicans seeking to cut off taxpayer abortion funds with waging a "war on women."
In the past, the slightest suggestion of a GOP "war on women" would be enough to bring out the white flag a-flutter. But this time the stiff-spined GOP refused to be buffaloed by the high-octane rhetoric. Within days a group of Republican women fired back, calling Wasserman Schultz's demagoguery "baseless" and "inaccurate."
For years, feminists have succeeded in dictating the parameters and vocabulary of the gender debate. By trotting out a sympathetic victim, playing on lawmaker chivalry, or resorting to outright falsehoods, feminists have been able to maintain hegemony over the public discourse. Politicians, newspaper editors, even university presidents learned to toe the feminist line, or else become tagged with the "anti-woman" moniker.
All that changed on February 18. That's the day the U.S. House of Representatives' continuing resolution bill scrapped the funding for Planned Parenthood's abortion business.
In short order, revenue-pinched state legislatures took up the same refrain. Planned Parenthood funding cuts were approved in Indiana, Kansas, and North Carolina. Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed HB 1210, prohibiting abortion providers from receiving state funds.
Another sacred cow of radical feminism is the near-automatic award of child custody to a divorcing woman. The fact that children who lose contact with their loving fathers are far more likely to drop out of school and get in trouble with the law doesn't seem to register with feminist logic (forgive the oxymoron, if you will).
But in recent weeks, a bevy of Republican presidential candidates, including Herman Cain and Gary Johnson, lined up to pronounce the current system deeply flawed. Newt Gingrich castigated the "extreme anti-male bias" of family courts.
Another gem in the feminist diadem is the Violence Against Women Act, which is used as a slush fund by domestic violence groups to support lobbying efforts for a broad array of radical causes. But two weeks ago, House Judiciary Committee member Ted Poe vowed to make the law gender neutral. "I certainly agree with equal protection under the law. And maybe a name change is in order," the Texas congressman explained.
And it's not just politicians who are poking holes in the feminist catechism of gender victimhood.
Following its embarrassing overtime loss to the Japanese women's soccer team, Bryant Gumbel of HBO Sports revealed the double-standard that permeates sports reporting these days. "Had a men's team turned in a similar performance," Gumbel commented, "papers and pundits nationwide would have had a field day assailing the players, criticizing the coach, and demanding widespread changes to a men's national team that flat-out choked."
Then the cheeky "Everything I Do Is Wrong" campaign by the California Milk Processor Board that lampooned clueless men and hormone-addled women. The campaign triggered the wrath of the feminist Politburo, with Ms. Magazine demanding an immediate end to the "sexist" campaign.
The Ms. Magazine antics elicited this rejoinder from columnist Jenn Taylor: "What better way to expose portrayals of women as irrational whiners and hysterical bitches than by whining irrationally and bitching hysterically?"
It gets worse.
It's one thing when conservative knuckle-draggers delight in the excesses of feminism. But when a fellow liberal debunks a feminist sacred cow, that's hitting below the belt!
That's exactly what the current issue of Time magazine does — it puts to the lie the shibboleth that working women pull a second shift when they come home, facing a pile of dirty laundry and shrieking kids, as dad lounges on the porch to watch the Dodgers game. According to Ruth Davis Konigsberg, "Quantitatively speaking, we have no grounds to stand on. And it's time that women — myself included — admit it and move on."
It's getting harder and harder for the gender guerillas to play the victim card. Things are looking grim.
© Carey Roberts
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
