If it seems to you like women in Red states are the subjects of witch hunts, you’re right. And it has nothing to do with “life”: it’s all about economic and political power
And now that I have read it, you are right, on every point. With women graduating from colleges at a higher rate than men, it’s time to shove us back into second class citizenship. I’m going to be 70 this year and I know that’s damn old. Back in the day, a married woman could not get credit on her own. There was very little day care available, and only women whose husbands were poor providers worked outside the home. Having a child without being married was “out of wedlock.” Abusive spouses were rarely reported, same with child abuse. Going to college was for getting your Mrs degree. Misogyny was accepted as normal though the language was less crude. In the 80’s I worked for a progressive company that allowed pictures of nude women to hang in the service department. The company where I did my internship paid women substantially less than men because we were secondary earners(I.e. wives). Gotta stop, my blood pressure can’t take it!
Yep. I’m 10 years younger than you at 60. But even so when I was 21 I had to fight to get a credit card in my name and was not successful. Even though I was employed with a steady income and no missed payment or delinquency issues, since I was not married, the only way they would give me one was if my father signed for me or my 16 year old brother! While either of them likely would have signed for me, I refused to do it. Finally a few years later, after I moved to a different area where the attitudes toward women were more flexible I was able to get one in my own name without a male co-signer’s signature. When I bought my first house, the mortgage paperwork signature block listed my name and then labeled me as “an unmarried woman”. I asked them if they included the label “unmarried man” on single male mortgage signers and was told no, they didn’t. When I balked at signing it with the label they said I could take it or leave it but they weren’t changing it. They were sure they could sell the house to a more cooperative person. I signed the damn thing, but now almost 30 years later it still pisses me off when thinking about it. It seems our currency situation is attempting to set us back even further than that and it makes me nauseous with anger.
To you and Laurie both: I just turned 70 and it is hard to see "civilization" deteriorating. Yet not that far back to fall, scarily. Remember: we females were only considered human enough to vote in 1920. Black men had been enfranchised 50 years before. Susan B. Anthony couldn't testify in her defense when charged with criminal voting because no female was legally competent to be a witness at law. So recently, women couldn't own property, couldn't inherit, had no rights to the children of their body, and marriage was legal sex-slavery. So I guess we have made some headway, but how trivial a distance in historical time to fall back!
You are not damn old. You're a whipper snapper. My wife turns 70 in three weeks, I turn 83 this week. :)
It seems little has changed since I was a teen. My mother was an account analysis at a bank, she kept training new analysts (men) who subsequently got pay raises, while she did not. she earned $1.00 an hour (single mom with three kids) for year.
When she asked why the men she trained were getting raises and she not, the response was "they have families". Her response, "so do I and three children", Her supervisors retort was "find a husband". She was not about to subject us kids to a strange man that would take over the household.
Good grief! What a story! My take on the issue is, how recently we clawed up to at least "woke" about the status of females. And yet females can be enforcers against their own "uppity" kind. My Mom(is she famous here yet?) was p'd off when PG&E wouldn't take her (college instructor) co-sign for my first electric bill: had to be Dad: She railed interminably about how the "lazy" male coaches got paid more than the "hard-working" women sports and PE teachers. Yet Gloria Steinem was second only to Ralph Nader (seat belts) on her hate list, and she railed against "shrill" women with bullhorns (Vietnam) and how hippy women were even more debased than men, and in the context of abortion, "sluts" was one of her favorite words.
That is something that has always chapped my behind as well-the women that fight against and place obstacles in the path of other women. While I do not agree with it, I kind of understand the resistance from men. They see it as losing status and power. But why would women resist? That feels like an even worse betrayal to me. I came to the conclusion that those types of women have been indoctrinated so completely into the patriarchal system they can’t even conceive of anything else. They must, perhaps subconsciously realize they are only “borrowing” power from men. And so they fight tooth and nail for men and the status quo even when it means fighting against their own rights. The name Phyllis Schlafly still makes my lip curl up in a snarl.
It wasn't all that long ago when a woman's only identity was from her husband or father. To feel better perhaps or for her own protection she had to be her husband's or father's willing follower and always defend him, not herself. I love reading history, but it's pretty glum where women are even mentioned. I hear you. Ruthie B
Phyliss Schafly is the reasonwe don't have an Equal Rights Amendment, She campaigned against it. Schafly, Boebert, MTG, ACB perceive themselves as beneficiaries of the status quo.
Like Clarence Thomas, Tim Scott and every gay Republican very comfortable as "house slaves". KIssing the masters ass, brings rewards, better pay, jobs, fame, career advancement and for women, the safety and security she perceives she will enjoy as a Handmaiden,, until her protector and provider tires of her and trades her in. Then she will see the error of her ways...Met quite a few like that.
Yes. I’ve seen it too. Many women, even after their male partners have traded them in for newer, younger models, attack and denigrate the new woman rather than the male partner and rather than acknowledging the patriarchal system than not only allows it but in many ways encourages it.
That is the problem with America today. Although my mom suffered discrimination, she was a Republican and was like your mom. For full disclosure. I am a Viet Nam vet, and retired officer.
I hated those hippies with bull horn, felt they were a bunch of commies. They were basically students in the sway of commie professors (yes there were quite a few). However as my cloistered life expanded after retirement and I met lefties like the Weather Underground and SDS My attitude about the war changed. It was not a war to stop communist expansion. In fact Vietnam, after the fall of Saigon, kick the ass of China and liberated Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge those are not the only opinions changed.
We are products of our time, and the propaganda of the time.
Yes. I was asked in a job interview once, “Why are you here wasting my time and trying to take a man’s job? You need to get married. You don’t need a job.”
And the corporate media,talking heads, pundits, opinion pages keep trying to brainwash us that things are getting better.
And it just isn't gender discrimination. I would not want to be a black person, especially a kid, in this environment. It is getting worse and not better, and I blame Fox and the misinterpretation of the 1st Amendment. The 1st amendment does not give anyone, including corporations the right to say anything they want, it says that CONGRESS shall make no law,. Nothing in there about states, people, corporations, and that is why DeSantis is banning speech and books, because he is not Congress, and the politicians know that and do nothing, otherwise they would be embarrassed
I'm 75 years old now - and lived in Hawaii during the 1970s. Sure, we were fighting alongside Gloria Steinem for women's rights and the right to choose - not to have a baby. But it was never much of an issue there in the islands. I did celebrate Roe in 1973 - but to believe that could come to an end, never entered my mind. Now I live in Denver - not too far from Colorado Springs where we have REGULAR murders - in the open - of abortion doctors and workers at Planned Parenthood Clinics. It's pretty hard to take the always-present LET'S MAKE THINGS HARDER FOR WOMEN - or just beat them the hell up and hopefully kill them. Whenever I see some slogan like - "America - Home of the Free and the Brave" - I just want to PUKE. Yeah, long as you're a WHITE MAN. This is how my entire life has felt. Whenever I visit a country where women are actually celebrated - HELL YES, I want to stay. Even Catholic countries like Argentina are winning abortion rights. So, AMERICA - WTAF??? The Supreme Court is so corrupt now - NO HOPE.
Has it ever struck you, when one of the tyrants goes, like, hey, we aren't extreme, we just want "reasonable" limits: that's what Roe was? They act like, Roe was anything goes, States can't regulate anything, whatever stage of gestation is meaningless.... When that wasn't Roe at all.
Reading this article brought back memories of when I was training for my RN degree in 1978 and was rotating in the maternity ward in a private hospital in a wealthy suburb of Los Angeles . A mother of three children was getting an abortion due to failed birth control and that she was overwhelmed by three children already as well as her husband recently losing his employment. She expressed gratitude that I didn’t judge her and being a young mother of two I was understanding of circumstances that could lead to a decision like this. The charge nurse gave me the option of not attending the procedure if I had any religious objections which I didn’t. I was naive back then and didn’t realize the extent of the crazy Christofascist hysteria leading to shaming and vilifying women as well as assassinating doctors for performing abortions. I also remember what I went through after I obtained my degree, was working but recently divorced, and tried to apply for a checking account and credit card from a major bank. What a joke that was. I was told I had to have my husband’s approval! I had to sit down with the branch manager and show income (I was actually making more money than my ex-husband ironically ) and he grudgingly let me open an account. It’s ridiculous what women have had to go through over the years for autonomy and now the right wing nutters want to send us back decades.
I can’t help but get angrier as I read this and remember the past. I’m old now too and thankful that I live in a fairly progressive state (California), not perfect but at least we have a sane governor. I remember the mess of Ronnie Raygun as governor, and as I have commented in the past, was horrified he was elected President. Somehow too many regressive Americans are just compelled to elect racist, misogynistic hate-filled people who have no vision to really help our country advance and seem determined to turn us into a banana republic.
Gavin Newsom is sane, as compared to red state governors, however I question his judgement (sadly) after all he married Kimberly Guilfoyle, Don Jr;s girl friend. Then again when it comes to sex men have little if no sense. The smallest of two heads do the thinking (been there done that)
Biden hasn't chose a VP yet. Sadly, Kamala is an empty suit. My preference would have been Katy Porter, but I saw her on Bill Maher ,and she waffled her way out of taking a position in culture war issues, because Congress people and Senators , State or Federal, lack the skill set to govern, they learned the politics of amelioration and compromise.
We need a governor as VP not another bipartisan compromiser, we got one now and look what he has wrought, for one think a right wing flak, Merrick Garland. Dude was a moderator for the Heritage Society, and vetted to Obama by the notorious right winger Orrin Hatch R-UT.
I nominate Jay Inslee, Gov. of Washington. He knows how to govern, and just signed an assault weapons ban,.
I think Biden is trapped by his commitment to having a women of color as VP. Not that there aren't qualified WOC, it is that by choosing one that the media will easily torch, is the difficulty.
He needs someone which the independent (never Trumpers) could get behind, and not be scared off.
The choice has to be pragmatic... meaning choosing a sure winner that can boost the votes, not some old tired race horse that has been stomping around the paddock having paid it's dues, which is what the DNC invariably back Like the conservative Terry McAuliffe, and look how that turned out.
A fresh face, without a track record that can easily be oppo researched.
I too like Gavin Newsom and, like all men, he's made mistakes. Kimberly Guilfoyle seems to be a "witchy woman" who is out for her own interests (becoming a First Lady? or more?). She might have realized that being Gavin's wife wouldn't get her what she wanted, but instead that linking herself with Don Jr. might. Whatever the case, I like Gavin's current wife -- they seem a better match.
I'd like to vouch for Kamala Harris. You call her an "empty suit", which I think is a premature judgment. She performed her role as an AG in California well. Now, her role as VP requires her not to steal the limelight from her boss, but to learn the ropes. She's done that well, imo. It appears the Democratic Party wants to take things carefully with Biden's return, so it remains to be seen how Kamala's role might change in a second term.
I acknowledge the accuracy of assessment of Kamala as AG. However as AG she ran a staff, that did all of the work for her, all she had to do was sign. I am not a Californian, but did live there for 7 years 25 years ago. So not familiar with her public performance.
I just know that her public performance as VP has been very vanilla, totally lacking in motivation and charisma and on at least one occasion embarrassing.
Obama also was an empty suit or shall I say a blank slate, which Larry Summers and Rahm Emanuel used like a sock puppet.
'He is a good, honorable decent man, and from what I discern, a faithful loyal husband and a great father.
But he had no experience in governing, his background was a one term senator and community organizing, and it showed It was Biden who told him to instruct the DOJ not to defend the Defense of Marriage act. (Obergefell v Hodges) thus in my vernacular and empty suit., whose staff made all of the decisions, like excluding single payor advocates from the White House, and given Health Insurance executives and lobbyists, essentially open access to the Oval Office.
Totally AHIP's idea via Rahm Emanuel, thus instead of having a few words changing the medicare enabling legislation such as "eligible from birth" we have a 600 page bastard of a document, meat for lawyers, and an AHIP provision, negated (as it should have) by SCOTUS.
Not even Bernie could get Obama's ear, he couldn't get past Rahm, and Pelosi was all on board with AHIP (Association of Health Insurance providers) because the DCCC is dependent on AHIP donors.
Until Trump, the only real difference between the two parties has been on which side of the culture war they stood, and the Democratic stance was more talk than walk. Still is as I see it, because it had a narrow window to pass legislation that would legalize abortion, the same window they used for safeguarding gay marriage.
Fanni is laudable, has real guts,but alas the governor and legislature have passed legislation that permits the governor to replace AG's that he doesn't like .I am sure that Fanni is his reason and target, although the public reason is to replace AG's that are "soft on crime"
Oh boy, Kamala Harris. If VP is supposed to be successor, we caring American Democrats are in deep trouble. I think she's far worse than "empty suit." I think she is unelectable, despite adequate credentials on paper, because of VOICE. Hear in your mind's ear, for instance, Oprah Winfrey's voice. Then try to listen to Kamala. I can't stand it for more than 3 words before I reach for the remote to change the channel. I guess it's politically incorrect to criticize anything about a woman's style, or whatever. But, sorry.
Just turned 70, me too, me too. So right to turn the spotlight on who the heck are our fellow citizens who vote for the racism and misogyny. Conversations I have had seem to sidetrack to taxes. The average Joe seems to panic at the word, and totally assume that a) the jackboots are coming for a slice of every penny of his net worth (not distinguishing "income.") and b) if a Democrat says, won't raise taxes on anyone earning over X$ said Democrat is a liar, and go back to a. As Thom focuses on, the racism and misogyny actually have underlying "zero-sum" panic. Who's gettin' my stuff?
What is being overlooked is that the origins of the anti-woman policies and practices have their origins in the dogma of organized monotheistic religious organizations/cults. Best example is the Catholic Church that has murdered and tortured people for centuries and had a particular fondness for burning women alive on stakes.
We look with dismay at the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia and Iran and Afghanistan by Muslim fanatics, but we ignore the Christian sects that are equally dismissive of women's rights. We let a Catholic church that has its priests and bishops notoriously involved in serial child rape be protected at the highest levels of the organization tell us that they have a unique connection to "god" and know what is morally proper.
It comes down to the money that the churches are able to extract from their members and all their dogma is designed to promote and maintain that revenue stream and to increase it by refusing to let people practice birth control. The Catholic church has made using condoms a sin and this has had dire consequences with the spread of HIV in Africa.
The corrupt U.S. Supreme Court is ignoring the separation of church and state that was so very important to the founders of our non-Christian nation and this institution no longer serves a useful purpose and should be disbanded.
I’m not sure religion is being overlooked. It’s certainly part of it for sure. But I think religions, as far as any I’m aware of, are rooted in misogyny and patriarchy. So religion is just one more “layer of proof” the patriarchy holds up to keep all members of society who aren’t in the privileged power positions, in line. Another layer of proof used comes from those who claim they are constitutional originalists. Women had no rights within the original constitution. All rights within the constitution were reserved for white male land owners. In my mind, all of it traces back to patriarchy and misogyny at the root, with everything else, including religions, supporting that root.
I don't it's this complicated; these dudes are messed up mysogynists. Daddy (or Uncle so and so or a clergy member or a teacher or whomever) raped them as a child and Mommy didn't protect them. One is sicker than the next. Beyond that, they all use abortion as a 'false flag' to divert electorate attention, polarize people and create dissension to hide all of their prurient, deviant behaviors. Thomas is a creep and we all know it. Kevin McCarthy gives me the creeps, too. Gym Jordan? Just stop.
You raise a deeper issue. Although it is certain Christian sects that oppose abortion, Christ said nothing about it. These Christians must go to Jewish traditional writings, in this instance, the Torah (Books of Moses) to justify their position. But many Jews do not agree with the Christian interpretation of the Jewish writings. Although there are liberal and conservative Jewish opinions about how wide the grounds that justify abortion are, there is general agreement that it is always permitted to protect the health of the mother.
How many disputes between Christian factions are over interpretations of the Jewish writings that have been renamed the Old Testament. The Russian mystic Helena Blavatsky (1831–1891) was aware of the divisive harm the inclusion of the Jewish writings into Christianity, renamed as the Old Testament, was causing. She dubbed the Bible, “the Rabbi’s revenge”.
But as you pointed out in an earlier article, keeping a large majority of voters focussed on divisive issues, like abortion, keeps them from focussing on learning the methods the wealth class is using to hollow out the middle class. The wealthy will fund both sides to keep the abortion issue front and center.
What a mess our society is in. For solace, I return to some words I find comfort in: "Come to me, all of you who are weary and burdened ... and you will find rest for your souls." Matthew 11:28. These words come from a man who dispersed a crowd of men who were set on stoning a woman caught in an adulterous act (and only the woman, the man was excused). Despite the many errors in my own life experience, I've found his words to be true -- it's possible, in such a society, to find the rest he spoke of.
Shocking to learn that 1 in 6 hospital beds in the U.S. are under "Catholic directives". That's quite the industry the Pope and his Cardinals and bishops are running. Interesting how many institutions that began with good intentions and motives have become an "industry" that steers financial profit to men.
There are more female voters than there are male voters in America. Women who vote for right wing Republicans are the problem. Left-wing pro-choice males are helping what few women are protecting their rights to an abortion. This has more to do with religious in doctrination and greed of the capitalists than it has to do with white males. The capitalist wants slaves like the good old days of building the pyramids and ever since.
When it comes to issues like abortion, pro gun, right wing nuts like Boebert and MTG, There are two types of women. Those that have no identity of their own (problem is out patriarchal, hence misogynistic society). There are a lot of women who have no identity of their own, they latch on to their husbands, what he champions and thinks is what they champion and think. I've know women who were (for instance) Arizona Cardinal fans, there husband were, and even wore Cardinals jackets, then they divorce and marry a Seattle Seahawks fan, and they start wearing a Hawks jacket. These women would not mind living in Gilead as a handmaid, until hubby tires of them and finds a replacement.
Then there are the self validating, independent women, who think for themselves, but the right wing tries to neuter them by calling them feminazis. Like they think hurling the charge of liberal at lefty at you is suppose to bully you into submission.
Doesn't work with me, those are labels I wear proudly, but prefer progressive, as liberal as to wishy washy and is the word that best describes most of the Democratic party, and lefty is too far, it is associated with Marx and Marxism, who was not a socialist, but a proto libertarians, he was pro free trade, pro a 100% gold standard, and held the middle class in total disdain, as do the oligarchs who own the shares in America Inc.
Marx;s ideal world was two classes, the ruling class and the proletariat, who were dependent on the ruling class. His critique was never against the ruling class, the entitled.
For instance he wrote scathing letters to southern papers imploring them to free the slaves and hire them back at market wages. His partner Frederick Engels, owned a textile factory and had to buy cheap and inferior Egyptian cotton, as southern cotton was to expensive (owning slaves cost money, money to house, feed and clothe, money to entertain and hire a preacher to teach them the slave religion, that there condition was sanctioned by god, and from it they benefited.
I have never read mARX, but I always thought he advocated equal wealth for everybody. After listening to right wingers be right him all my life, that's my opinion of him. Why does the right wing despise him so much then? The right sure loves their socialism also. Their earned income tax credits and their tax deductions for reproducing... The women do need to unite and look after each other while we still have a democracy, because once we lose the democracy, they're going to be toast. The family unit and religion and capitalism produces a bunch of angry sociopaths. And the right calls Biden and extremist leftist liberal?
Marx and Adam Smith are best read with toothpicks holding your eyes open. Millions quote them, few have read them.
Marx was a proto libertarian. He advocated eliminating the middle class but favored a ruling class (capitalists were the bourgeoisie, financiers the ruling elite)
The USSR claimed to be Marxist (libertarian) and the Great Soviet Encyclopedia hailed Adam Smith as their inspiration.
Marx advocated a 100% gold standard. The USSR was on one, where a ruble was valued at .958 grams fine gold. Result a perpetual shortage of money, in fact trying to sneak rubles out of the country was a crime. Soviet customs inspectors zealously searched luggage for rubles, nothing else. Incoming luggage was searched for "subversive" books and documents.
The 100% gold standard resulted in permanent depression, with a surfeit of consumer goods, and queues for meat and bread. All disguised as necessary because of the cold war
Art 12 of the 1936 Soviet constitution says, in essence, if you don't work you don't eat.
Very libertarian, very capitalist. (Increase the supply of labor and you decrease a variable expense. labor.
Daddy Fred Koch, made his fortune building oil wells and refineries for Stalin in the 1930's and like Ayn Rand, actually fell in love with the real USSR, the libertarian USSR where wages are kept artificially low, leaving the corporation (and Lenin called the USSR state capitalism), and the gold standard.
Libertarianism is Marxist.
Marx was not advocating and equal distribution of wealth, but an equal distribution of power.
The idea in the 19th century was known as Levelers. As American as Alexander Hamilton, who believed in a society ruled by a ruling class of the wealthy, with a permanent, king like, President and all of the legislators and executive were to be selected by the ruling class of white, property owning males.
If we told the right wingers that mARX was more of a libertarian than a communist and that Jesus was more of a communist than a capitalist, the right would never believe us.
Of course not, they live in an echo chamber. I get called a lefty and a liberal all of time often with some crass adjectives, and they expect me to run and/or deny Because cowardly politicians do just that, and they are facilitated by a corporate media, which is allergic to any inhibitions as to running their corporations such as the squeeze the last bit of juice out of the orange,
It doesn't work on me. On Quora a fascist jerk, tried to silence me with "fillthy leftist" I took proud ownership and came back at him as a fascist jerk.
And that gives away the real reason for their opposition to abortion. They don’t care about the “babies”, and they never did (we know that, because they refuse to do anything to support them once they’re born).
It’s extramarital sex that they want to stop, because their religion tells them it’s wrong.
Not extra marital sex, because the right wingers are frequently exposed as perverts, adulterers, and even given standing ovations when they enter the Congress after being exposed.
It is about male hegemony, the patriarchy, and the root is psychosexual, these are pseudo men, they have the genitalia, but can't get aroused and thus copulate unless they are in complete control of a submissive woman. Quick example, rapists and InCels.
Insecure right wing males, and totally secure liberal males. Look at their hero's and agenda.
John Wayne and gun fetish v. Sidney Poitier and gun control
Pretty much, except not just extramarital, but any female sexuality. It was a revelation to me when my Mom began yelling "sluts!" at the TV re: abortion. She bought hook, line and sinker that "sluts" were using abortion as routine birth control. That was long before Mifeprestone, so we're talking about a world-view that depraved, predatory females were getting themselves scooped out regularly so they could be promiscuous. So you are absolutely right: never mind about "life at conception" or "babies." Just punish the "sluts."
I agree, it is apparent that Dana read your comment with cerebral filters, that is a too frequent occurrence on comment pages. If you go to lengths to explain clearly what you meant, it becomes TL:DR, and the reader loses interest.
A very frequent occurrence is the person that reads an article or comment, basically looking for something that will trigger them, or when the read that offending (to their eyes) sentence the eyes and mind stops reading.
You said whore and apparently that was a trigger word, the rest of your comment was read with inflamed sensibilities that inhibited a rational and calmer response.
Women are already dying from not being given medical help. Removing a dead or dying or deformed fetus from a sick or dying woman is NOT an "abortion." Anyone denying women medical care for any reason are EVIL. White (or other) males and twisted women pushing this evil are choosing to BE evil themselves. Pitiful! Ruthie B
i worked in a church basement free clinic pre-Roe versus Wade. I watch the young women being dragged down the stairs there's blood running down her legs from botched code hangers abortions. We had opportunity to send them to New York or Japan. The wealthy have always had access to abortion and always will.
Right wing men are big on freedom until it involves a woman's right to choose. They don't do nuance, their brains are not wired that way. Stories of individual hardship, rape, and a health crisis will not move them, because it is not happening to THEM.
Religious men and women who fight for "life" are absolutely certain that suffering and deprivation will get you to heaven. Makes no sense---shows no empathy.
The polls on the abortion rights issue are all over the place, but what rings true is that the majority of people do want choice; they have empathy and support WOMEN. Misogyny is alive in this country, but it is not well because we have exposed it.
Glinda: "So, what the Munchkins want to know is, are you a good witch, or a bad witch? Dorothy : But, I've already told you, I'm not a witch at all!"
And now that I have read it, you are right, on every point. With women graduating from colleges at a higher rate than men, it’s time to shove us back into second class citizenship. I’m going to be 70 this year and I know that’s damn old. Back in the day, a married woman could not get credit on her own. There was very little day care available, and only women whose husbands were poor providers worked outside the home. Having a child without being married was “out of wedlock.” Abusive spouses were rarely reported, same with child abuse. Going to college was for getting your Mrs degree. Misogyny was accepted as normal though the language was less crude. In the 80’s I worked for a progressive company that allowed pictures of nude women to hang in the service department. The company where I did my internship paid women substantially less than men because we were secondary earners(I.e. wives). Gotta stop, my blood pressure can’t take it!
Yep. I’m 10 years younger than you at 60. But even so when I was 21 I had to fight to get a credit card in my name and was not successful. Even though I was employed with a steady income and no missed payment or delinquency issues, since I was not married, the only way they would give me one was if my father signed for me or my 16 year old brother! While either of them likely would have signed for me, I refused to do it. Finally a few years later, after I moved to a different area where the attitudes toward women were more flexible I was able to get one in my own name without a male co-signer’s signature. When I bought my first house, the mortgage paperwork signature block listed my name and then labeled me as “an unmarried woman”. I asked them if they included the label “unmarried man” on single male mortgage signers and was told no, they didn’t. When I balked at signing it with the label they said I could take it or leave it but they weren’t changing it. They were sure they could sell the house to a more cooperative person. I signed the damn thing, but now almost 30 years later it still pisses me off when thinking about it. It seems our currency situation is attempting to set us back even further than that and it makes me nauseous with anger.
To you and Laurie both: I just turned 70 and it is hard to see "civilization" deteriorating. Yet not that far back to fall, scarily. Remember: we females were only considered human enough to vote in 1920. Black men had been enfranchised 50 years before. Susan B. Anthony couldn't testify in her defense when charged with criminal voting because no female was legally competent to be a witness at law. So recently, women couldn't own property, couldn't inherit, had no rights to the children of their body, and marriage was legal sex-slavery. So I guess we have made some headway, but how trivial a distance in historical time to fall back!
You are not damn old. You're a whipper snapper. My wife turns 70 in three weeks, I turn 83 this week. :)
It seems little has changed since I was a teen. My mother was an account analysis at a bank, she kept training new analysts (men) who subsequently got pay raises, while she did not. she earned $1.00 an hour (single mom with three kids) for year.
When she asked why the men she trained were getting raises and she not, the response was "they have families". Her response, "so do I and three children", Her supervisors retort was "find a husband". She was not about to subject us kids to a strange man that would take over the household.
Good grief! What a story! My take on the issue is, how recently we clawed up to at least "woke" about the status of females. And yet females can be enforcers against their own "uppity" kind. My Mom(is she famous here yet?) was p'd off when PG&E wouldn't take her (college instructor) co-sign for my first electric bill: had to be Dad: She railed interminably about how the "lazy" male coaches got paid more than the "hard-working" women sports and PE teachers. Yet Gloria Steinem was second only to Ralph Nader (seat belts) on her hate list, and she railed against "shrill" women with bullhorns (Vietnam) and how hippy women were even more debased than men, and in the context of abortion, "sluts" was one of her favorite words.
That is something that has always chapped my behind as well-the women that fight against and place obstacles in the path of other women. While I do not agree with it, I kind of understand the resistance from men. They see it as losing status and power. But why would women resist? That feels like an even worse betrayal to me. I came to the conclusion that those types of women have been indoctrinated so completely into the patriarchal system they can’t even conceive of anything else. They must, perhaps subconsciously realize they are only “borrowing” power from men. And so they fight tooth and nail for men and the status quo even when it means fighting against their own rights. The name Phyllis Schlafly still makes my lip curl up in a snarl.
It wasn't all that long ago when a woman's only identity was from her husband or father. To feel better perhaps or for her own protection she had to be her husband's or father's willing follower and always defend him, not herself. I love reading history, but it's pretty glum where women are even mentioned. I hear you. Ruthie B
Phyliss Schafly is the reasonwe don't have an Equal Rights Amendment, She campaigned against it. Schafly, Boebert, MTG, ACB perceive themselves as beneficiaries of the status quo.
Like Clarence Thomas, Tim Scott and every gay Republican very comfortable as "house slaves". KIssing the masters ass, brings rewards, better pay, jobs, fame, career advancement and for women, the safety and security she perceives she will enjoy as a Handmaiden,, until her protector and provider tires of her and trades her in. Then she will see the error of her ways...Met quite a few like that.
Yes. I’ve seen it too. Many women, even after their male partners have traded them in for newer, younger models, attack and denigrate the new woman rather than the male partner and rather than acknowledging the patriarchal system than not only allows it but in many ways encourages it.
That is the problem with America today. Although my mom suffered discrimination, she was a Republican and was like your mom. For full disclosure. I am a Viet Nam vet, and retired officer.
I hated those hippies with bull horn, felt they were a bunch of commies. They were basically students in the sway of commie professors (yes there were quite a few). However as my cloistered life expanded after retirement and I met lefties like the Weather Underground and SDS My attitude about the war changed. It was not a war to stop communist expansion. In fact Vietnam, after the fall of Saigon, kick the ass of China and liberated Cambodia from the Khmer Rouge those are not the only opinions changed.
We are products of our time, and the propaganda of the time.
Yes. I was asked in a job interview once, “Why are you here wasting my time and trying to take a man’s job? You need to get married. You don’t need a job.”
This makes me angry! I also trained several younger men who became my bosses. That’s ultimately why I left that job.
And the corporate media,talking heads, pundits, opinion pages keep trying to brainwash us that things are getting better.
And it just isn't gender discrimination. I would not want to be a black person, especially a kid, in this environment. It is getting worse and not better, and I blame Fox and the misinterpretation of the 1st Amendment. The 1st amendment does not give anyone, including corporations the right to say anything they want, it says that CONGRESS shall make no law,. Nothing in there about states, people, corporations, and that is why DeSantis is banning speech and books, because he is not Congress, and the politicians know that and do nothing, otherwise they would be embarrassed
I'm 75 years old now - and lived in Hawaii during the 1970s. Sure, we were fighting alongside Gloria Steinem for women's rights and the right to choose - not to have a baby. But it was never much of an issue there in the islands. I did celebrate Roe in 1973 - but to believe that could come to an end, never entered my mind. Now I live in Denver - not too far from Colorado Springs where we have REGULAR murders - in the open - of abortion doctors and workers at Planned Parenthood Clinics. It's pretty hard to take the always-present LET'S MAKE THINGS HARDER FOR WOMEN - or just beat them the hell up and hopefully kill them. Whenever I see some slogan like - "America - Home of the Free and the Brave" - I just want to PUKE. Yeah, long as you're a WHITE MAN. This is how my entire life has felt. Whenever I visit a country where women are actually celebrated - HELL YES, I want to stay. Even Catholic countries like Argentina are winning abortion rights. So, AMERICA - WTAF??? The Supreme Court is so corrupt now - NO HOPE.
Has it ever struck you, when one of the tyrants goes, like, hey, we aren't extreme, we just want "reasonable" limits: that's what Roe was? They act like, Roe was anything goes, States can't regulate anything, whatever stage of gestation is meaningless.... When that wasn't Roe at all.
Reading this article brought back memories of when I was training for my RN degree in 1978 and was rotating in the maternity ward in a private hospital in a wealthy suburb of Los Angeles . A mother of three children was getting an abortion due to failed birth control and that she was overwhelmed by three children already as well as her husband recently losing his employment. She expressed gratitude that I didn’t judge her and being a young mother of two I was understanding of circumstances that could lead to a decision like this. The charge nurse gave me the option of not attending the procedure if I had any religious objections which I didn’t. I was naive back then and didn’t realize the extent of the crazy Christofascist hysteria leading to shaming and vilifying women as well as assassinating doctors for performing abortions. I also remember what I went through after I obtained my degree, was working but recently divorced, and tried to apply for a checking account and credit card from a major bank. What a joke that was. I was told I had to have my husband’s approval! I had to sit down with the branch manager and show income (I was actually making more money than my ex-husband ironically ) and he grudgingly let me open an account. It’s ridiculous what women have had to go through over the years for autonomy and now the right wing nutters want to send us back decades.
I can’t help but get angrier as I read this and remember the past. I’m old now too and thankful that I live in a fairly progressive state (California), not perfect but at least we have a sane governor. I remember the mess of Ronnie Raygun as governor, and as I have commented in the past, was horrified he was elected President. Somehow too many regressive Americans are just compelled to elect racist, misogynistic hate-filled people who have no vision to really help our country advance and seem determined to turn us into a banana republic.
Gavin Newsom is sane, as compared to red state governors, however I question his judgement (sadly) after all he married Kimberly Guilfoyle, Don Jr;s girl friend. Then again when it comes to sex men have little if no sense. The smallest of two heads do the thinking (been there done that)
Biden hasn't chose a VP yet. Sadly, Kamala is an empty suit. My preference would have been Katy Porter, but I saw her on Bill Maher ,and she waffled her way out of taking a position in culture war issues, because Congress people and Senators , State or Federal, lack the skill set to govern, they learned the politics of amelioration and compromise.
We need a governor as VP not another bipartisan compromiser, we got one now and look what he has wrought, for one think a right wing flak, Merrick Garland. Dude was a moderator for the Heritage Society, and vetted to Obama by the notorious right winger Orrin Hatch R-UT.
I nominate Jay Inslee, Gov. of Washington. He knows how to govern, and just signed an assault weapons ban,.
I think Biden is trapped by his commitment to having a women of color as VP. Not that there aren't qualified WOC, it is that by choosing one that the media will easily torch, is the difficulty.
He needs someone which the independent (never Trumpers) could get behind, and not be scared off.
The choice has to be pragmatic... meaning choosing a sure winner that can boost the votes, not some old tired race horse that has been stomping around the paddock having paid it's dues, which is what the DNC invariably back Like the conservative Terry McAuliffe, and look how that turned out.
A fresh face, without a track record that can easily be oppo researched.
I too like Gavin Newsom and, like all men, he's made mistakes. Kimberly Guilfoyle seems to be a "witchy woman" who is out for her own interests (becoming a First Lady? or more?). She might have realized that being Gavin's wife wouldn't get her what she wanted, but instead that linking herself with Don Jr. might. Whatever the case, I like Gavin's current wife -- they seem a better match.
I'd like to vouch for Kamala Harris. You call her an "empty suit", which I think is a premature judgment. She performed her role as an AG in California well. Now, her role as VP requires her not to steal the limelight from her boss, but to learn the ropes. She's done that well, imo. It appears the Democratic Party wants to take things carefully with Biden's return, so it remains to be seen how Kamala's role might change in a second term.
I acknowledge the accuracy of assessment of Kamala as AG. However as AG she ran a staff, that did all of the work for her, all she had to do was sign. I am not a Californian, but did live there for 7 years 25 years ago. So not familiar with her public performance.
I just know that her public performance as VP has been very vanilla, totally lacking in motivation and charisma and on at least one occasion embarrassing.
Obama also was an empty suit or shall I say a blank slate, which Larry Summers and Rahm Emanuel used like a sock puppet.
'He is a good, honorable decent man, and from what I discern, a faithful loyal husband and a great father.
But he had no experience in governing, his background was a one term senator and community organizing, and it showed It was Biden who told him to instruct the DOJ not to defend the Defense of Marriage act. (Obergefell v Hodges) thus in my vernacular and empty suit., whose staff made all of the decisions, like excluding single payor advocates from the White House, and given Health Insurance executives and lobbyists, essentially open access to the Oval Office.
Totally AHIP's idea via Rahm Emanuel, thus instead of having a few words changing the medicare enabling legislation such as "eligible from birth" we have a 600 page bastard of a document, meat for lawyers, and an AHIP provision, negated (as it should have) by SCOTUS.
Not even Bernie could get Obama's ear, he couldn't get past Rahm, and Pelosi was all on board with AHIP (Association of Health Insurance providers) because the DCCC is dependent on AHIP donors.
Until Trump, the only real difference between the two parties has been on which side of the culture war they stood, and the Democratic stance was more talk than walk. Still is as I see it, because it had a narrow window to pass legislation that would legalize abortion, the same window they used for safeguarding gay marriage.
How about Fanni Willis?
What about her in the context of my comment.
Fanni is laudable, has real guts,but alas the governor and legislature have passed legislation that permits the governor to replace AG's that he doesn't like .I am sure that Fanni is his reason and target, although the public reason is to replace AG's that are "soft on crime"
Oh boy, Kamala Harris. If VP is supposed to be successor, we caring American Democrats are in deep trouble. I think she's far worse than "empty suit." I think she is unelectable, despite adequate credentials on paper, because of VOICE. Hear in your mind's ear, for instance, Oprah Winfrey's voice. Then try to listen to Kamala. I can't stand it for more than 3 words before I reach for the remote to change the channel. I guess it's politically incorrect to criticize anything about a woman's style, or whatever. But, sorry.
Just turned 70, me too, me too. So right to turn the spotlight on who the heck are our fellow citizens who vote for the racism and misogyny. Conversations I have had seem to sidetrack to taxes. The average Joe seems to panic at the word, and totally assume that a) the jackboots are coming for a slice of every penny of his net worth (not distinguishing "income.") and b) if a Democrat says, won't raise taxes on anyone earning over X$ said Democrat is a liar, and go back to a. As Thom focuses on, the racism and misogyny actually have underlying "zero-sum" panic. Who's gettin' my stuff?
What is being overlooked is that the origins of the anti-woman policies and practices have their origins in the dogma of organized monotheistic religious organizations/cults. Best example is the Catholic Church that has murdered and tortured people for centuries and had a particular fondness for burning women alive on stakes.
We look with dismay at the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia and Iran and Afghanistan by Muslim fanatics, but we ignore the Christian sects that are equally dismissive of women's rights. We let a Catholic church that has its priests and bishops notoriously involved in serial child rape be protected at the highest levels of the organization tell us that they have a unique connection to "god" and know what is morally proper.
It comes down to the money that the churches are able to extract from their members and all their dogma is designed to promote and maintain that revenue stream and to increase it by refusing to let people practice birth control. The Catholic church has made using condoms a sin and this has had dire consequences with the spread of HIV in Africa.
The corrupt U.S. Supreme Court is ignoring the separation of church and state that was so very important to the founders of our non-Christian nation and this institution no longer serves a useful purpose and should be disbanded.
I’m not sure religion is being overlooked. It’s certainly part of it for sure. But I think religions, as far as any I’m aware of, are rooted in misogyny and patriarchy. So religion is just one more “layer of proof” the patriarchy holds up to keep all members of society who aren’t in the privileged power positions, in line. Another layer of proof used comes from those who claim they are constitutional originalists. Women had no rights within the original constitution. All rights within the constitution were reserved for white male land owners. In my mind, all of it traces back to patriarchy and misogyny at the root, with everything else, including religions, supporting that root.
I don't it's this complicated; these dudes are messed up mysogynists. Daddy (or Uncle so and so or a clergy member or a teacher or whomever) raped them as a child and Mommy didn't protect them. One is sicker than the next. Beyond that, they all use abortion as a 'false flag' to divert electorate attention, polarize people and create dissension to hide all of their prurient, deviant behaviors. Thomas is a creep and we all know it. Kevin McCarthy gives me the creeps, too. Gym Jordan? Just stop.
You raise a deeper issue. Although it is certain Christian sects that oppose abortion, Christ said nothing about it. These Christians must go to Jewish traditional writings, in this instance, the Torah (Books of Moses) to justify their position. But many Jews do not agree with the Christian interpretation of the Jewish writings. Although there are liberal and conservative Jewish opinions about how wide the grounds that justify abortion are, there is general agreement that it is always permitted to protect the health of the mother.
How many disputes between Christian factions are over interpretations of the Jewish writings that have been renamed the Old Testament. The Russian mystic Helena Blavatsky (1831–1891) was aware of the divisive harm the inclusion of the Jewish writings into Christianity, renamed as the Old Testament, was causing. She dubbed the Bible, “the Rabbi’s revenge”.
But as you pointed out in an earlier article, keeping a large majority of voters focussed on divisive issues, like abortion, keeps them from focussing on learning the methods the wealth class is using to hollow out the middle class. The wealthy will fund both sides to keep the abortion issue front and center.
I don’t even need to read this to know you’re right!
What a mess our society is in. For solace, I return to some words I find comfort in: "Come to me, all of you who are weary and burdened ... and you will find rest for your souls." Matthew 11:28. These words come from a man who dispersed a crowd of men who were set on stoning a woman caught in an adulterous act (and only the woman, the man was excused). Despite the many errors in my own life experience, I've found his words to be true -- it's possible, in such a society, to find the rest he spoke of.
Shocking to learn that 1 in 6 hospital beds in the U.S. are under "Catholic directives". That's quite the industry the Pope and his Cardinals and bishops are running. Interesting how many institutions that began with good intentions and motives have become an "industry" that steers financial profit to men.
There are more female voters than there are male voters in America. Women who vote for right wing Republicans are the problem. Left-wing pro-choice males are helping what few women are protecting their rights to an abortion. This has more to do with religious in doctrination and greed of the capitalists than it has to do with white males. The capitalist wants slaves like the good old days of building the pyramids and ever since.
When it comes to issues like abortion, pro gun, right wing nuts like Boebert and MTG, There are two types of women. Those that have no identity of their own (problem is out patriarchal, hence misogynistic society). There are a lot of women who have no identity of their own, they latch on to their husbands, what he champions and thinks is what they champion and think. I've know women who were (for instance) Arizona Cardinal fans, there husband were, and even wore Cardinals jackets, then they divorce and marry a Seattle Seahawks fan, and they start wearing a Hawks jacket. These women would not mind living in Gilead as a handmaid, until hubby tires of them and finds a replacement.
Then there are the self validating, independent women, who think for themselves, but the right wing tries to neuter them by calling them feminazis. Like they think hurling the charge of liberal at lefty at you is suppose to bully you into submission.
Doesn't work with me, those are labels I wear proudly, but prefer progressive, as liberal as to wishy washy and is the word that best describes most of the Democratic party, and lefty is too far, it is associated with Marx and Marxism, who was not a socialist, but a proto libertarians, he was pro free trade, pro a 100% gold standard, and held the middle class in total disdain, as do the oligarchs who own the shares in America Inc.
Marx;s ideal world was two classes, the ruling class and the proletariat, who were dependent on the ruling class. His critique was never against the ruling class, the entitled.
For instance he wrote scathing letters to southern papers imploring them to free the slaves and hire them back at market wages. His partner Frederick Engels, owned a textile factory and had to buy cheap and inferior Egyptian cotton, as southern cotton was to expensive (owning slaves cost money, money to house, feed and clothe, money to entertain and hire a preacher to teach them the slave religion, that there condition was sanctioned by god, and from it they benefited.
I have never read mARX, but I always thought he advocated equal wealth for everybody. After listening to right wingers be right him all my life, that's my opinion of him. Why does the right wing despise him so much then? The right sure loves their socialism also. Their earned income tax credits and their tax deductions for reproducing... The women do need to unite and look after each other while we still have a democracy, because once we lose the democracy, they're going to be toast. The family unit and religion and capitalism produces a bunch of angry sociopaths. And the right calls Biden and extremist leftist liberal?
Marx and Adam Smith are best read with toothpicks holding your eyes open. Millions quote them, few have read them.
Marx was a proto libertarian. He advocated eliminating the middle class but favored a ruling class (capitalists were the bourgeoisie, financiers the ruling elite)
The USSR claimed to be Marxist (libertarian) and the Great Soviet Encyclopedia hailed Adam Smith as their inspiration.
Marx advocated a 100% gold standard. The USSR was on one, where a ruble was valued at .958 grams fine gold. Result a perpetual shortage of money, in fact trying to sneak rubles out of the country was a crime. Soviet customs inspectors zealously searched luggage for rubles, nothing else. Incoming luggage was searched for "subversive" books and documents.
The 100% gold standard resulted in permanent depression, with a surfeit of consumer goods, and queues for meat and bread. All disguised as necessary because of the cold war
Art 12 of the 1936 Soviet constitution says, in essence, if you don't work you don't eat.
Very libertarian, very capitalist. (Increase the supply of labor and you decrease a variable expense. labor.
Daddy Fred Koch, made his fortune building oil wells and refineries for Stalin in the 1930's and like Ayn Rand, actually fell in love with the real USSR, the libertarian USSR where wages are kept artificially low, leaving the corporation (and Lenin called the USSR state capitalism), and the gold standard.
Libertarianism is Marxist.
Marx was not advocating and equal distribution of wealth, but an equal distribution of power.
The idea in the 19th century was known as Levelers. As American as Alexander Hamilton, who believed in a society ruled by a ruling class of the wealthy, with a permanent, king like, President and all of the legislators and executive were to be selected by the ruling class of white, property owning males.
If we told the right wingers that mARX was more of a libertarian than a communist and that Jesus was more of a communist than a capitalist, the right would never believe us.
Of course not, they live in an echo chamber. I get called a lefty and a liberal all of time often with some crass adjectives, and they expect me to run and/or deny Because cowardly politicians do just that, and they are facilitated by a corporate media, which is allergic to any inhibitions as to running their corporations such as the squeeze the last bit of juice out of the orange,
It doesn't work on me. On Quora a fascist jerk, tried to silence me with "fillthy leftist" I took proud ownership and came back at him as a fascist jerk.
“STONE ALL THE WHORES”
And that gives away the real reason for their opposition to abortion. They don’t care about the “babies”, and they never did (we know that, because they refuse to do anything to support them once they’re born).
It’s extramarital sex that they want to stop, because their religion tells them it’s wrong.
Not extra marital sex, because the right wingers are frequently exposed as perverts, adulterers, and even given standing ovations when they enter the Congress after being exposed.
It is about male hegemony, the patriarchy, and the root is psychosexual, these are pseudo men, they have the genitalia, but can't get aroused and thus copulate unless they are in complete control of a submissive woman. Quick example, rapists and InCels.
Insecure right wing males, and totally secure liberal males. Look at their hero's and agenda.
John Wayne and gun fetish v. Sidney Poitier and gun control
Pretty much, except not just extramarital, but any female sexuality. It was a revelation to me when my Mom began yelling "sluts!" at the TV re: abortion. She bought hook, line and sinker that "sluts" were using abortion as routine birth control. That was long before Mifeprestone, so we're talking about a world-view that depraved, predatory females were getting themselves scooped out regularly so they could be promiscuous. So you are absolutely right: never mind about "life at conception" or "babies." Just punish the "sluts."
That's pretty revealing, Ron Murray.
Then I probably didn’t say what you think I said.
I agree, it is apparent that Dana read your comment with cerebral filters, that is a too frequent occurrence on comment pages. If you go to lengths to explain clearly what you meant, it becomes TL:DR, and the reader loses interest.
A very frequent occurrence is the person that reads an article or comment, basically looking for something that will trigger them, or when the read that offending (to their eyes) sentence the eyes and mind stops reading.
You said whore and apparently that was a trigger word, the rest of your comment was read with inflamed sensibilities that inhibited a rational and calmer response.
Women are already dying from not being given medical help. Removing a dead or dying or deformed fetus from a sick or dying woman is NOT an "abortion." Anyone denying women medical care for any reason are EVIL. White (or other) males and twisted women pushing this evil are choosing to BE evil themselves. Pitiful! Ruthie B
Yep.
i worked in a church basement free clinic pre-Roe versus Wade. I watch the young women being dragged down the stairs there's blood running down her legs from botched code hangers abortions. We had opportunity to send them to New York or Japan. The wealthy have always had access to abortion and always will.
BUT: ectopic pregnancies die? Hydatidiform mole causes positive pregnancy test/--just DIE?
Right wing men are big on freedom until it involves a woman's right to choose. They don't do nuance, their brains are not wired that way. Stories of individual hardship, rape, and a health crisis will not move them, because it is not happening to THEM.
Religious men and women who fight for "life" are absolutely certain that suffering and deprivation will get you to heaven. Makes no sense---shows no empathy.
The polls on the abortion rights issue are all over the place, but what rings true is that the majority of people do want choice; they have empathy and support WOMEN. Misogyny is alive in this country, but it is not well because we have exposed it.
Glinda: "So, what the Munchkins want to know is, are you a good witch, or a bad witch? Dorothy : But, I've already told you, I'm not a witch at all!"
Pro life and saving unborn babies are not the real reason for anti abortion actions, just a farcical excuse which regrettably most of America buys.
Thom talks about Fred Luntz how he uses words to disguise real intent, actually it is Orwellian.
The real purpose is male inferiority, the need to be in control of women, it is psychosexual.
There are of course people, who are easily convinced of the propaganda and have succumbed to the call of he pied piper.