Discussion: War On Women, SOS CLinton's Remarks, Women's Summit.....

[MMC]

Yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said this at the Women of the World Summit in New York City: "Now, we know that young woman in Tunisia and her peers across the region already are facing extremists who will try to strip their rights, curb their participation, limit their ability to make choices for themselves. Why extremists always focus on women remains a mystery to me. But they all seem to. It doesn't matter what country they're in or what religion they claim. They want to control women. They want to control how we dress, they want to control how we act, they even want to control the decisions we make about our own health and bodies.".....snip~

One can use any New Source they like. These were the remarks made by the SOS at the Women's Summit. What is it with the liberal left with all these wars. The War on Poverty, The War on Drugs, The War on the Middle Class, the War on Hunger, and now the War on Women. These are not Wars.

Should the SOS be comparing extremists from the ME and the East to those in the West? How can she compare them to those who say there are extremists in this country? Shouldn't the SOS be sticking up for the US, other than saying we are against this or that?

This is utter nonsense. Isn't it true Clinton made these remarks all for the US campaign? Why would she come out with these remarks and not focus on some of those countries that are so called allies? Instead she tries to paint those here in the US as to waging a war on women? I think Hillary needs to step out of LaLa Land and come back down to reality. Bottomline is the Demos know Obama is down to 41% with independant voters. That the Demos feel like they are losing women voters.

Perhaps they are or maybe this time round less women are interested in what either party has to say. One thing is for certain less women have trust in Obama's Economics. This is where Obama's speeches will not do him any good. For when there is less food on the table, less money coming-in, families that cannot afford to go out, and women not having the money to even go out and get their hair-done while not being able to shop. I think we know who controls most households expenses and that checkbook/credit-card. Thoughts?

 

[Tigger]

There has been a Liberal idea of a "War on Women" for the last century. It was part of the Sufferage Movement, the Feminism Movement and has become ingrained in the mentailty of american women in these last few generations. It's the ultimate hypocricy. They want to be treated like Men when it is to their advantage but when it is not they want to be treated like the delicate flowers of grace and beauty their gender used to be. Any identification of this double standard is decried as a "War on Women".

 

[katiegrrl0]

I think she is correct and I thank her for speaking out on such a crucial topic that touches all women whether they realize it or not. Three cheers for Hilary.

 

[MMC]

Clinton should have took in consideration that American Women live in a modern society and not that of one that is a tradionalist. This should be the Number One Distinction and not the focus on her definition of extremists. How does her remarks even show that she can identify with women in the Likes of Arab Countries? Sure she can feel for them. But they are not the same as the women in the US.

Who would be waging this War on Women in the US? Because as it stands today women are just as productive to society as man is. Both conservative women and liberal women can validate such. Both also have a different view as to walking down that path in life. Clinton should have pointed out all the strides American Women have made. Talked about how women are the largest voting block in this country. Moreover she should have known better than to lump all into one sum.

 

[Tigger]

Who would be waging this War on Women in the US? Because as it stands today women are just as productive to society as man is. Both conservative women and liberal women can validate such. Both also have a different view as to walking down that path in life. Clinton should have pointed out all the strides American Women have made. Talked about how women are the largest voting block in this country. Moreover she should have known better than to lump all into one sum.

Yes, let's look at those strides which american women have made in the last century....

1. Destruction of the Nuclear Family
2. Dramatic Increase in the Divorce Rate
3. Destruction of Traditional Marriage
4. Destruction of Traditional Gender Roles
5. Necessity of Affirmative Action to forward their Agenda

should I go on, or is that enough?

 

[a351]

The whole victimhood shtick is getting pretty worn out. To insinuate that women are still oppressed in this country is rather silly, not to mention an insult to those women facing legitimate harm and discrimination overseas.

 

[katiegrrl0]

Clinton should have took in consideration that American Women live in a modern society and not that of one that is a tradionalist. This should be the Number One Distinction and not the focus on her definition of extremists. How does her remarks even show that she can identify with women in the Likes of Arab Countries? Sure she can feel for them. But they are not the same as the women in the US.

Who would be waging this War on Women in the US? Because as it stands today women are just as productive to society as man is. Both conservative women and liberal women can validate such. Both also have a different view as to walking down that path in life. Clinton should have pointed out all the strides American Women have made. Talked about how women are the largest voting block in this country. Moreover she should have known better than to lump all into one sum.

You mean to tell me, you don't think there is a war on women in the US? There certainly is.

It doesn't matter what country they're in or what religion they claim.

That line in Clinton's speech states this.

 

[katiegrrl0]

The whole victimhood shtick is getting pretty worn out. To insinuate that women are still oppressed in this country is rather silly, not to mention an insult to those women facing legitimate harm and discrimination overseas.

It is not an insult to women at all to say in the US there is an assault on women's rights.

 

[Ikari]

You mean to tell me, you don't think there is a war on women in the US?

No, I do not think there is. I think that term is as politically motivated as the War on Christmas and whatever other propaganda wars people throw terminology out there for to try to ham up their cause

 

[a351]

It is not an insult to women at all to say in the US there is an assault on women's rights.

When you compare the two situations it certainly is, women overseas are subject to inhuman treatment of the worst kind such as rapes without legal punishment,stonings,honor killings, and restricted civil rights of all kinds, while women here are claiming a war over employers refusing to contribute funds to their contraceptive use, or some individuals (women included) objection to abortion as a elective medical practice. The two are not comparable in any way, shape, or form.

 

[MMC]

You mean to tell me, you don't think there is a war on women in the US? There certainly is. That line in Clinton's speech states this.

No I don't think there is a war on Women. Women in the US do not have to go thru anything like what Arab women do. Also there is a stark difference between women in Tunisia and say Women in Saudi Arabia. Would you trivialize the strides and gains women have made?

What women in the US get raped and then are forced to marry their rapist? Or get raped and then are accused of adultery and stoned to death? What women are told that cannot go out into public unless they are with a guardian? What women in the US get taken to court for driving a car and then for their punishment. Are beaten publicly?

 

[iliveonramen]

No I don't think there is a war on Women. Women in the US do not have to go thru anything like what Arab women do. Also there is a stark difference between women in Tunisia and say Women in Saudi Arabia. Would you trivialize the strides and gains women have made?

What women in the US get raped and then are forced to marry their rapist? Or get raped and then are accused of adultery and stoned to death? What women are told that cannot go out into public unless they are with a guardian? What women in the US get taken to court for driving a car and then for their punishment. Are beaten publicly?

So what exactly is the meaning of this post? If you're not stoned for being a rape victim or are allowed to drive quit your bitching?

You can use the same argument for every small government person that calls our government intursive. For every person that complains about corruption.

 

[MMC]

We speak of the red-blue, liberal-conservative political divide. But the division that really matters is the one that separates modern, secular societies based on individual freedom from traditionalists ones based on social relationships that always force women to take a back seat.

What we're seeing, in other words, is not strictly speaking a "war" against women so much as a new spring offensive against modernity itself, being led by all the usual reactionary suspects in which women's hard-won social and political freedoms are once again treated as collateral damage.....snip~

"War on Women" Just Tip of the Iceberg - Ted Frier - Open Salon

This is from the Liberal left Magazine Salon. Even they know when to call a spade a spade.

 

[Grim17]

No, I do not think there is. I think that term is as politically motivated as the War on Christmas and whatever other propaganda wars people throw terminology out there for to try to ham up their cause

That was a bad comparison because there is no organized front against women in the U.S, but there is an organized effort against Christmas here (and Christianity in general).

 

[herenow1]

You mean to tell me, you don't think there is a war on women in the US? There certainly is. That line in Clinton's speech states this.

Can you give examples of war on women here in the US?

 

[Tigger]

You mean to tell me, you don't think there is a war on women in the US? There certainly is.

LOL. If anything there is a War on MEN in the United States perpetrated BY women.

 

[MMC]

Yes, it is hard to believe but even here at home we have to stand up for women's rights and reject efforts to marginalize any one of us because America needs to set an example for the entire world.....snip~

This is what Clinton said too. Have American Women already set an example to the rest of the world?

 

[Ikari]

That was a bad comparison because there is no organized front against women in the U.S, but there is an organized effort against Christmas here (and Christianity in general).

I think that is an absurd statement. There is no "organized front" against Christianity in this country.

 

[MMC]

What is that example? Paying for other people's birth control? Stay away from those decisions about my body, but give me your wallet to pay for those decisions?

The US has liberated women and given them freedom all around the world. Why didn't Clinton single out those countries that do have a War on Women going?

Consider women in America graduate more than men. Obtain More graduate degrees than men.
Women in the United States can vote, have children in wedlock, have children out of wedlock, get married, choose to be single, commit adultery, work, choose not to work, go outside, drive a car, take the bus, show their ankles, go shopping without their husbands, get married when they choose to not when they are forced to, leave their husbands in abusive situations, obtain justice against a rapist, change religions, protest in the street, etc. Women are not oppressed and have rights as human beings in the United States. Having someone else pay for your birth control is not a right and if they refuse to pay for it, they aren't waging a "war on women."

And According to Bloomberg more apt to get a job than a man under this Administration.

 

[Grim17]

I think that is an absurd statement. There is no "organized front" against Christianity in this country.

Then explain the efforts of the ACLU over the years.

 

[iliveonramen]

We speak of the red-blue, liberal-conservative political divide. But the division that really matters is the one that separates modern, secular societies based on individual freedom from traditionalists ones based on social relationships that always force women to take a back seat.

What we're seeing, in other words, is not strictly speaking a "war" against women so much as a new spring offensive against modernity itself, being led by all the usual reactionary suspects in which women's hard-won social and political freedoms are once again treated as collateral damage.....snip~

"War on Women" Just Tip of the Iceberg - Ted Frier - Open Salon

This is from the Liberal left Magazine Salon. Even they know when to call a spade a spade.

Sure the rhetoric is strong but that's politics. Is the actual issue more nuanced? Sure. That's actually pretty accurate the Salon article you posted. Of course Dems will take what's given to them and run with it. That's politics.

Edit: I would like to point out though....it's pretty amazing how mandated coverage of birth control has spun out of control for Republicans. It was something that they had a good case for....intruding upon freedom of religion to Conservative states passing bills that makes it easier for anybody to not cover contraception.

 

[katiegrrl0]

When you compare the two situations it certainly is, women overseas are subject to inhuman treatment of the worst kind such as rapes without legal punishment,stonings,honor killings, and restricted civil rights of all kinds, while women here are claiming a war over employers refusing to contribute funds to their contraceptive use, or some individuals (women included) objection to abortion as a elective medical practice. The two are not comparable in any way, shape, or form.

I am not comparing anyone's situation to anyone's. That foolishness. Everything comes in degrees. The degree does not matter. They suffer a different type of tyranny. Discrimination is discrimination no matter the degree. The word to work with is war. If we call discrimination war then so be it. There is a war on women in the US.

 

[Ikari]

Then explain the efforts of the ACLU over the years.

Not an organized front against Christianity.

 

[Ikari]

I am not comparing anyone's situation to anyone's. That foolishness. Everything comes in degrees. The degree does not matter. They suffer a different type of tyranny. Discrimination is discrimination no matter the degree. The word to work with is war. If we call discrimination war then so be it. There is a war on women in the US.

In that case there is a war on everything in the US, and the propaganda term becomes useless.

 

[a351]

I am not comparing anyone's situation to anyone's. That foolishness. Everything comes in degrees. The degree does not matter. They suffer a different type of tyranny. Discrimination is discrimination no matter the degree. The word to work with is war. If we call discrimination war then so be it. There is a war on women in the US.

What discrimination or "tyranny" are you speaking of?