June 11, 2010
Beastly Thoughts
Is Tina Brown trying to say that in her little world, women aren't women if they don't share her views?
Former New Yorker editor Tina Brown appeared on Thursday's Good Morning America to deride the mostly Republican women who won primaries on Tuesday as "wingnuts" and to sneer that they represent a "blow to feminism."GMA's "Morning Mix" segment featured Brown and journalist Catherine Crier, part of a panel that usually includes reporters agreeing with each other over liberal talking points. After Stephanopoulos recited the numerous women who won nominations on June 8, the current Daily Beast editor dismissed, "...The only trouble with this one is, it almost feels as if all these women winning are kind of a blow to feminism."
I'd really like to hear Brown expound upon why she thinks that the success of conservative women is a blow to feminism.
I rather suspect she means it is a blow to the contrived and utterly useless liberal feminist ideology of victimhood... it certainly isn't a blow to equality.
And isn't equality what real feminists desire?
Update: Cassy Chesser calls Brown and her co-conspirators "fascist feminists." I think her label is probably dead-on.
"And isn't equality what real feminists desire?"
Equality was never part of the feminist plan. What they want to do is flip the gender roles. Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Posted by: Mat at June 11, 2010 09:39 AMa lot of feminist are lesbians. they have their own agenda, the straight ones are just controllers, imho.
Posted by: southernsue at June 11, 2010 09:48 AMIf conservatives had their way women would not have the right to vote.
God you people are stupid.
Posted by: anon at June 11, 2010 10:39 AMIf conservatives had their way women would not have the right to vote.
And evidence for that comes straight from the little voices in you head? I thought so.
God you people are stupid.
We are simply crushed that a genius such as yourself can only spew childish insults instead of any sort of supportable and reasoned attack.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 11, 2010 11:00 AMIf liberals had their way, Sarah Palin would not have the right to vote. Or run for office.
Posted by: Pablo at June 11, 2010 11:09 AMANON - you may want to add these few letters to your posting name: ENTITY. you would then opine under your correct name: ANONENTITY. your name would then match your opinion: worthless!!
Posted by: mixitup4645 at June 11, 2010 11:16 AMIt is wrong to criticize Anon. Like most liberals, he really has now idea of what he is talking about and reacts only on emotion. I am sure that he is unaware of the fact that women have been treated as equals or superior being in the West and South in deference to the Northeast.
Note, Wyoming was the first to give women the vote and I would not classify them as liberal. In the South, women have always been in the vanguard of business and plantation management. In addition, they are considered superior to men and treated as such.
I agree that there is a significant component of lesbians who dominante this movement and can never be satisfied (double meaning).
Posted by: David at June 11, 2010 11:32 AMMs. Brown, aka "Captain Lug Nuts" looks at California's Ms. Whitman and Ms. Fiorina and says "ooh icky--the whole CEO thing in California". She points to problems on Wall Street with financiers and bankers--and equates that to CEO's from a corporation that provided a valuable service--E-Bay, and a corporation that built products and sold software--HP.
To Captain Lug Nuts, all corporations are icky, and all CEO's are bad.
To me, well all the talking head lefties--well, they're just full of crap.
Posted by: Comanche Voter at June 11, 2010 03:57 PMWell of course feminists want equality. However, it's the "Animal Farm" sort of equality, you know, where some animals (liberal women) are more equal than others?
Posted by: mikemcdaniel at June 11, 2010 11:16 PM
