Dig this tweet from Kirsten Powers. Kirsten Powers of USA Today and CNN. The 294,000-followers-on-Twitter Kirsten Powers.
I have a dream—that one day I will be able to say more than two sentences without some conservative man interrupting me and yelling at me and twisting my words.— Kirsten Powers (@KirstenPowers) October 6, 2018
I don't know if it's possible to be less self-aware. The chick's got gigs at two national media outlets and more Twitter followers than Dayton, Ohio has people and that by a factor of two. Looking it up, she's got more followers than Orlando, Florida has people.
STOP SILENCING HER, YOU MISOGYNISTS!
Well, I guess it just goes to show you how powerful the patriarchy is.
 |
| Kirsten Powers as she sees herself. |
16 comments:
She works at CNN. How many conservatives is she around?
Taking a wild guess, she's whining about some guy she interrupted on the news actually speaking back and not agreeing with her?
Letters to Hannah #MeToo and the so-called "complexity" of women
"When a woman is "complex" it's because she can't make a decision. She allows her mind to be clouded with alternate proposals, unsolved problems and the-best-of-both-worlds dreaming; and, incapable of resolving herself to the best real-world possibility, consigns herself to a world of constant frustration -- a state of irrational paralysis which they then call "complexity." ("Does this dress make me look fat?") The man weighs all and picks some. A crazy woman weighs all, gets some, and then wonders why she can't have the rest. She's complex because she hasn't thought it all out. The options she whines about are the ones she forgot to cross off.
This theory, I think, is the best explanation for feminism. That women want to look competitive -- but need quotas to compete with men. That they want to have careers -- and also raise children. That they want to flaunt their sexuality -- but can't handle objectification. That they want to look strong -- but need special defense against rape. That they all want to be sexy -- but can't handle standards on sexiness. That they can't make decisions when drinking -- but should still be allowed to buy drinks. That they need paid maternal leave -- but that everyone should consider them equally efficient. That a woman is trustworthy -- but that contracts and judges and juries are necessary to protect women from the mendacity of women. Each pair of interests proving, on some level, that no matter how many times you tell a child you can't have your cake and eat it too, some of them are too stupid to believe it."
Foxie, I didn't think of that. Great point! Where exactly were all these conservative men keeping her from speaking her truth? Maybe the pizza delivery boys shouted at her from the doorway when they showed up to deliver pizzas to the crew.
Ilion, I love you, man, but I don't think I agree with that. I think it's important to separate the thin layer of loudmouth, self-pitying feminists from the normals. I would argue that most women appreciate men and the role we play in being their completion by providing and protecting.
The problem right now is that the normals are the ones being silenced.
Good thing, I was going to have to do a similar "demonstrate insane contradictions by grouping all members of a sex as if they really do speak as one" trick; the hard part would be deciding if it's on the "don't conflate the actions of individuals with the whole group oh but those activists speak for all women no matter how much you denounce their stupidity because they haven't stopped" or a more general conflation of high school twerps, young single men, married guys and bitter divorcees.
These jerks want to demonize the other side-- which in theory consists of only the other sex, but in practice is everybody who doesn't agree with them. So women who don't do what their self-appointed speaker demands are not "really" women, but abusive twerps who are useful to said speaker are "allies." It is annoying to be lectured about how I am "supposed" to think by the folks who declare they're giving me a "True" voice.
Believe it all you want ... nevertheless, the brutal truth is that most modern American women *don't* appreciate men (in general) or their own man (in particular).
As woman...
I've grown to hate what feminism did. I believed their BS when I was an undergraduate student, some thirty years ago. I just thank God it was before the even crazier nonsense they came up with.
They try to ruin everything. I work in what used to be a make dominated field. Some men were heels, but most were great guys. Now it's in the process of flipping to a female dominated field.
Women ruin everything.
There's a lot of counting how many women vs how many men. When a senior woman made a sane comment at some women's meeting, you could hear the collective gasp.
I am married to a wonderful husband. Who's intelligent, strong, extremely hard-working, and very protective. I love him, and I love being married to him. The me of thirty years ago would've been too stupid to appreciate him as much as I do now.
Other way around, too; there's a lot of entitlement, and a great lack of gratitude.
Indeed, not all women are pointlessly-envious ingrates, just as not all men are [whatever today's feminist accusation is].
Nevertheless, *who* initiates the super-majority of divorces in this country? *Who* separates children from their fathers? *Who* spends the next decade or two indoctrinating those children into disdain for their fathers? *Who* votes for the politicians of the pro-treason, pro-murder, pro-injustice, pro-perversion Democrats?
I could go on an on, and the answer will continue to be "Jane Doe, normal American woman". And the reason Jane Doe does these wicked and destructive things (destructive both to individuals and to society) is for the reasons Mr Egerer spells out in the post to which I linked (with added comment at my own blog).
That Jane Doe reacted negatively to the Democratic smear campaign against Justice Kavannaugh is of a piece with the thesis -- in general, women expect, and indeed demand, to have it both (or more) ways. To the point here, women want to be free to demonize men, especially their own man ... but they don't want the natural-and-inevitable consequences to occur. It wasn't the unfounded accusations that turned Jane Doe away, it was being forced to see herself in the mirror.
Ilion, I'm pretty sympathetic to that comment, thanks to my own experiences, but I'd also admit that my experiences are limited to just me (and my bad choices). I hesitate to draw broader conclusions. Alsom I know that the media is heavily biased towards the narrative of woman-as-victim, man-as-oppressor, so I reflexively doubt the samples of anecdotes I see them report.
It's all very complicated and I'm trying not to fall into the trap of "Here's what's wrong with your kind!" the way the progressives have lately. I know I do that when I label progs and then yell, "Here's what's wrong with your kind!", but I hope that's a grouping by ideology and not something more than that.
The other thing I'd say is that both Foxie and the foxie Lee ( :-) ) are examples of what I would consider normal, healthy, beautiful women. That works for me!
Back when divorce was only at-fault, the percent of divorces filed by women was about the same, in those studies where they've done the research.
That's because a guy that's sleeping around doesn't care that he's married, and there's no reason to file if he can just cheat; women who cheat tend to want to be married to the guy they're cheating with. Likewise, a guy who doesn't care about his kids doesn't have to be separated from them, because he splits before they're born. (nearly 40% of single mothers have never been married) He got what he wanted in the act that caused them.
As for who votes in Democrats, only slightly more than half of women surveyed voted for Hillary, and only slightly more than half of men voted for Trump-- married vs unmarried was a bigger divide.
So those horrible single people should be blamed for the Dems before you go after women.
Thanks, KT. ;)
I think you might appreciate my husband's comment:
"I didn't marry 'women.' I married a woman. I only need one."
Usually triggered by a buddy bemoaning how there's so very many who are not suitable. :D
Foxfier -- love it!
This isn't a popular thought, but it's one my sister, my aunt, and I share: we're not sure giving women The vote was such a great idea.
One of my female Facebook friends posted an image of the word "Vote" where the letter V was formed by a women's crotch. Ugh.
If that's what informs a women's vote, maybe we shouldn't have it. (BTW, that's not what informs my vote.)
I don't think folks who have informed votes are the target-- but I do think sex is a powerful motivator, especially in the groups that are currently going absolutely insane.
Reduce women down to their crotch, build your platform around easy, consequence-free access to the same, heap shame and threaten violence for anyone deviating.
You can motivate a lot of very shallow people.
Post a Comment