Demonrat spin, why can't we complain about the bad behaviour of women?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Demonrat spin, why can't we complain about the bad behaviour of women?

---

Because then, to be perfectly fair, we'd have to talk about the bad behavior of men. And the room would continue to spin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Because then, to be perfectly fair, we'd have to talk about the bad behavior of men. And the room would continue to spin.

---

Yes but it would be fair

Being fair gets you a few nights on the couch, or in the dog house, if the dog lets you in.

My point exactly

to be fair ;I am not blaming anyone . it is what it is . I was in fact one of the original feminists . I don't think anyone should get special treatment based on gender .

But with intersectionalism and wokeness ;Feminists have turned on each other creating new oppressors and victims (.and I dont even want to bring up the transformer factor where anyone can be any gender they "feel " they are . Imagine that conflict ! . You see it all the time now with men who feel they are women winning women sports events ) . The experiences of white feminist women are different from non-white . The 'Metoo' movement is too white privileged . This is where Kristen Gilibrand's campaign backfired .She tweeted "

The Future is Female ,Intersectional Powered in our belief in one anotherAnd we’re just getting started "

But that had been the rally cry of the lesbian movement and Gilibrand had no business claiming such oppression . So the responses to the tweet were overwhelming negative . She knew she stepped in it . In an effort to salvage something out of it ,she went to CNN and said she was misunderstood ;that all she meant was

“Please include the ladies in the future, because they’re not really included today.” To the intersectional audience ,women of privilege like Gilibrand were already included . Her husband was a successful venture capitalist How could she share the same experiences with minority or lesbian or transformer feminists ?There isn't even any glass ceilings for her to break except one . There hasn't been a female President . So of course her big complaint to CNN was that the top Dem candidates for President were white men.

The problem is that she is demonstrably a phoney. Before her born again wokenss she was a gun loving ,big tobacco supporting ,stepford wife until she became a political opportunist . She centered her campaign on racial justice and the fight against sexual assault. Fluent in wokeness, Gillibrand hoped to win over the most progressive, social justice minded Democrats. But she never broke away from the pack because .....well she was the victim .

More like fake empathy for real victims Tom, because that's what turned people off the most. True politician looking for a raise.

Quote:

---

to be fair ;I am not blaming anyone . it is what it is . I was in fact one of the original feminists . I don't think anyone should get special treatment based on gender .

---

A somewhat confused statement there, you are for feminists who are bent on the domination of men and yet you don't think women should have special treatment

I said feminist not femiNazi

Maybe some women are bent on dominating men, just as some men think they are entitled to dominate women, but that's a small group on either side since most of us can agree females have the same rights as men within their own responsibilities. It can get confusing whose who and what's what sometimes even to the point of SHOCKING, but all humans are equal under the law regardless of that other stuff, so what's the problem?

Don't forget this whole notion of wokeness and intersectionalism is a liberal fad that is hot in college studies . What I say on this issue is pure mockery . But my point is also sound . Gillibrand thinks she is a woke person . But intersectionalism; dissecting the population into ever smaller interest groups, by definition creates more victims and oppressors .

Point taken but does that also innclude the real vicyims of oppressors that happen to be women? Mockery or not using just one small narrow example such as your senator and her failed attempts to gain traction on her bid for president doesn't make your broader case for liberal ideas or intersectionalism. Re victimize maybe, but oppresors may be a stretch.

I have brought up Gillibrand . I also brought up the Harris v Mayor Pete feud . Now we have Evita v Sanders redux Evita recently made the claim that Bolshevik Bernie's supporters and a bunch of testosterone induced misogynists

who spend all day trolling his opponents online. “It’s his online Bernie bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women,” Now does anyone seriously think that Bernie is some kind of woman haters ;or that his supporters are Neanderthal members of the he-man woman haters club ?

https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-da66...278255.jpg?c=2

Evita

implied there’s some equivalence between Sanders and Trump, saying: “We want, hopefully, to elect a president who’s going to try to bring us together, and not either turn a blind eye, or actually reward the kind of insulting, attacking, demeaning, degrading behavior that we’ve seen from this current administration.” But yeah . Bernie is not woke enough or he would reign in any of his supporters who attack his women opponents .

woke I ain't, awake I is

Sen Warren held a pow wow and announced that she promises to

fill half of her Cabinet with "women and 'nonbinary 'people" . Classic intersectional wokeness .During December's debate she promised

to "go to the Rose Garden once every year to read the names of transgender women, of people of color, who have been killed in the past year."

Recently Evita joined the attack Joe Biden campaign that Warren and Sanders have been tag teaming . Well actually Sanders was saying there was some
corruption " in the Biden clan. But as the wet noodle that he is ;he backed down when Biden challenged him. So he and Warren must've added a pretty shekel or two the the Clintoon Foundation to enlist Evita .

You know the rules Tom, one man one vote, so guess what, one woman one vote applies, and there are more women than men so just do the math. Men have always done whatever it takes to get elected so why are you surprised that women would not adopt the same strategy. Seems to work.

I'm a late comer to this thread having just read Tom's opening post. You absolutely nailed it. The Kavanaugh hearing was a travesty. This business of female worship has become the new national religion. When Warren pledges to read the names of women and the "non-binaries" who have been killed, but then leaves out the men, it's a classic liberal "feel-good" moment, and yet is actually gender prejudice cloaked in morality. What's amazing is to think of how many brain dead democrats will actually pony up good money to help this woman get elected. She's just another HC in that she's an incompetent pol who would never make it if she was a man. She can only appeal to her gender. She has no other electable quality.

So what? Any dem but the dufus. He cheated the last election, and is trying to cheat on the next one.

Quote:

---

He cheated the last election, and is trying to cheat on the next one.

---

Rumor mill.

He cheats at everything even golf.