babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » Does Feminism Control The Bush Administration?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Does Feminism Control The Bush Administration?
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 20 April 2006 11:31 AM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
by Phyllis Schlafly

I haven't read beyond the headline and credit yet, but somehow I know it's going to be good.


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 20 April 2006 01:13 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
This nationwide trend is getting worse. Public school unions are dominated by feminists who have weighted teacher compensation in a way that is more attractive to women than men, i.e., toward generous retirement packages rather than better salaries based on merit, especially for teaching the more difficult subjects.

Yeah, because having a penis makes you better at teaching the more difficult subjects.


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 20 April 2006 02:11 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I most remember Phyllis Schaffley for her successful campaign to make sure that there would be no Equal Rights Amendment in the US.

She specifically wrote that, if passed, it would mean that men could not be excluded from women's washrooms.

Like in Canada, where we have had an Equal Right Amendment since s. 15 of the Charter came into effect, in 1984. Somehow the guys still have separate washrooms here.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 20 April 2006 02:53 PM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What is this piece of right wing drivel doing on this forum particularily in the Feminist section.

quote:
Is President George W. Bush a feminist, or is he just a typical gentleman who is intimidated by feminists and unable to cope with their unreasonable demands, tantrums and rudeness? When it comes to public policy and personnel appointments, the result is the same.

What is the point of this type of broad brush attack on feminism and why is it posted here.


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 20 April 2006 02:59 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I dunno, maybe waiting for a delicious feminist critique? Phyllis is so yummy to chew on.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 20 April 2006 03:00 PM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Please read the policy. This appears to be trolling at its finest. No analysis no rebuttal but merely a reposting of an anti-feminist rant. Not the right forum in my opinion.
From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 20 April 2006 03:04 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And the damn peaceniks are in the White House too!!
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 20 April 2006 03:16 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
kropotkin, I know we are in sensitive times right now on babble, but I am not trolling. Even feminists can have fun poking at anti-feminists.

Please try to relax.

P.S. I helped *write* the policy.

[ 20 April 2006: Message edited by: writer ]


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 20 April 2006 03:33 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

[ 30 April 2006: Message edited by: Reality. Bites. ]


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 20 April 2006 04:15 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yeah, I'm having a pretty good laugh about it. I actually found the article while doing my daily search for feminist news. That search often digs up more anti-feminist rants like this one than it does stories written by feminists.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 20 April 2006 04:37 PM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sorry I should have known who you were so I could have subjectively decided on your post rather than objectively looking at it and determining it was a nasty piece of work that had simply been reposted.

I should know by now that this board has different rules depending on whether your really part of this community or merely someone who occasionally posts.

My fault I will ask in the future whether the poster is an exempt "real" Babble poster and has carte blanche to post what they like because everyone knows they are good and true Babblers.

The rules I presume will still apply to the rest of us?


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 April 2006 04:55 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
kropotkin, it's true that the rules shouldn't apply differently to different members of babble. However, it's generally pretty well known (including by her title, editor emeritus) that writer is the former editor of rabble. And just reading a few of her posts, we know she's not anti-feminist.

People often post anti-feminist articles in the feminism forum in order to share the icky stuff that's out there with other feminists. Maybe it wasn't immediately obvious that writer was being sarcastic in her opening post, but I think most people could figure it out in a few moments.

It was an understandable mistake if you're not used to writer's posts, but I think now that it's been clarified what her motive was in posting it, maybe it's best just to leave it at that. A little bit of wry humour at the expense of an anti-feminist dork like Schlafly isn't so bad.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 20 April 2006 05:18 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

[ 30 April 2006: Message edited by: Reality. Bites. ]


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050

posted 20 April 2006 06:19 PM      Profile for Papal Bull   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Timebandit:

Yeah, because having a penis makes you better at teaching the more difficult subjects.


Well, of course. Didn't you know that already? I mean because the penis provides its user with a magic wand. That's why spell casting is best taught by males.


From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
simonvallee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5141

posted 22 April 2006 02:29 AM      Profile for simonvallee   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Timebandit:

Yeah, because having a penis makes you better at teaching the more difficult subjects.


Not to defend the author, but I think the reasoning is more that men are more competitive whilst women seek more security. So the retirement package would attract more women because they plan ahead for their old days whilst men get bored because they aren't rewarded for being better teachers (or teachers of more difficult matters), so they're repusled by the working conditions.

Now, I don't agree with such reasoning, but I think that this is what was meant.

Anyway, it's wrong. Unions pretty much everywhere, even in male-dominated sectors, generally favor measures like retirement package and look down on salaries based on personal merit.


From: Boucherville, Québec | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 22 April 2006 02:45 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

[ 30 April 2006: Message edited by: Reality. Bites. ]


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
siren
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7470

posted 22 April 2006 02:50 AM      Profile for siren     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
From the article:

quote:
Nor do we hear anything about spending taxpayer funds to force universities to attract more men into the soft Liberal Arts subjects that now have a big majority of women students.

Interesting that the standard changes here. For the rest of the article the comparison is male/female teachers but when it comes to "soft" Liberal Arts, the comparison is male teacher to female students. Why?

FWIW the English Lit profs at my BA university were all male. And viciously sexist to boot. They didn't consider Hemingway novels a "soft" subject matter.

Oh, and sure it's all funny and snorty when it's happening in the US -- but look what's happening up here: Topic: Status of Women Canada - REAL women campaigns to abolish it .


From: Of course we could have world peace! But where would be the profit in that? | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Pride for Red Dolores
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12072

posted 22 April 2006 02:47 PM      Profile for Pride for Red Dolores     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I haven't seen a more typical,blatant, paranoid anti-feminist article in a while..How can anyone be against an "end to sexist oppression"(bell hooks) -especially a woman with all that feminists have done in the past to make things better that she is benefitting from ? Articles of this nature always remind me of antisemitism of the Nazi's and the view of communists during the Cold Way- they're looking to take over the world and all that drivel...

With regards to "The Bush Administration is now getting ready to apply this same mindless mentality to math and science departments, which are predominately male because men are more interested in those fields than women and score significantly higher on math and science aptitude tests" and "There isn't a shred of evidence that women are discriminated against in math and science; there are no separate tracks for men's math and women's math" she seems completely oblivious to the ways women are gendered or engineered if you will from birth to like certain things. Conservatives in general like small government that has no involvement in social issues- another reason I'm NOT a conservative- it is the government's job to care for ALL its people, and this means seeking equality for women in society. The author of this article seems to see all those poor patriarchal institutions are being victimized- which is nice and ironic given that it's the oposite.

[ 22 April 2006: Message edited by: Pride for Red Dolores ]


From: Montreal | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Andy (Andrew)
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10884

posted 22 April 2006 05:13 PM      Profile for Andy (Andrew)   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
God bless Mrs. Schafly's son.
From: Alberta | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
siren
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7470

posted 22 April 2006 07:07 PM      Profile for siren     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pride for Red Dolores:
Conservatives in general like small government that has no involvement in social issues- another reason I'm NOT a conservative- it is the government's job to care for ALL its people, and this means seeking equality for women in society.

I agree with much of what you say here RD. Just a small quibble -- "conservatives" (in quotes because it is more what "conservatism" has recently become, not its founding principles) just say they like those things. However they tend to bloat government rather than downsize and love meddling in social issues. Gay marriage anyone?


From: Of course we could have world peace! But where would be the profit in that? | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Pride for Red Dolores
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12072

posted 23 April 2006 01:40 AM      Profile for Pride for Red Dolores     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Quite right Siren..

[ 23 April 2006: Message edited by: Pride for Red Dolores ]


From: Montreal | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 23 April 2006 10:21 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Pride for Red Dolores, you make a good point about Schlafly, and one I've always felt was such a contradiction when it comes to her. She claims that she hates strident feminists who speak their opinions so loudly and fight for the right of women to be equal in the public sphere. And yet, she herself benefits from these rights that women have fought for, in that she has been able to choose something other than a career as a housewife - she's doing the lecture circuit and has a career being a right-wing pundit. She is as strident and shrill as any of the most strident and shrill feminists she denounces. Really, she's the mirror image of Andrea Dworkin in that respect.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca