Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Before anybody calls me a sexist or a bigot, I have been an advocate for women's rights practically all my life. Years ago, I said frequently that this country needs a female as President because they tend to be more caring, honest, and empathetic ... however, after seeing how modern day feminism has turned many women into egotistical monsters, I am now saying just the opposite.
Let's take two of the most vocal and well known women in the past few years: Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. On a personal level, both of these women make my blood boil, and for many different reasons. Hillary believes that it takes a village to raise everybody else's children (as she proudly espoused in the 1996 Democrat Convention), and even wrote a book about it. When she ran for President two years ago, one of her campaign issues was advocating for the government to grant $5,000 to each child born in the U.S. All of this might come across to some as caring, but it's actually very demeaning to taxpayers in general (especially those who don't have children).
Sarah Palin talks like a conservative, but like Hillary, she is a feminist liberal in real life. She has five children (the youngest of which has Down's Syndrome) ... so instead of being at home caring for her family like a good wife and mother should, she is out bouncing around the country shouting at rallies while carrying her baby around ... then becoming highly offended at the word "retarded". She preaches abstinence for teens while her unwed teen daughter is out banging around & getting pregnant. Gee, perhaps if she was HOME with her family more often instead of trying to play Super Mom, things would be different.
I could go on and name a few other loud mouthed women in politics(Nancy Pelosi, Janet Napolitano, etc.) who are really about as distant from being nurturing or caring as one can get. These women are caring, but only about themselves and/or anybody who agrees with them. Those who disagree are called "intolerant", "sexist", "selfish", etc. In this sense, women are no better than men. In fact, when it comes to issues involving children, female politicians are even worse than the males because they seem to think it's everybody else's responsibility to fund and raise all the kids in the U.S. ... and they expect everybody to be tolerant of those who make the choice of procreation even if unable to afford this choice monetarily, timewise, or both.
Worst of all: women in power tend to have a bias against MEN. Most of the things they speak about involve THEIR female issues, THEIR personal beliefs, THEIR causes, and THEIR ego trip to overpower men and rule the world. It's too bad it has come to this because back in the 1970s, feminism used to be about equality, and that's the way it should be. However, since women have pretty much become equal to men, feminists seem to want superiority and dominance instead of a balance.
"""""Before anybody calls me a sexist or a bigot"""""
That meant, "Here I go on a sexist bigoted rant where I spew as much misogynist hatred as possible but I'm not sexist"
And CD will allow this sexist bigoted hate speech TROLLING ranting because it's ONLY directed against women...not an important group like blacks or Hispanics....
This thread could be called, "I'm Scared, Weak, helpless and Need Some Target to Blame"
A woman is just as capable of being a good president as a man. But not every woman and not every man is capable of being a good president.
As for Palin going all over the country and leaving her kids home for their dad to raise---I can't believe I'm defending her but what is wrong with the best bread winning in a household getting out and doing that? As long as both people in the marriage agrees, and the kids have a parent with them on a daily basis, it's not our business. Hint: men are perfectly capable of being good stay-at-home parents.
Hillary's "it takes a village" is purposely misunderstood by the right, I think. It means a return to the values of the 40s and 50s where everyone looked out for the kids in their neighborhoods. Like it or not, individuals outside of a family have an impact on a child---for better or worse. What is wrong with acknowledging that and advocating that we all strive to be positive role models?
Last edited by Wayland Woman; 11-12-2010 at 05:58 AM..
Wow. I think it's a real shame that some people still hold such unfair biases against all women.
That's because a lot of people don't really understand leadership. Women have always been great leaders, even if not as visibly so as their male counterparts. I firmly believe a leader is a leader regardless of gender and look forward to seeing some of my favorite conservative female leaders run for higher office in the years to come. Hillary...not so much.
I disagree. There is a much larger difference between liberal and conservative candidates than between men and women. I know you don't want to be called it but the fact that gender is more important to you than ideology, where a candidate stands on the issues, etc. does make you sexist. I'm not the PC type that throws words around like that often either.
Before anybody calls me a sexist or a bigot, I have been an advocate for women's rights practically all my life. Years ago, I said frequently that this country needs a female as President because they tend to be more caring, honest, and empathetic ... however, after seeing how modern day feminism has turned many women into egotistical monsters, I am now saying just the opposite.
Let's take two of the most vocal and well known women in the past few years: Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. On a personal level, both of these women make my blood boil, and for many different reasons. Hillary believes that it takes a village to raise everybody else's children (as she proudly espoused in the 1996 Democrat Convention), and even wrote a book about it. When she ran for President two years ago, one of her campaign issues was advocating for the government to grant $5,000 to each child born in the U.S. All of this might come across to some as caring, but it's actually very demeaning to taxpayers in general (especially those who don't have children).
Sarah Palin talks like a conservative, but like Hillary, she is a feminist liberal in real life. She has five children (the youngest of which has Down's Syndrome) ... so instead of being at home caring for her family like a good wife and mother should, she is out bouncing around the country shouting at rallies while carrying her baby around ... then becoming highly offended at the word "retarded". She preaches abstinence for teens while her unwed teen daughter is out banging around & getting pregnant. Gee, perhaps if she was HOME with her family more often instead of trying to play Super Mom, things would be different.
I could go on and name a few other loud mouthed women in politics(Nancy Pelosi, Janet Napolitano, etc.) who are really about as distant from being nurturing or caring as one can get. These women are caring, but only about themselves and/or anybody who agrees with them. Those who disagree are called "intolerant", "sexist", "selfish", etc. In this sense, women are no better than men. In fact, when it comes to issues involving children, female politicians are even worse than the males because they seem to think it's everybody else's responsibility to fund and raise all the kids in the U.S. ... and they expect everybody to be tolerant of those who make the choice of procreation even if unable to afford this choice monetarily, timewise, or both.
Worst of all: women in power tend to have a bias against MEN. Most of the things they speak about involve THEIR female issues, THEIR personal beliefs, THEIR causes, and THEIR ego trip to overpower men and rule the world. It's too bad it has come to this because back in the 1970s, feminism used to be about equality, and that's the way it should be. However, since women have pretty much become equal to men, feminists seem to want superiority and dominance instead of a balance.
OK, I read your whole post, and now I'll say it: you're sexist. You tout out a few examples to justify your opinion, then make assumptions based on those women. Nice.
Before anybody calls me a sexist or a bigot, I have been an advocate for women's rights practically all my life. Years ago, I said frequently that this country needs a female as President because they tend to be more caring, honest, and empathetic ... however, after seeing how modern day feminism has turned many women into egotistical monsters, I am now saying just the opposite.
Let's take two of the most vocal and well known women in the past few years: Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. On a personal level, both of these women make my blood boil, and for many different reasons. Hillary believes that it takes a village to raise everybody else's children (as she proudly espoused in the 1996 Democrat Convention), and even wrote a book about it. When she ran for President two years ago, one of her campaign issues was advocating for the government to grant $5,000 to each child born in the U.S. All of this might come across to some as caring, but it's actually very demeaning to taxpayers in general (especially those who don't have children).
Sarah Palin talks like a conservative, but like Hillary, she is a feminist liberal in real life. She has five children (the youngest of which has Down's Syndrome) ... so instead of being at home caring for her family like a good wife and mother should, she is out bouncing around the country shouting at rallies while carrying her baby around ... then becoming highly offended at the word "retarded". She preaches abstinence for teens while her unwed teen daughter is out banging around & getting pregnant. Gee, perhaps if she was HOME with her family more often instead of trying to play Super Mom, things would be different.
I could go on and name a few other loud mouthed women in politics(Nancy Pelosi, Janet Napolitano, etc.) who are really about as distant from being nurturing or caring as one can get. These women are caring, but only about themselves and/or anybody who agrees with them. Those who disagree are called "intolerant", "sexist", "selfish", etc. In this sense, women are no better than men. In fact, when it comes to issues involving children, female politicians are even worse than the males because they seem to think it's everybody else's responsibility to fund and raise all the kids in the U.S. ... and they expect everybody to be tolerant of those who make the choice of procreation even if unable to afford this choice monetarily, timewise, or both.
Worst of all: women in power tend to have a bias against MEN. Most of the things they speak about involve THEIR female issues, THEIR personal beliefs, THEIR causes, and THEIR ego trip to overpower men and rule the world. It's too bad it has come to this because back in the 1970s, feminism used to be about equality, and that's the way it should be. However, since women have pretty much become equal to men, feminists seem to want superiority and dominance instead of a balance.
Oh....so you are a loser and can't get a women to see you as important - got it!
Let's take two of the most vocal and well known women in the past few years: Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. On a personal level, both of these women make my blood boil, and for many different reasons. Hillary believes that it takes a village to raise everybody else's children (as she proudly espoused in the 1996 Democrat Convention), and even wrote a book about it. When she ran for President two years ago, one of her campaign issues was advocating for the government to grant $5,000 to each child born in the U.S. All of this might come across to some as caring, but it's actually very demeaning to taxpayers in general (especially those who don't have children).
You do realize that is the way it is and has been done in most places for thousands of years. Part of why America is degrading is because people are not doing that as much anymore. Communities used to take a much more proactive role in raising children to keep gangs and drug use down among young people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
