Teller Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I keep seeing this expression used, and I'd like to know exactly what it means. Frankly, it seems like bunk to me. Women are a literal majority in this country, and make up a majority of the voting base. So does it really make sense to wage a "war" on them? Is it happening? Or is this akin to Bill O'Reilly's claims of a "War on Christianity," where an issue or two are ridiculously exaggerated and used to stoke the flames and motivate the base? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I keep seeing this expression used, and I'd like to know exactly what it means. Frankly, it seems like bunk to me. Women are a literal majority in this country, and make up a majority of the voting base. So does it really make sense to wage a "war" on them? Is it happening? Or is this akin to Bill O'Reilly's claims of a "War on Christianity," where an issue or two are ridiculously exaggerated and used to stoke the flames and motivate the base? It is the same as the War on Christmas...only it has to do with the fact that politicians actually are working to curtail women's rights. Jon Stewart has a nice synopsis. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-april-16-2012/the-battle-for-the-war-on-women Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I keep seeing this expression used, and I'd like to know exactly what it means. Frankly, it seems like bunk to me. Women are a literal majority in this country, and make up a majority of the voting base. So does it really make sense to wage a "war" on them? Is it happening? Or is this akin to Bill O'Reilly's claims of a "War on Christianity," where an issue or two are ridiculously exaggerated and used to stoke the flames and motivate the base?It's largely the same as the "war on Christmas", "Christianity under attack", etc. etc. Policy differences become a frontal assault. I have a relative who is a Catholic priest who is convinced Obama is attacking the church because of the health care requirement to offer abortion insurance coverage. He has a moral objection to abortion and I understand him not liking this. I counter that I've had a moral objection to funding the carnage of innocent people in Iraq for years, but nobody offered to cut that part out of my taxes. I've been forced to help fund the slaughter of civilians, and while I don't like it I also don't think this is some kind of "war" against me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 "War on (whatever)" is generic sloganeering, nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Women lost 300k jobs in the last 3 months i thought i read? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Females are getting killed off at a alarming rate, but that's really more genocide. Acceptable losses I suppose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 When the GOP is attacking women's reproductive rights at the state and Federal level including abortion and birth control, when the GOP passes a budget that will cut programs for women and children like SCHIP and food stamps and medicare, when the GOP is attempting to legislate away funds for Planned Parenthood at the state and Federal level that will impact programs serving poor women who have no other access to healthcare, YES THERE IS A WAR ON WOMEN. Make no mistake. You men just don't see it, but as a woman I see it every day in every way. And we are not standing for it this election year. And do not attempt to just sweep it aside as like the "war on Christmas" or "war on <insert other subject>" because it is not the same. AsburySkinsFan has it absolutely right. Also, the economic situation and jobs situation affect women just as much as they do men and perhaps more, in the case of single women who are raising children. The GOP policies belie their bleating that they are for "every life beginning at conception" when their policies directly affect the born children who are living poverty or near poverty. All so they can fund wars that will kill children on foreign soil where we have no business being. They are sick and their policies are sick. Besides, O'Reilly is an ***. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Infringing on my right to kill and get free stuff=war Help, I'm being persecuted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Infringing on my right to kill and get free stuff=war Help, I'm being persecuted From your writings here, twa, you come off as the most disrespectful, misogynistic of men. Maybe you aren't like that in real life, but one would never know from reading your stuff here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 This isn't going to end well...I blame H_H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 It's largely the same as the "war on Christmas", "Christianity under attack", etc. etc. Policy differences become a frontal assault. I have a relative who is a Catholic priest who is convinced Obama is attacking the church because of the health care requirement to offer abortion insurance coverage. He has a moral objection to abortion and I understand him not liking this. I counter that I've had a moral objection to funding the carnage of innocent people in Iraq for years, but nobody offered to cut that part out of my taxes. I've been forced to help fund the slaughter of civilians, and while I don't like it I also don't think this is some kind of "war" against me. I thought the Catholic Church thing was about simple birth control, not abortion? Or is it both? And I thought they had reached a compromise where the Church wouldn't haven't to cover it? ---------- Post added May-12th-2012 at 02:14 PM ---------- From your writings here, twa, you come off as the most disrespectful, misogynistic of men. Maybe you aren't like that in real life, but one would never know from reading your stuff here. He's just a troll. Which is even worse in my opinion. I'd prefer genuine wrong over fake, purposefully-inflammatory wrong. But that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 And we're off to the races.... I don't think it's a war on women by intention, but I can see why many women feel that way. It's to be expected when the results of the proposals take away or limit what many women feel are their rights. And when they so obviously effect/disadvantage women and are championed visibly by mostly men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 And we're off to the races.... I don't think it's a war on women by intention, but I can see why many women feel that way. It's to be expected when the results of the proposals take away or limit what many women feel are their rights. And when they so obviously effect/disadvantage women and are championed visibly by mostly men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 NOW you're trolling and stumbling in to the spamming area twa. If posting a few cartoons in response is the best you can do,don't post at all. Let's see if this train continues to risk a head on or manages to switch tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 And we're off to the races.... I don't think it's a war on women by intention, but I can see why many women feel that way. It's to be expected when the results of the proposals take away or limit what many women feel are their rights. And when they so obviously effect/disadvantage women and are championed visibly by mostly men. I agree with you. No, I don't think that "all Republicans hate women". (Some of them just have wide stances.) (Sorry. Had to. It was a joke.) But, yeah, I can see how, when every state where the GOP has control, they're competing to see which one can come up with the newest attempt to ban, not only abortion, but support for all birth control; When some places are proudly repealing laws that say that women have to be paid the same wage for the same work; I can see why some people look at these laws and conclude that they're being targeted. ---------- Post added May-12th-2012 at 02:47 PM ---------- Let's see if this train continues to risk a head on or manages to switch tracks. Poll? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 From your writings here, twa, you come off as the most disrespectful, misogynistic of men. Maybe you aren't like that in real life, but one would never know from reading your stuff here. How so? Because I don't endorse their slaughter or servitude? Because I support their self education,self defense skills and health? Which writings do you object to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted May 12, 2012 Author Share Posted May 12, 2012 When the GOP is attacking women's reproductive rights at the state and Federal level including abortion and birth control, when the GOP passes a budget that will cut programs for women and children like SCHIP and food stamps and medicare, when the GOP is attempting to legislate away funds for Planned Parenthood at the state and Federal level that will impact programs serving poor women who have no other access to healthcare, YES THERE IS A WAR ON WOMEN. OK, take a breath. I started this thread because I have a legitimate question. And I want to get a legitimate answer. I have two daughters who are my world. If there's some serious effort to prevent them from reaching their full potential, then I want to know about it. So I hope we're clear there. I wasn't at all trying to "bait" you, nor looking for a fight. We've been down that road, and you're not good for my blood pressure when it happens. To your point here. I understand your position on abortion. But you understand that not everyone agrees with the current law of the land, right? If we call this thing a war on women because of abortion, that's like saying women who are in favor of abortion are waging a war on kids. I think both of those statements are, frankly, ludicrous. To the point on birth control...I fully admit that I may be missing something, but the stories I've seen about birth control have surrounded forcing religious organizations with moral objections to provide birth control. To that, I would simply say "if separation of church and state is good everywhere else, it is there too." Food stamps and Medicare are not female-only issues. I can sympathize with your concerns in that regard, but in no way does cutting back either single out women. SCHIP is a different story. There would be more of an impact, generally, to women there, no doubt. I'm not going to get into PP, because nothing good can come out of you and I discussing that. Make no mistake. You men just don't see it, but as a woman I see it every day in every way. And we are not standing for it this election year. With all respect, I think it's bad juju to make a blanket statement about what people know or don't know because of plumbing. However, I admire anyone who does something about the causes that are important to them, and doesn't sit at home on election day, then ***** for four years afterwards. And do not attempt to just sweep it aside as like the "war on Christmas" or "war on <insert other subject>" because it is not the same. AsburySkinsFan has it absolutely right. Also, the economic situation and jobs situation affect women just as much as they do men and perhaps more, in the case of single women who are raising children. I completely disagree here. Just because you don't see what other people who feel persecuted are complaining about, doesn't mean it's not real for them. Just like the WoW is real for you. And I would disagree about single women raising kids being impacted more economically too. I know first hand, as a non-custodial father, what it's like to bring home about 30% of my check after taxes and child support. So economically, I'm not seeing it either. The GOP policies belie their bleating that they are for "every life beginning at conception" when their policies directly affect the born children who are living poverty or near poverty. All so they can fund wars that will kill children on foreign soil where we have no business being. They are sick and their policies are sick. Out of respect for our mutual sanity, and the tenor of the board, I'll just leave this alone. Besides, O'Reilly is an ***. You might be surprised to learn this....I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I think it's a somewhat fair term. If you look at the equal pay bills... republicans are blocking it. If you look at female contraception, Republicans are disallowing it, if you look at the right to self-determination, Republicans oppose it. And these aren't isolated events, but bills being pushed on the federal level and in more than a dozen red states. Should women feel picked upon and as if the Republican party is trying to push back women's rights to where they were sixty years ago? I think it's a very reasonable fear if you look at their economic and health policies. Why they think this is a winner for them I'm not sure, but it seems to be something they are very eager to target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I think it's a somewhat fair term. If you look at the equal pay bills... republicans are blocking it. If you look at female contraception, Republicans are disallowing it, if you look at the right to self-determination, Republicans oppose it. And these aren't isolated events, but bills being pushed on the federal level and in more than a dozen red states.Should women feel picked upon and as if the Republican party is trying to push back women's rights to where they were sixty years ago? I think it's a very reasonable fear if you look at their economic and health policies. Why they think this is a winner for them I'm not sure, but it seems to be something they are very eager to target. Now, switching sides, though, I have to point out that, say, the GOP's attack on equal pay laws isn't just about women, either. They pretty much oppose equal pay laws for everybody. That's why I'm saying I don't think they're doing this because they hate women. (They're doing it because they hate civil rights laws.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I think it's a somewhat fair term. If you look at the equal pay bills... republicans are blocking it. If you look at female contraception, Republicans are disallowing it, if you look at the right to self-determination, Republicans oppose it. But being the intelligent progressive you are ,you understand they oppose not equal pay,but rather the burden such widely abused laws impose disallowing contraception perhaps you can flesh out beyond their opposition to mandating it? How are they opposing self determination?....I find that most interesting....expound a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 But being the intelligent progressive you are ,you understand they oppose not equal pay,but rather the burden such widely abused laws imposedisallowing contraception perhaps you can flesh out beyond their opposition to mandating it? How are they opposing self determination?....I find that most interesting....expound a bit. I made my statements quite plain. No need for gymnastics. What you want to do is play lawyerly rhetorical tricks. To many woman, Republican politicians are coming at them from all sides. They are attacking their ability to make personal decisions, they are attacking their ability to make a fair income, they are attacking their ability to get equivalent protection. How many laws have the Republicans pushed to try to prevent insurance from covering viagra? It's not that hard to see that the GOP is going after a policy that woman should find repressive and unfair. ---------- Post added May-12th-2012 at 05:16 PM ---------- Now, switching sides, though, I have to point out that, say, the GOP's attack on equal pay laws isn't just about women, either. They pretty much oppose equal pay laws for everybody. That's why I'm saying I don't think they're doing this because they hate women. (They're doing it because they hate civil rights laws.) Not disagreeing, but if you were a woman wouldn't you see it as one more slap in the face or political punch to the gut? ---------- Post added May-12th-2012 at 05:16 PM ---------- Now, switching sides, though, I have to point out that, say, the GOP's attack on equal pay laws isn't just about women, either. They pretty much oppose equal pay laws for everybody. That's why I'm saying I don't think they're doing this because they hate women. (They're doing it because they hate civil rights laws.) Not disagreeing, but if you were a woman wouldn't you see it as one more slap in the face or political punch to the gut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I think conservatives would naturally support and ty to promote traditional roles for women in society. This may mean different things for different people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 . . . traditional roles for women in society. . . :munchout: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 "War on (whatever)" is generic sloganeering, nothing more. Yeah, what he said. Except for the actual War on Whatever. We don't even care what you're defending, we just want to blow things up, damnit. This isn't going to end well...I blame H_H. I do, too. He probably did it because he's white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.