Women should be free to make whatever choices feminists decide are good for them

Leslie Loftis:

Ann Romney, The Corporate Wife

Ann Romney is a valuable asset for the Romney campaign. Not only is she an inspirational wife and mother and apparently a talented speaker, but she’s also a woman who effortlessly draws errors from the Democrats. Last night, Juan Williams felt lukewarm about Ann’s performance and called her a “corporate wife” because her husband has always taken care of her.

To the extent he meant that someone wealthy enough to not have to worry about the price of gas isn’t the most believable person on the plight of the middle class, Williams isn’t way out of line. But after decades of being groomed by feminists not to dismiss women’s opinions, his comment smacks of dismissing the experiences of an entire group of women based on career choice. She hasn’t had to take care of herself financially so her opinion isn’t valuable.

One might think that feminists would come to Ann Romney’s defense, but they beat Williams to the attack months ago. Remember the Ann Romney “hasn’t worked a day in her life” comment from Hilary Rosen back in April? Both comments suggest that unless a woman works for money and accolades outside the home, then she has nothing of value to say.

Not only is the notion insulting, it’s also wrong.

Both career women and housewives offer valuable perspective, but for topics outside a particular area of expertise like law or accounting, a housewife, even a rich one, might know more than the career woman does.

Countless books, blogs, essays, and coffee chats have told us that professional women max out with juggling their career and motherhood. They don’t have time for anything else. They know a lot about modern parenting and are well-informed in their professional fields, whereas housewives of Ann Romney’s vintage and style have the time and the means to be hands-on at home and examine a broad spectrum of issues. In fact, that is the defense used by affluent, educated, feminist, freelance women writers. When they face criticism that they are too out of touch with ordinary women due to their affluence and the flexibility of a freelance life, they counter that they have the perspective, opportunity, and even duty to write about women’s life issues. The grand dame of the Second Wave, Betty Friedan, was just such a housewife who wrote about all women based upon her experience in affluent suburban New England. It is quite bold for feminists to argue that affluence should discount a woman’s opinion.

I have a confession to make. I don’t give a shit about feminism anymore. I am tired of watching women be their own worst enemies and then turn around and blame anything with a penis for their troubles.

I don’t give a rat’s fucking ass if women want to have a career or be stay-at-home moms. I’m not opposed to either option. If you can make your dreams come true then more power to you. If you have to settle for something less than perfect well then join the fucking club. It ain’t always what you want you get the most of.

But don’t act like one path is more righteous and holy than the other.

Most importantly, leave me the fuck out of it. It’s not my job to give you equality. I have an ethical responsibility to myself to treat everyone equally but I don’t owe you shit.

WOMEN ARE THE FUCKING MAJORITY. If you all got together you could win every election. So quit whining about how the evil penis-people are holding you back.

Don’t bother telling me that I don’t understand. I already know that I don’t, and I never will. Solve your own problems.

Let me know when you get your shit together. But don’t ask me to help you move it.

This entry was posted in Feminism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

70 Responses to Women should be free to make whatever choices feminists decide are good for them

  1. myiq2xu says:

    Yes, there is a reason I am single.

    • DandyTiger says:

      You’re not winning any Phil Donahue awards today. Whatever happened to him anyway. Oh yeah, fired by MSNBC because he was liberal and talking against Bush during 911.

  2. mcnorman says:

    I am tired of watching women be their own worst enemies

    You are not alone.

  3. DM says:

    I’d like to borrow from MLK’s quote, and change it a little bit:

    I have a dream that one day we’ll live in a nation where people will not judged by the color of their skin, gender, sex orientation or looks, but by the content of their character.

  4. DeniseVB says:

    I remember the same critics of Ann Romney told Sarah Palin to stay home and take care of her children. Geesh, wish they’d make up their minds.

    • Lulu says:

      I was told that by a boss once and she was a woman. She also told me I didn’t need to work because my husband did. Her husband was fired regularly. You never know what is rattling around in some people’s heads.

    • foxyladi14 says:

      Whirly gigs 😆

  5. DeniseVB says:

    Yay, Sarah on Megyn Kelly *Live* coming up !!!!! Fox News

  6. DeniseVB says:

    Sarah’s in Wasilla, on the phone. Talking about what Romney-Ryan should expect after the convention.

  7. DeniseVB says:

    Sarah – Yahoo dude deserved to be fired. Using as an example how evil the media will treat them.

  8. DeniseVB says:

    Sarah – Paul Ryan gave a terrific speech, Biden will call in sick for debate !

  9. DeniseVB says:

    Fox kicked everyone’s butt last night in overnight ratings:


    10-11PM Coverage

    FNC: 7,702,578 viewers (2,067,483 in 25-54)

    NBC: 4,149,000 viewers (1,492,694 in 25-54)

    ABC: 2,858,000 viewers (993,941 in 25-54)

    CBS: 2,559,000 viewers (943,519 in 25-54)

    MSNBC: 1,440,882 viewers (402,044 in 25-54)

    CNN: 1,340,129 viewers (451,370 in 25-54)

  10. WMCB says:

    I just read this aloud to my two sisters who are visiting. They cheered. Amen. I will fight hard against actual sexism where it exists (and yes, it still exists). But this whiny, complaining, tearing other women down, using “feminism” as nothing more than a handy political bludgeon for whatever we don’t like, obsessing over our vaginas, sneering at anything masculine, and generally being horses asses over the whole gender thing and inserting it as the source of all evil always, has left me cold.

    Quite frankly, apart from the choice issue where I disagree, R women seem a hell of a lot more resourceful, powerful, independent, individually accomplished, unapologetic, and excited to make their own way in the world than the D’s are.

    I know it’s a generalization, and there are exceptions. But in the past decade, lefty women have seemed so fucking whiny and dependent, cravenly begging for political largesse instead of just grabbing life (and politics) with both hands and a big “fuck you” smile like the R woman are.

    • AniEm says:

      Absolutely. What was so mindboggling is that grassroots Repubs are the ones who embraced Palin, despite the fact that her daughter had a child out of wedlock. It was the left who savaged this young woman along with her mother. Feminism has gone through the looking glass and is defunct.

    • Karma says:

      I know you’re generalizing so I will some more. But don’t those accomplished and resourceful women descriptions really have more to do with rural vs city women? And rural women more often being Reps?

      Because those city slicker Republican (Noonan, etc) women certainly didn’t understand Palin’s appeal either and sounded an awful lot like the ‘feminists’ Democrats.

      In other words, how dare those hick Clintons/Palins, come to DC….

    • yttik says:

      “…. just grabbing life (and politics) with both hands and a big “fuck you” smile like the R woman are.”

      LOL! Yep, that pretty much sums up what I admire most about R women right now.

  11. elliesmom says:

    I’m an old second wave feminist, and I agree with you. “What women want” today is not what I broke down barriers for so I’ve retired. Women have set up their own circular firing squad. Let them shoot it out on their own. I’ve been a career woman, a corporate wife, and a stay at home mom at different times in my life. They all take talent if you do them well, but why should any guy respect those roles if women don’t?

  12. Oswald says:

    The most ironic part is that the guys who catch the most shit from women are the nice guys. They get punished for what the jerks do.

  13. kanaughty says:

    who the heck is the mystery speaker? is it gw, palin, the virginia governor guy, swarzenegger? who the heck is it, really? i am in suspense….

    any guesses?

  14. kanaughty says:

    is clint eastwood a republican?

    • Oswald says:

      Yeah, but he doesn’t usually get into politics. He ran for mayor of Carmel for personal reasons.

  15. freespirit says:

    Why, the nerve of women. They’re supposed to be free to make the choices men decide are good for them.

    I am a feminist, and I make my own damn decisions. Don’t assume that real feminists are members of Code Pink and NOW. Most of us real feminists ditched them in 2008, when they gave up the opportunity to vote for a true feminist – Hillary Clinton – and voted, instead, for Obama.

    It’s also a mistake to assume that the real feminists are supporters of Palin and the so-called Conservative feminists. That’s a damn oxymoron. The Pubs may be evolving toward a moderate view, but, if so, that will be a very slow transformation – If Mitt’s VP choice is an indicator, and if the far right speakers like Santorum and Hucabee, featured at the convention have a say in the matter.

    It’s really easy to take a chance on someone else’s rights.

    • tommy says:

      Oh please, conservative feminists are an oxymoron? Do you know any of them personally? I do. They would dispute your assumptions. Your worldview is different than theirs. Thats all.

    • DandyTiger says:

      With “real” feminists vs., I guess, faux feminists mentioned, you’re providing an example of the problem this post is about. As long as the “other” women are the enemy, the likelihood of finding common ground and working together is pretty slim.

      Who is taking chances with someone else’s rights?

      • freespirit says:

        The post tells the truth. The author doesn’t give a shit anymore about women’s rights. I haven’t really heard too many guys expressing a whole lot of concern about women’s rights, recently., anyway. Not their rights on the line. Hell, no matter who the Pubs nominate, you’re just ready to jump on that band wagon.

        You define feminist how the hell ever you want to DT. I know what it means to me – and since I don’t have to take orders or bow to pressure from anyone – man or the “feminists” referred to in the post – whoever they may be – and since, women’s rights are so unimportant anyway, why do you give a shit how I define it.

        Maybe you should address that question to myiq – the premise of his article is that women are taking their marching orders from feminists. Quite frankly, if one is already a feminist, by whom are the orders being issued?

        There is a woman running for POTUS. The choice is not only between Obama and Mitt. She won’t win, but I think I’ll support her. I won’t vote Obama under any circumstances. But, Romney/Ryan – especially, Ryan? If Romney was courting the moderate Dem vote, he damn sure had a weird way of showing it.

        BTW, don’t blame the women for the fact that you no longer give a shit about their rights, myiq. How big a deal was that issue to you to begin with? I’m guessing not a big deal – even before this election, when we wouldn’t all get on board with supporting a conservative, Republican ticket. Damn us all! We failed to fall in line, again? Where do we get the nerve?

        • WMCB says:

          Excuse me, but where the hell did myiq say he didn’ give a shit about women’s rights? Or that women’s rights were “unimportant”? He NEVER said that. Not once. He said he didn’t care much about “feminism” anymore. Not the same thing. Nor did he say a word about MEN making women’s choices. He talked about women making their own choices, and their own lives.

          Your reaction here is a pretty good example of what we are talking about. Deviate from the feminist party line by one iota, express an opinion not couched in the cushy buzzwords you prefer, and suddenly he is a bad bad person who hates him some women and is all for our subjugation. Your response does not in any way address his actual statements or arguments. It’s an emotional response that amounts to not much more than “You hate wimminz and so does Ryan!!!! ZOMG! Be shunned, you are in that category of those people, and thus guilty!”

          WTF?? How in hell do you jump from what myiq actually said, to what you just accused him of thinking, feeling, and believing?

          Apart from abortion on which we disagree, what the hell have conservatives or Ryan or Romney said or done that is so oppressive to women? I’m not seeing it. You and those like you telling me over and over that R’s want women oppressed simply doesn’t ring true. Not a goddamned one of those women on stage this week looks very oppressed to me. They look pretty fucking powerful and happy about it. And they got fucking CHEERED by all those evil evil oppressive R men.

        • bluestate says:

          i am concerned about women’s rights too but voting for romney. ryan is meant to be a gift to hardcore conservatives. he will not be president and romney himself has asserted that fact many times already.

        • myiq2xu says:

          The author doesn’t give a shit anymore about women’s rights.

          Can you please explain to me why I should care about your rights?

          What about the rights of Republican women? Are they any less important than yours?

          (About 40-45% of women vote Republican.)

        • DandyTiger says:

          You stated it’s easy to take chances with someone else’s rights. That didn’t make sense to me, so I asked about it. You didn’t answer. If I’m talking about politics, about issues, or promoting one candidate over another, how is that risking someone else’s rights? And is that only risking one groups rights? What about Libertarians rights? Catholics rights? Atheists rights? Are some groups more important than others? Is there just one group that’s the most important and we should all be focused on their rights?

          It was actually an honest question after an honest concern.

        • freespirit says:

          myiq – I’m seriously not going to respond to your question about when you said you didn’t give a shit about women’s rights. Re-read your own post. As you said, you don’t understand, so don’t worry about it. If you don’t get it by now, it just ain’t worth the trouble explaining. Your condescending tone in that article says way more than you realize.

          DT – I honestly think you know what I mean, but just in case you’re not attempting to be a smart-ass – I have a concern about women’s rights – including, but not limited to, reproductive rights. Romney and Ryan both have opposed freedom to choose to have an abortion – Ryan, is particularly strident on the subject. I hate the Obama Dems as much as anyone here, and WILL NOT VOTE FOR OABAMA, so there’s no room for a reply that singing the refrain about Obama being worse for the country than Romey. That goes without saying, imo – hell he would be worse than the devil himself.

          But, on a philosophical level, it takes some damn gall for a party and the leaders of that party, two of whom are running for the highest two offices in the country – a party that wants government out of every other aspect of life, to so strongly declare its belief that government should have control of a woman’s reproductive freedoms. Regarding your statement about all of the other groups who care about their rights – whoever they are – let them fight for them if they mean something to them. I’ve done my share of fighting for civil rights for African Americans, GLBT rights, and the rights of others. I haven’t seen too many of them standing on the side of women who are fighting for equal rights, so I’m pretty much just focusing on gender equality at this point – in terms of rights. So don’t reply that I should care about other stuff more. I’m talking about women’s rights, as contrasted to the rights of other groups, as you brought up.

          My response was to myiq’s condescending article – the original title of which was, I believe, “women are free to make the choices that feminists have decided they should make” – or something very similar.
          No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Most feminists are pretty independent thinkers. It was an insult to me, and I believe it would be to other a number of women who resent being told in effect (repeatedly in replies to comments)- “Don’t you worry ’bout women’s rights. Romney won’t mess with that . And, even if he does (or kicks the bucket and Ryan does), that’s just not as important as a lot of other concerns. Don’t even consider something as inconsequential as whether the the guy we think you should support for president sees your gender less important than men, and has admittedly and openly declared that he wants government to control your reproductive system”. As someone who believes strongly in women’s rights, I would have much more trepidation about casting my vote for such a candidate than apparently some of the people here – including, and (I believe) especially, the guys.

          If you’re a white guy, you don’t have to worry about equal rights, and apparently, many don’t.

    • bluestate says:

      i totally agree

    • foxyladi14 says:

      Amen Jo. 🙂

  16. tommy says:

    Modern day feminists value a career woman. Self-chosen stay-at-home-moms are treated as trailer trash. Yeah, sorry, I ain’t PC about it. I lost all respect for pro-choice dems when they criticized Palin for giving birth to a baby with downs syndrome (although Sarah knew the problem much earlier). Jeez, that is her choice. Respect that. But no, despite lip service, they decide on what they consider as the wise and better option. Too freaking controlling. Some leftist blogs are unbelievable. They criticize Ann for giving birth to 5 males. Dudette, its biology. Ann didn’t have a say in it.

    • Lulu says:

      Yes. I think the Democrats should continue to talk about women working outside of the home. It is so much more important than the fact that they can’t find a job if they want one or that young people cannot get started in a career. That is a winning strategy. /s/

  17. HELENK says:

    I was working when I had my first child. I went back to work after she was born. This was in the late 1950s. I got flack for working people saying I should be home with the kid. In fact at that time if you were married with children it was damn tough to get hired.
    When I had my 2nd child, I did not go right back to work. SAME people who gave me flack about working with my first child were asking me when was I going back to work.
    I decided then and there. I can not please the world, do not want to please the world and until they pay my bills they can go to hell

  18. well myiq2xu, that was quite a rant!! And you are right. There is trouble in the sisterhood and women are their own worst enemy. If only we could get it in our heads that there are more of us than anyone else, we’d knock things into shape as far as equality in no time. But so far it ain’t happening. Women are more sexist than men.

    But as angry as the whole thing makes you, men have played a role in our predicament as well. And why shouldn’t they? Who wants to relinquish power? No one regardless of gender. So that is where all of the games begin and end.

    Good thing we’re not all Lorena Bobbits or you’d be in trouble…..

  19. I have a confession to make. I don’t give a shit about feminism anymore. I am tired of watching women be their own worst enemies and then turn around and blame anything with a penis for their troubles.

    I’m having a similar evolution in my own thinking.

  20. yttik says:

    What bothers me the most about the criticism towards Ann Romney, Sarah Palin, even Hillary Clinton, is that they have all been accused of being stay at home wives, as if that is not a position in which you earn your keep. I really resent that accusation, because even if you’re well off, staying at home and raising kids is an incredibly difficult job. You earn every bit of your room and board and than some, so even though you are not being formally paid, you have a full time job, and you’re not only taking care of yourself, you’re taking care of others.

    Although Hillary Clinton has often had a job outside of her family, she was still accused of doing nothing but “hosting tea parties in the white house” as if being a first lady and working diplomacy was not a “real job.”

    All women are working women. We always have been.

  21. myiq2xu says:

  22. myiq2xu says:

    • myiq2xu says:

      Florida Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, said Thursday that the female-heavy line-up of speakers at the Republican National Convention was merely “shiny packaging” to distract voters.

      • yttik says:

        What was it they called women’s rights last year? Something about women being a sack of rocks weighing us down?

        • yttik says:

          Ah yes, lost the link but saved the quote, it was “rocks in a rucksack”

          “A senior U.S. official involved in Afghanistan policy said changes to the land program also stem from a desire at the top levels of the Obama administration to triage the war and focus on the overriding goal of ending the conflict.
          “Gender issues are going to have to take a back seat to other priorities,” said the senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations. “There’s no way we can be successful if we maintain every special interest and pet project. All those pet rocks in our rucksack were taking us down.

        • Oswald says:

          That gives new meaning to the term “heavy petting.”

        • darraghcmurphy says:

          jesus fucking christ yttik that is a killer quote. Thank you for finding and posting it. I hope Hillary fired his puke ass.

      • flipping out seeing such outstanding women talking about things other than vaginas and uteruses

Comments are closed.