View Single Post
Old 07-25-2016, 03:31 PM   #7998
wittynickname
wittyusertitle
 
wittynickname's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
Not particularly, at least as far as it applies to her criticisms of his pro-life stance. The comments he made in that Mulan article are pretty sexist, so it might even be an accurate statement more broadly - I could be convinced.

But her complaint about his pro-life stance is that he favours policies that have a negative effect on the reproductive rights of women, thereby causing women harm. That's different from anything remotely connected to misogyny, which is a form of bigotry. It requires actual chauvinism, a belief in the inferiority of women in some way.
But he has proven repeatedly that he clearly does feel that way. The Mulan article, the comment that women who work "stunt their children's growth" because of it? He has clearly proven he doesn't really hold women in a place of high-esteem nor respect their abilities very much.

He has repeatedly worked to limit the rights of women in the name of "pro-life" and "morality."

So if he's so worried about women giving birth, why is he trying to defund Planned Parenthood, often the only option for low income women in need of prenatal care? If he's so worried about women and babies, why is he taking money from the TANF fund that is specifically to help low income women and their children, and giving it to an anti-abortion group? Why is he not pushing for equal pay for women? Why is he not pushing for maternal leave for new mothers?

He isn't voting to help women, he's only voting to limit their rights.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, votes like a duck, well.

Last edited by wittynickname; 07-25-2016 at 03:33 PM.
wittynickname is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to wittynickname For This Useful Post: