Is "feminism" truly feminist?
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 12:15 pm
It really isn't in many cases- especially when it comes to the plight of women in real danger of oppression or worse:
Indeed...and it's a nasty backward paternalistic belief system. Can we all agree upon that?Vander wrote:Call it Stockholm Syndrome if you want, but there is a belief structure involved.
I think Hillary lost all legitimate "feminist" cred when she didn't divorce her unfaithful and extreme womanizer piece of garbage excuse for a husband just to retain a path to ultimate power.callmeslick wrote:correction to above. The speech was in Bejing, but touched on a lot of Islamic world issues:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeche ... speech.htm
says you. Of course, no one gave you the right to speak for those who DO call themselves feminists, did they?Nightshade wrote:I think Hillary lost all legitimate "feminist" cred when she didn't divorce her unfaithful and extreme womanizer piece of garbage excuse for a husband just to retain a path to ultimate power.
actually, that story has been floated and pretty much debunked in the actual press.In fact she attacked her husband's victims.
do you own a mirror?She truly is a piece of work.
people do different things, react in different ways and make unique choices. The ability to do so doesn't connote anything beyond PERSONAL FREEDOM, and while you might wish to opine, it's frankly none of your freaking business, and in NO WAY reflects upon anything important.Nightshade wrote:Hillary was very publicly HUMILIATED before the entire world when Bill was caught red handed lying to everyone and cheating on her with Monica Lewinsky.
Anyone with a shred of dignity would have divorced their lying/cheating spouse on the spot.
That’s funny…you never “exchange” opinions…you line item veto them, and replace them with your own.callmeslick wrote:most of the time, isn't that what occurs on a message board? I mean, exchange of opinions?
actually, that story has been floated and pretty much debunked in the actual press. [/quote]callmeslick wrote: In fact she attacked her husband's victims.
Later in the interview (Today Show/Matt Lauer), Hillary bluntly issued her threat:
“I think we’re going to find some other things. And I think that when all of this is put into context, and we really look at the people involved here, look at their motivations and look at their backgrounds, look at their past behavior, some folks are going to have a lot to answer for.”
Less than two weeks later, on February 8, former high level Clinton White House operative George Stephanopoulos said on the ABC News Sunday morning talk show This Week that the Clinton administration was threatening to go scorched earth on Clinton’s accusers and investigators by employing the ‘Ellen Rometsch strategy’ should they not back down.
The ‘Ellen Rometsch strategy’ involved blackmailing into silence Clinton accusers, investigators and political opponents by threatening to expose their backgrounds if they did not back off.
I suggest slick, before you go denigrating other people, you at least have the the facts to back up what you are saying. As it stands this, along with other statements you made in the past, shows you to be a congenital liar when it come to politicscallmeslick wrote:do you own a mirror?She truly is a piece of work.
deflecting WHAT? That TB is sort of lame calling other folks names, or accusing others of EXACTLY what he shows himself to be? That was my point with the mirror comment, and I'll stand by it. Nothing to deflect whatsoever. Now, go back to rejecting facts in the name of some sort of ideological test of news sourcing.woodchip wrote:I didn't say it. Again, nice try at deflecting.