Sunday, July 04, 2010

"Feminists need to demonize these attractive Republican women because they pose an existential threat to feminism."

Stuart Schneiderman: The Hotness Gap:

If a man had to choose between a fantasy date with Nikki Haley or one with Elena Kagan, which would he choose? If he had to choose between being married to Sarah Palin or being married to Hillary Clinton, who would he prefer?

There is worse yet. As I believe, feminism is a cult. It is directly in the business of recruiting new adherents. From the perspective of feminist recruitment efforts, ask yourself this: if a girl is going to choose an adult female role model, who is she more likely to choose, Sonia Sotomayor or Michelle Bachmann?

Feminists need to demonize these attractive Republican women because they pose an existential threat to feminism.

Labels:

22 Comments:

Blogger Stormbringer said...

Of course. Liberals attack instead of use reason. And Conservative women are the true embodiment of feminism. Liberal feminazis are ideologues and have no interest in the betterment of society or The Sisterhood.

And they're jealous because there are more babes on the Conservative side.

3:02 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger TMink said...

And they are fighting for the brand name. Their vision of feminist means progressive. To see these attractive conservative women who have actually accomplished something and ascribe to a different brand of feminism is very threatening.

And it is made worse by the fact that these women are attractive.

Happy 4th!

Trey

3:29 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger Francis W. Porretto said...

It's been said that feminism was concocted to get social acceptance for unsightly women. There might be some truth in that, considering how vanguard feminists have frequently defied traditional grooming practices. However, this position might ignore a deeper cause in favor of a tactic.

Men, whatever the desires of women, will naturally direct their attentions and affections toward attractive women -- and despite the huge amount of derision feminists have dumped on our norms for for female beauty as being "socially constructed," those norms have been remarkably constant over the decades; the fashion industries have had little success in changing them. Unattractive women have thus been disfavored for marriage and childbearing. Since the desires for male protection and the blessings of children are innate to the female of our species, this is a source of great unhappiness for the disfavored.

Among persons of less than adequate moral education, this gives rise to the most destructive of all emotions: envy. The envious person will happily do harm to those he envies, even if that can bring him no gain whatsoever. This is as applicable to envy over romantic and marital success as to any other sort.

A core aspect of gender-war feminism is, of course, the theme that men are women's enemies. That notion will bend susceptible men into a posture of apology for their unenlightened fellows; it will make susceptible women suspicious of the motives of their mates, even if those mates are passionately devoted to them and never dream of mistreating them. It will cripple many marriages and sunder quite a few. And the resulting suffering slakes the Schadenfreude of feminists who, whether because of physical unsightliness or emotional deficiency, cannot get the pair-bonds they refuse to admit they crave.

3:35 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger DADvocate said...

Interesting point by Schneiderman. Makes my wonder if feminsist have big feet.

3:59 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger Cham said...

I don't think these newly minted Republican female politicians are necessarily demonized, they tend to shoot themselves in the foot without help from other people.

Mind you, I am a big believer in a two party system. I am thrilled that the Republicans see the value in migrating away from the Angry White Male neocon as their ideal candidate. However, they are unwisely are sticking to a very narrow platform with no tolerance for any politician who might veer from the straight and narrow. Consequently they are choosing relatively new female candidates that don't have a political history so the entrenched Rush Limbaugh types can't pick their past apart and complain they aren't gun-rights enough, pro-life enough, christian enough or fiscally conservative enough.

Unproven politicians can become a problem, just look at Sarah Palin.

4:11 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger I R A Darth Aggie said...

Unproven politicians can become a problem, just look at Barak Obama.

FIFY. You're welcome. Also, do let me know when people start speculating if The Won has had plastic surgery to improve his appearance.

4:19 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger Master Doh-San said...

"If a man had to choose between a fantasy date with Nikki Haley or one with Elena Kagan, which would he choose? If he had to choose between being married to Sarah Palin or being married to Hillary Clinton, who would he prefer?"

Even a drunk, blind, retarded homosexual would prefer Haley over Kagan or Palin over Clinton.

5:42 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger TMink said...

Cham, Palin is a PROVEN politician.

Barak is the noob.

Trey

5:56 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger DADvocate said...

the Angry White Male neocon

Another feminist, liberal straw man which better reflects the bigotry and hatred within the minds of feminists and liberals than anything within conservatives. Yes, we hate white males, especially if he's angry about being hated.

6:46 PM, July 04, 2010  
Blogger blahga the hutt said...

"I am thrilled that the Republicans see the value in migrating away from the Angry White Male neocon as their ideal candidate."

Hmmm...something about what Peter Dane said a couple of articles ago about Cham disliking men comes to mind...Nah!!! It's just my imagination...

2:14 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger kmg said...

Always, always remember :

Whenever anyone makes a waaaaay off-base accusation, projection has consumed the accuser.

Thus, defending against the off-base accusation is not right. Counter-attacking the projection is better.

This is most common with leftists/feminists, but remember this rule for life in general.

3:29 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger kmg said...

One thing Democrats and Republicans are united on is the urge to conduct misandry.

Democrats and Republicans unite to form the Misandry Party :
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/01/28/democrats-and-republicans-unite-to-form-the-misandry-party/

Republican women still agree with 99% of the feminist agenda. Their only dispute is how best to extract from men while giving them nothing in return.

Do NOT make the mistake of thinking Republican women are opposed to misandry (Dr. Helen being an extremely rare exception).

3:32 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger kmg said...

Democrats and Republicans unite to form the Misandry Party.

3:32 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger kmg said...

Cham's entire comment is pure and total projection.

3:34 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger Cham said...

Not exactly projection, kmg. Here is an interesting article in Newsweek from Saturday about Nikki Haley that is worth reading regarding the new Republican selections. I wish Ms. Haley all the best.

7:36 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger Ern said...

Men, whatever the desires of women, will naturally direct their attentions and affections toward attractive women

True, but attraction isn't simply a matter of physical attributes. I believe that Sarah Palin, for example, would be attractive even if she had been given the face and body of Hillary Clinton or Elena Kagan. Sarah Palin's attractiveness is due as much to the fact that she is genuine and is comfortable with who she is as with the genes that determine her appearance. The fact that she has obviously taken good care of herself physically helps a lot, as well.

8:47 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger TMink said...

Then there is her honesty and values. Those are very attractive. And that is why people seek to destroy her.

Trey

11:08 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger Ern said...

Well said, Trey.

11:27 AM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger Roman said...

While I do like the company of "attractive" ladies, I think the most sexy part of a female is what is between their ears. I have to have a women I can talk to!

4:41 PM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger Thor's Dad said...

Here's the real indicator of conservative hotness - has anyone seen any porn sites that have Hillary Clinton or Elena Kagan look a likes?? Or have you ever hear anyone refer to a Dem as a MILF? Plug dear Hil into that equation to induce vomiting.....

7:28 PM, July 05, 2010  
Blogger Nick said...

I have to choose either Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin? THAT is the dichotomy chosen? Seriously?

My answer would depend... am I allowed to put duct tape over my wife's mouth?

9:24 AM, July 06, 2010  
Blogger Topher said...

I'm in line with kmg. I think this sort of "we have the hotter chicks!" analysis is gravely off-base, for two reasons. The venal reason is that there are many, many attractive women in every corner of the political spectrum.

The second and most serious reason is that in fact, the crucial tenets of feminism - female exaltation and prerogative and male subservience - have infected all of our social institutions, even a significant share of those on the right.

First there was careerist feminism and base male-bashing; following that came a backlash of both genders with a hard-on for chivalry as a sort of "code" that they didn't buy the feminist claptrap. But then, finding out they didn't like working as much as they thought they would, feminists started to co-opt the chivalry thing, and to theorize that it was OK to be a stay at home mom, and then quickly generalized that to "a man's duty is to provide for his wife," whether or not she's caring for the family children, all the while removing wives from any commensurate obligation (sexwise, comfortwise or otherwise) to their husbands and deriding said obligations as degrading sexism.

Then the conservatives doubled down again on their pedestalizing of women through the "family values" campaigns, which looked like anti-feminism on the outside but to the girls was really the same thing, demanding men put down payments of "commitment" and money into their relations with the fairer sex and pay off their original sin of maleness. While the advance of marriage law meant that women could buy out of their own marital commitments with golden parachutes.

Perhaps I don't have the points of history exactly correct, but that's basically the situation in America today. For a man looking for a respectable and ostensibly equal woman, it's equally difficult to trust a feminist or a modern religious woman, as they both come with their own brands of misandrist entitlement. So forgive me if I'm not cheerleading the nicer, hotter brand of female politicians on the right. Have any of them spearheaded anti-misandry, alimony reform, paternity fraud protection, consideration of fault, bogus "date rape" hysteria, false accusation railroadings?

Until they do I think their stump-speech stance on or against feminism is null data.

It's a lot like an old Dr Seuss story - there were two groups of some creature, and one had stars on their bellies. So the other group made a machine to put stars on themselves. And so the first group had their stars removed, and on and on it went until nobody could remember who was in which group anymore.

12:34 AM, July 07, 2010  

Post a Comment

<< Home