What women's rights look like when the two sides come together as one.
What women's rights are when women are no longer manipulated by party rhetoric.


Wednesday, February 29, 2012

The Women Have Spoken

Cynthia Ruccia



It appears that women were the key ingredient to the Romney win in Michigan last night. I'm not here to endorse a candidate or take a victory lap, although I do hope that if Mitt Romney becomes the Republican nominee for president that he will put a woman on the ticket with him. He's the only candidate so far from either party who has even paid lip service to that idea.

My main reason for writing today is to debunk the myths that women are irrelevant on the Republican side and that the Republican women are complicit in the meme that the Republicans want to put women back in the kitchen and saddle them with more babies than what they want, you know that whole "barefoot and pregnant" story that gets repeated ad nauseum. Guess what people-----------IT ISN'T TRUE!!!! And the Michigan Republican primary results yesterday state that loud and clear.



For anyone reading this piece who continues to run up against the screamers on the Democratic side who like to use the above argument as a selling point to get you in line, send them here to read. The truth is that once you take away the extreme element on either side, probably 60--70% of the people in the middle want much of the same things. We want the economy to pick up. We don't care about the divisive abortion arguments. The contraception subject is closed------people can do what they want. We want the election to be about our economic empowerment.

And the Republican women in Michigan put Romney over the top because they care about what the rest of us care about. They have no interest either in blasting women into the Stone Age. They are tired of the attempts to use them as a political football on reproductive rights. The Republican women work just like many of us. They are moms just like many of us. They want their daughters, nieces, and girls in general to have great economic and career opportunities just like the rest of us. What great news that we women want many of the same things regardless of party preference!!! If we would just stop allowing ourselves to be manipulated by party rhetoric and join hands, you would be able to hear those glass ceilings being shattered from coast to coast. It will take courage for we women to break out of our current mold. But we can do it, and we must take the steps to unite. Reach out and befriend a woman from the other side. Put a human face on it for yourself. It will shatter for you forever the ridiculous myths the two parties are putting out about women.

So------it's great news out of Michigan for women today. And there's no need for me to write a whole lot because the women of Michigan have spoken for themselves!!!!



29 comments:

  1. I like that Cynthia. Maybe I'll try to make a new friend today.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As a Republican woman, I couldn't agree more! Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You said it! Michigan Believes!!
    What is your take on Ohio women?
    Barbara

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ohio is a state that has a little of everything. we're a little bit of city and a little bit of country and everything in between. I can't pretend to know how things will turn out next Tuesday, but it will be close however it turns out

      Delete
    2. Cynthia,

      I do want Romney to be the nominee, because there should be a real choice facing the American people in 2012. The more and more I watch the dems. Romney is this years Hillary to them. No matter what bench-mark they set and he then meets...they raise the stakes higher & higher. Rick S. is Obama experience wise in 2008, with B.O. now being the more experienced of the two...case closed...ugh@@@

      Delete
    3. I also find it hard to get through this election season so far without having constant flashbacks to 2008....

      Delete
  4. go to the website of a moderate republican woman and make friends. To do that you have to give up on some of your favorite militant rhetoric on choice etc... and talk like you do to your republican friends in real life.
    Let's reach out and see if we can come together on one issue, that being the issue that we need to stick together and vote for each other because that is the only way women will only take their rightful place as the top percent of leadership in congress and the white house. `

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the funny thing is that once you take away all of the militant rhetoric on both sides, we're really all in this together. We need the weight of all of us to shatter those glass ceilings regardless of our positions on other things. But it seems like common ground is the enemy of the parties.......

      Delete
  5. Women, being over 1/2 the population should make a difference in every election. Neither party should be able to count on the "women's vote."

    The Democratic PTB refer to women voters as "feelers" not "thinkers." I think women ought to show them how we "feel" about an insult like that. Or perhaps we shouldn't worry our little heads about it. Perhaps we should just keep endlessly supporting the Dems that talk about what they will do for us, but when they had the White House, Senate and House did squat. A few marginal issues that would supposed to bring us all groveling to the Democratic Party wagging our tails behind us? Are we that dumb?

    I support Mitt Romney because I find him the least objectionable candidate. Not a rousing endorsement but then I'm an old crab and I don't "like" most politicians. Some less than others.

    I am hoping that Governor Romney will choose Susanna Martinez, Governor of New Mexico as his running mate if he wins the nomination. I find her smart, savvy and very "historic." And we know we have to have someone "historic."

    It would be interesting to see if the misogynists on both sides of the isle would attack her as they did Sarah Palin given her ethnicity. Marco Rubio is all ready being attacked from the left but they feel "safe" doing it because he's Cuban. Susanna is Mexican-American. She would pose quite a dilemma.

    I wish ethnicity didn't play a part in who(m) we vote for or against but the reality is that it does. On one hand I cannot blame Hispanics for feeling that one of their own would be more open to listening to their particular problems. On the other hand I think that voting by race is, well racist.

    Either way I cannot and will not support Democratic women running for office so long as Obama is in the White House, Reid is in the Senate and there is any chance whatsoever that Pelosi and her giant gavel ever come back into power.

    I don't "like" either party or their leadership. But at this point in time I dislike the Dems and their leadership more.

    If by some fluke the idiot Santorum wins the nomination for the GOP I shall be voting for Gary Johnson on the Libertarian ticket. I always vote because I believe that if I am not a part of the process I don't have a right to complain. And I like to complain. Long, loud and often.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think that would save Susanna - think Herman Cain, Condi Rice, Allen West, Alberto Gonzales etc. I would love to have her on the ticket though - or Nikki Haley - both great! I don't like either party - never have - but I've been a lifelong Republican only because I've viewed it as the lesser of two evils. I would love to vote Libertarian though if it wouldn't just help get Dems elected. But this time I don't care if the Pubs run an eggplant - I'm voting against Pres. Obama.

      Delete
  6. I am afraid that Rick Santorum's observations about contraception being harmful to women are too nuanced -- or too easy to demagogue -- to be easily understood. It's true that contraception has allowed married women to determine the number of children they will have and how far apart they will be spaced so as to allow them to pursue their educational and career goals. That's the upside. The downside is that for single women contraception has enabled men to be more coercive about demanding premarital and casual sex (friends with benefits) with no intention whatsoever of marriage, even if the contraceptive fails and the woman becomes pregnant. Hence there are plenty of women out there who "can't find a decent husband" -- a phenomenon that has hit educated black women particularly hard -- and women whose ticking biological clocks have forced them to become single mothers -- not ideal from an economic standpoint. Contraception has enabled a level of promiscuity in our society that has ultimately demeaned women and objectified them worse than the early feminists could ever have imagined. Hence, career women taking pole dancind/stripping classes at the gym and having their vaginas cosmetically altered to look like a porn queen. I am a feminist and I know Santorum is 100 percent right, but he's a white, male, conservative Republican and most feminists are not going to admit that in their hearts of hearts they know he is right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that these are problems that need some attention, and some folks may agree with Santorum's approach. However, that particular powder keg of issues is perhaps something that government shouldn't and can't get involved in. If Santorum were any other kind of leader, particularly a religious one, people might be more tolerant of the message. But coming from a candidate for president of the United States, that issue isn't going to fly with the electorate now or possibly ever------who knows? And although a case could be made that changing the moral tone of the country might be beneficial to women economically, the bottom line to me at least is that we need more women running things in our country. Then maybe women would be able to fix some other nagging problems because their voices will be heard from a position of strength rather than weakness.

      But you bring up a huge number of things, and I agree that these are subjects that could use some serious discussion without the usual chorus of voices with their screaming platitudes. And I have to say that since Santorum is a white male, conservative or liberal, he might not be the right messenger. I'm not sure women are willing to listen to yet another man telling them what's right or wrong for them. And actually that might be sexist, but it is what it is.

      Delete
    2. Santorum's only sin, if I may, is that he is using the bully pulpit *before* becoming president. He wants to focus attention on huge philosophical and cultural issues that ultimately impact our collective economic well-being. But during a campaign unemployed people want to hear about jobs. This disucssion is as helpful right now as it is for Obama to tell people who are wondering which food group to give up so they can gas their cars about green energy intitiatives that won't pay off for decades if at all. And Santorum is further harming his candidacy by allowing his opponents to demagogue him by giving the false impression that the president has any power whatsoever to regulate or ban contraception or abortion. That power belongs to the legislative branch (both state and federal) as well as to the courts, which interpret the constitutionality of laws (all of which you know personally, Cynthia). For someone to claim that Santorum wants to take away their birth control pill is beyond ludicrous. But this is how one wins elections these days, through deception and deflection.

      Delete
    3. Great points Stiletto. I wish more women would not fall for the old tricks and really THINK about it. I'm afraid though that much of the media has decided to deceive and deflect rather than to inform.

      Delete
    4. it's always "gotcha" politics. Always. Somehow that makes people more interested and builds ratings?????? People always say that they hate this kind of politics, but when polling is done before and after, these tactics always work. pffft.....

      Delete
    5. I find Santorum's entire attitude toward women arrogant and insulting. He presumes to know better than individual women how they should plan and live nd plan their lives.

      Do some women fall for men's lines? Of course they do. Was there ever a time when that wasn't true?

      With contraception and information about sexuality widely available, at least when women DO make the mistake of trusting the wrong man, or when they choose to be active sexually of their own accord, they have the option of protecting themselves from pregnancy so they don't have to spend the rest of their lives paying the price for a momentary lapse or immature judgment.

      I am sick to death of men thinking they have the right to protect women from themselves. After a generation of relative sexual freedom, only now are women really coming to grips with what individual freedoms and responsibilities mean.

      I say, let girls and women make their mistakes and learn from them, let them decide and act on their own individual priorities, let them become mature and responsible based on their own experience and sense of empowerment, let them voluntarily learn from each other and grow apace. That is what freedom is.

      What freedom is NOT is being required obey the sexually repressive dictates of some moralizing male politician who believes women lack the character, intellectual capacity, moral judgment or legal right to determine their own course.

      Delete
  7. I think at this time a President with good sense, including good business sense, would be helpful. I will vote for Romney in VA's primary. I also hope he will find a good woman for his running mate.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm glad Romney won in Michigan (and Arizona) and that women played a big role in his victory. But as a Virginian, the latest round of right-wing attacks on women's health has made me realize that all these so-called "small government" folks put way too much energy into making government so large and powerful that it can invade women's lives, health care decisions, doctors' offices and even their bodies at will.

    Until this month, as a lifelong feminist and fiscal conservative (and a lifelong Dem until the Dems torpedoed Hillary in 08), I had been a solid Sarah Palin supporter since 2008, and Tea Party supporter since 2009. But this recent wave of anti-women right-wing shenanigans -- from subverting Komen to enacting state-mandated rape of pregnant women -- has driven me firmly back into the Democratic camp until we get it through the Neanderthals' heads that NO, WE ARE NOT GOING BACK to reproductive slavery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess it's lucky for me that I just don't care about any of that any more. I'm so sick of all the demogoguery, manipulation, and the veiled and not so veiled bullying - usually women on women. WAY more so-called "feminist" women seem to feel they have the right to tell me how to run my health care, my body, my voting, and even whether I get to call myself a feminist - or not - than any group of men or politicians on the right.

      I can't even type "reproductive slavery" without laughing. It's so over-the-top melodramatic and the use of the word "slavery"? Condoms can be bought in restaurant bathrooms now and in bulk on the internet for 10 cents each. I hardly think we are teetering on the edge of "reproductive slavery" whatever the hell that is even supposed to mean. Are women ever going to be able to have calm and rational discussions on these topics without hitting the old language panic button? I'm so sick of the presumptuousness of "women's health" or "women's issues" or "women's rights" assuming I am just ovaries with legs. The truth is I don't give a flip flyin fig about "reproductive rights" or contraception.

      Delete
    2. The truth is that the "reproductive rights" discussion accomplishes what it sets out to do. I don't believe that anyone in either house of the U.S. Congress is really going to touch it with a ten foot pole, or do it for long. HOWEVER, it serves both sides to scream bloody murder about this subjects because it gets their plegmatic bases all excited, ginned up, and ready to do battle in an election year. We are all of us pawns in someone else's quest for power when this very subject comes up. It's CRAZY!!!! And although what is going on in VA is tough, it is not a bellweather for the rest of the nation. I swear, if we women don't stop letting ourselves be manipulated by the reproductive carnival and its rhetoric, we will never ever have anything and we WILL be blasted back to the stone age. We need more women in power positions------50% at least. The dialogue and rhetoric WILL change. It's worth a try. Because what do we have now? A bunch of men on both sides of the aisle wagging their tails on reproductive issues and we come running into place on cue. Sorry, I REFUSE to play that game any longer......EVER!!!!

      I understand why JBinVA is feeling extra sensitive on the subject considering what is playing out in VA. Who knows how we'd feel if we were living there? But to me it is hardly a reason to fly into the arms of the party that purveyed the grossest sexism ever and continues to treat women as pawns-----just like the other side. Both parties have poor track records.......

      Delete
    3. A bunch of men on both sides of the aisle wagging their tails on reproductive issues and we come running into place on cue. Sorry, I REFUSE to play that game any longer......EVER!!!!

      Ditto!

      Delete
  9. Thinking for one moment that Mitt Romney would choose a woman for his veep running mate is utterly delusional, at best, Cynthia. This isn't about being friends with Repub women-- I have plenty of them. It's time to wake up & look with a truly objective view. Rose-colored glasses will hardly accomplish that. And, Stiletto to state that "someone" is claiming that Santorum wants to take away women's rights to choose is ludicrous is well... ludicrous. The ONLY someone doing the deflecting is Santorum, no one else is putting words into that man's mouth. I think there's wayyyy too much rationalizing going on here in order to justify support for Repub candidates which in essence, is an anti-Obama, anti-Dem vote. I'm not a huge Obama supporter, but neither have I completely lost my perspective on reality. The Blunt-Rubio amendment was hardly a Dem idea. Facing reality is a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No reason to ridicule Anonymous. I get so tired of people who don't have the courage to stand by their convictions and post tacky, rude, and nasty comments under the guise of "anonymous." Who knows who you are and what you stand for? Are you a troll putting out propaganda to attempt to stop debate? And clearly you are never on this blog. Women Win Too isn't a vehicle to bash President Obama. Aside from your rudeness and inability to have a civil discourse, the only thing I agree with you about is that it is delusional to think that ANYONE would choose a female running mate. However, lip service was paid by Romney to that idea, and no one else has even brought it up. You sound like you're just another of those people who would hate the idea of a woman as VP or president anyways. But too afraid to own up to your own misguided misogyny.

      Delete
    2. Speaking of facing reality Anonymous - The Dems have run one woman for VP and the Pubs have run one woman for VP. So it's just as likely Romney as a Pub would pick a woman as it is likely Pres. Obama as a Dem would pick a woman. Oh wait- I forgot - Pres. Obama had a chance to pick Hillary and he went with VP Biden. I guess it's up to Romney - or whoever wins the nomination - and I intend to let them know there are plenty of women to choose from.

      Delete
    3. BTW Anonymous - have you ever asked a Pub woman why she might agree or disagree with the Blunt amendment? I'll give you my .02 just in case ;) I do agree with them that it violates the 1st amendment/religious freedom. But that isn't why I'm against having contraception as a mandatory coverage item by insurance companies. I'm already forced - because of government "regulation" aka interference in the private market - to pay for all sorts of insurance coverage I do not want and will never need. For example drug and alcohol rehab. If it were a true free market for insurance, I could save myself a ton of money not having that and many other treatments covered. Insurance companies are not charities - the more you want covered the more it costs. But because the government, and it's almost all Democrats on this one, wants to "take care of me" they continue to add to the list of what my insurance has to cover and of course it costs more. I do not want contraceptive coverage. I do not want to be forced to pay for it. I have my business handled and I do not want to spend more money on something I do not want or need "for my own good." So which party is really on the side of helping "big insurance" make more money and rip me off?

      Delete
  10. Okay, but here is what I am interested in:
    "Warren Buffett backs Hillary Clinton in 2016"
    http://politi.co/UrsdJZ

    ReplyDelete