More Battles "The Right's War on Women" & a Little or no coverage

13 posts / 0 new

Fri, 2011-03-04 17:35

Hellebor

At a time when even 'Serious' news sites give all the front page to Charlie Sheen, the reproductive rights of Americans at large are clearly under attack.

Is feminism so passe? Why is this seen as a purely women's or Feminist issue, when it impacts everyone in the U.S.?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/utah-women-may-face-mur...

Guilty until proven innocent? A bill written by a man with a long track record of anti- women, & anti- freedom legislation.

Where is this all going to end? I think women have to demand front page coverage of this & other anti-women, anti- fredom, anti-family legislation currently on the U.S.'s Right Wing's front burners.

We had better get our act together sooner, rather than later!

In Canada, our P.M. has threatened to throw every book in the library at Human Traffickers. (perhaps he just means brown people, bringing in other brown people, in boats?)

But after over 2 years, we are still mulling this one over. 2 fathers transported their 2 twelve year old daughters across the Cdn./U.S. border to 'marry' Warren Jeffs, an accused pedophile.

http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Bountiful+dads+smuggled+daughters+into+...

Is that just another form of 'Religious Expression"?

We have been pussyfooting with these groups for decades. They have been proven to have broken both U.S. & Canadian laws, & yet we are afraid to stop this exploitation of Canadian children.

It's time we stopped being complacent, & reflecting on past glories. (They were not That glorious. We still work harder for less $$, & we still do the bulk of Everything else.)

I'm still trying to understand how these issues are seem as 'Just for Women. I don't know of many men who want 7 children. Hitler also decided to make 'Baby Machines' out of women, but nobody seems to draw that analogy. They are too busy calling each other, & the President of the U.S., "Hitler".

It's time to get loud again, sisters, & brothers! They can't hear us over Charlie Sheen.

Issues Pages:

Civil Liberties Watch

Fri, 2011-03-04 17:48

Hellebor

Well, I've had 2 views & no comments... Yup. We have Nothing to say.

Fri, 2011-03-04 19:10

George Victor

You are right on, with this, Hellebor. My own attempt to further discussion died in the feminist forum.

Fri, 2011-03-04 19:57

milo204

i mean i don't think we should be surprised when the media refuses to cover issues like this. They never have.

The only way any of this will get any attention is either through independent media or if women organize themselves and agitate to make this an issue (which they are trying to do).

Just look at the missing FN women in BC and across canada. It took a lot of organizing and agitating just to get a very brief mention in the press (long passed) and not much has come of it.

Like you point out, when the corporate media wants to it can get everyone talking (charlie sheen, etc.) about BS, but by their very nature they're never going to discuss issues of real substance or anything that challenges authority, becaue they are a major part of that authority...

Sat, 2011-03-05 12:49

Hellebor

Inde. Media doesn't seem to have room for us either. George Victor pointed out that he couldn't get a discussion started either. (& that's our input being MIA, not the lack of coverage.)

Salon.com seems to have us on the back burner too.

It took decades for even local press, & the police to start looking at the astonishing number of missing women in Canada. They got written off as street people, sex trade workers, drug users, Aboriginal women, & the Poor. Justice For All, huh? Why would women in any of these groups just disappear in such great numbers? It's just not even logical, unless foul play was a factor, & foul play ought to have produced a thorough police investigation! (Women are still dispppearing.)

CBC Doc Zone did a show this week called, " The F. Word: Who wants to be a feminist?" Germaine Greer stated that 'Nobody 50 years younger than me should be taking advice from me." Hey, in the absence of anybody else, why not?

I don't Know what it's going to take for younger women, child bearing age women to figure this out. Maybe when they head to the family Dr. in the Great Outback of America, & maybe Canada & find that birth control information is no longer available to them ?

When they end up in court defending themselves against the already tragic situation of loosing a baby? (Many women have a difficult time getting a baby to term, & must go through great sadness, with the loss of a child each time. I wonder how many of them will find themselves not only deeply depressed, but under greater suspicion, with the loss of each child?)

Do we go back about 50 years (in Canada!) to when ' giving out birth control information was illegal', even for your family doctor?

(At the same time, condoms could be purchased at the drug store. Under the counter. No visable birth control, but men still had the upper hand. It was difficult enough for unmarried men to ask for them, how humiliating must it have been for a young unmarried woman, in a small town? Even a married woman might have been viewed with suspicion. "Why wasn't her Husband making this purchase?")

Maybe we could re-brand ourselves? I don't know how George Victor would feel about becoming a "Steel Magnolia" or a "Womb With a Viewpoint"? There must be something that would grab attention ( like the irrelevent Bra Burning incident did), & also include men who wanted to keep Family Planning as a Right.

"Kate Plus 8", & "18 Kids & Counting". I wonder if TLC would be interested in people who have 2 kids, 1 kid, or maybe even No Kids, by choice? Not Bloody Likely!

I would Like to know if International Women's Day produced any protests, street theatre, or general outrage in States like Utah. Surely women & their partners across America have Something to say about the liberites being taken with their Liberties?

I guess i'll never find out, unless I spend a lot of time on the 'Net searching for local organizations..

(I wonder how the Right Wingers will tie governing the nation's wombs into 911 or a Homeland Security issue? Maybe Glenn Beck knows? )

Sat, 2011-03-05 13:24

Catchfire

Actually, we've had plenty of discussions about this already, on both reproductive rights and on the MSM fascination/diversionary tactic with Charlie Sheen. You might also might want to wait longer than 13 minutes on a Friday night before you declare a subject uninteresting to the local populace.

And George, you've been warned about berating babble feminists for not jumping when you snap your fingers before. I'm asking you to stop that.

Sat, 2011-03-05 13:58

WillC

The right has the advantage of having fewer issues. For fiscal conservatives, it issue is: how do we get more money in the hands of the rich? Social conservatives have more, but they are more likely to be able to work together.

If we only advocate your one idea, to the exclusion of all others, we arrive at the condition we are at today. Women can become the US Secretary of State and a credible candidate for President, while poor women are shut out from government financed arbortions. A woman can be PM of Canada, while First Nation women live lives of desparate povery. A woman could be CEO of a Corporation that is polluting the environment.

It just comes down to the old argument, which is more important , Class or Gender?

Sat, 2011-03-05 14:15

MegB

WillC wrote:

It just comes down to the old argument, which is more important , Class or Gender?

I don't think it has to be either/or. Both are important, and if one is more important than the other I would guess it has to do with individual perspective.

Also, use of the term "gender" is problematic, because it's non-specific. Biology frequently doesn't match gender in an individual, and vice versa. Not criticizing, mind you. Just making an observation.

Sat, 2011-03-05 15:06

WillC

I only used it, because I couldn't think of any other.

Sat, 2011-03-05 15:29

#10

George Victor

quote: "And George, you've been warned about berating babble feminists for not jumping when you snap your fingers before. I'm asking you to stop that."

my quote: "My own attempt to further discussion died in the feminist forum."

I have not received a PM or anything approaching a civilized response to my "finger snapping," just continuous threats . I have never been accused of "snapping my fingers" before. I have explained, openly, my emotional state on entering into the FF thread. My previous entry into that territory, last month, was to ask the meaning of "othered." I was given a complete answer by others, but was laughed at by you in ageist fashion, and discussed as though I was not present. Try to put those blessed humanist principles to work.

Sat, 2011-03-05 16:45

#11

MegB

'Continuous threats' translates to 'repeated warnings' when you personally trash people. If you would like to take this to PM, please do so, so that this, and other threads, can continue without drift.

Tue, 2011-03-08 01:08

#12

Hellebor

Sorry about getting a little 'over anxious' about these issues, but I had been checking other News & Discussion boards over a few weeks & found most news items re: the Clawback of Reproductive & Women's Rights to be Dead in the Water. This was kind of a last ditch Friday night attempt at getting some kind of feedback at all. (Glad you have a "life", Catchfire. I don't, by choice.

Anyway, since I'm blissfully unaware of rancor on the feminist thread..... meh.... I must have missed it.

Honestly, it seems like some kind of legislative Blitz Krieg. Nearly every day some sort of crack pot, cracker based idea gets run up the flag pole in another U.S. State. I guess i'm in a kind of shell shock over this stuff.

Who would have ever thought this kind of thinking would prevail in the U.S., in 2011? Would would have thought even the dumbest Goober would have the tunnel vision moxie to try this out? (& worse yet, have it taken seriously!?)

Who would think that 'respected' U.S. boards would champion the cause of Sharia Law, call it 'misunderstood' & everyone who sees the flaws in it as 'Islamophoboc'. Moderate Muslims in Ontario already defeated it before it got to legislation. It was another pop up issue of the Ont. Liberal party to bolster votes in their usual bastion "New Immigrants".

Now the U.S. boards seem to see it as "fair play'? Perhaps this reflects the U.S.'s ever present infatuation with faith, blind or other? Perhaps since media in the U.S. is still primarily male dominated, even on Inde. websites, they can't see it's negative impact on women in Family Law cases? (Which seem to be the most noted, & news worthy cases.) Or perhaps they are not happy with their own divorce settlement, or custody arrangements & want to put forth a little street justice of their own?

Class or Gender? It affects everyone. This is one situation that will 'Trickle Up'. For a while some may be able to bi-pass restrictions with money & power, (or being married to money & power) but sooner or later it will not only be applied to everyone, it will be applied against everyone. Use of 'artifical' birth control may be the scandal that costs a political career not to far in the future. And it will probably be a female candidate, or the spouse or adult child of a Liberal/Left male candidate.

By allowing the minority to impose their hide bound version of social norms, & civil rights on the majority of the population, we will be entering true totalitarian government. Hitler wanted control of the wombs of his nation too. Why isn't that self evident?

I hope that the Left & the sane Middle ground in Canada will not be indoctrinated to this kind of thinking. We said , "NO!" to Fox North, but will we ba able to say, "No!" to various religious groups, & other powers behind the Corporations? Only time will tell.

Sun, 2011-03-13 17:36

#13

Hellebor

I think 'Feminists" have just mostly become too darn well behaved to be noticed.

But given G20, & all The King's Horses & Men, ready to beat the snot out of & arrest the good citizens of Canada & the GTA....