The War on Women

Moderators: DrVolin, Wombaticus Rex, Jeff

Re: The War on Women

Postby 82_28 » Wed Jun 29, 2016 8:23 am

Yeah, I don't understand it either. Fundamentalism of all kinds needs to go away. But one must do it on their own not by fear by someone or some entity that parades itself as a religion. There are no rules, as we know, but I respect the cultures involved because it's the shit they have to grow up with and live in. I wonder though (gag) how the fuck Clinton is going to navigate these arcane laws say she becomes president and visits chiefly Muslim countries. It could go either way but I don't see her bowing to the pressures of decorum and if she did (if she wins -- another gag) she would have hell to pay by the seemingly rabid right wing idiots here. Since she has already proven she is an effectively right wing figure who appears to be left or liberal or whatever. It reminds me of dubya holding hands with the crown prince whatever the fuck he is.

Image

As with all things, I have no idea how this shit works. Let's hope it doesn't come down to her. Hella bummed that Warren has decided to back Clinton. What can you do as a mere spectator in this shit show?
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby backtoiam » Wed Jun 29, 2016 9:16 am

blue said

Is this fucking satire?

Since everyone already knows women are punished, tortured and murdered on a regular basis by Sharia Law Enforcers there is no need to document each occurrence.

Way to murky up the waters of the war on women tho. Must be MRA's.



mmmmm...nope. this is not satire for sure. I agree that Sharia Law Enforcers are punishing women. We are on the same page far as I can tell. I didn't document any occurrence either. We could do that but why should we?

Since we agree, how did I murk up the water?
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby American Dream » Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:04 am

backtoiam » Wed Jun 29, 2016 3:49 am wrote:Lets face it, "white men" treat their "women" a hell of a lot better than this middle eastern culture does. Our females are allowed to wear bikinis and do as they will.

There are places in the Middle East where women can be seriously punished for not having that Burka on that head. If they get caught out on the street breaking Sharia Law the price can be damn heavy.

Its a real deal and that is why we have all these young angry horny middle eastern men causing havoc with young girls. These mid east guys, a lot of em, never saw a "candy store" before. They like it. I agree that we should be able to discuss that without being "bigots" because we are not bigots............


You can not fool me- I am smart. This is satire... I have even known some feminists and they never hang out with bros who talk like this...
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 16429
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby Luther Blissett » Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:31 am



lol
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:31 pm

You put a lot of thought into that karma and I don't disagree with it in the outlines or details. I also don't want to get too much into it. Why? I think it boils down to the fact that almost all of us on this forum we are HERE ("West") rather than THERE (elsewhere) and get caught up with both the issues and the religious fanatics here that we have to deal with, rather than there. Which isn't to say we won't talk about both, but more often it will be Anglosphere West than anything else...

Also, note thread topic, which refers to developments in the U.S. These are real enough (though contested by some here) and horrible even if they don't match the level of Saudi Arabia (Iran is much more complicated, but not defensible). Are women's rights to their own bodies under constant attack? Are their specific interests taken seriously enough by state and institutions? (and never mind how often everyone's rights are also trampled). Is there such a thing as rape culture? Do girls and boys get targeted with gender-specific propaganda that may not always work as intended but still often fucks them up for life? (Do we have guys here who think all "our" women belong to them and they are the ones who generously allow them to wear bikinis?) Is any of that improved or made less objectionable because circumstances may be dramatically worse in places other than the ones we're talking about in this thread? (The U.S., mostly.)

Please note these further complications:

- Characterizations of Islam or types of it, true or not, are generalized to all people who are Muslim or from Muslim countries, and weaponized into racisms against them without allowing exceptions; they are never seen as other than other. This is something we can do something about here.

- Characterizations of Islam or types of it, true or not, are used to support bloody wars of aggression against Muslim countries and populations, with horrific consequences. Wars that are justified in part as liberating these peoples from oppressions (for like, five minutes before the feminist or liberal facades are dropped altogether and everything just gets worse for everyone involved). This is sort of our obligation to do something about. Also, it makes everything "we" supposedly are trying to combat in "Islam" worse, not better. It's "terrorist" recruitment. It may not always create "the enemy," but it sure makes the enemy worse.

- That last point is obscured by the Bill Mahers of the world, who want to sell the lie that all this hatred against America and the West is exclusively the product of religious brainwashing, which is bullshit. No one's really killing themselves for the 72 virgins. They're envisioning themselves as heroic actors in a war against a beast that wants to destroy their own culture, traditions, or nations. Said beast keeps providing evidence to encourage them, even if it's far from the whole story. (They're also mostly doing things that are completely useless in what they think is a defensive or counter-war, and thus providing the justification in reverse.)

- Historically speaking and right up to today, the jihadis and some of the worst preacher types at the cutting edge of the worse types of Islam are instrumentalized or used as proxies of Western policy, or (at elite levels) even get input on Western or U.S. policy. This happens almost as often as they are demonized and turned into ultimate enemies whose destruction justifies any level of collateral damage, including the extermination of wedding parties because an algorithm told the drone operator that a legitimate target might be present. Again, this is "our" tax dollars at work and obviously makes worse precisely those problems about "Islam" that "we" supposedly intend to correct.

- tl;dr, America fucking crushed Western parliamentarianism in Iran, Arab secular nationalism, and a bad communist regime in Afghanistan that was nevertheless developing the country and protecting women's rights, allying with all kinds of jihadis and the Saudi kingdom all the while, sometimes rotating said jihadis from freedom fighter into terrorist enemy. And now we want to complain about the predictable results, too?

Finally, it's not just some preacher in Sacramento saying fucked up things. He's lauding mass murder and thus encouraging more of the same. Enough people get murdered and maimed in a retail fashion for being gay or trans or uppity females or whatever other bullshit in this country (omitting for the moment the even larger number who are done in by the police for appearing to have a dangerous skin color). But beyond that, the difference between this Sacramento preacher and (at least our image of) Baghdadi, the Daesh leader, is that he's in Sacramento with the relative prosperity as opposed to Syria with the universe in ruins. Mr. Sacramento also wants to be a mullah warlord executing homosexuals on orders from God, but he happens to be in a country that wasn't bombed (but did the bombing) and where the separation of church and state is fairly intact. Don't tell me fuckers like that don't matter. Don't tell me there is an inherently more civilized nature to Christendom as opposed to Islam. The supposed gifts of modern Western civilization did not for the most part arise from but against the violent opposition of Christendom. Islam has its Sufis -- persecuted and sometimes murdered by the Iranian state -- and the Christians have their Quakers. Mr. Sacramento Preacher would no doubt like to see the Quakers hanging from streetlamps.
To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

Top Secret Wall St. Iraq? & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 12451
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby DrEvil » Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:07 pm

The new Ghostbusters movie has been getting a lot of flak from the MRA/misogynist/trolls for having an all female cast. The first trailer on youtube is the most disliked video ever. Now that it's finally out I looked it up on imdb and was surprised to see it have a rating of 4.3 with over 17K votes. The reviews I've read all say it's a good movie.

I then took a closer look at the distribution of votes by age and gender, and the results are pretty fucking depressing:

Males average: 3.9
Females average: 7.7
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1289401/rat ... _=tt_ov_rt
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 1832
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Sep 11, 2016 6:10 pm

Wisconsin to Pay Abortion Providers $1.6 Million After GOP’s Failed Anti-Choice Measure
Sep 8, 2016, 6:44pm Michelle D. Anderson
The U.S. District Court in the Western District of Wisconsin ruled Thursday that the state must pay the money to Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Affiliated Medical Services, also known as Milwaukee Women’s Medical Services.


Teri Huyck, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said in a statement Thursday that Scott Walker’s anti-choice efforts have proven to be an expensive bill for Wisconsin taxpayers.

The Wisconsin Office of the Attorney General has agreed to pay the state’s abortion providers a $1.6 million lawsuit settlement to cover legal fees they amassed while fighting an unconstitutional 2013 admitting privileges law passed by the state’s GOP-held legislature.

The U.S. District Court in the Western District of Wisconsin ruled Thursday that the state must pay the money to Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Affiliated Medical Services, also known as Milwaukee Women’s Medical Services.

Judge William M. Conley declared as part of Thursday’s judgment that the admitting privileges law was unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. The Republican-backed law had required doctors to have hospital admitting privileges within 30 miles of the location where an abortion was to be performed. Anti-choice legislators push admitting privileges laws as a safety precaution even though abortion care has proven time and again to be exceedingly safe.

The state attorney general had twice appealed to the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which affirmed a previous lower court’s decision to block the law in both instances. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take the case in June, just a day after overturning a similar Texas provision in the landmark Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt case.

Wendie Ashlock, clinic director for Affiliated Medical Services in Milwaukee, welcomed the news, telling Rewire that dealing with the anti-choice measure and filing the lawsuit was a “daunting” process.

“We had to pull records. We had to deal with trying to get admitting privileges and not getting a response from hospitals,” said Ashlock, a 23-year veteran at the clinic. “It was a very frustrating process to go through …. It’s nice to know that we’re going to be able to recoup some of the costs.”

Conley said the defendants, which include Wisconsin Attorney General Brad D. Schimel and members of the state medical examining board, were prohibited from enforcing the anti-choice law. He had blocked the law’s enforcement soon after Gov. Scott Walker (R) signed it into law in 2013.

The judgment came a week after state officials filed a second request to amend the case’s briefing schedule because the two parties had reached a settlement.

The parties had not reduced the agreement to writing, but had planned to file a stipulation formalizing the settlement, according to court documents.

The court judgment on Thursday said the stipulation and agreement would not prevent the providers “from seeking attorneys’ fees and costs in the event of future litigation” to enforce the district court’s judgment “for work related to such enforcement.”

The abortion providers had requested the funds in July, noting that they were entitled to reimbursement of the legal fees under the Civil Rights Attorneys’ Fee Awards Act of 1976. The providers asked for $1.7 million in attorneys’ fees, $44,253 in billable costs, and $22,545 in out-of-pocket expenses, as Rewire reported.

Teri Huyck, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said in a statement Thursday that Walker’s anti-choice efforts have proven to be an expensive bill for Wisconsin taxpayers.

That money, she said, could better be spent on helping people gain access to basic birth control and preventive health care.

Planned Parenthood operates 21 health-care centers in Wisconsin, two of which provide abortion care. The affiliate recently closed a clinic that offered abortion care in Appleton.
https://rewire.news/article/2016/09/08/ ... ettlement/
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: The War on Women

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 11, 2016 7:53 pm

You have no idea how overjoyed my wife was when I told her we'd decided not to behead her but instead to let her wear a bikini and work and vote and stuff.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4667
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Sep 11, 2016 9:37 pm

OP ED » Sun Sep 11, 2016 6:53 pm wrote:You have no idea how overjoyed my wife was when I told her we'd decided not to behead her but instead to let her wear a bikini and work and vote and stuff.


You're a saint! A saint, I tell ya.
To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

Top Secret Wall St. Iraq? & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 12451
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby OP ED » Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:32 pm

She somehow disagrees. Good for her that I have allowed her to do so.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4667
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Sep 18, 2016 9:43 am

Court: Louisiana Can’t Defund Planned Parenthood
Sep 15, 2016, 3:17pm Nicole Knight
Former Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) last year cited anti-choice activists' widely discredited smear videos as the basis for removing Planned Parenthood from the state Medicaid program

A federal appellate court on Wednesday rejected Lousiana’s attempt to defund Planned Parenthood, marking a victory for thousands of Medicaid patients and reproductive health access in the state.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld a preliminary injunction by a lower court, which had blocked the state Republicans’ attempt to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast (PPGC).

Former Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) last year cited anti-choice activists’ widely discredited smear videos as the basis for removing Planned Parenthood from the state Medicaid program, saying Planned Parenthood doesn’t “represent the values” of the state.

Planned Parenthood and patients quickly sued, and a district court blocked the state’s defunding attempt—a decision the appellate panel affirmed on Wednesday.

APPRECIATE OUR WORK?
Rewire is a non-profit independent media publication. Your tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.
DONATE NOW
In a 38-page decision, the three-judge panel wrote that the state failed to provide grounds for its claims that Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast had committed fraud or misrepresentation. The panel wrote that the state “has simply pasted the labels of ‘fraud’ and ‘misrepresentations’ on PPGC’s conduct, and then insisted that these labels should insulate its termination actions from … challenges.”

Republican lawmakers in states across the country and in Congress have attempted to strip Planned Parenthood of funding amid baseless allegations by an anti-choice front group that the provider unlawfully sells fetal tissue.

These states are now facing a Zika virus threat, with 29 cases reported in Louisiana on Wednesday by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. States that have gutted reproductive health funding are now particularly vulnerable to Zika outbreaks, as Vox reported.

Referencing the federal Medicaid statute’s free-choice-of-provider requirement, the appellate panel wrote that patients have the right to choose among a “range of qualified providers, without government interference,” and said the state hadn’t made its case that Planned Parenthood was unqualified.

The Obama administration last year warned states that defunding Planned Parenthood is likely illegal.

More than 5,000 Louisianans rely on Medicaid for health-care coverage at Planned Parenthood facilities in New Orleans and Baton Rouge. The facilities offer well-woman exams, cancer screenings, sexually transmitted disease testing and treatment, but do not offer abortion care, as Rewire has reported.

“For too long, politicians have tried to restrict Louisianans’ access to the care they need and deserve,” Melaney A. Linton, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, said in a statement Wednesday. “Today’s ruling affirms that Louisianans can continue to rely on Planned Parenthood, their trusted health care provider.”
https://rewire.news/article/2016/09/15/ ... arenthood/
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: The War on Women

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:46 pm

justdrew » Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:01 pm wrote:up next, the republicans plan on holding up re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act




:thumbsup
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: The War on Women

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Thu Sep 29, 2016 9:33 am

But they're pro-life. How does the cognitive dissonance not make their heads explode.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... cs-funding

The rate of Texas women who died from complications related to pregnancy doubled from 2010 to 2014, a new study has found, for an estimated maternal mortality rate that is unmatched in any other state and the rest of the developed world.

Politics is killing mothers in Texas
Jessica Valenti
Jessica Valenti Read more
The finding comes from a report, appearing in the September issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, that the maternal mortality rate in the United States increased between 2000 and 2014, even while the rest of the world succeeded in reducing its rate. Excluding California, where maternal mortality declined, and Texas, where it surged, the estimated number of maternal deaths per 100,000 births rose to 23.8 in 2014 from 18.8 in 2000 – or about 27%.

But the report singled out Texas for special concern, saying the doubling of mortality rates in a two-year period was hard to explain “in the absence of war, natural disaster, or severe economic upheaval”.

From 2000 to the end of 2010, Texas’s estimated maternal mortality rate hovered between 17.7 and 18.6 per 100,000 births. But after 2010, that rate had leaped to 33 deaths per 100,000, and in 2014 it was 35.8. Between 2010 and 2014, more than 600 women died for reasons related to their pregnancies.

No other state saw a comparable increase.

In the wake of the report, reproductive health advocates are blaming the increase on Republican-led budget cuts that decimated the ranks of Texas’s reproductive healthcare clinics. In 2011, just as the spike began, the Texas state legislature cut $73.6m from the state’s family planning budget of $111.5m. The two-thirds cut forced more than 80 family planning clinics to shut down across the state. The remaining clinics managed to provide services – such as low-cost or free birth control, cancer screenings and well-woman exams – to only half as many women as before.

At the same time, Texas eliminated all Planned Parenthood clinics – whether or not they provided abortion services – from the state program that provides poor women with preventive healthcare. Previously, Planned Parenthood clinics in Texas offered cancer screenings and contraception to more than 130,000 women.

In 2013, Texas restored funding for the family planning budget to original levels. But the healthcare providers who survived the initial cuts reported struggles to restore services to their original levels.

Indeed, the report said it was “puzzling” that Texas’s maternal mortality rate rose only modestly from 2000 to 2010 before doubling between 2011 and 2012. The researchers, hailing from the University of Maryland, Boston University’s school of public health and Stanford University’s medical school, called for further study. But they noted that starting in 2011, Texas drastically reduced the number of women’s health clinics within its borders.

Advertisement

The report comes just as public health advocates are raising questions about Texas’s ability to prepare for the Zika virus, which is transmitted by a common species of mosquito and has been linked to severe birth defects. The World Health Organization has advised women in areas of local transmission to delay pregnancy.

Texas is one of several southern states where health officials say there is a risk of a local outbreak. But about half the state lacks ready access to OB-GYN care, making it difficult for women to obtain contraception or for pregnant women to confirm the health of their babies. Just this month, Texas’s health department drew fire for allocating $1.6m of the $18m the state budgets for low-income women’s family planning to an anti-abortion group that does not provide basic health services.

“There is a need to redouble efforts to prevent maternal deaths and improve maternity care for the 4 million US women giving birth each year,” the authors said.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1709
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The War on Women

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Sep 29, 2016 9:36 am

but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but

democrats are the same as republicans ...


Image
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: The War on Women

Postby seemslikeadream » Sat Oct 01, 2016 5:49 pm

POLITICS
Oregon Politician Said Educated Women Aren’t ‘Susceptible’ To Abuse
It was moments after the governor said she was a domestic violence survivor herself.
10/01/2016 04:53 pm ET
Hilary Hanson
Viral News Editor, The Huffington Post
Republican candidate for Oregon governor Bud Pierce has apologized for stating that educated women with good jobs are not “susceptible” to abuse.

“A woman that has great education and training and a great job is not susceptible to this kind of abuse by men, women or anyone,” Pierce said at a Friday debate with Oregon Gov. Kate Brown (D) in Portland.

The comment was particularly clueless, considering that it came just moments after Brown noted that she was a domestic violence survivor, KGW reports. (Her campaign later clarified that her husband, Dan Little, was not involved.)


An audience member had asked the two of them about a recent report finding that more than half of the state’s female population has experienced sexual or domestic violence.

As the crowd booed, Pierce attempted to clarify his comments.

“OK, so, powerful women have access to lawyers and courts and go at it. But the women who are most vulnerable are poor women who don’t have a place to turn, because they don’t have shelter, they don’t have family around them,” he said. “So I would argue that in addition to strong laws and going after every sexual predator and every abuser, that the way we can make women have a better existence and be less susceptible to being harmed is to make them powerful in terms of their job and their opportunity.”

Brown appeared taken aback. “I’m honestly not sure where to start,” she said. “I grew up in a middle-class family. I went to law school. I know what it feels like to be paid less — substantially less — than the male lawyer in the office next to me. This is not just about power; it’s about making sure that people are not discriminated against because of their gender, because of their race and because of their sexual orientation.”

Pierce released an apology later Friday, acknowledging that “any women, regardless of economic status, can be subject to domestic violence and sexual abuse.”


Poverty and lack of resources can, of course, make it more difficult to seek help in an abusive situation, and a 2013 Department of Justice report found that women in “economically disadvantaged neighborhoods” were more likely to experience intimate partner violence.

But the premise that people with good jobs or high levels of education aren’t susceptible to abuse is — as Brown demonstrates — just flat-out wrong.

And the stereotype that domestic violence only happens to poor or uneducated women could prevent people from seeking help.

“Because, as an educated or professional person, the victim will say, ‘These things shouldn’t be happening to me,” Nanci Kreidman, CEO of the Domestic Violence Action Center, told Hawaii Business in 2012. “And so they have a greater interest in protecting the secret because they’re embarrassed. There’s less sympathy from others and more judgment involved.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bud ... 407cde417e
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: norton ash and 52 guests