Skip to main content

Why do so many Republican women hate their own gender?

For a long time, I've wondered why so many women are self-described Republicans. After all, this is the party which typically stands up to women's right to choose what to do with their bodies post-pregnancy. This is the party which claims the pay gap is a myth. This is the party which often times victim-blames women for sexual harassment, assault, and rape. This is the party which seems to see women more as objects (trophies) than as people. Due to this, I think it's safe to say many self-described Republican women are self-haters. Two such individuals which may exemplify this more than any others are Ann Coulter and Dana Loesch.

As I've written about Ms. Coulter several times in the past, I'll refrain from going into too much detail about her here. Having said that, allow me to share with you one quote she's uttered: "Women should not have the right to vote."

That brings me to NRA spokesperson Dana Loesch, who recently said the following on her show, Relentless:

"I am so tired of this matriarchal witch hunt on young men. There is nothing toxic about masculinity, but there are plenty of toxic things about third-wave feminism and the matriarchy that's attempting to assert authority and also be the ombudsman over all characteristics and definitions of that which are either masculine or feminine. As a boy mom, kind of had enough of this. Especially like women who just need to stay in your lane and don't be telling men how their masculinity is toxic. No, the problem that we're having with society is that there's an attack on masculinity where toxic masculinity isn't an issue in all of the homes where there are absent fathers. That's a lack of, not toxic. See, we have an issue right now where men are underappreciated, dads are ridiculed either as the dumb dad on television, that awful stereotype still persists, or they are told that, what, they're oppressive, they are suppressive simply because they are males and in the United States of America. I'm so tired, as a woman, as a mother of boys, having ot combat this garbage from women -- many of which, many of whom don't even have children, -- and others who wouldn't be able -- they wouldn't know what masculinity was if it hit them in the face. No. Honestly, stop it."

That last full line perfectly sums up everything that's wrong with Ms. Loesch's rationale and rant: "[Many women] Wouldn't know what masculinity was if it hit them in the face."

There's nothing wrong with a man being masculine, but there's a stark difference between a man simply being masculine and a man using that masculinity to hit a woman in the face. Look, I've been uncoy about criticizing some members/arguments of the #MeToo movement, even though I'm a member of the group. However, there's never a time to condone sexual harassment, assault, or rape, no matter the gender of the victim. This isn't a case of masculine vs. feminine; it's a case of right vs. wrong. Some men and women are more naturally masculine than their counterparts and that's perfectly fine. The same can be said about those whom are more feminine than their peers. I don't hear anybody actively fighting against said masculinity or femininity. I've been referred to by some females as masculine, others as stereotypically feminine, but regardless of my level of masculinity or femininity, that never gives me an excuse to physically/sexually violate another person. Women all over the country (and world) are simply fighting for equality. They're fighting to have a voice, to be heard. They're fighting the all-too-common double-standards in the workplace in this patriarchal society. If Dana Loesch has a problem with that, she, like a lot of other Republican women, needs to look in the mirror, admit to herself what she is - a self-hater, and do some serious soul-searching. If, at the end of the day, she decides to undergo a sex-change operation and become a man, I'll support her decision. Oddly enough, chances are her Republican colleagues won't.

https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2018/06/07/nra-spokesperson-dana-loesch-some-women-wouldn-t-know-what-masculinity-was-if-it-hit-them-face/220390

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/ann-coulter-women-should-not-have-the-right-to-vote-but-they-can-still-write-books/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"