According to MSNBC, this is the future of feminism. :) twitter.com/lizthatch/stat…— Liz Thatcher (@lizthatch) February 26, 2013
According to MSNBC, this is the future of feminism. :) twitter.com/lizthatch/stat…
Sometimes, a picture speaks for itself. This is one of those times.
Wow RT @freebeacon: The “future of feminism” on MSNBC twitter.com/FreeBeacon/sta…
— Rschrim (@Rschrim) February 26, 2013
Wow RT @freebeacon: The “future of feminism” on MSNBC twitter.com/FreeBeacon/sta…
— Rschrim (@Rschrim) February 26, 2013
Young and fresh! RT @freebeacon: The “future of feminism” on MSNBC twitter.com/FreeBeacon/sta…
— Heather (@hmfearny) February 26, 2013
Young and fresh! RT @freebeacon: The “future of feminism” on MSNBC twitter.com/FreeBeacon/sta…
— Heather (@hmfearny) February 26, 2013
I’ma gonna have to pass on that!
I’d say they are “one foot in the grave, the other on the banana peel” feminism… …
The one on the left looks like she lived through the Heaven’s Gate suicides.
You win. Thread Over. I mean…holy Christ that was good.
Wattles: The future of feminism.
James Poli: “Oh, God…I’m orgasmic. You’re ability to completely dehumanize people you disagree with based upon their looks alone has sent me into the stratosphere.”
And after slogging through this forum, could you BE more negative in EVERYTHING YOU TYPE? It got old, and you are not as entertaining as you think.
I’m negative? On a comment board in which 99% of all the commentators judge people on what they look like, and not on their ideas?
Yes, you are negative. And by looking at the 3 pictures of those ladies…I could say this one thing: they’d be much more personable with a SMILE on their faces! The lady on the left has a fake smile and sad eyes. That is not a person I would chose to speak to.
I might be as ugly as a mud fence, you would not know online, would you? But I go outside and smile and TALK to men and women. Attractiveness is more than skin deep, and honestly? These women don’t look like they want to be open to attractiveness.
Hmmm. The woman on the left has a small smile on her face. And, do you always judge people’s personability (even assuming that that’s the standard you apply to all men and women in the public eye) in a single photo or two?
And why didn’t twitchy rpovide us the actual video? Perhaps the two women are personable? Perhaps they have something interesting to say?
So, let me get this straight: you approve of the vitriolic, juvenile humor of Rush Limbaugh, an unattractive, somewhat overweight man (is he personable enough for you?), but you criticize me for countering comments on this board evaluating the “tuckability” (nod, nod, wink, wink) of two modestly dressed women who may be 55 or even 65 years old?
And, do you approve of the personability of the commenters on this board? Do you like that they comment on how sexually attractive they find older, modestly dressed women? That they compare them to dogs?
These little ladies should have worn their Easter bonnets to dress up MSNBC even more than Maddow and Andrea Mitchell already do.
A Friar Tuck wannabe and an Ed McMahon lookalike is the future of feminism?
Ha! I literally laughed out loud! Funny
Yoooo are correct, sir!
Neither of those nasty old broads been “nailed” since fire was discovered !
Thanks for the photo, Joseph. I give you a 3/10 on looks. It’s the early balding that really brought down your score. And, how old are you now? 33? What happens when you, too, experience the ravages of age like the two older women pictured above?
It ain’t going to be pretty.
Well, as those women may be lesbians, you may very well be wrong. Lesbians don’t focus on visual beauty to the degree that heterosexual men do (or homosexual men, for that matter) in choosing sexual partners. Which is, of course, why they, like heterosexual men, can afford to not be concerned about good looks.
And, frankly, in comparison to older women in other, more beauty obsessed cultures, Tammy Faye Baker with her load of clownish make-up, or former Hollywood starlets who have so many facelifts they no longer look human, they look pretty good to me.
Thank you for setting me straight ! I get it. Dudes who “get off” on other dudes excrement are morally superior to me because I’m disgusted by it. I’m “phobic” because I’m sickened by it.
And REALLY, in all honesty, these old broads wouldn’t get picked up by cartoon characters Homer Simpson and Ned Flanders on their WORST drunken nightin Vegas !
My take: if the left can bring up fake straw-men, I can quote cartoons.
These old broads are probably no less lovely than the grandmothers of most commentators on this board.
A Friar nobody wants to Tuck.
Yep, because “Tuckability” is the only way to evaluate a woman.
Geesh, no wonder the feminist movement is so powerful in this country.
Maxx, thanks for the photo. Not too bad. Perhaps a 5/10? But, I look forward to the day that you’re the same age as these feminists, who are at least fifty five, and may even be pushing sixty five.
Throw up your picture then, and then we can all comment in your “tuckability.”
1. I’m already in my 50’s.
2. Photo at the left.
3. I’m not a feminist in the year 2013…however, I do share something in common with them…for I too, am not concerned about my sexual appeal to men.
I’m not a man, Sheriff John.
That’s great Steve. I almost choked. You are right though !!!
pajamakat: “Oh my God, Steve…I just loved, loved, loooved your ability to dehumanize people based only upon their looks, without considering their ideas or worth as human beings.
And, the fact that these women are at least fifty five or maybe even sixty five and resemble my grandmother and Aunt Sara? I say, just screw em.
And, in your next post, when you attack the legacies of Mother Theresa, Dick Cheney, and Chris Christie, based upon their looks alone, I’m there. You’re just like, so the MAN, Steve.
Nice try surprise, but while you are ripping on Steve, how about going after some of the idiots on your side who do that constantly. Oh wait, I forgot, to be a liberal you have to be a Hypocrite.
I have ripped on my fellow liberals, when they’ve gone after Ann Coulter on her looks.
It’s up to each of us to curtain the excesses on our own side. But, I didn’t see a single comment on this board saying, “hey, guys, look, just let’s go after the lame ideas of these women, and leave their looks alone.” Of course, Twitchy only presented the photo, and not the video, so we don’t know what their actual ideas are.
L O L !
that’s not funny
Your right! The one on the right does look like Ed McMahon!
Oh, what a surprise…instead of addressing what these women are saying, conservatives on a conservative mock their appearance.
Ho hum…the world never changes.
Looks like one these women forgot her Turtle Shell to go with her Turtle Neck.
The other isn’t anything to write home about, either.
If this is the future of (progressive) feminism… the future is looking pretty bright!
In much the same way that an oncoming tractor-trailer looks very bright if you’re standing in the middle of the interstate at night.
if that is the face of feminists, i don’t think they will get very far!
I have a feeling that they do get very far, although it’s only with each other.
LOL….ewwww…brain bleach please.
And if that’s the face of the “Feminist Movement” I’m glad I didn’t join. Yikes!
As the mother of a daughter, this is not the face of feminism. Just another round of militant women who hate men and despise family.
That’s what Feminism is.
Just as the faces of Mother Theresa and Pope Benedict represent Catholicism or the faces of Jerry Fawell, Pat Robertson, and Tammy Faye Baker represent evangelical Christianity?
Not a single commenter on this board has even attempted to address the content of what these women were saying. Not one.
So, in order for conservatives to listen to what women say, women have to be attractive?
No, but they have to be personable. Just by looking at them, I don’t want to talk to them. Their minds are closed and they will not listen to another person say anything contrary to their mantra. They must be open to others: even men. Which means that they must be able to go past their pre-conceived and learned notions that ‘all men are bad’ and ‘all women are victims’ which is difficult. And honestly? Attractiveness has nothing to do with makeup or clothing as more of an attitude. It’s an attitude of being comfortable with being a woman, not being ashamed of it, nor being in your face with it.
“I don’t want to talk to them. Their minds are closed.” I don’t know them, and images of people certainly don’t tell the whole picture of who we are as human beings, but your statement indicates to me that, regarding these women, your mind is clapped pretty tight shut.
As far as these so-called “Women’s groups” go, where is the public outcry against these Democrat misogynist’s who are all for reducing “buddy less” women to their “ladyparts”, carrying a whistle in one hand and a Vagina costume in the other while in search of a callbox located in the “safe-zone” because she can’t possibly be trusted to listen to her gut feelings about being in danger? Much less trusted with a weapon. I’m for EMPOWERING women, not rendering them defenseless.Until they take up one of the most important issues facing women today,Government CONTROL, they are peddling nothing I want to hear.
Well, it sounds like you have an issue that you feel pretty passionate about: women’s ability to keep and bear arms. Why don’t you create your own “women’s group,” if the issue means that much to you?
And, as for Code Pink’s ridiculous and completely over-the-top vagina costumes, do you honestly think they represent all feminists? Or, that the women featured above are associated with Code Pink? That’s like judging NFL football by the over-the-top enthusiastic fans who paint their faces the colors of their favorite team.
Just imagine Jim Harbaugh of the San Francisco 49ers making a media presentation about his team’s strengths and weaknesses, and instead of asking questions on that topic, the media focuses on those crazy fans who paint themselves read and gold, and vandalize cars and start fires after every victory. Harbaugh has no control over and no connection to those crazy fans; and, I bet the women above have no control over and no connection to Code Pink and its crazy vagina-costuming members.
Um, there’s already a group that’s on board with me….”The People” of the United States. Our “Manifesto”? It’s called the Constitution. I do not care how over the top any woman’s group goes. If I do not follow what they are dishing out, I do not join them. What I was referring to is why they are silent when a member of our Government comes out and says “you don’t know if you are in danger or not” and then proceeds to say women can’t be trusted with a gun because she might pop a couple rounds into some willy-nilly goofy s.o.b who was just joshing. I comment on those costumes because I was around back in the day, when Greer and Steinem et al were first on the scene. When we were all doing our best to be looked at than MORE THAN A VAGINA…and now…this. No they do not represent ALL women, but it is a step backwards BIG TIME and they get air time…but at what cost? And they don’t see it.
“…a member of our Government comes out and says “you (women) don’t know if you are in danger or not.” Which member of government came out and said THAT?
And, yes, I agree with you that Code Pink and those who promote the Slut Walk are doing a great disservice to feminism, no matter what their politics, no matter that they call themselves feminists.
HA kinda like what liberals say about conservative radio and news. Anything MSNBC is promoting I’m not buying, anything Obama is FOR, I’m against. Not because I do not know what he is saying, I’ve been there,listened to him, and them, enough to know when a shovel is the only tool needed. Any more time spent is wasted.
Yes, because a single photo, and the caption “feminist” tells us all we need to know about other human beings.
If that’s the future of feminism, then I’m seriously considering batting for the other side.
The “Future of Feminism” looks an awful lot like the callbacks for the role of “Phys Ed Teacher” in the next Wayans movie.
MSNBC- busting stereotypes one feminist at a time.
And busting a few mirrors in the process…
I seriously can’t stop laughing at this pic. This is exactly how I pictured the robes from that Hale Bop cult to look like. And with the lighting it looks like the spaceship is ready to beam up the one on the left.
These are obviously middle aged women. Tell me, do your own middle aged mothers look all that better?
And, for that matter, how about conservative middle aged male pundits? Are they all beauties?
Nothing wrong with middle aged women. There is something very wrong with middle aged women who think we have a war on women in this country, so in that respect they are open to every bit of ridicule coming their way. Planned Parenthood, Sandra Fluke, and Code Pink scared the crap out of very ignorant low info voters, and now we are stuck with a crappy president. So pardon me if I don’t apologize for the snark. And middle aged women dressing up as vaginas? The WORST. I totally support the early women’s rights movement, but THIS is NOT that movement. This isn’t about rights, it’s about getting free stuff, having big daddy government pay your way, but at the same time complaining that the same government is in their “business”. Ridiculous, and not in any way, shape, or form- PROGRESSIVE.
You’re judging these women only on their label as feminists, and their photo on twitchy. You have no clue what their platform is, and what they view as the “Future of Feminism.”
Look, I’m a liberal feminist, and I, too, agree that the term “War on Women” is pure hyperbole (just as the “War on Drugs,” ‘War on Christmas,” and “War on the 2nd Amendment” are pure hyperbole). A more honest description of all the legislation Republicans were trying to pass prior to the 2012 election (you know, that legislation to reduce access to abortion and redefine rape victims as “accusers,” while maintaining the term “victim” for people who report non-sexual crimes) would be “Campaign to reduce women’s bodily autonomy and ability to access the legal system after sexual assault.” But, of course, that label is far too long. Frankly, I don’t know what a proper name for it would be…”Campaign Against Women’s Sexual Autonomy”? Maybe. But, still too long.
“…And middle aged women dressing up as vaginas?” What in the world does that have to do with the two middle aged women pictured above?
Are you not familiar with Code Pink? They ARE the new feminists, and that’s what they do. As I said in my last post to you- fair enough regarding these two particular women, but most feminists also lump republican males as women hating old white men who want to legislate women’s vaginas. Unless you have an all female congress/ senate- sorry you’re stuck with male legislators. Thems the breaks. And if you want big government to take care of you, you’re gonna have to put up with them or vote em out.
While I’m on a tangent, I just want to say- Akin was an idiot- I will give you that. Even Twitchy called him out. But Mourdock was totally railroaded by feminists. The guy is a Christian, with Christian views. Half this country thinks the same way. If you want tolerance for women and gays, you gotta give it back. And after he made those comments, feminists were screaming that every republican had those viewpoints. Including Romney. Again, you won’t get an apology from me regarding any feminist after what they pull time and time again.
Yes, I’ve heard about Code Pink. But, I’ve never heard that they are THE new feminists. I thought that the majority of new feminists just want what the majority of old feminists wanted: freedom from sexual assault, and equal opportunity in education, the workplace, and in government. I’m not talking about Andrea Dworkin, or Betty Friedan, just average American women who want a better world for their daughters. Here’s a group that I think embodies the new feminism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Billion_Rising
I don’t want an apology from you. But, I would like conservatives AND liberals to police their own when they use disgusting bullying tactics (particularly when they attack people on characteristics they can’t control) or resort to extreme measures. But, I’m not the one who should be making that case to you. I should really return to liberal websites and make the case there. I’ve done this a little on liberal websites before, but not nearly enough. In turn, conservatives need a conservative championing decency, not a liberal feminist.
And, yes, I fully acknowledge that liberals used hyperbole and outright lies (as in Romney’s stated position on abortion) in order to win the election. And, for the small role I played in that, I’m sorry.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with going on a conservative website and having a debate. You never know who you might reach FWIW I am an independent.I am also not a Christian. I have no problem voicing my opinion on either side of the fence. As a women with daughters, I do sympathize with some feminist ideas. But honestly I think Fluke and her ilk are flakes. I think VAWA is a sham and I think any woman who thinks a Christian org or small business should pay for something they don’t believe in is ridiculous. And that is all I hear about from feminists these days.
To this day I am not even quite sure what Romney’s position on abortion is. All politicians flip flop ( or evolve, lol) I just think fiscally he would have been better for our country, and right now this country needs to focus on that. Roe vs. Wade will never be overturned and anyone who believes it would is naïve. So who cares if a Christian or Mormon is against it or not? Let them have their beliefs. Being militant and shaming them is never going to be the answer. It’s only going to make this country more divisive.
It’s not about busting stereotypes, but about whether all women, 35, 45, 55, 65, middle aged or older, ugly or beaurtiful, have a place in the public eye.
These two women are probably no less attractive than your own grandmother. Get over it.
Oh, does Sarah Palin deserve a spot in the public eye? SNL and every lib did not seem to think so. Same with Michelle Bachman. You do know the names they were called on a daily basis, don’t you? The allegations hurled at their kids? Are these poor brave women only brave because they are libs? How about Michelle Malkin and Mia Love? have you ever been exposed to the vitriol thrown their way? Spare us the faux outrage.
I’ve stood up for Ann Coulter and Marcus Bachman, when my fellow liberals were making fun of their looks.
So, my outrage is NOT faux.
And, unlike Ann Coulter, who is vitriol queen vis-a-vis liberals, these women (as far as I know) have never viciously attacked conservatives.
I’m no fan of Ann Coulter but she can take care of herself. She dishes it out and she takes it. Fair enough regarding these two particular women, but if they are anything like their Code Pink counterparts, I don’t feel sorry for them either. The “new” feminists are by and large, nasty,have no problem attacking conservatives and again bare no resemblance to the earlier feminists that fought for equal rights.
This is an organization that I think exemplifies the new feminists, even if the founder is not that young:
And, when a “nasty” new feminist attacks conservatives, and especially when they attack conservatives on something superficial or irrelavent like physical looks, go after those specific feminists. You all don’t want to be tarred with the same brush as Rush Limbaugh or Todd Aikens do you?
Why should all feminists be tarred by nasty feminists who go after people’s irrelavent weaknesses, versus engaging with their ideas?
So, which one is the dog groomer and which one is the Episcopal Clergywoman?
Apparently, and ironically, the ‘future’ of feminism involves stopping all of the world’s clocks.
SineWavell: “Like, OH MY GAWD! Like, like, you’re my hero, bro. You, like, like, look at these pictures of people, like, whose worldview you disagree with, and then, like, completely dehumanize them based only upon their looks.
“Like, how do you DO that? Is it, like, a special gift from GAWD?”
“My panties are, like, in a twist…I’m just THAT orgasmic over your, like, cosmic cruelty. I think I may, like, faint.”
And, the 7 silent likes: “Yeah…us, too, we, like, also kinda support SineWavell’s shout out to TocksNedlog’s bashing people based upon their looks, but, GAWD, we’re too afraid to even post comments annonymously.”
Dude your doctor called. He wants you to get back on your meds.
I’ll accept this part
“Like OH MY GAWD! Like, like, you’re my hero”
Thank you….i work hard to be heroic..
“Dude your doctor called. He wants you to get back on your meds.” Old hat, Sinewavell, old hat. That retort is all over the web. Surely, you, obsequious cheerleader of cosmic cruelty, can do better?
“I’ll accept this part
“Like OH MY GAWD! Like, like, you’re my hero”. Unfortunately, Sinewavell, that was me pretending to be you cheering on the cosmic cruelty of TocksNedlog. You see, the hero part referred to TocksNedlog, not to you, and was intended to be……
Oh, never mind. Why do I even bother? It’s like shooting fish in a barrel.
Like I said.. you’re off your meds
I just fell off my chair laughing. That was great!!!!
Dee M.: Like, Oh My God…..your ability to humiliate and dehumanize people who you disagree with based solely on their looks makes me orgasmic.
You people are brutal
Yes, brutal and hilarious are the new face of conservatism. Too bad that intellectual engagement, integrity, and decency aren’t part of that same face.
Oh, please…get off your low horse and stop pretending the left is any different.
I don’t pretend that the left doesn’t mock conservatives. But, I’m beginnning to believe that, in contrast to conservatives, the left doesn’t mock older, earnest, and not-very-attractive women who happen to disagree with them.
Mother Theresa, that lovely, but not-so-physically-attractive woman who fought against condoms and birth control was safe from us. And, I don’t see the attractive Gloria Steinam, the most famous feminist of our age, get nearly the same vitriol as Bella Arzbug, or the two women above.
Conservatives must really hate ugliness in women.
“…intellectual engagement, integrity, and decency…” are not to be found in conservatism, you said. If you really believe that, it’s no wonder you’re ignoring the main point of your response to me.
At the moment, I can’t think of an older, earnest, and not-very-attractive conservative woman. Can you?
When’s the last time you heard anyone even mention, let alone mock the long-dead Bella ABZUG?
I said that too bad those estimitable qualities are not the new face of conservatism.
Actually, I got ABZUG messed up with Betty Friedan, whose photo (along with derogatory comments) was just posted on these boards. Thanks for the correction. I’m getting forgetful in my old, and not-very-attractive age.
“I can’t think of an older, earnest, and not-very-attractive conservative woman.” You mean other than the example of the now deceased Mother Theresa? Not off the top of my head. But, that’s not too surprising. Conservative media are less likely to hire unattractive women, and conservative culture is far harsher to unattractive women in the spotlight (as the comments on this board so aptly show).
Let’s face it, unless you’re someone’s Mom or Grandma, conservatives just don’t want to be seeing older, unattractive women about. Older, and/or unattractive men…they’re far more acceptable. That’s one reason why Chris Christie (unattractive, male) and Sarah Palin (attractive, female) are potential candidate material for conservatives, and Hillary Clinton (with her not very glamorous, plain looks) is not (among many other reasons).
I don’t know that Mother Teresa was a conservative. Her stances against abortion and non-natural birth control do not, in themselves, make her what I would call a conservative. I would imagine she had some very liberal beliefs, too. I know next-to-nothing about her political beliefs. I could guess that she was lucky enough not to have any, which may be why she was able to do what she did.
Re: your belief that liberals are more tolerant of ugly, old women’s looks,we won’t know that what you say is true until we find ugly, old, conservative women and see what liberals have to say about them. I can’t imagine it would be very much different from what’s being said here. And judging from the things they say about attractive, young, conservative women, it might just be a whole lot more vicious.
Believe me, Hillary Clinton’s looks have Nothing to do with the reason she’s not potential candidate material for conservatives.
Just out of curiosity, what for you makes a conservative? For me, it’s a prioritization of the traditional family in society; an acceptance of heirarchy in all institutions; trust in government to provide national security, administer punative eye-for-an-eye justice, and control sexual mores and reproductive processes; and distrust of secular government in actually helping its citizens.
Where did Mother Theresa fall on this continuim? I don’t know, but I would wager that she was more conservative than not. Probably not a liberation theology/liberated American nun type Catholic, more of a Pope Benedict type Catholic.
And, as for those old, ugly, conservative women, perhaps we’ll have to wait until the ravages of time strike Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, and Michelle Bachman, and Michelle Malkin, assuming they’re still in the limelight at 55 or 65.
But, even so, these prominent conservative women are different from the feminist women pictured above. Coulter, Palin, Bachman, and Malkin all made names for themselves by their harsh condemnation of liberals (especially Coulter and Malkin, who as pundits outside the political arena, are freer to say nasty things). Whereas, the only thing we know about the older, admittedly, not very physically attractive women pictured above is that they’re feminists, and that one of them founded The Women’s Media Center (a non-profit, I believe that seeks to promote the representation of women in the media and reduce hyper-sexualization of women and girls in advertising, movies, and on tv). As far as I know, neither of them has expressed the least bit of vitriol against conservatives. But, just their photo, with the tagline “The Future of Feminism,” was enough to unleash a tsunami of abuse among the commentators on this board.
Part of me wishes I had the ability to find the images of older, not-so-attractive conservative women, possibly the wives of Republican senators or powerful conservative Christian pastors, photoshop them as to appear to be giving a media appearance, title the photo “The Future of Feminism,” and just wait for the vitriol to fly, before folks realized who they were castigating. But, another part of me says “no,” why in the world would I want to subject other women to such horrific abuse?
RightThinking1: “Like totally. I just loved, loved, loved the way you dehumanize people you disagree with based upon their looks.”
“After this, you want to get together to roll wheelchair bound children into rivers, or blind puppies?”
One of the things that make the Left so tedious, is the absence of a sense of humor. Humor is where you find it…, and it remains humor. The ability to laugh is something that distinguishes our species from the others. I would suggest that you avoid all late-night shows, as they are rife with non-PC humor, generally at the expense of conservatives.
You’re confusing leftists (i.e. authoritarian Marxist-Communists) with modern day American liberals. In opposition to American conservatives, whose favorite amendment is the 2nd, liberals love, love, love the 1st. It’s all that freedom of expression and speech, you know.
I was trying to be funny by parodying your obsequious lackey-like championing of a bully who attacks people on physical attributes they can’t control (as in the ravages of old age in women over 55).
And, I would try to also parody liberal (and libertarian, I might add) late night hosts and their audiences when they mock conservatives based on their looks, but I don’t have the access.
I have gone after my fellow liberals for mocking the looks of Ann Coulter and Marchus Bachman on liberal websites, though, and I encourage you to do the same.
Got to work on my parody, though, so that the next time I try to take on bullies and their obsequious cheering sidekicks, I get more laughs. Any suggestions?
(Looking at my shoes in embarrassment) I should have recognized your comment for what it is. I am probably becoming knee-jerk reactionary in consequence of occasionally visiting HuffPo, and then failing to wash my hands upon leaving.
No suggestions. Parody and sarcasm are difficult to transfer without sufficient surrounding context, which is tricky in list postings. One of the reasons for that lies in the fact that the Left often bleat patently absurd things (which you and I might interpret as parody) which they actually, seriously, believe.
Chris Matthews and Lawrence O’Donnell have REALLY gone ’round the bend this time!
My determination to build a time machine and travel back to the year 1954 in order to woo Grace Kelly just increased by a factor of a million.
Me too…..and I’m a happily married woman!
Is that Yoda?
“No no me it is not. Appear in drag I never do. Forget all about this you will”.
They look like typical libs to me.
Exactly what I thought.
Yeah because clearly when they reach a certain age women should all just stfu and bake you a pie or something. Hur hur hur!
N.O.W runs silent on everything that should be a concern to them EXCEPT when it’s about what “entitlements” women should be GIVEN. They are LOUDLY silent when this Administration backs countries and organizations that maims/kills women for just being women and affords them NO rights.They are LOUDLY silent when Sharia Law rears it’s ugly head IN THIS COUNTRY. And as far as women defending themselves against rape…all I heard was ‘whistles” from the Left and SILENCE from all women’s organizations EXCEPT those backing the 2nd amend. rights of women to defend themselves.
If that was their choice to do so, what would be wrong with that?
Exactly…I am in my 50s and I make brownies for my husband on a weekly basis…and BTW, he values my opinion on everything…”STFU” and “baking” are not mutually exclusive. You can bake and still be an individual, you know?
Luke…tell me…if you were one of those women’s age and you met them in a bar (being a single man, of course), would you ask one of them out? The more of a ‘feminist’ a women becomes, the less ‘feminine’ she becomes too.
Uhh I think somebody screwed up. That looks like the past of feminism to me.
The more things change, the more they remain the same.
AUGHHH! (shaking) Dude! You should warn a person before you hit them with something like that. That scared me half to death.
Liberal women are just flat out repulsive. Inside and out. Kirsten Powers may be the exception to the rule.
Hello, liberal woman here. Sorry that neither my inner nor outer beauty don’t meet your standards. But, then, possibly your inner and outer beauty don’t meet mine!
And you think I should care??? Bwahahahahaha…snort..snort….thanks for the laugh…..
You don’t care, then why should I? Why should either of us care whether the other has inner or outer beauty? I ask this in all seriousness.
You ask WHY I should not care?? As a liberal, I despise you, lady, and everything that your empty head strives to change about this once great nation. I view liberals just like I view Muslims. As my enemy. With nothing but contempt. Seriously. Bless your little heart, anyway.
Because the Past of Feminism was about looking beyond women as only delicate sexual beings who belonged in the home as a wife and mother..period, and the “future” of Feminism is ALL about focusing on “ladyparts” to the point of dressing up in costumes and walking around shouting “look at ME, I’m just a HUGE PINK VAGINA”! (although I think the color pink is lost on these two) Nowadays,Being a “lady” is all but lost. Being a woman equals being a Bitch. And there is no longer any pride in modesty or mystery…now it’s just a free for all, lay it all out there and the crudest…wins.
Very nicely stated. I totally agree.
That’s a good point. Plus, with anything else involving “justice” for a certain group of people, its all about the money. There’s a very large, profitable industry arising from the new feminism and the people who advocate for “feminist justice.” Like the race hustlers, its in these people’s best interest to continue to stoke these fires, even when so much progress has been made.
When non-conservatives claim victimhood (taxation without representation under the British before 1776, being forced to associate with contraception-providing-medical health insurers under ObamaCare), it’s purely for noble reasons; but when other identity groups (African Americans decrying their history of chattel slavery and Jim Crow laws, Japanese Americans their internment during WWII, and women their lack of the vote until the early 20th century, sexual assault, and slut shaming), it’s only about the money.
Rush said it best–“Feminism was created to give ugly women acceptance in society”. Pearly words.
His exact words were, “Feminism was created to give ugly women something to do on Saturday night”. I remember because it made me laugh so hard I literally choked on my coffee which scared the hell out of my wife in the other room. Stuff like that you remember. :op
As Mr. Limbaugh is not all that attractive himself, his comment is pretty ironic. I guess we might say that vitriolic right wing radio gives a platform for unattractive, overweight men.
Yeah, but the difference is Rush is funny. Those two ladies don’t look like they could find a joke if it glowed in the dark. I’ve met those kind of feminine-ish womyn before. They’re not terribly fun to be around. Rush, however is smart, funny and not on a 24/7 pms run. Yes, pun intended.
Got it. Funny makes it permissible. And, you didn’t find my equally juvenile joke about Rush funny? Aw shucks. I’m disappointed.
And, if it’s only the ugly and the earnest who may be mocked, why not make fun of the looks of Mother Theresa, Pope Benedict, and Pat Robertson? No, it’s only the ugly feminists who get the treatment.
You may be right, though. Funny is the way to go. Perhaps I need to come up with a comedy routine about cowardly commentators (and, I include myself) who hide behind pseudonyms and mock public figures on their looks.
So which one are you in this post? The Hypo or the crite? Maybe the pot? Maybe the kettle? Upset because others comment on attractiveness but you as the “looks” police is AOK? Almost as transparent as your King.
I shouldn’t have to be policing you. You should be policing yourselves. I go after liberals when they mock Ann Coulter for her looks, and in comparison to the women above, who, as far as I know, don’t throw vitriol at conservatives, I, as a liberal, have far less reason to feel fuzzy warm about Ms. Coulter.
OH my Goodness, I am so sorry, I forgot that liberals NEVER talk about the appearance of Conservatives. Wait a minute that ALL they do, hey surprise, GFY I’m pretty sure you know what that means.
This liberal doesn’t. I’ve posted criticism targeting Jon Stewart for implying that Marcus Bachman, Michelle Bachman’s husband, is gay (based upon his looks), and I’ve criticized other liberals for mocking Ann Coulter’s looks.
I can do a better job, though. And, I will try.
Decency doesn’t have a political party.
Adela, is your post the post of a lady, a woman of modesty or mystery?
Wouldn’t a “lady” have simply avoided the fray, and allowed the feminists and the misogynists to slug it out?
And, as for the women pictured in the above video, how do you know whether what they are expressing is crude?
And, feminism is not all dressing up as a huge pink vagina. These women are from the Women’s Media Center, which, if I’m not mistaken, fights the lack of women’s representation in media, and fights the hyper-sexualization of girls and women in media.
A “lady” does not simply “avoid the fray”, she speaks her mind and hopes a baiter, such as yourself, will learn from her mussing her hands.
“No clue as to their “crudeness” as maybe their vagina costumes may be at the cleaners.” Adela, you’re no lady (and I don’t mean that as an insult, even though you may take it to be). You’re sharp, funny, and are completely willing to use sexual references openly in order to attack an opponent. More Sarah Silverman than lady you are.
And, although Sarah Silverman is too much for me sometimes, for the most part, being like her is not a bad thing.
I’ve often said I am a walking contradiction. Many layers to this old ball of wax. I have moments when I love Ron Paul and others when Kirsten Powers would get a big kiss from me.Right now I am a bit pissed at CPAC and their stance on GOPROUD… I have never said “I” am a “lady”, although I have my moments. I agree with a bunch of what you have said, I find peoples’ attractiveness in what attracts me to them,sometimes it’s the blueness of their eyes, the size of their nose, the calm of their nature, the sharpness of their tongue, the size of their heart, the crazy way they love to party….the list is very long. I was asked recently what quality I admired most in myself, and I would say it is my adaptability, so I understand the non-insult and I thank you.
Oh and as far as Sarah Silverman goes, I have watched her and some of her material is very funny, I never make rape jokes or support raunchy sexual “humor” aimed at children by others so when these lines were crossed, I stopped watching what she was doing. Although I am adaptable, even this almost 60 year old has a crude-o-meter.
Yeah, Ms. Silverman is too much for me at times, too. I’m all for frank clinical discussions on sex, and gentle ribbing, but Silverman is like a Mac Truck without brakes on a narrow winding mountainous lane.
We’re all walking contradictions, probably. For instance, I’m a liberal feminist AND a Tolkein nut: the “Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring,” a film that celebrates, for the most part, conservative values and male comaradrie, is my favorite movie. I bet that those two feminists photographed above also have their contradictions.
And, you’re quite welcome about the non-insult.
If you can see past your self righteousness for a moment, you might see that I was commenting on “the future of Feminism” in general. Past, present and future actually. No clue as to their “crudeness” as maybe their vagina costumes may be at the cleaners. Or not, don’t know, don’t care.
Yep, you’re right. Self-righteousness is one of my weaknesses. I don’t know what it is, though. When I see (or hear or read about) people ganging up on the not-so-lovely, the disabled, the underdog, the blind puppies, I want to fight back in self-righteous anger. I even go after my fellow liberals when they mock conservatives on their looks (in my own cowardly, annonymous online posting way).
But, you know what? Maybe if more of us were just a little more self-righteous about attacks on people over circumstances they can’t control (as in looks and sexual appeal in people over sixty), the world would be a better place.
Good lord, someone needs to sink their faces into dough and make us some monster cookies.
I’m guessing that when each of these creatures were in high school, they were voted “most likely to end heterosexuality” of their respective classes.
This is what they look like now ….what’s changed?
What Lena Dunham and Sandra Fluke will look like by 2033.
No way, 2015, 16 tops. Fluke will be eat up with vd, and Dunham’ face will be disfigured from brillo like catheads.
V the K, why don’t you throw your photo up, and we’ll all take a crack at judging your “tuckability?”
And, then in 2033, you can do it again, and we can revise our estimates.
Like Rush says…feminism was created to give ugly women…access to the mainstream.
Does anyone remember the George Carlin bit from the 70s where he said that any woman who was for abortion was one you’d probably not want to sleep with anyway?
I think he said that in the 90’s about women that were AGAINST abortion. I wish it were the other way around. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM
You could be right…but I remember being in high school when I heard it, and that was in the late 70s. But now that I think about it, it makes more sense (coming from him, being a liberal), the other way around. Heck, I probably got it wrong…that was a long time ago that I heard it
And, as I mentioned before, vitriolic right wing radio was invented to give a platform to ugly fat slobs
Seriously? You expect people to take your outrage seriously with a comment like that? Project much? You just proved another liberal stereotype- HYPOCRITE.
You’re right. I was being hypocritical. I should have focused on Limbaugh’s behavior and not his appearance. You were right to call me out on it.
Now y’all! Except for the mantle of feminism, either one of these ladies could be one of y’all’s Grand Mother or something. But yeah, you’re right, they are “pork chop tied around the neck” ugly.
Quoting Klinger from M*A*S*H – “If my dog had your face, I’d shave it’s butt and teach it to walk backwards”.
And, indeed, no less lovely than the conservative overweight women one might find shopping in the Walmarts throughout rural and suburban America.
Who says they’re conservative? A lot of those women belong to the “Free Sh!t” army. And just because a woman has a little “meat” on her bones doesn’t mean they are unattractive.
I said no less lovely. You jumped to unattractive. And, I didn’t say that only conservative women shop at Walmart; but, as a liberal who hates Walmart and knows many liberal women who share this feeling, I’m going bet that conservative women of all sizes are well represented at Walmart.
So, in the interest of fairness, if the Republican party is made up of “old, white men,” then the Feminist Movement is made up of “old, white women?”
Yeah pretty much, don’t say that too loud though, you will get called seeeexist
Robin MORGAN ya say . . . well THAT explains the Captain’s hook!
(WOW! . . . just, wow!)
I was thinking “alice the goons” chasing Popeye all over their island…except now they’re probably chasing Olive Oil. lol
God help us all.
Feminism wears a Snuggie??
And a ‘Depends’.
There’s something that makes me nervous about an adult diaper named “Depends.” It should be…”Definitely!”
Friar Tuck is the future of feminism???
Nice one mom…
I guess the future of feminism requires a degree in carpet munching.
When gelflings and skexies mate.
granny panties and a diaper
The future of feminism isn’t looking too bright if that’s their representation.
“It is a light sabre, the formal weapon of a Jedi Knight …”
Is it just me or does the person on the left look like Alec Guinness in the first Star Wars movie ?
Maybe after he was stung by a couple bees. And run over by an Abrams.
Robin Morgan is a man-hating old bat with daddy issues whose been at the tip of the spear of the radical left her whole life. She’s all for radical free speech for herself, but wants the government to shut down Rush Limbaugh at the barrel of a state gun for his. She’s Alinskiite through and through and should be scoffed at until she disappears into the sad annals of history.
Imagine…these abominations are the reason why we’re talking about sending our wives and daughters to the trenches…
You’re not sending your wives and daughters to the trenches. Some of your wives and daughters are volunteering to go.
Oh, and these women are far from abominations. When you reach 55 or 65, the apparant age of these women, throw your photo up so that we can evaluate how well your looks have survived the ravages of time.
Hardly the future…more like the past with those two. Sort of historical in their way.
Maybe that’s Carson and Ed in drag for an old skit on the Tonight Show.
Maybe they like to think of themselves as “reverends” like rabid leftist
Audette Fullbright, whom Wyoming Rep. Hans Hunt told off.
old women who hate men?
In other words, they will contracept, abort, homosexualize and euthanize themselves out of existence. Good.
Repping bitter old white women since the vietnam era
1: butt ugly trolls that cant get any swinging dick to even look at them for a minute, who are angry at good looking women for “hoggin” up all the men. generally lesbians, poorly educated, liberal, radical and have nothing better to do than to try and get other women to be unhappy just like them. often correctly referred to as “feminazi’s”
1. Allegedly human, but only having any real value unless a “swinging dick” looks at them.
Thanks for the clarification.
There is a huge difference between a “woman” and a “feminist”. James’ post was a stellar example of a “feminist”. Women are not envious of, hateful toward, spiteful of, and resentful of men. They embody the beauty of their gender, while you liberal wretches exploit yours.
Well from their looks we all know why they are feminists.
Wait a minute, are those Nike’s? That chick on the left bears a striking resemblance to Marshall Applewhite. Apparently there WERE a few escapees from the Heaven’s Gate Cult after all!
aged and barren?
Robin Morgan — “I feel that man-hating is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.”
That should thin out the population.
Looks like one of the cultists from “Return to the Planet of the Apes”.
Dykes in Snuggies is the future of feminism?
Looks like the one is selling Snuggies and the other is selling “Life Alert” pendants.
These women don’t need a gun to keep rapists at bay
These are brave women. One of them founded the Women’s Media Center, and, undoubtedly, knowing full well that she does not fit the mold of women that most men want to see in the media (that is, some men are not airbrushing women’s image or removing their image from photos altogether a la the Hasidic Jews or Islamists).
You go, girls! You’re no less attractive than Rush Limbaugh or the majority of large conservative women one might find shopping at Walmart in Texas, Mississippi, or Alabama. And, you’re far more attractive than the majority of old starlets and t.v. female evangelists who try to hide the ravages of time with tons of pancake make-up, botox, and face lifts.
And, you do what you do in spite of knowing that conservative juvenile men (and, some women) are going to mock your looks, and make the point that they’d never dream of sleeping with you.
Oh but it’s totally okay to call people like Sarah Palin a c*nt, right? Or to say that her child is the product of incest, or that her other daughter is a slut, or that Michelle Bachman’s husband is a closeted gay? And not just on message boards- on places like SNL? How bout calling Mia Love a house N*gger? Michelle Malkin every Asian stereotype you can think of? Not to mention all those women are also called the c word on a daily basis every time they open their mouth? You really have a lot of nerve. Are women only brave when they are libs? Knock off your faux outrage.
Feminism has become a south park esque joke, complete with vagina suits and old women stuck in the sixties.
It’s time that everyone just admit that feminism does not represent the majority of american women, just old ultra-liberal white women and their “womyns studies” lemmings. When feminism ignores a woman like Condolezza Rice, someone who graduated highschool at 15, overcame adversity in the deep south, and was admitted into an all male golf club not by whining and complaining, but because she was skilled and talented, not to forget that she is happily child and marraige free a feminist idea that is heavily promoted. She is ignored because she is a republican. Sarah Palin, Mia Love and Michelle Malkin literally “have it all”, they have families, strong marriages and thriving careers, they are free-thinkers, voice their opinions, and stand by what they believe in(which is admirable and brave). They have been thrown under the bus, backed over and called every nasty name in the book. The most sickening part is these “pro womyn” hypocrites joined in on the bashing.
Brave?? I’ll give them that. It takes a lot of courage to appear in public like that.
Brave. Hell, yes. How well would you stand up under a barrage of people holding up up 1/10 (the looks ratings that most commentators on this board would give the women above) signs in mass upon catching sight of you?
And, as for appearing in public, these women are no less lovely than the majority of women who shop at Walmart.
You sure have this hard-on for Wal-Mart, don’t you, lady?? Oh..that’s right…You are an Obamanaut…You hate businesses that make money and shun unions. As for being “no less lovely”?? These hags aren’t lovely at all, let alone “no less”.. Ugly is ugly, madam. As for me? I do not know, nor do I care how I would stand up under this type of scrutiny. I do not intend to go on TV and complain about my gender’s plight in the mean world. At 64 years of age, I am happily retired in that Southern bastion that you despise so much. Yep…Texas. Where men are men and women are women, and we know the difference and celebrate it without rancor. As for Wal-Mart?? I love the place. Save a lot of money, they have a great selection of stuff to buy, and they are NON-Union. what’s not to love?? Feminists are like gays and liberals in general. Never happy with what they have nor who they are. You always want what someone else has. Pathetic drones..every one of you.
I wouldn’t say that I have a “hard on.” But, I do loathe Walmart. Communist China is our #1 long term threat, and Walmart paved the way for millions upon millions of American jobs, technology, and expertise to be transferred to China’s authoritarian shores. Walmart should just fly the red and star banner of Communist China over all its retail outlets and be done with it.
And, I don’t despise the Southern bastian. I hope to make it out to Austin and San Antonio and New Orleans some day. I’ve already visited Florida and Virginia.
“Ugly is ugly.” Perhaps. But, may I suggest that it applies to behavior even more than to appearance? And, the behavior demonstrated here vis-a-vis the two women pictured above would make Medusa blush.
You are nuts, woman. First of all, your pal, Barack Obama is the biggest threat to America. Progressive liberalism is second. Iran & all of Islam would be third. Wal-Mart simply competes in the global economy, and they do it legally and with skill. You and your ilk believe in protectionism from the world marketplace, and you resent those American companies that take advantage of the world dynamics to profit. Profit is, after all, the purpose of capitalism. Why don’t you simply admit that you prefer socialism to capitalism?? At least you would display a modicum of honesty. I know that is difficult for liberals to grasp, however. Figures you would wish to visit Austin. Its where we keep our liberals and Muslims. You’d be happy there I suppose. I wouldn’t advise you meandering too far from Austin, however. Not too many liberals do.
La La La La. My name is Joe, and I believe that the current President of the United States of America is the biggest threat to America. I also believe in leprachauns, and in astrology, and in the healing power of crystals.
“Wal-Mart simply competes in the global economy.” Ah yes, that ole’ free market global economy, in which Wal-mart gets to access slave labor (what word other than “slave” can you call people who do not have freedom of speech, press, assembly, religion, and bearing and keeping arms, or a voice in their own government?), thereby, helping to destroy the economic bargaining power of American workers here at at home?
And, why don’t you simply admit that you prefer the authoritarian Communism of China, Wal-Mart’s main sponsor? People living in Communist China don’t have freedoms that we enjoy, nor do they live under the rule of law, AND the Communist Party still controls the economy, still makes the 5 year plans. Their leaders still call themselves Communist. What part of “Communist” do you not understand?
“…You and your ilk believe in protectionism from the world marketplace.” And, you and your ilk don’t realize that every developed nation has used protectionism in the early stages of its development to build infant industries, and that Communist China is doing it in a HUGE way now to build up its own. The Communist Party controls every major corporation in China, spends billions upon billions of dollars to build high tech companies, and forces Western companies to partner with native State-Owned-Enterprises (SOE’s) so that technology and expertise will be transferred to its shores. Not to mention the manipulation of China’s currency to keep its value low, thereby, encouraging exports.
But, shhh…American multi-national corporations don’t want you to think about that because they want to access that potential 1.3 billion Chinese consumer market. And, as a condition of access, China forces them to transfer jobs, expertise, and technology. Too bad these corporations have to betray their own country in the process.
Gobalized free trade? You’ve swallowed the free trade kool aide hook, line, and sinker. The only reason globalized “free trade” exists is because America, at GREAT expense to its taxpayers, maintains military bases all over the world, and upholds the world order. There’s no invisible hand of the globalized free trade market, unless it’s the armored hand of the U.S. military. But, now, some American workers realize that, in addition to paying a lot of taxes, they’re having to compete with Communist slaves, and this new world order, which primarily benefits major stock holders, bankers, and Communist Party leaders in China, kinda sucks.
I’m not opposed to profit. Private business and actual COMPETITIVE markets are VERY good. But, this new capitalism of the 21st century that rewards CEO’s for the MAXIMIZATION of profit in the short term at the expense of employees, communities, the environment, their nation, and even the long term interests of their own companies is NOT good.
Oh, and on a final note: even your governer, Rick Perry, believes in a little government intervention into the economy, a little socialism: he and his Texas delegation travel to liberal states with more taxes in order to poach high tech companies. I guess that’s just because Texas has developed primarily on its oil and natural extractive industries, and just can’t create high tech companies from the ground up…it’s just got to poach them from outside state borders.
And, I note that that the small divisions of tech companies from liberal states who have moved to Texas move primarily to Austin…what a surprise.
Actually, your screed about China is BS. I could care less how much Chinese people earn. That’s their business. As far as Wal-Mart profiting from it? they are hardly alone, lady, and it happens to be quite legal. You may not like it, but that’s tough. It is what it is, and your whining will do nothing to change it. As for Texas not producing high tech companies?? Ever hear of Dell Computer?? Texas Instruments?? And Dallas happens to be where businesses and companies coming to Texas are going to. ahead of Houston and Austin. Finally, just look around yourself, Sister Sue…and see what socialism and liberal mismanagement of our economy has wrought. Barack Obama has done more harm in four years than all previous Presidents combined. And he’s not finished yet. You have been whining and bitching at me for over two days now, and my wife is getting a bit jealous. Besides, I have had these same arguments with your kind many times. My chickens make more sense than a liberal. On that note, I’ll just say, Bye-bye for now. You are hopeless…Bless your little heart, anyway…
“I could care less how much Chinese people earn. That’s their business.” Well, if you had worked in the manufacturing sector in the past twenty years, and didn’t pay attention to how much Chinese slaves were being paid, then you were an idiot. You would have realized that your days in the manufacturing sector were numbered. And, no matter what economic sector you work in now, if you don’t understand that a nation with a small manufacturing sector won’t be a major player on the world stage for long, you’re also an idiot.
“Ever hear of Dell Computer?? Texas Instruments??” Yeah, I’ve heard of them. I forgot that Texas was one of the states that benefitted so mightily from the Space Program…you know that good ole’ federal funding and support, what some might call socialism. I wouldn’t be surprised if Dell and Texas Instruments had their beginnings in the Space Program.
“Barack Obama has done more harm in four years than all previous Presidents combined.” What weed are you smoking, Brother Sam? President Clinton and President Bush were responsible for overturning and maintaining the status quo on the Glass-Steagal Act, thereby making the 2008 fiscal crisis possible. And, who were the series of presidents leading up to the 1929 Black Friday and the Great Depression?
“You have been whining and bitching at me.” Time to run to your wife, and tell her that the big bad feminist is picking on you. Do let her know, too, that you’re amongst a regiment of bullies who dehumanize unattractive, older women simply because they ARE feminists.
“I have had these same arguments with your kind.” Your kind? You make me sound like an alien from a planted pod.
“My chickens make more sense than a liberal.” Spend a lot of time debating the economy with your chickens, do you? No wonder you think that President Obama is the #1 threat to America. Henrietta the Hen told you.
Bawk, bawk, bawk, keBOCK!!!!!!!!!……Moon bats….
Cite your source, Ringworm, cite your source. We can all throw around quotes all day long without attribution.
My apologies, here’s the source — “Lesbianism and Feminism: Synonyms or Contradictions?”, in Going Too Far: The Personal Chronicle of a Feminist, p 178.
I gave you the source, whats your rebuttal?
Do you still think she’s brave? If so, how would you define a coward?
You did indeed. And, I saw it, and was going to comment on it. But, now I can’t even see it on the board. Do you see it?
If it’s not too much trouble, can you give it to me again, but this time with the author’s name?
Literally laughing out loud.. just needed to sit Tamara Holder between them