Article written by

blue milk also writes for The Guardian and Fairfax publications. You can read more about her at her own blog, blue milk.

10 Responses

Page 1 of 1
  1. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help
    The Kittehs' Unpaid Help at |

    The whole thing was head-up-his-arse whiny privileged white guy nonsense, like an MRA with the rare ability to construct a sentence. But this bit made me laugh: “Here’s the gist: all those uptight girls hanging onto their virginity ought to liberate themselves and get into the sexual scrum with the boys.”

    Um, if the girls were so uptight, who were the boys having sexual scrums with? Each other? He doesn’t even suggest there were “bad girls” (blech) around.

  2. angharad
    angharad at |

    to such women whose anger is beyond all understanding, particularly for men of my and Romney’s generation.

    Um…Obama’s not that much younger than Romney is he?

    Also ‘whose anger is beyond all understanding’ is clearly just another way of saying ‘irrational’.

  3. Arcadia
    Arcadia at |

    such women whose anger is beyond all understanding

    Lordy, I feel so patronised. How silly must I be? Clearly, it should not be important to me to be able to decide what to do with my own body, get equal pay for equal work, have universal healthcare. I probably should leave those decisions to some wealthy white man, most likely my husband or father, and probably the state if I don’t have one of those. They’re just bound to have my best interests at heart…

  4. tigtog
    tigtog at |

    Angharad, Romney was born in 1947, Obama was born in 1961. Strictly speaking that makes them both Boomers, but they’re at different ends of the Boomer spectrum.

    I’m only a few years younger than Obama. I definitely think of him as my generation. I definitely think of Romney as the previous generation.

    All this while I think of “generations” as a suspect trope.

  5. AMM
    AMM at |

    Watching the Middle East burn and the American economy trashed by debt and deficits are irrelevant to such women whose anger is beyond all understanding, particularly for men of my and Romney’s generation.

    Typical [redacted]ic — and misogynistic — over-generalization.

    1. I don’t know if I count as “Romney’s generation” (I was born in 1953), but the anger I think he’s trying to refer to is hardly beyond _my_ understanding. (I’m also “white”, male, and USA-an, so I am definitely in the demographic he was targeting.)

    2. FWIW, the reports I saw indicated that the “white women” demographic actually _favored_ Romney slightly. In the USA, the Republicans are generally assumed to be “better on economics” than Democrats (for no reason I can discern, but, whatever), and this was an issue for middle-class (white?) voters of both genders. Anecdotal evidence suggests that, for a lot of women in this demographic, it was a question of which was more important: an improved economy, or a government that didn’t hate them.

    My point is that reality is so much more complicated that that quote admits that it makes the guy sound like a wooden-headed fool (as in, my mind is made up, don’t bother me with facts.) It would sound dumb even coming from a Joe Six-Pack at a neighborhood bar. From someone whose profession supposedly involves understanding complex systems, it makes me wonder whether his professional work (whatever it is) has any basis in reality at all.

  6. angharad
    angharad at |

    @tigtog – I didn’t realise Romney was that old. I’m Gen X myself, and I wouldn’t really classify either of them in the same generation as me, but the point, as you say, is that it is clearly possible for people of different generations to have common understanding of one another’s issues.

  7. quixote
    quixote at |

    The Obama quote on the picture was funny. During which campaign did he say that? What he actually does as Prez is the opposite. (See BS about selling Plan B over the counter, giving bishops power over the civil rights of women unlucky enough to be employed by them, Stupak, it just goes on and on and on and on.)

    Still, at least he sometimes, when campaigning, pretends that women are people. That’s more than the other side does. But if it’s only to get women to vote for him, is that actually a good thing?

  8. quixote
    quixote at |

    Just to be clear, my point isn’t that there’s anything wrong with your argument. We have heard, and we do reject. I’m only trying to say that a real candidate who really stands up for our rights would be great.

  9. Megpie71
    Megpie71 at | *

    Looking ahead (I originally wrote “looking forward”, but let’s be honest, I don’t think anyone looks forward to elections) to the Australian election season (I’m in WA, we have two to deal with – one federal, one state), I have to wonder why the hells the Liberal party thinks they’re going to get me to alter my long-standing preference for them at the bottom of the list through their current behaviour.

    On the federal side, we have Tony Abbott, whose behaviour in the Slipper affair makes it clear that with a “friend” like him on your side, you don’t need any enemies. He’s a known misogynist, a politically connected thug and bruiser who has made it very clear repeatedly that his attitudes about the place of women in society belong in the fifties – the eighteen-fifties – and I don’t care how much of a domestic angel he is for his wife, I don’t want him in charge of making any policy decisions that can affect my life and livelihood.

    On the state side, we have our current premier, Mr Barnett, and our state Treasurer, Troy Buswell. Now, Mr Barnett is mostly harmless, in that he’s a standard Liberal with the ‘born to rule’ mentality and all the rest, and he’s the member for one of the more swanky beachside suburbs. Buswell, on the other hand, is a menace. He has a history of behaving inappropriately toward female colleagues and staff, a history of speeding (which caused him some definite problems when he was Transport Minister), and a history of behaving inappropriately while drunk toward potential Liberal party donors. He currently has a multi-million dollar defamation case in action against his former partner, Adele Carles (Independent member for Fremantle). The reason he’s treasurer at present is because he’s one of the few MPs in the state Liberals who could handle the job.

    Again, why would I want to vote for them?

  10. SunlessNick
    SunlessNick at |

    If “damaged women” vote for Obama, maybe it’s because they realise how much damage the Republicans did them.

Comments are closed.