A friend of the blog emails:
Obama talks about undeveloped countries and opportunities for women in those countries.
“It turns out that one of the best indicators of whether a country is developed or not is how does it educate its girls and how does it treat its women,” Obama said. “And typically, those countries that do a bad job on that are backwards and behind economically.”
Here, I agree. There are Middle Eastern countries that invoke religious laws to justify barring women from educational opportunities, employment, and just being out in public.
Amazing as this might seem to some millennials, there are places much, much worse than the United States.
But, MPR tweeted this article, leading with the following quote-
“There would be less war, kids would be better taken care of and there would be a general improvement in living standards and outcomes,” Obama said.
Why do we need to constantly perpetuate this sexist myth that all women are anti-war, that all women agree on what is the ‘right’ way to provide child care? As a woman, I am deeply offended by this myth.
I am offended for many reasons. Supporters of Obama love this type of quote. It makes them feel are warm and fuzzy for being “woke” and feminist. Then, they turn around and bash Betsy Devos for being pro Charter schools. Oh, women don’t know what is best for their children in that case?
“Progressivism” is all about supporting the right women/gays/minorities. As Berg’s Eighth Law of Diversity notes, “American progressivism’s reaction to one of “their”constituents – women, gays or people of color – running for office or otherwise identifying as a conservative is indistinguishable from sociopathic disorder.” There’s only one lane allowed for women, gays and minorities – otherwise, they’re apostates, and treated as such.
They are the type of people who bashed Margaret Thatcher for her economic policies in Britain. Did Thatcher improve living standards in Britain? Of course. But, your answer to that probably depends on your political beliefs, and not based on the fact that she was a woman. I am not sure Obama supporters come to the same conclusion as me.
By the way, Hillary Clinton likely would have had us in a war by now. Oh, and Thatcher was not an anti-war woman, either. Does that make Trump “the woman” candidate since he hasn’t started a war?
By the way – while I am the Twin Cities’ best feminist, I am unabashedly male, so I’m probably not the one to ask – but I can’t be the only one who cringes, visibly, at some of modern culture’s more visible pandering to women, can I? My peeve lately is people using the term “HERStory”, with helpful idiot caps, when a history article refers to women? More seriously, I can’t be the one that notices that modern “feminism’s” big push seems to be a return to victorian social conventions (but not, repeat not, mores) as re women?
I do not care if your political beliefs are different from mine. I am happy to debate policy differences. But I am sick of people in the 21st Century making blanket statements that all women believe this or all blacks vote for that. We have examples of competent and experienced women and people of color on all sides of the issues. We also have many examples of people- men, women, any race- who have not been competent. Even if you disagree politically, you can give credit to someone who is competent.
Yes, as Americans who believe in freedoms for all people, we abhor the way some countries disregard women and children. But, if you conflate that with we need women in charge to make us all better, then you are being just as oppressive. You are not allowing women the same opportunities to have independent beliefs as you have allowed for yourself as a man.
Obama’s comment is the rankest form of pandering. And anyone who’s ever worked in the real world knows that women are, pretty much, like other humans. Some are good, many are walking trash. I’ve worked for managers who were good, and many who were worse than worthless, a few are downright evil – and they’re about evenly split by gender.
Why does the worst ex-President since Jimmy Carter think leaders would be any different?