What prompted this behavior is her pro-life stance and desire to defund Planned Parenthood. While I strongly disagree with her views on these issues, no women should be subjected to this disgusting and frankly, violent, treatment.

When later interviewed, Cupp pointed out that no one will remember their disclaimer that “no such photo actually exists” – they will only remember the picture. That is what will be circulated far and wide. After all, the internet is forever. No matter the tasteless source of the article, the result can be used again and again to punish the subject, which is its design:

“The fact that I work very hard and I’m an ivy league educated woman with a pretty good job doesn’t matter when you look at a photo like this.”

She also wondered if Nancy Pelosi or Michelle Obama had been treated that way, would there be the comparative non-outrage. Cupp also spoke about the other degrading behavior aimed at women such as Sarah Palin — but she only mentioned conservative women. As Dylan Stableford reports in Yahoo News:

“The outrage of Sandra Fluke will not be matched on my side,” Cupp said. “It seems that feminism has devolved into an institution that has picked losers and winners and has decided that some women qualify for respect and other women do not.”

Fluke, though, called Hustler’s depiction of Cupp “offensive,” adding on Twitter: “Sexualization of female public [figures] attempts to limit them to being sexual figures and [nothing] more.”

Planned Parenthood also tweeted its support of Cupp.

I was encouraged to see that both Planned Parenthood and Sandra Fluke came out to denounce Hustler Magazine’s behavior. And while Ms. Cupp’s remarks were accurate as far as they went, she should also have stressed the fact that it is not only conservative women that are treated like this. Politically inconvenient women get this kind of treatment, no matter which side they are on.

It is a bad habit of conservatives when noting the insults hurled at Palin, Michelle Bachman, Laura Ingraham, Nikki Haley and others to conveniently forget that mainstream media, social media, comedians and trash mags lobbed disgusting images and slurs at Hillary Clinton, too – and did so for many years with no let up. It was a favorite, longtime hobby to use visual depictions of Mrs. Clinton that were sexually explicit and degrading.

Years ago, SPY magazine had a cover with Hillary’s dress being blown up above her waist, showing male underwear with a bulging penis underneath. That was a milder image and it was just the beginning.

Hillary toilet paper, Hillary nutcrackers, facebook depictions of sex acts being committed on Hillary by animals: was that not degrading treatment, too? She’s not exactly a conservative. Both the left and right were guilty here. In fact, in 2008, the left attacked Hillary Clinton just as viciously as they would any conservative woman. According to them, the ends justified the means.

Conservative women do not deserve to be treated like Cupp was – and no woman does. Just as it is inexcusable that only a liberal woman would be defended against misogyny– both sides need to realize that to be taken seriously, we need to defend any and all women against this kind of treatment. Both sides need to stand up in a loud voice as one and demand that it stop.

And just as Cupp complains no liberal will stand up to defend her, there was not exactly a deafening roar by conservatives when Hillary Clinton’s own party condoned the 2008 verbal and visual media stoning we all witnessed.

An article that was released in Playboy a couple of years ago about “conservative women we’d like to hate f*ck” was likewise horrifying. Hate f*ck? Is that anything like rape? Likewise, Sandra Bernhard commenting that Sarah Palin would be “gang raped if she dared set foot into Manhattan” – is this what we want to wish on a woman just because we disagree with her politically? Bill Maher also wished reporter Lara Logan’s horrid gang assault upon The View’s Elizabeth Hasselback.

No side has a claim to purity and no woman is immune. If a woman’s politics or aspirations conflict with or supersede that which the other players feel is appropriate, sexually degrading material is hauled out to put her back in her place. It is not only insulting, it telegraphs violence — not wit, not humor. This sort of attitude and treatment of any women promotes violence and disrespect towards all women. Not acceptable.
************************
Anita Finlay is the author of Dirty Words on Clean Skin: Sexism and Sabotage, a Hillary Supporter’s Rude Awakening, now available on Amazon in both print and Kindle editions.

A spate of articles analyzing the “Mommy Wars,” ignited by political operative Hilary Rosen’s recent comments targeting Ann Romney, each argued that the mommy debate is not the one we should be having. In Politico, Tara McGuinness states that most women today do not have a choice about working, whether or not they have children, as 73% are now in the work force. The issue for mothers is not whether to work, she states, but how they will be treated and compensated when they do. The NY Post’s Rich Lowry quotes the latest polling data wherein women are far more concerned with health care costs and availability, joblessness, gas prices and outrageous government spending. Contraception, the current war-waging tool of the Obama Administration and many Republicans, only ranks sixth on the list.

Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post wants a clear answer from Republican candidate Mitt Romney regarding his stance on equal pay for women. While his hedging stinks, President Obama needs to weigh in on this, too. The Lily Ledbetter Act, passed soon after his inauguration, may make it less difficult for a woman to seek redress for pay inequities after the fact, but does nothing to guarantee equal pay for equal work in the first place. Recent reports indicate female staff in this White House earn 18% less than the men. This figure has been disputed saying that it depends on the “type” of job — but doesn’t that also indicate that women don’t enjoy the same high level jobs as the male staff? Are they not qualified for the higher paying jobs? You’d have a hard time selling that one. It is a problem no matter how you parse the data. That stinks, too. Ms. Marcus continues:

Likewise, what is Romney’s view on the 1994 Violence Against Women Act, which established domestic violence and stalking as federal crimes, and provided funding for services for victims? Republicans in Congress are holding up reauthorization of the measure because of protections it would add for undocumented immigrants and gay men and lesbians…

Republicans are accused of waging a war on women by holding up reauthorization of this act, but aren’t Democrats aiding and abetting this war, too? Why don’t women rate their own bill? If Democrats want to reauthorize this legislation, then just make the bill about stopping violence against women, without adding in provisions they know are sure to irritate Republicans and hold up the law. Who is playing politics here? The added provisions should likewise have their own bill — put this debate out front and center and duke it out.

Both sides play games. Women are used as a political football, manipulated for our votes, but when it comes time for actionable legislation, we get little. The real war is one of disrespect and infantilization. Both sides think women need to be talked down to and have the issues “man-splained” to them. Women can do the explaining themselves, actually.

Women in the public sphere know this trivialization and demeaning treatment all too well. That’s why so few run for office. Although we are 52% of the population, we have less than 17% in Congress. Female candidates receive 40% less media coverage on the issues and three times the coverage on their personal appearance as men. A misogynist gauntlet awaits any woman on the campaign trail. Being called whore, slut and worse are not inviting prospects.

While Ms. McGuinness, Ms. Marcus and Mr. Lowry all raise valid points, they do not touch on the root cause for the disrespectful behavior aimed at women on both sides. This is not about women being treated as a victim class. It is about women being treated as a lesser class, still requiring a ‘talking to’ about what is good for us.

Mainstream media, advertisers and comedians objectify and insult women while politicians advantage themselves by this behavior when their poll numbers dictate a need to do so.

If it is convenient to let the media excoriate a woman, i.e., Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin in 2008, then the party of women’s progress, namely Democrats, will let it continue sans objection. Otherwise, when Hillary was called hag, witch, bitch and she devil, there would have been an outcry to make it stop. When Sarah Palin was called a “c**t,” “dumb tw*t” and hung in effigy outside a West Hollywood home, likewise a cry would have gone out to say enough is enough. Attacks on both women were met with silence.

If it is convenient to score political points by holding up Ann Romney as a paragon of motherhood in order to depict Democrats as elitist snobs who are anti-family, Republicans will do so.

The ends justifying the means seem to trump a woman’s rights every time. Both parties’ slogan seems to be “vote for us, we’re not as bad as the other guy.”

The real war has to do with pandering, disrespect and tired sexist bias. As a fellow traveler put it, this is the work of misogyny – no matter your choice, no matter your looks, your demeanor or your ideas, we will find something wrong with it and a reason why you fall short of the feminine ideal. This may seem an antiquated notion. But if it were, we would not still be falling all over ourselves to insult one side or the other, as if either a stay at home mom or a career woman could, or should, claim righteousness.

Both sides further seek to divide and conquer women, condescending to them by pretending they do not care about anything other than contraception and Roe v. Wade.

And when it comes to being pro-women, as the artist Annie Lennox so aptly put it, “feminism” is considered the “f” word. A poll conducted by The Daily Beast shows it is a label only 17% of people even wish to be associated with and yet the word itself only speaks to true equality.

It is not limited to contraception. It is not pro-life or pro-choice. It is not limited to careerism or sexual liberation. It is not about having kids or not having kids;

And it is not about treating men as the enemy.

It is about respect. It is about equality and equal pay. It is about the ability of each woman to self-determine without having a rich white man (or anyone) tell her what to do, how far she can go in business, in politics or anywhere else.

It is about trusting a woman to make her own adult judgments without condescending instruction or supervision.

Anything other than self-determination is sexist. The fact that we are debating which type of lifestyle is better is an insulting distraction, as if a cookie cutter solution is possible in this day and age.

A number of political operatives painted Sarah Palin as a bad mother for her choice to be a Vice Presidential candidate while raising five children with her husband. Now Mrs. Romney is criticized for the opposite. Clearly, a political agenda is more important than consistency, common sense or respect where the hunger to win an election is concerned.

Both sides engage in this destructive stereotyping, with disastrous results for women and the electorate as a whole. Women deserve to be respected for their choices, and their ability to arrive at them, not put into convenient, and limiting, categories.

This kind of thinking is a weapon designed to stoke animosity and contempt prior to investigation, keeping otherwise likeminded women focused on attacking each other rather than empowering themselves and their sisters – regardless of political persuasion.

We can do better.
*************************
Anita Finlay is the author of Dirty Words on Clean Skin, Sexism and Sabotage, a Hillary Supporter’s Rude Awakening, now available on Amazon in print and on Kindle. Please visit her website www.anitafinlay.com.

In an election year, we will surely hear a great deal of pandering from both political parties. Since the 2010 midterms revealed a surprising drop-off in the numbers of women who voted for Democrats, the current pandering is aimed squarely at the hearts and minds of women. Will it work? If I’d learned anything in 2008, it is that women have an endless capacity to settle for crumbs rather than standing up to claim the cake. Dirty Words on Clean Skins asks us all to be more involved in the debate.

Please visit my website at anitafinlay.com to learn more. Dirty Words On Clean Skin is now available on Amazon. It is also available at Amazon’s Kindle Store as of today!

Thank you, as always, for your kind support of my work.

Those like Matt Taibbi, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Jack Cafferty, David Schuster, Dana Milbank, Chris Cilizza, to name a few, have long enjoyed deep cover because of their supposed stance on social issues. That does not nor never should have bought them a pass. These men purport to be journalists and serious commentators. Never was their vile behavior more evident than the sexist horror show of 2008 against Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. Their vile, sniggering behavior continues unabated. In fact the only half-hearted apologies ever elicited from any one of these men has only come after a hand slap, a loss of ratings or advertisers…Is that the level of political discourse in this country when discussing women: She devil, bitch, Nurse Ratched, bubblehead?

Rush was forced into the same kind of apology last week. Was he sincere? Doubtful. Will he do it again? Very Likely. Has Bill Maher ever apologized for his endless litany of demeaning statements about women?

Rush Limbaugh is entitled to like or dislike whomever he wants, but if the best way he has to discredit Hillary Clinton is by saying she has “a testicle lockbox” or by calling her a “Femi-Nazi” – I’d say he’s lost the argument. And if Bill Maher likewise has to insult Hillary by saying “They fined CBS a million dollars for showing Janet Jackson’s nipple. Just think what they could get for Hillary Clinton’s c*nt,” and calls Sarah Palin a “c*nt” and a “twat” – it is pretty obvious that the cheap shot is all he is good for. It doesn’t say much for his mental capacity otherwise.

Bill Maher just made a million dollar donation to a SuperPAC with the mission of re-electing President Obama. How does that sit with the party of women’s progress? So we don’t care if you treat women like garbage – as long as your check cashes?

Limbaugh and Maher are shock jocks. That’s how they make their money. However, they also both function as commentators on different news programs. But whether they do or not, these two, along with David Letterman and Jay Leno, have powerful bully pulpits. They cannot hide behind the safety net of “comedian” or “host” when what they are selling is hate-speech. Their jokes, satire, rants, whatever you call them, have a devastating effect night after night that is just as costly as that of the vile pundits on MSNBC or CNN.

Just imagine the equivalent comment being made by any one of these guys toward President Obama? What is the equivalent comment to calling a man a slut, a whore, a c*nt, a twat, a moron, a mashed up bag of meat with lipstick, saying that a particular woman “reads copy with a big set of hairy balls in her mouth” (that was from Taibbi)…What if you made a slur against a Jewish person? A Muslim? Juan Williams made a general comment voicing his nervousness about Muslims traveling in traditional garb on airplanes and NPR fired him.

I have no objection to anyone taking a female candidate or a woman making statements in the public sphere to task on the merits. But let’s stick to the issues, shall we?

Why is it necessary for these men (or the complicit women who egg them on) to call women by the most denigrating names possible – as if their very gender was at the root of their crime.

Moral relativism is not acceptable. The source of these comments does not matter, nor the target. This is hate speech, not free speech. If it were not hate speech, what else accounts for all the violence against women in this country and around the world? Clearly, there still exists some sort of sick need to put women in their place, either with words or by violent means. My fear is that men who control the air waves or use ink by the barrel influence society in negative ways when it comes to how we view women. They decide what a woman is worth and influence how they should be treated by speaking of them so disrespectfully.

If the Rush Limbaughs and Bill Mahers and Keith Olbermanns of the world cannot find a more intelligent way to take issue with a female subject than resorting to acting like bullying twelve year olds, then maybe they are not up to the job.

We are so busy in this country protecting every group under the sun from offense. Yet women are still graded and degraded on the basis of appearance, age, sexuality, vocal quality – anything that will allow them to be cleaved into body parts and then disempowered. It is up to women on both sides of the aisle to stop themselves from being used and manipulated in this debate and express a zero tolerance policy. It is up to men on both sides of the aisle to stop grading on a curve when it comes to their own transgressions or those of their brothers.

While it was only fitting that Rush Limbaugh apologize for his behavior, he should not be singled out or used politically as a distraction from the larger debate. If politicians are only coming to the defense of women when they need our votes, it is up to us to say ‘you can do better.’

President Obama called Ms. Fluke to express his support. But if he really wants to support her – then he must return Bill Maher’s million dollar donation to his re-election campaign, since Maher, like Limbaugh is a horrid culprit in this debate and a regular purveyor of sexist attacks upon women of both parties.

Mr. and Mrs. Obama have two beautiful daughters. I know they would never want Sasha and Malia to be on the receiving end of the sexist commentary made by the likes of a Limbaugh or a Maher. Given that a newscaster by the name of David Shuster referred to the Clintons as pimps and their daughter Chelsea a whore by inference, nothing is outside the realm of possibility any longer. Propriety is a thing of the past. No insult to any woman is off limits it seems.

The President has the most powerful bully pulpit in the world. Rejecting Mr. Maher’s money would go a long way toward proving that this zero tolerance policy starts at the top, and is not just about politics.

****************
Anita Finlay is the author of the soon to be released book, Dirty Words On Clean Skin: Sexism and Sabotage, a Hillary supporter’s rude awakening.

As Bronwyn reported yesterday, my governor, Nikki Haley, endorsed Romney on Friday. This is important since our primary is the third one in the New Year. Romney was glad for it, too, saying people were “lining up outside her door” to get this coveted endorsement. Below is a good interview with Gov. Haley, conducted by Greta van Susteren (h/t Bronwyn):

Nice, right? But then things went downhill pretty quickly. Check out this sexist description of Gov. Haley in WaPo. Apparently, for this writer, Ned Martel, a woman is either Church Lady” or a “Real Housewife”:

[snip] In person, she cuts an indefatigable and glamourous figure. She eschews a Church Lady mien for something more Real Housewife: fit, attractive and encased in suits that stop just below the elbow and just above the knee. And she says often how her job is sales, selling corporate chief executives on South Carolina with many lures. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Welcome to being a woman in politics in the United States.

The second story is bad (h/t to The New Agenda). It could easily be entitled, “Whistleblower Slamdunked,” but it’s headline is this: “Former N.B.A. Employee Says Sexual Harassment Concerns Were Ignored.” And why is he a “former employee”? Because he had the audacity to stand up for the women who were being sexually harassed, that’s why.

Now, I should say at the outset that I have very little respect for the N.B.A. I used to watch it, but over time, it seems to me that a number of players are just a bunch of thugs. Arrests have piled up, fights on court, all kinds of actions that have marred the game. Unfortunately, this attitude is now being evidenced in the college game, with the melee between Cincinnati and Xavier Universities recently. To label it as unsportsmanlike is a gross understatement. One of Xavier’s players, Tu Holloway, said in a press conference afterward that some Cincinnati player was calling them out before the game. He said, “We got disrespected a little bit before the game…We are grown men over there. we got a bunch of gangstas in the locker room, not thugs, but tough guys on the court…”

I beg to differ. You are a bunch of thugs, and the last ten seconds of the game showed that clearly.

Now, back to the N.B.A. Security official, Warren Glover. This is a long story, with one incident after another occurring to women who had the misfortune to work for this organization. I recommend you read the whole thing to get an idea of the depth of sexism, misogyny, and sexual harassment inherent in this organization. It is truly shocking, and appalling. Here is just the beginning of it:

A former N.B.A. security official says that he repeatedly warned his superiors that women in the office were being sexually harassed or discriminated against, but that his concerns were ignored and that he was ultimately fired for his actions on the women’s behalf. He is suing the league for lost wages and damages.

Warren Glover, 50, was fired as a security director in July, after 10 years with the N.B.A., despite a glowing performance record for most of his tenure, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday morning in New York State Supreme Court. In the suit, Glover accuses senior N.B.A. security officials of creating a “hostile work environment” in which he was “demeaned,” “treated differently from other employees” and denied promotions because of his willingness to speak out.

In one instance, Glover said a senior security official made sexual advances toward a female colleague, then demeaned her publicly when she rejected his advances. In another, a different security official proposed using sexually inappropriate material as part of a presentation to N.B.A. players. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

It gets much, much worse when you read the extent of the sexual harassment women to which women have been subjected there. I would like to commend Mr. Glover for doing the right thing. He is truly a stand up guy.

And now for the ugly, though the story about the “student-athletes” brawling would qualify. But this is about the OWS “protesters,” and again, they, too could qualify as thugs. In Seattle recently, not only did they try to block the ports (and really, just what the hell were they trying to accomplish with impeding the rights of workers to work???). The “protesters” were throwing paint at the police, which isn’t the worst part, except they hit a police horse with it, and that pisses me off. In addition to paint, they threw BRICKS and REBAR. You know, rebar, “reinforced steel.” Yeah, I’d say the “thug” moniker is well deserved, not to mention CRIMINAL. Enough with this crap. Throw them all in the slammer, I say. They interrupt workers? Throw them in jail. Impede traffic intentionally? Throw them in the slammer. Hurl dangerous objects at police and others? Throw their asses in jail and charge them with assault with a deadly weapon, because bricks and rebar would certainly qualify. Enough with this crap already.

Yuck, blech. With the exception of the first story, I realize this might leave a bad taste in one’s mouth. Allow me to end, then, with a little holiday cheer. This combines one of my favorite songs, and my love for “Glee”:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Whew, I feel better. Hope you do, too. Have a good weekend, everyone.

For instance, there’s the story about the 85 year old grandmother who claims she was strip searched by the TSA. Now, many of you know that I routinely get the TSA pat down since I had a knee replacement. It is no fun. I mentally check out every time they do it because it is SO invasive that to be fully present just leaves me in tears. Thank heavens our little airport is finally getting a scanner in Feb. I will take the radiation any day of the week.

Though, it doesn’t help if the scanners aren’t actually working, like when I returned from Grand Cayman last week. When you come back into the country, you have to go back through security. Charlotte DOES have scanners, but they weren’t on. Great. Another pat down.

So, you know I can totally relate to this poor woman who endured a strip search. She plans to sue, and I support her in that 100%.

Then there is this bit of religious wisdom from a Saudi Arabian legal scholar (h/t Hokma). Did you know that women having the right to drive will only lead to pornography and prostitution, not to mention premarital sex? Apparently, according to Kamal Subhi. Evidently, Mr. Subhi has never heard that prostitution is the oldest profession, and I am pretty darn sure there weren’t cars around way back when. Ahem.

And of course, as many know, Herman Cain has suspended his campaign. The MSM got just what they wanted. Reminds me of how they went after Sarah Palin, too, except nothing they said about her was true, though that didn’t stop them. Every lawsuit was dismissed, the emails exonerated, but the damage was done. I am sure the JournoListers were dancing with glee.

Oh, and I cannot leave out this little story. I am sure you will all feel very sorry for these folks. Yes, some of the poor OWSers arrested in LAmight need therapy as a result. For real. I am not making this crap up:

Most of the roughly 300 Occupy L.A. protesters were released from jail by Friday evening, with some immediately speaking out on the police raid that cleared their camp.

One speaker suggested that some of those arrested might need therapy. Several said they felt traumatized after witnessing police use nonlethal force and being forced to wait for hours in zip-tie handcuffs. Some displayed cuts on their wrists from the handcuffs. Others complained that they were forced to urinate in bags on the bus as they were transported to jails. [snip] (Click here to read the rest of these whiny, entitled, lament about how mean the police are to people who break the law.)

Seriously? What the hell did they expect, rides in limos to the Ritz? Good grief.

Blech. This is but the tip of the iceberg for the weekend. But it’s Sunday, and time to take a bit of a break, don’t you think?

It’s a Celtic Woman kind of day for me, so first for your musical pleasure, this beautiful piece, “O, America”:

Click here to view the embedded video.

And now for this beautiful, and fun, piece from Celtic Woman:

Click here to view the embedded video.

In the midst of all of the political and economic craziness, I hope this brings a bit of a respite for you.

Oh, wait – I know. Obama was NOT great on women’s issues, he did not treat women well and his sexism was in evidence frequently on the campaign trail, his wife, too. Seriously, do I need to provide evidence to support that after all this time, and the numerous links/examples? Seriously? Okay – here is one more, with some bonus coverage of how misogynistic the media was:

Click here to view the embedded video.

And then comes this report from the Washington Post in a review of the new Ron Suskind book, Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington and the Education of a President. To say it is not glowing about how women – upper level women – were treated in the Obama Administration is putting it mildly:

Friction about the roles of women in the Obama White House grew so intense during the first two years of the president’s tenure that he was forced to take steps to reassure senior women on his staff that he valued their presence and their input.

At a dinner in November 2009, several senior female aides complained directly to the president that men enjoyed greater access to him and often muscled them out of key policy discussions.

Those tensions prompted Obama, urged on by senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, to elevate more women into senior White House positions, recognize them more during staff meetings and increase the female presence in the upper ranks of the reelection campaign. “There were some issues early on with women feeling as though they hadn’t figured out what their role was going to be on the senior team at the White House,” Jarrett said in an interview Monday. “Most of the women hadn’t worked on the campaign, and so they didn’t have a personal relationship with the president.”

Uh huh. But that is not the full story. It wasn’t just that some of these women weren’t involved in the campaign. This isn’t about one group being outsiders trying to get into the inner circle, no, not at all. It was women-specific:

[snip] One of the most striking quotes in the book came from former White House communications director Anita Dunn, who was quoted as saying that, “this place would be in court for a hostile workplace. . . . Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”

Dunn says she was quoted out of context and told The Post on Friday that she told Suskind “point blank” that the White House was not a hostile work environment.

On Monday, Suskind allowed a Post reporter to review a recorded excerpt of the original interview, which took place over the telephone in April. In that conversation, Dunn is heard telling Suskind about a conversation she had with Jarrett.

“I remember once I told Valerie that, I said if it weren’t for the president, this place would be in court for a hostile workplace,” Dunn is heard telling Suskind. “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.” [snip]

So first, Dunn tells the truth, then tries to lie to cover up for Obama, but her own voice confirms this quote, “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.” That is mighty damning, indeed (and honestly, Anita, STOP COVERING FOR THIS MAN! Good grief. Have a little self-respect already.).

But Dunn was not the only one:

Other episodes were relayed to Suskind by Christina Romer, former chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers, whose disputes with Summers have been widely reported, including in an earlier book on Obama’s White House by journalist Jonathan Alter.

Romer is quoted by Suskind saying, after being excluded by Summers at a meeting, “I felt like a piece of meat.”

Holy smokes. These two women were not some underlings who resented not being higher up in the chain. No, these two women had pretty prominent positions. Wow. That is an incredible statement. And it goes on from there. Click here to read the rest of the article.

I might add, what makes that statement so striking is that most women know how incredibly difficult it is to prove that kind of “workplace” hostility. Too often, the perpetrators are defended, and circle the wagons to protect them. Heck, as noted, even Dunn tried to protect Obama from the charge. So it is telling indeed that she used that phrase in her conversation with Jarrett. Telling, indeed.

I wish I was surprised. I am not. When Obama made Jon Favreau the Head White House Speechwriter, and allowed him to retain that position even after the following photo came to light, I knew that was the kind of ship Obama would be running:

And that was AFTER then-Senator Clinton had been named as Obama’s Secretary of State choice.

Yeah. That sums up how things were going in the Obama Administration perfectly, don’t you think? Just how much do you think has changed now? Let’s hear it!

Here is the story, as detailed in Saunders’ piece, In This Brave New World, Girls Disappear:

The world is becoming unbalanced. In pockets across the globe, women are giving birth to too many boys. In China, the sex ratio is 121 boys to 100 girls. In India, it’s 112 to 100. Sex selection also is a force in the Balkans, Armenia and Georgia. In her eye-opening book, “Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men,” journalist Mara Hvistendahl estimates that ultrasound and abortion have “claimed over 160 million potential women and girls – in Asia alone.” That’s more than the entire female population of the United States.

If you think that scarcity makes women more valuable, you are right – but that does not mean females benefit. As “surplus men” have trouble finding mates, young girls are forced into prostitution. Others are forced into arranged marriages. On Taiwan’s eBay, Hvistendahl finds three Vietnamese women for sale for $5,400.

Those women who do well economically in the new order sadly are more likely to abort daughters in favor of sons.

Is this not disconcerting? Not only are girls being aborted in greater numbers by choice, but the decreased numbers of girls does not translate to girls being treated better. Not even close, unfortunately. Most disturbing is that women are buying into this mindset, and how that is made manifest.

Saunders points out, though, that this isn’t just bad for women:

The results are equally bleak for men. Many boys grow up knowing they are unlikely to marry and start a family. In two years, 1 in 10 Chinese men will lack a female counterpart. The Chinese have a term – fenquing for “angry youth” – to describe the legions of young men likely to grow old alone. They find release in places like the Rising Sun Anger Release Bar, “where for the price of a few drinks, customers can pummel one of the bar’s hired hands.” In that equation, both men are losers.

In three decades, Vietnam – a poor country that provides brides and kidnapped prostitutes to affluent overly male nations – will have 4.3 million surplus men.

Holy cow. The difference the shortage of women will make in such a brief period of time is astonishing.

Saunders touches on the path of good intentions, whose result seem to fulfill the old adage paves the path to hell:

Hvistendahl finds no shortage of villains in this story. There’s China’s one-child policy, which resulted in untold forced abortions. Western governments and charities threw money at family-planning efforts to stem population growth in Asia, with little concern to the methods – forced sterilizations and abortions – employed. Then there are the willing participants – doctors, nurses and parents – who choose to engage in female feticide. French demographer Christophe Guilmoto recalls an Indian woman who was livid because she had aborted a boy after a doctor misdiagnosed the gender of her fetus.

I was struck at the distortion of good intentions. Family planning does promote prosperity, while overpopulation is unhealthy and destabilizing. Researchers develop technologies to help families. But in a world where technology moves faster than ethical thinking, giving would-be parents the gender they prefer is good business. So you get fertility clinics like the Los Angeles outfit that advertises, “Be certain your next child will be the gender you’re hoping for.”

Of course, sex-selection abortions happen in America, often among immigrant families. Hvistendahl reports that 35 percent of Asian American pregnancies result in abortion. [snip]

Oh, yes – definitely “good intentions” paved the way to this hell, which affects girls on a massive scale. And the numbers are just staggering.

Saunders concludes with the following:

[snip] Canadian sociologist Sharada Srinivasan has another suggestion. As she told Hvistendahl, at some point, feminists have to define sex selection as a human rights abuse. That would be a good start. (Click here to read the rest.)

Yes, it would be a good place to start – it is a human rights abuse, and the sooner we start dealing with it as such, the better.

I will leave you as Saunders did in her piece, with the following quotes. These should get your blood a-pumping: Thoughts On Parenthood

“You can choose whether to be a parent, but once you choose to be a parent, you cannot choose whether it’s a boy or girl, black or white, tall or short.”

- Delhi gynecologist Puneet Bedi

“Better 500 rupees now than 500,000 later.”

- Mumbai ultrasound ad

“Less than $5 invested in population control is worth $100 invested in economic growth.”

- President Lyndon B. Johnson, in a 1965 speech in San Francisco

Then there is political commentator Kirsten Power’s take on this situation from her revelatory account in The Daily Beast. She was most distressed by this scandal given her long friendship with and trust of, er, Mr. Weiner…Not only had she believed his endless lies and media manipulations, but the months of his “sexting” encounters that have now been uncovered reveal something to her about the man that is far more disturbing:

But even if I could see past the lying and extreme narcissism that is noteworthy even by Washington standards, there is the issue of his attitude toward women. What has emerged is a picture of a predator trolling the Internet for women—some half his age—with which to engage in cybersex. We know only about the women who were responsive to his overtures. The odds are very high that he struck out with many, and other women were victim to his unsolicited sex talk. Women should be able to “friend” a married—or unmarried—congressman on Facebook or follow him on Twitter without fear of being the recipient of lewd talk or behavior. Just because a woman “likes” your video on Facebook doesn’t mean you can send her a picture of your penis. This is textbook sexual harassment. It may not be illegal, but it’s definitely unethical. He is in a position of influence, and many women—especially a 21-year-old—would be afraid to report a congressman doing that to them because he holds so much power. Also, he claims none of the women he contacted were underage, but how could he possibly know that?

By far the most disturbing information that we have been privy to—there is, no doubt, more out there that we don’t know—is the transcript of a nine-month “sexting” relationship Weiner had with a Las Vegas blackjack dealer. Radar Online posted the transcript, and it is rife with misogyny and distorted views about women. In referring to oral sex, Wiener tells her, “You will gag on me before you c** with me in you” and “[I’m] thinking about gagging your hot mouth with my c***.” This is not about sex. It’s about dominating and inflicting physical pain on a woman, a fantasy the hard-core porn industry makes billions of dollars on selling to men. You don’t want to gag a woman with your penis unless you have some serious issues with the way you see women.

Ms. Powers is correct. The only people who wish to sublimate others, who can only feel bigger by making others feel smaller or powerless are those who feel small themselves. Double entendre notwithstanding.

But Ms. Power’s conclusion is most telling in that I fear her disillusionment with her own party will only grow over time:

Despite my disappointment in his behavior and my concerns about his capacity to be in a leadership position, my heart still aches for him and his family. We are all flawed human beings, and this is not about meting out judgment. It’s about having some sort of standard for what the Democratic Party stands for—especially regarding treating women with dignity and respect—and Congressman Weiner has fallen far short of even the low standard to which we generally hold our elected officials. It’s time for him to go.

The Democratic Party may say it stands for the respectful treatment of women, yet the 2008 and 2010 election cycles and the continued crude verbiage employed against women candidates — or any woman with whom they do not agree — leftie MSNBC host Ed Schultz calling Laura Ingraham a “slut” for example — show that Democrats only pretend to respect women for votes. Real respect is something they do not understand. Just ask Hillary Clinton, — that she-devil-Nurse-Ratched-vaginal-American-Tonya-Harding-tea-party-having-white-bitch, who according to Senator Leahy, Speaker Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Reid et al, should have just shut up and sat down for the good of the party.

And just how much respect has Mr. Weiner shown for his wife, long time SoS Clinton aide, Huma Abedin. Powers points out there is already a whisper campaign underway to blame the now pregnant Ms. Abedin for Weiner’s behavor. This likewise follows a longtime pattern in American culture, regardless of party, to blame the woman for the man’s indiscretions. She travels a lot, they murmured…and what else are they trying to insinuate? Hillary was blamed for Bill. And in fact, even Michelle Obama was blamed for her husband sitting in the wrong church for twenty years.

Are men adults responsible for their own behavior? Or a bunch of overgrown Peter Pan’s singularly lacking in moral compass or common sense? We do both women and men a disservice by granting oxygen to these outworn stereotypes.

Several party leaders agree with Ms. Power’s assessment that eight term congressman Weiner should resign. I am sure he has become quite the inconvenience heading into an election year:

Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. Allyson Y. Schwartz, a leader of the party’s House campaign committee, called Wednesday for Rep. Anthony Weiner to resign after he admitted he sent lewd photos to women and talked dirty with them via Twitter and Facebook.

Weiner’s behavior was so offensive that he has lost the ability to command respect from his constituents and brought dishonor to the House, Schwartz said.

“As Americans we have the right to expect better behavior from members of Congress, leaders of our country,” Schwartz said in an interview. “I don’t think we should accept it.”

Lastly, we have the bread and circuses aspect of this entire episode. As blogger, dbsweden, pointed out in the New York Times today:

Here we go again! If it isn’t about celebrity nits like Paris Hilton or Charlie Sheen it’s about the inconsequential sexual activities of Vitter or Weiner or Spitzer. And now we focus on Weiner’s pregnant wife. For crying out loud, when are we going to get news of significant consequence like the amazing abilities of Senators and Congressmen to do seven to eleven percent better picking stock winners than even the experts on Wall Street? University researchers in Georgia and Florida have eye-opening figures on the! investments of Washington politicians that somehow haven’t managed to make the pages of the national press.

Fellow readers, do any of you wonder why Americans remain largely ignorant of genuine malfeasances in Congress by virtue of all the soporific sex scandals? Wake up, America! Demand honest investigative reporting on why Washington is dysfunctional and almost totally corrupt, on why the rich are being coddled while the remaining 98% of Americans are being shafted. Let’s get less news from the bedrooms and more from the boardrooms. The latter are where the scandals grow like mushrooms in a dark basement.

While I disagree with dbsweden’s attempts to diminish the ramifications of Mr. Weiner’s horrid conduct, the misogynist aspect of it and his feeble attempts at a cover-up, the blogger does raise an interesting point in that we are being bombarded and infested with this scandal while distracted from other important economic, legislative and foreign policy issues of the day. They are buried in the 24 hour news cycle when they should get our undivided attention. Do I think he should resign? Yes. But it is up to Mr. Weiner’s constituents to decide whether he stays or goes. Not him or his party. He should also get help from a psychotherapist. We should place the blame for his actions squarely where it belongs — on him. It also wouldn’t hurt to note how women were and are disrespected throughout this entire process.

And we should get back to other critical issues facing this nation.

What say you?

No, Anthony Weiner has no one but himself to blame for the mess he is in. His long time friend (and for a brief period, girlfriend), Kirsten Powers, came out with a scathing post about Weiner on Wednesday, June 7th. She has been friends with him for years, and unknowingly carried his water on “Hannity” in defense of Weiner. She is not carrying it any more, as this post highlights:

[snip] Narcissism doesn’t begin to describe this kind of behavior. It seems there was nobody he didn’t lie to. The New York Times reported this morning that he told donors a week ago that the scandal was the result of a “vast right-wing conspiracy” and that “everything [would] be fine.” We also learned after his press conference that he coached a former porn star with whom he had communicated online on how to lie to the media.

But even if I could see past the lying and extreme narcissism that is noteworthy even by Washington standards, there is the issue of his attitude toward women. What has emerged is a picture of a predator trolling the Internet for women—some half his age—with which to engage in cybersex. We know only about the women who were responsive to his overtures. The odds are very high that he struck out with many, and other women were victim to his unsolicited sex talk. Women should be able to “friend” a married—or unmarried—congressman on Facebook or follow him on Twitter without fear of being the recipient of lewd talk or behavior. Just because a woman “likes” your video on Facebook doesn’t mean you can send her a picture of your penis. This is textbook sexual harassment. It may not be illegal, but it’s definitely unethical. He is in a position of influence, and many women—especially a 21-year-old—would be afraid to report a congressman doing that to them because he holds so much power. Also, he claims none of the women he contacted were underage, but how could he possibly know that?

By far the most disturbing information that we have been privy to—there is, no doubt, more out there that we don’t know—is the transcript of a nine-month “sexting” relationship Weiner had with a Las Vegas blackjack dealer. Radar Online posted the transcript, and it is rife with misogyny and distorted views about women…

[...]

A whisper campaign has started in New York that Weiner’s wife was partly to blame for what happened. “You know, she does travel a lot” is what one New York political operative told me they have heard from multiple reporters. So now we have the “blame the woman” campaign even though what Weiner did had zero to do with sexual satisfaction and everything to do with his own mental issues and attitude toward women. And, by the way, plenty of men have wives who travel and they don’t start preying on women on the Internet and sending pictures of their private parts. [snip] (Click here to read the rest, and believe me, it is well worth your time.)

Again, Powers’ post is well worth your time – there are some things in there to support her charge of misogyny, and she is right on the money.

Unlike Chris Matthews, whose sexist, boorish behavior have been on display for a number of years. You may recall that even Media Matters took him to task for his sexism toward Hillary Clinton, though his expression of such seems to have only scratched the surface:

[snip] One young conservative female guest who appeared several times on Matthews’ show told TheDC that bizarre comments toward women were part of his off air banter as well.

“During one appearance, during the commercial break, Matthews informed me he loves it when women wear baby doll dresses,” she said. “It’s his favorite thing to see women wear.”

[...]

Liberal watchdog groups such as Media Matters and the Daily Kos have hit Matthews hard for his poorly chosen, even misogynistic words toward liberal women.

Media Matters noted Matthews’ poor math in trying to figure out how many women governors there were in 2008.

“Where are the big-state women governors? Where are they? Name one. They don’t exist,” Matthews said of the potential for a future female presidential candidate.

Media Matters subsequently pointed out that in 2008 there were in fact many female governors with populations comparable to the big name former governor presidential candidates, such as Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell, and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.[snip]

Holy crappydoo. Seriously?? “Babydoll” clothes? Unaware that there are a number of women governors??

Yeah, this guy is a lunatic:

[snip] His emotional rants have become commonplace on “Hardball,” and made his show must-watch TV for the likes of Mediate, NewsBusters, Real Clear Politics and even The Daily Caller — all waiting with bated breath for Matthews to inevitably say something “insane.”

When asked by TheDC why he watches so religiously, Ian Schwartz, Real Clear Politics video editor, did not mince words.

“‘Hardball’ is a reminder that I am sane,” said Schwartz. “Chris Matthews is more of a gaffe machine than Joe Biden and the ignorance of his sexism and bigotry makes the show entertaining to watch.”

“He’s a freak show” said another media reporter. [snip]

You got that right, for so, so many reasons.

But you know who one of his favorite targets is:

[snip] Sarah Palin is another of Matthews’ punching bags. He has called the former Alaska governor and former vice presidential nominee “profoundly stupid,” “a dolt,” and an “empty head.”

“He’s a known sexist pig. It’s not misogyny based on political party,” Amy Siskind, president of the women’s advocacy group The New Agenda, wrote at TheDC. “No, Matthews has a familiar pattern: he purposefully strikes out at any woman who is rising in power.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest. I have just scratched the surface of this outstanding article.)

Matthews thinks Palin is “profoundly stupid” and a “dolt”? Wow. This is just yet another uninformed opinion put forth by this brain trust.

I will allow Gov. Palin herself to dispel the biased, sexist attack by Chris Matthews in this synopsis of her recent bus tour:

Just WHO is “profoundly stupid,” Mr. Matthews? I’ll give you a hint. It ain’t Gov. Palin.

Good grief.

Yes, that is the problem – that Weiner’s “privacy” has been violated, not that he has disgraced his office, his wife, and himself, with very little contrition for what he actually DID. No, his tears were over being CAUGHT, not that he is a freakin’ pervert, engaging in sexting with women around the country, and apparently, made phone calls to some of these women from his House office. There is no doubt that not only did he act unprofessionally, but unethically, compounded by his vast number of lies upon lies.

But as Jennifer Rubin pointed out in her Washington Post piece, “Anthony Weiner, Wronged Man? Not Quite,” some are taking the Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz approach, claiming this is a “private matter.” They are wrong. Rubin specifically mentions Ezra Klein and Richard Cohen:

I’ve been a bit amazed at the post-bizzaro press conference insistence by some on the left that Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) is a wronged man. Ezra Klein via Twitter professes to be puzzled how this can be a big deal. Richard Cohen writes:

We are doing a terrible thing here — we hypocrites of the press, especially of the blogosphere. Every man lives a bit in a fantasy world, maybe women, too, but I know nothing of them. Every man is a boy, either in mind or in deed. Much of this is harmless. There are no bodies. There is no crime. This is the case with Weiner. No damsel was in distress, and no one was rescued.

This is the place for me to condemn Weiner. Consider it done. He’s a liar and a creep, although how one can be the latter without being the former is beyond me. (Still, lying is impermissible.) But I would also like to condemn those who made it their business to destroy him, who deputized themselves to invade someone’s private life, his fantasy life, and hold him up to ridicule.

Let me point out that Weiner went beyond fantasy. Or have we forgotten that these are real women with whom he was communicating? Women who, gosh, he thinks, are not underage. Women who he supposed would not blackmail him. Women whom he apparently told his wife about before their marriage but could not bring himself to give up. The press isn’t invading his mind or his bedroom; it’s looking at his Tweets and talking to the women on whose Timeline he was willing to risk his marriage, his career and his self-respect. [snip]

So let me make sure I understand Mr. Cohen’s point – he thinks the press is doing the wrong thing by REPORTING THE NEWS??? I am just shaking my head in disbelief at these men. Oh, no, check that – I am shaking my head in DISGUST at these men, and their willingness to use their professions as “journalists” to try and protect this pervert.

Jennifer Rubin’s response was very good, I thought:

[snip] Let me point out that Weiner went beyond fantasy. Or have we forgotten that these are real women with whom he was communicating? Women who, gosh, he thinks, are not underage. Women who he supposed would not blackmail him. Women whom he apparently told his wife about before their marriage but could not bring himself to give up. The press isn’t invading his mind or his bedroom; it’s looking at his Tweets and talking to the women on whose Timeline he was willing to risk his marriage, his career and his self-respect. (As for the comment, “Another Christian has been thrown to the lions. The ‘Christian in this case is a Jew,” I am dumbfounded and dismayed that Weiner’s religion should enter into the discussion.)

As for the “I just don’t get it” response of some young liberal men out there, I can only imagine that ideology so dominates their lives that they fail to see the harm in a public figure’s not-at-all-private conduct. Or perhaps they too see the Tweets as a harmless pastime. Maybe, for all the “sexual harassment” training we’ve gotten, we’ve forgotten some essential training in ethics. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

I don’t get it, either, Ms. Rubin, except to say that this mindset is incredibly disturbing. (Ms. Rubin goes on to note that the Wall Street Journal has a very good editorial on Rep. Weiner’s behavior and judgment, and I encourage you to either finish reading her piece, or read the WSJ piece here.)

The next piece of news also deals with a Democratic Representative, Earl Blumenauer. Seems Rep. Blumenauer is upset at the effort put forth by the Parks Department for doing anything that might amount to educating Gov. Palin about American history. Yes, he is upset that money is being spent to give the governor an education at our historic sites and monuments, presumably because it is making her smarter than many in the press (I refer you to the ridiculous recent brouhaha over Paul Revere) in which journalists by and large failed to factcheck before jumping on their condescending “gotcha” bandwagon).

Yes, this representative, Earl Blumenenaur, has some “serious concerns” over the money spent thus far on Palin and her bus tour:

[snip] “Many of the press accounts of stops included in this tour, which provided personal and political benefits to former Gov. Palin, suggest that National Park Service resources were made available to an extent beyond that which an average American family would receive,” Blumenauer wrote.

He cited media reports of Palin and her family receiving a private guided tour of Mount Vernon, early admission to the National Archives and a 10-person escort involving park rangers and New York City police officers at the Statue of Liberty.

“For cases in which the Park Service did not have additional personnel on duty as a result of the tour, was manpower diverted from regularly-scheduled services to accommodate the Palin family’s visits and is this a routine practice for visiting celebrities?” Blumenauer added.

National Park Service spokesman Jeffrey Olson said his understanding is that Palin received customary treatment for a visiting celebrity and that the costs of her visits were nominal at best.

“We see celebrities on a regular basis, it’s something that we’re used to,” Olson said. “We give them a tour but we also try to not make it a bug hoo-ha for all the other visitors. So it’s kind of standard fare if there’s a celebrity or two that show up we do a special program for them.”

That usually involves rangers and interpreters that are on the job regardless. “That’s why it’s not an extra cost for us,” Olson said. “We just try to make sure everybody has a good experience at a national park.” [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Maybe that’s what is getting Rep. Blumenaur’s goat – that Palin is seen as, and treated like, a celebrity. Oh, but the best part? Palin was not the one who requested the Park Police provide an escort while she was at the Statue of Liberty. Rather, it was one of the officers in charge who did that. Oops – so much for this little “gotcha” attempt by Rep. Blumenaur.

One of the commenters at this Politico.com article was kind enough to post a video of another “celebrity” getting a private tour at the Statue of Liberty. I wonder if Rep. Blumenaur was so quick to investigate the money spent on THIS tour:

I am going to guess, no, Rep. Blumenaur did NOT demand an accounting from the Parks Service for Rep. Weiner being able to go where people had not been able to go since 9/11. But, hey – that’s different, right? Yeah, sure, right.

And in an incredible twist of irony, Rep. Weiner called President Clinton to apologize to him for this whole sexting scandal. President Clinton officiated at Weiner and Huma Abedin’s wedding.

Gee, I wonder what the conversations are like between Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin?

Blech. This whole thing is making me ill – support for this immoral, unethical piece of work (Weiner), and attempts to take down someone as a result of PDS. The hypocrisy is staggering, and I am just sick of it.

How about you? Feel free to talk about the issues above, or anything else on your mind today.

To celebrate Women in Sports, especially with the Women’s World Cup (soccer) coming up this summer, Secretary Clinton delivered the following remarks:

Now you know, I am a HUGE soccer fan. And I was able to attend the semifinals in DC of the World Cup of which Sec. Clinton spoke. In fact, President Clinton was at the stadium at the same time I was, watching the match. There was even a flyover with fighter jets – cool! Oh, and the US obviously won, since they went on to win the World Cup in the dramatic fashion Sec. Clinton mentioned.

This is a great time, this celebration. But wow, do we still have a long way to go.

While Secretary Clinton is reflecting on Women and Sports, a “Gay Girl in Damascus” was allegedly kidnapped in Syria. In Egypt, another woman journalist was almost killed in Tahrir Square last week, saved by a police officer, who was then beaten himself for rescuing her.

A Libyan student in Australia received only THREE YEARS in jail for sexually assaulting four women, and two girls, one of whom was only 13. Why? Well, you know, it is a whole cultural thing. The way these women dress, oh, my, it just upset him SO much, and made him excited, all at the same time. So he did what any man would do – he attacked them. Oh, wait – most men do NOT do that:

Libyan Almahde Ahmad Atagore, 28, was sentenced to three years behind bars yesterday for sexual assaulting a number of young women in Melbourne in August and September last year, the Herald Sun reports.

Atagore was shocked by the cultural differences and felt isolated and depressed, particularly as he did not have a mosque nearby, said County Court Judge Margaret Rizkalla.

He told a psychiatrist he did not like how Australian women dressed, leaving him angry but also aroused. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Women, and girls, participating in sports is important, there is no doubt about it. And it is very cool that the US does sports exchanges with other countries. The benefits to girls and women who participate in sports are numerous, with higher self esteem and better overall health at the fore.

But it is not enough when men still think they can overpower women, see women purely as sexual objects, or violate them in a sexual manner as a show of power (though it really highlights the man’s weakness, IMHO). It is not enough when they are seeing a very different message coming from the media, and from our political parties. When the Democratic elite are still supporting a complete sleazebag like Anthony Weiner, what kind of message does THAT send to our young women and girls? When judges in countries like Australia grant a short amount of jail time for a man who assaulted several women, and two girls, as a nod to his neanderthalic view of women based on his religion, how do the girls and women in Australia feel? What is the message being sent to them?

I am glad we still have Title IX in this country, and am happy to celebrate its 40th anniversary. Our girls and women deserve it. But all girls and women, here and around the world, deserve to be treated better than we are. We deserve to not have some slimeball US Representative texting a college woman with a photo of his private parts. We deserve for men to serve the time for the crimes committed against us, not some slap on the wrist. We deserve to be able to do our jobs without threat of DEATH because gangs of men descend upon us.

We deserve better. We deserve better from men, we deserve better from the women who support these sleazeballs, we deserve better from our elected officials.

To follow up on Sec. Clinton’s suggestion, and while I can still post videos from YouTube (our illustrious US Senators are threatening to make it a felony to embed videos), I want to honor the US Women’s Soccer Team. Below is look back at the ’99 World Cup win, and the iconic moment of Brandi Chastain scoring the winning goal for the US Women over China for the Gold:

May the US Women play hard, play clean, have no injuries, and bring back the Gold from Germany.

This is disturbing on so many levels, not the least of which how women continue to be treated. At first there were denials that any such thing had occurred:

A senior Egyptian general admits that “virginity checks” were performed on women arrested at a demonstration this spring, the first such admission after previous denials by military authorities.

The allegations arose in an Amnesty International report, published weeks after the March 9 protest. It claimed female demonstrators were beaten, given electric shocks, strip-searched, threatened with prostitution charges and forced to submit to virginity checks.

At that time, Maj. Amr Imam said 17 women had been arrested but denied allegations of torture or “virginity tests.”

And now, there is the justification for these, um, “tests” by the military:

But now a senior general who asked not to be identified said the virginity tests were conducted and defended the practice.

“The girls who were detained were not like your daughter or mine,” the general said. “These were girls who had camped out in tents with male protesters in Tahrir Square, and we found in the tents Molotov cocktails and (drugs).”

The general said the virginity checks were done so that the women wouldn’t later claim they had been raped by Egyptian authorities.

“We didn’t want them to say we had sexually assaulted or raped them, so we wanted to prove that they weren’t virgins in the first place,” the general said. “None of them were (virgins).”

This demonstration occurred nearly a month after Egypt’s longtime President Hosni Mubarak stepped down amid a wave of popular and mostly peaceful unrest aimed at his ouster and the institution of democratic reforms.

Afterward, Egypt’s military — which had largely stayed on the sidelines of the revolution — officially took control of the nation’s political apparatus as well, until an agreed-upon constitution and elections. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

Wow. I scarcely know what to say about that admission. It is despicable, deplorable, and horrifying.

Of course, women were not the only ones tortured, as the video below makes clear:

As horrible as the treatment sustained by some of these male protesters is, and it is, it does not compare to the torture, and threat of MORE torture, the women endured. The threat of electrocution or surrender to “virginity tests” is not much of an option, is it?

And here is where the “I told you so” part comes in. Many of the Lefty stripe were celebrating turning over Egypt to the military. Picture Alfred E. Newman when you read this: “What could go wrong?”

Plenty. Not only are they teaming up with the Muslim Brotherhood (told you so about that, too), but women continue to bear the brunt of the anti-woman structure there. Can you imagine any woman in the United States, or Europe, being forced to decide between Electrocution and a Virginity Test? Hell to the no. And it is not okay that our Egyptian Sisters are being forced to do so at the hands of the military.

The rights, and dignity, of women are being subjugated in Egypt. Amnesty International is all over this, thank heavens (I am a card carrying, regular contributor to AI). But between the Muslim Brotherhood and the military, I continue to fear for the safety of women in Egypt.

And I still want to know why Obama wants to send them so damn much money given these human rights abuses, and the strong role of the Muslim Brotherhood. Again, I must ask – where is the hue and cry? So far, the silence is deafening…

Ahem. I wish I could tell you that this is just some “Onion” type parody, but it is, in fact, true. Yes, Manal Al-Sherif, was detained by the religious police because she got into the driver’s seat:

Authorities detained a Saudi woman on Saturday after she launched a campaign against the driving ban for women in the ultraconservative kingdom and posted a video of herself behind the wheel on Facebook and YouTube to encourage others to copy her.

Manal al-Sharif and a group of other women started a Facebook page called “Teach me how to drive so I can protect myself,” which urges authorities to lift the driving ban. She went on a test drive in the eastern city of Khobar and later posted a video of the experience.

“This is a volunteer campaign to help the girls of this country” learn to drive, al-Sherif says in the video. “At least for times of emergency, God forbid. What if whoever is driving them gets a heart attack?”

Human rights activist Walid Abou el-Kheir said al-Sherif was detained by the country’s religious police, who are charged with ensuring the kingdom’s rigid interpretation of Islamic teachings are observed. [snip]

Al-Sherif has a point – at the very least, women should know the basics of driving a car for emergencies, but also because, well, it’s assholic for them to be barred from something so many of us take completely for granted. Especially since the only reason they are barred from driving is their gender.

But wait – there is more:

Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world to ban women – both Saudi and foreign – from driving (emphasis mine). The prohibition forces families to hire live-in drivers, and those who cannot afford the $300 to $400 a month for a driver must rely on male relatives to drive them to work, school, shopping or the doctor.

Women are also barred from voting, except for chamber of commerce elections in two cities in recent years, and no woman can sit on the kingdom’s Cabinet. Women also cannot travel without permission from a male guardian and shouldn’t mingle with males who are not their husbands or brothers.

[...]

Dressed in a headscarf and the all-encompassing black abaya all women must wear in public, al-Sharif said not all Saudi women are “queens” who can afford to hire a driver. She extolled the virtues of driving for women, saying it can save lives, and time, as well as a woman’s dignity. Al-Sharif said she learned how to drive at the age of 30 in New Hampshire.

[...]

“We want to live as complete citizens, without the humiliation that we are subjected to every day because we are tied to a driver,” the Facebook message reads. “We are not here to break the law or demonstrate or challenge the authorities, we are here to claim one of our simplest rights.” (Click here to read the rest.)

Well, golly gee – that’s just a little demanding, isn’t it? Wanting to live as “complete citizens” in their own country? Pushy, pushy, pushy…

All snark aside, isn’t it just remarkable that in the 21st century, one of our allies treats women as subhuman based on religious practices? We engage with Saudi Arabia on a regular basis (they have oil, you know). Hell, our president bowed down to their king (!) as if he was one of his subjects. (There is more we are doing for them, too, about which you likely have not heard about in terms of the US crafting a “private security force.” My friend, Diamond Tiger, has the story at her blog, Logistics Monster. Check it out.)

And yet, women there do not have the most basic of rights, ones we take for granted every single day. How would we fare if women in this country had to have a driver, or take a taxi, to work, to school to pick up the kids, to go grocery shopping, to do ANYTHING?? Never mind should an emergency arise. I reckon the women in Saudi Arabia are just SOL.

But, hey, they are our allies, religious police notwithstanding. Heaven forfend we expect better from them in their treatment of half the population. Don’t want to upset them, after all. That would be politically and culturally insensitive of us. I mean, we’re just talking about women, right? Right?

I don’t know if the action al-Sharif and the other women there will be successful or not, but I sure hope so. I wouldn’t expect a whole lotta help from the US on this – it isn’t like we have been adamant that women have more rights there anyway. Oh, we acknowledge there are problems, but when our president bows to their king, I just wouldn’t hold my breath if I was them. Would you?

But here’s the thing – this man apparently has a history of treating women horribly. From another maid in Mexico, to a reporter doing an interview, to prostitutes in New York City, he has a history of rape in the worst cases, and rough treatment in the cases of the prostitutes (provided by the same madam, Kristin Davis, who provided prostitutes to former NY Governor, Eliott Spitzer).n A recent book details the rape of the maid in Mexico (which went unreported), along with 14 other women who claim sexual assaults by this man.

Aforementioned madam, Ms. Davis, would not provide any more prostitutes to Strauss-Kahn due to his abusive behavior. The last time was when Strauss-Kahn was going to NYC for a conference with President Clinton:

[snip]Kristin Davis said she provided young women for the IMF chief in 2006, as he ran for the French Socialists’ presidential nomination, and that one complained about his “aggressive” behaviour.

“He was a client of my agency,” she told The Daily Telegraph. “When men abuse women I’m no longer going to protect their identities”.

[...]

Miss Davis, 35, who claims to have a long list of celebrity clients, said Mr Strauss-Kahn called her directly on her mobile phone and paid $1,200 cash for two-hour sessions in hotel rooms.

“He wanted an ‘All-American girl’, with a fresh face, from the mid-West,” she said. “A girl in January 2006 complained he was rough and angry, and said she didn’t want to see him again”.

In September 2006, Mr Strauss-Kahn travelled to New York for a conference hosted by Bill Clintonn September 2006, Mr Strauss-Kahn travelled to New York for a conference hosted by Bill Clinton. Miss Davis claims that month, she sent him a Brazilian-born prostitute who reported that “he was rough”, said Miss Davis, adding: “She told me not to send any new girls to him.” [snip]

Well, I would think not. Sheesh.

As to the other women, I do have a nagging question, which the author of this Telegraph article alluded to, as well:

A deluge of fresh allegations of sexual misbehaviour engulfed Dominique Strauss-Kahn yesterday.

The 62-year-old International Monetary Fund chief, who is accused of the attempted rape of a chambermaid, is said to have targeted young students, ‘behaved like a gorilla’ with an actress and had flings with the widow of an Italian academic.
As Strauss-Kahn languished on suicide watch in New York’s Rikers Island prison following the alleged sexual assault at a Manhattan hotel, the new claims sent further shockwaves reverberating through France and the financial world.

The revelations will trigger more questions about how the IMF’s managing director escaped censure during his rise to become one of the world’s most powerful money men and a potential president of France.[snip]

NO FREAKING KIDDING. That is what I would like to know. With all of these women, in a number of countries, being on the receiving end of, at best, inappropriate advances, and at worse, rape, how is it that NO ONE went after this man?? Go check out this article, and see the long list of women that we KNOW about who had dealings with Strauss-Kahn, just to give you an idea:

[snip]The mother of Tristane Banon, a Parisian novelist who claims to have been subjected to a frenzied sex attack by Strauss-Kahn nine years ago, used the Facebook website to deliver a scathing attack on her daughter’s alleged aggressor.

[...] French socialist politician Auriele Filippetti said the IMF chief had groped her in 2008 and from then on vowed to make sure she was never alone in a room with him.

Piroska Nagy, a Hungarian economist who had a brief affair with Strauss Kahn when both were married in 2008, told investigators that he had a problem and that she felt coerced into sleeping with him because of his senior position and aggressive advances. [snip]

Now that is a story we have heard all too often, isn’t it?

And what was the response to Strauss-Kahn’s arrest in France? Now, let me just say – I love France. I have had great interactions with the French when I have visited there, so this is disturbing to me:

[snip]President Sarkozy is said to have rolled his eyes and said ‘We did warn him’ after hearing of his arrest.

[...]

Most French people believe fallen Strauss-Kahn is the ‘victim of a plot’ over the charge that he tried to rape a hotel chambermaid.

A poll found that 57 per cent of French people think he was ‘framed’ in a bid to ruin him.

Among socialist voters, 70 per cent believe the Left-wing politician has been set up. (Click here to read the rest.)

I guess that answers my question as to why no one has censured this man, or brought charges against him before: because they will not be believed, and he will be held blameless, considered the “victim” of some nefarious plot, not as an (alleged) rapist/serial sexual abuser.

Though the President of France saying they “warned him” is telling – about just what DID they warn him? And was their concern for HIM, or for the WOMEN? I think we can guess the answer to that, can’t we?

Well, hopefully he will not get away with it this time, though. It is far past time, if these claims are accurate (and I have no reason to believe they aren’t, especially since they are coming from all different sectors from a number of different women in a number of different countries). I would not be at all surprised to see more women come forward to levy charges against Strauss-Kahn. Thank heavens for the courage of the maid in NYC, though had other women done so previously, perhaps she would have been spared this horrendous fate, at least at the hands of Strauss-Kahn (allegedly).

Perhaps now, he will get his comeuppance, not just a roll of the eyes and a “warning.” One can hope, anyway…