Feminists are a Bunch of Irrational Ninnies

2010-02-09
By

I’ve been waiting all day to unload this, so sit down and get ready for a good belly-laugh…

Remember Susan Estrich? She was Michael Dukakis’ campaign manager for his disastrous presidential run in 1988. But washed-up liberals don’t shrivel up and blow away, they reinvent themselves as pundits and news analysts.

Apparently Ms. Estrich, the Grand-Dame of feminist victimology, has taken great offense at Apple Computer’s decision to name its newest electronic gizmo, iPad. So last week she penned a column called “The Value of Diversity.” Blazing away with her gendered six-shooter, Estrich issued this scathing pronouncement:

“Is there a woman in America who did not laugh, or at least roll her eyes, the minute she heard that the newest, hottest tablet computer from one of America’s most ingenuous companies was going to sound like a feminine hygiene product? The iKotex is what most people I know are calling it, with apologies to Kotex.”

The moral of Estrich’s preposterous complaint? That Apple needs to bring more women into the upper echelons of corporate decision-making.

Really, how can anyone with a claim to sanity come to view the name of a cute digital device as proof of gender oppression?

This isn’t the first time Ms. Estrich got her wires crossed.

Eight years ago Clara Harris ran over her ex-husband David, as their daughter sat in the front seat of the car. I’ve seen the tape, it’s sickening to watch the violent woman repeatedly drive her car over David’s prostrate body. The woman was later convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to hard time.

But Estrich thought the woman’s actions were completely justifiable. “Who could blame [Clara] for getting into her Mercedes and running him over?,” Estrich later asked.

Lindsey Harris, who had pleaded with her mother to cease the slaughter, took issue with Estrich’s bizarre rationalization. The young woman denounced her mother’s rampage as “the ultimate act of selfishness, caring only about obtaining revenge and thinking not one bit about how her horrible act was going to affect me or my brothers, Brian and Bradley.”

Amazingly, there are other persons out there who believe Clara Harris was doing what any woman in full possession of her senses would do.

One such person is Regina Barreca, PhD (gb@ginabarreca.com), professor of feminist theory at the University of Connecticut. Berreca bills herself as putting the “funny in feminism” — but a passing glance at the titles of her books reveals a lady with a well-honed ax to grind: “I’m With Stupid: One Man, One Woman, and 10,000 Years of Misunderstanding Between the Sexes Cleared Right Up,” and “Perfect Husbands (and Other Fairy Tales).”

And what does Berreca have to say about husband-killer Clara Harris? Repeatedly running over her ex was a “great moment of revenge,” she lucidly explains. That adumbration of the truth graces the current issue of Psychology Today.

And then the grand brouhaha over the recent Super Bowl ad featuring former Florida quarterback Tim Tebow and his mother Pam. Conveying a soft-sell pro-life message, the advertisement shows the muscle-clad football player playfully tackling his mother.

Almost everyone in the universe knew it was a joke.

Except for National Organization for Women president Terry O’Neill, who pitiably proclaimed herself Highly Offended: “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it.” Railing against the network airing the ad, O’Neill exclaimed, “I think CBS should be ashamed of itself.”

Five years ago Susan Estrich had a very public hissy-fit when she discovered only a fraction of the L.A. Times op-eds were written by women. A few days later the Times ran a piece by Charlotte Allen explaining the relative dearth of female writers: “Ideological feminism has ghettoized and trivialized the subject matter of women’s writing.”

Once upon a time, feminists haughtily proclaimed their movement was intended to eradicate the stereotype of air-headed women who couldn’t think calmly or act rationally. Funny how feminism has become a gaudy parody unto itself.

1,783 views

  • http://avoiceformen.com/ Paul Elam

    Estrich’s take on this reflects as much gynocentrism as it does stupidity. The analogous name of the device, much akin to the fitting “note pad” is both efficient and gender neutral.

    Estrich hears a word with many different meanings and assumes we all have to filter it through sexual politics.

    Perhaps she will now write a scathing commentary on Thai cuisine for the vulgar and sexually insensitive creation of Pad Thai. Or maybe a hit piece on the misogynistic leanings of accountants who “pad” the books.

    The more I listen to feminists, the more I know that NWO conspiracy theorists have nothing on them at all.

  • http://shrink4men.wordpress.com Dr Tara J. Palmatier

    Makes me think Estrich is ready for a “pad-ded” cell.

  • SingleDad

    It’s all very funny. People espousing murdering their loved ones, boys being systematically shut out of education, men in Haiti not able to eat. Very funny. Those wacky feminists.

    Well the feminists said with Bush they had no access to the White House. The White House should NOW be called the pink house I think.

    I’m not laughing. And Apple is probably reconsidering the name.

  • http://www.shatterdmen.com shattered men

    Maybe Estrich was in need of the pad by Kotex so she was not responsible for her actions. Remember, PMS is a legitimate excuse for murder when it suits their fancy but it can not be used to exclude a woman from having her hand on the nuclear trigger.

  • Denis

    American feminists are irrational as are the women (and men) who buy what they are selling. We all know this. Feminists have aggressively damaged this country (especially men and boys). Their wreckage is on a monumental scale. We know these truths.

    The amazing part is that they get a pass by everyone. The amazing part is that they have been given a pass by everyone for over 4 decades.

    We don’t need to analyze the feminists anymore.

    We need to analyze why nobody stands up to these insane people. We need to analyze why male politicians see the female vote and not the male vote.

    The reality is that we men need to confront each other much more than we need to confront feminists.

  • Mr.K

    Since Supreme Court clerks interact with justices, doing reserch and sometimes help with writing of opinions (some Justices claim they write their own) Susan Estrich became familiar with inner-workings of the Court when she clerked for Justice Stevens. How much influence she had, only the insiders know. Link: Wikipedia;

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Estrich

  • Denis

    We men like to talk.

    While we talk, the feminists affect legislation.

    They influence the political process.

    They get their way.

    Thank God for Phyllis Schafly:

    (oh…btw..did anyone notice that The International VAWA was submitted to the Halls of Congress this week?)

    Obama Panders to the Feminists
    Phyllis Schlafly
    Tuesday, February 09, 2010

    Barack Obama’s “spread the wealth around” doesn’t mean only higher taxes on taxpayers and more handouts to non-taxpayers. More especially, it means transfers of financial goodies to the president’s political allies.

    The American people were rightfully outraged when it became known that Sens. Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson were rewarded for voting for Obamacare with hundreds of thousands of dollars of benefits given uniquely to their states, Louisiana and Nebraska. Now we find that President Obama is paying off the feminists big-time for their support of his election.

    When Obama presented his multitrillion dollar budget, he declared with great fanfare that he was calling for a freeze in discretionary spending. Feminists immediately had a tantrum to complain that the freeze exempted funding for the military, intelligence and homeland security.

    Now we learn that all feminist programs and organizations will also be exempted from the freeze. Instead, they will get what White House spokesman Kate Bedingfield admits are “significant funding increases.”

    A White House document titled “Opportunity and Progress for Women and Girls” describes 15 federal programs that will receive increased funding to appease the feminists. Chief among them is the Violence Against Women project, which is targeted for a 22 percent increase, an extra $117 million more than current funding, which is already close to $1 billion a year.

    That earmark is a Joe Biden project known as feminist pork because the money goes right into the hands of radical feminist centers where they teach their anti-male, anti-marriage ideology, counsel women to get divorces and urge criminal prosecution against a man no matter how slight or unverified the alleged offense.

    The “Women and Girls” document reveals that Obama’s budget would appropriate $50 million to give grants to incentivize the states to adopt paid family leave. That longtime feminist goal would be very costly to small business and result in a loss of jobs.

    To please the feminists, other spending that will be exempted from Obama’s freeze includes an additional $400 million for the discretionary nutrition program for low-income women and an increase of $10 million for family planning.

    Of course, Obama’s budget will increase funding for daycare, one of the most favorite feminist objectives. Head Start, which already receives $9 billion a year, is scheduled for additional funding of nearly $1 billion, despite the fact that recent studies show that Head Start provides little or no beneficial results toward the stated goal of helping disadvantaged children catch up with other children.

    Obama’s budget also provides an additional $1.6 billion for the Child Care and Development Fund as part of the reauthorization of government spending for daycare. The feminists believe that childcare should be taken over by government in order to overcome society’s expectation that mothers should care for their own babies.

    Obama’s budget increases funding for a new program to recruit undergraduate students from underrepresented groups in science and technology careers. The budget also increases funding for a special program to give women (instead of men) more jobs in academic science and engineering careers.

    Obama’s State of the Union speech continued his pandering to the feminists. He said, “We are going to crack down on violations of equal-pay laws so that women get equal pay for an equal day’s work.” Equal pay for equal work has been U.S. law since 1963, so there’s nothing new about the law or its enforcement. Isn’t his Equal Employment Opportunity (EEOC) agency already cracking down against violations — and if not, why not?

    Obama’s statement was just a throw-away line to feed the feminist myth that women are victims of employment discrimination. It was also designed to try to validate the false feminist slogan that women are paid only 77 cents for work that earns a dollar for men.

    That’s not true because equal pay ought to be paid for equal work, and most women don’t work as many hours or in as dangerous or unpleasant jobs as men. Women prefer inside work in air-conditioned offices.

    Obama hasn’t yet gone as far as Norway, which passed a law requiring that women must comprise 40 percent of all companies’ corporate boards. U.S. feminists probably would like that rule — they pretend to see no hypocrisy in touting gender-neutrality while demanding affirmative action for females.

    Rush Limbaugh got it right when he commented on Obama’s State of the Union speech as “from the 1970s … totally cliched.” Half of American women are in the workforce today, while male unemployment is setting new records.

    Copyright © 2010 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

  • http://jmnzz.wordpress.com Jared White

    Feminists are retarded. Lol so what else is new?

  • gwallan

    Can I still use the term “number pad”? Is “touch pad” OK? Ooooh, probably not!

    Paul Elam said…
    Estrich hears a word with many different meanings and assumes we all have to filter it through sexual politics.

    It’s a window into her soul indeed. She is so gendered in her thinking and so fixated on anything remotely sexual it is inescapable for her.

    What is inexplicable to me, and often unacceptable, is the calm acceptance of these wacky notions by presumably intelligent folk who nonetheless wield influence.

  • http://maukonen.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/feminister-ar-en-bunt-irrationella-dumhuvuden/ Feminister är en bunt irrationella dumhuvuden « Ann-Mari's Blogg

    [...] } Feminister är en bunt irrationella dumhuvuden Tuesday, February 9, 2010 By Carey [...]

  • Jewels Vern

    It’s religious: the whole country is possessed by a spirit of stupid.






Search