Wednesday, May 02, 2012

Sandra Fluke's Bitter Pills to Swallow

(Or, "My mind, my body, YOUR money!" Or,  Why Modern “Feminisim” is Fluked Up)

Oh, golly gee. I guess I’ll need to have the obligatory post,  at long last, on Ms. Sandra Fluke and her Leftist allies’ ideological high jinx flukes.

Well now.  I've been around the block long enough in many social media outlets (one of my few real proficiencies--did I spell that right? :), to know generally who says what about whom, and the manner in which they really mean it.  While certainly some heartless right wing bastards like me and the late Bartmeister could pile on the fun, I'll note some serious points for now:

I’ve noticed that for the most part Breitbart's main meanness and snark, if we can really call the former part that, came in the form of return fire at the likes of MMFA and Kos kids. All's fair in love and war, the old English saying goes. Or perhaps it's Irish. Hell, who knows.  But a lot of the return fire was that he was naturally provocative not so much for what was said, but the showing up of the ACORN Sprouts and other forms of bureaucratic whoredom that some libs glommed onto, and so naturally they’d wish for somewhat less exposure to sunlight.  That they're doing virtual cartwheels at this point, however, is a tad over the top, even as their ideological aversion to such people is understandable. Naturally. I was not aware of Breitbart’s dandy little missive on the passing of Senator Kennedy, so I’ll  have to revert back and say that while all’s fair in love and war, this does not justify the crapfest on Twitter and elsewhere. It’s possible to be ideologically opposed to someone’s ideas without tossing the filthiest mud ball that happens to be lying at the feet.

Thus for example when I posted my opinion that those 30-year old rich honky chicks in law school can damned well afford their OWN anti-stork Pharmware, or just a trip to the local Golden Pantry curb store to buy a 3 dollar pack of rubbers, I was placed on a hit list called “Misogynist Assholes”.   Front line general, they say to me, in the (faux) “War on Women”.

 Charming.  If that’s the Left’s only answer to “what about my right NOT to pay you for something you can damn well get from a pharmacy yourself?’ to the large philosophical question they refuse to even second glance, then they are bereft of ideas. Finished. It’s all mantra and activism for whatever you happen to think you can get away with in lifting bills from other people’s pockets.

 Now comes the batting down of unwanted messages and blockages, etc. How nice. On that note that the WITHHOLDING of something = “denial of rights”, does MS. Fluke’s failure to buy ME a handy Colt .45 violate my male (or just citizen's ) right to 2nd Amendment guarantees?

Guns not related to healthcare, some might say?  Oh, well….depends on where you live. In my part of town a gun might keep you breathing. That’s healthcare—even if the mutant gunshot victim I shoot to save my family lives--and gets free ER treatment only slightly ahead of the illegal aliens lined up with kids with sore throats.

Just a passing notion, now that when in the age of permanent adolescence and the taxpayer being the ultimate grab bag even for relatively well-off white women who stand to make a fortune someday, drive cars that put mine to shame and live in uppity gated enclaves Whiter than an Easter Lily,  all the while preaching the mantras of “diversity” to the rest of us, but are poor-mouthing that nasty “misogynist” men like me are “keeping them down” by not signing on to reimburse the engineering costs of their active social life at the meat markets and bars. 
So I “violate” her rights?  So be it, if that’s her primitive, reductionist take on “rights”.
There ARE some gray areas in social welfare for the commonweal, yes.  The truly indigent and poor, for example, should probably have some provisioning from a combination of state, local, federal and private enterprise outlets for their health care.
 But this is where I must take a dark No. 2 pencil, and draws some thicker social lines—and manages some others’ expectations.  Real men might eat quiche after all these days, but they still shouldn’t use the magic of the State under auspices of O-care to allow money to flow from my children’s dental cleaning bill to MS. Fluke’s  passing or even permanent f**k buddy requests.  Her male friends can pick up the athletic sex gear tab as well---the little puissant, piss-ant weenies.  Where in the HELL are THEY in all this?
Are these alpha males also malnourished starvelings existing in some marginal manner on the North American continent who--like her--are bereft a bank account, and also happen to be going to G-Town U?  If so, how do they hook up with the likes of Ms. Fluke?  (Update on this Venusian goddess in the flesh, while in the middle of the writing—Sandra Fluke is not really a student anymore, but rather a political activist taking some coursework. Difference should be noted.)
The mind reels at the permutations here.   OK, stepping off the box for the moment…..

Next, while it's true conservatives can pile on the s**t-fest, it's usually more in the vein of snark--not real hate. I don't deny that exists on our side, and doubtless someone will dig some real juicy tidbits up from the Net. After all, it records everything, almost down to specific personal crap flushes.
When Sen. Ted Kennedy died, and then later poison pen warrior, Mr. “I-Can-Somehow-Manage-To-Piss-Off-Almost-Anyone” writer and agitating Catholic bashing and former Nation writer, Christopher Hitchens, went to the Heaven or Hell he didn’t believe in, I wrote obits on my own blog about their life adventures, and linked to some others, but didn’t leave (I don’t think) the reader with the notion that it’s an all or nothing scenario in life with any one human or situation, akin to that joke about how life almost never gives us stark choices on most anything, where a flight attendant offering dinner to first class travelers on some long flight asks her patrons one by one if they’d like
...” The filet mignon meal, pan seared to perfection, with a side of braised Oriental veggies and wholesome brown rice—or our new special--the S**t Platter, sprinkled and garnished with bits of broken glass, asbestos fibers, and rat fur covered in Black Death carrying fleas. “
Of course, life is not like that. Rarely are our choices and attachments painted on such stark canvas, including whom we deem ideologically sound and on “our” side.  I noted too on Twitter and elsewhere most of the conservative outlets posted much sympathy for Ted, and Hitchens. Admittedly, on the latter deceased enemy of us right wingers, at some deep pop-psyche level this conservative hat-tipping to Hitch (from myself too) commentary might have had to do with Hitchens almost Neo-Connish turnaround on some issues like Iraq, though he remained anti-Israel to the hilt on some days, and never got past his own nose or notions that Israel was nothing more than a virtual viceroy type puppet state of Brit and then American Imperialism in the Mideast.

 I could have chided Hitchens in post-mortem mode that he could’ve done better than to think nothing life is sacrosanct (as he put most matters) besides his scotch and impressive 6-pack a day cigarette habit, the latter venal sin being rising the point where he’s light one cig before finishing another on some interviews. That alone might have saved him the throat cancer encounter. But I didn’t pile on that either. 
 More on Hitchens: While he had some good insights and was a great writer on the backstory details of some issues, he never got around to making the connection that if Saddam was a goon for harboring WMD (or pretending) then his own hand waving away the USSR’s antics in Central America was foolish. He remained pugnacious on that flaw to the bitter end. Yet I wished his passage to the Netherworld only the best.

 I don't specifically recall (beyond Ann Coulter's "Panties Hung in Ted’s Teeth, JD Bottle in Hand, After Climbing Out of the Potomac River" commentary on the late “Duke of Chappaquiddick” and his retained status as hero to DNC and "women's groups" faithful in honor of aid to females---except for one) the level of vituperation against a single individual as I saw earlier on Twitter a few weeks back when the Rush stuff first broke. At least not in obit -“I-piss-on-your-grave” mode.  Actually, Coulter wrote that while Ted Kennedy was still alive. So even there….
 Of late, there HAS been lots of rehash about the late Andrew Breitbart being “MEAN”  (sounds like I’m getting lectured on Twitter from a kindergarten teacher—geesh) and nasty, about sluts and drugs and whether Limbaugh’s gold-plated health plan covered his meds and how if you looked like Jabba the Hut In front of a mic, you’d self-dope too. Yeah, the “Mean People Suck” mantra, from the bumper stickers no doubt one might espy at some boho university—like, say, Georgetown, the uterus of  future lawyers of America destined to someday pull in perhaps a magnitude higher money then you and me,  go on vacations to Aspen and enjoy a good Merlot while you and I are filling out various government forms to comply with the latest edicts for little people from the next archaic and nerve-wracking Bureau of Compliance, who have nicer cares than me from the starting gate, whose parents are fairly (generally) well-off, and yet bet for someone to reimburse their magical 30-count monthly wonder pills. Sure. 
That to me is true hatred and war. Hatred and war of me—or at least utter disdain from the new Condescendi  for regular people.  Hatred and war against the basic core assumptions of freedom and personal accountability that go traditionally with adulthood. Or, used to, in any case.
Hatred of reality.  War on reality. War against non-elite people working to pinch pennies, scrape the rug for spare change on some days, start businesses from scratch, and watch the housing market crash due government meddling, and like me, find oneself wondering how dinner is to be financed.

Social welfare on behalf of the truly needy and indigent is one thing, and can be assumed as part of the David Easton formulation of politics being the “authoritative allocation of values” in how we all help others. Fair enough, I guess. But even here, Easton gets it wrong, not to rib a famous political scientist:  Politics is merely the outgrowth of culture, the larger force at play. Thus culture is really the allocator of values.  Authoritative and otherwise, fair or unfair. 

But social welfare on behalf of feeding the sex habits of rich girl-women already nabbing more than a few public pennies in their own right,  but not “poor” in any real definition one can pull from Webster’s, are another thing altogether. 
To my occasional detractors reading this: where do we draw lines?  Are any lines to be drawn, then?
Indeed, not only does the State NOT have the right to force me to fund Planned Parenthood or pony up for allegedly “private” insurance carriers under ObamaCare to pay for one of the cheapest commodities out there (contraception of most types other than outright surgery), in an age of declining Western fertility rates and the coming dearth of productive workers to gild the gramps and the ever-increasing paunch of the Welfare State, it’s a fool’s errand to say the State even has a theoretical compelling interesting in preventing births at all at this juncture in history.  Almost certainly not.
Children are expensive in the early years, yes. But long term, it’s far more expensive for all of society for us to try and fund equivalent of lifestyles of dozens of retirees and politicians and bureaucrats alike and half the population already on the dole—with more on the way) on the back of a single worker.  That’s about how the ratio will work out not too many years down the road if current demographic trends continue.

An old adage has it that what’s good for GM is good for the nation.  That’s no longer good news. 

GM is now in bailout and political pull mode, and had to have the helping hand of Uncle Sam succor the union heavies due to having one worker for about every 10 retirees and dependents for gold-plated pension and health care costs, for which it spends more on than steel and technology upgrades and computer networking combined. If we, like GM, wish to turn into basically a giant nursing home that occasionally makes overpriced products on the side, then the nation will stay the course of increasing DINKism (Double Income, No Kids) or the one designer bambino at age 40.  Given that even European politicians are waking up to certain demographic realities and are desperately concocting all manner of “natalist” policies to encourage women to have more than that one designed baby (at most) at age 45, in order to shore up their own sagging welfare appendages struggling even now for workers to pay the freight, we might take note before it’s too late.

Side note on that account of Rush’s alleged hypocrisy regarding the Georgetown Easy Street Girls:
That was before the public dime covered such, whatever Rush’s personal issues elsewhere.  
While denied sternly, the fact is that unlike Rush’s arrangements with his private insurance, the new  “user fee” arrangements O-Care’s czars worked out to push past the courts, where what used to be called a “premium”, is actually now plainly admitted as being a real TAX, where money flows from pocket A to pocket B by force.
Some other  differences to note, these in relation to MSM outlets and talking heads’ responses hooting like rioting chimps over Limbaugh’s commentary, now that this thing has not only gone viral, but Higher Political:
Please note that none of the conservative women who've been insulted by prominent liberals have received a phone call from Barack Obama.”  –Jim Treacher
“So everyone is mad at Rush and thinks the advertisers should dump him; always the double-standard with the left.

Do you remember when...?

Bill Maher: "Sarah Palin is a stupid twat."

Ed Schultz: "Laura Ingraham is a right-wing slut."

Keith Olbermann: "Michele Bachmann is a mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it.”

David Letterman: “Sarah Palin dresses like a slutty flight attendant."

(Courtesy of Robert Avnet) David Letterman: "There was an awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game. During the 7th inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.".

-Courtesy of Robert Avnet
Note that Rush Limbaugh said Sandra Fluke is a slut only in an allegorical sense. He asked what one calls a woman who asks for money for sex.   While someone might say that’s a distinction with no real difference, Rush was actually making an allusion to "money for sex" in the political realm—not specifically saying Fluke did her Fluking with any “John” wiling to pony up money per se for a carnal session. 
Having said that, there ARE some pimps in politics, and we’ve had our fill of Pelosi and Sebelius, have we not?  (The “Johns” in this case are somewhat unwilling participants on some occasions.)
Fluke’s pathetic, albeit carefully engineered, orchestrated posturing, poseur moral begging actually screwed a much wider audience—the entire nation.  Rush was not far off the target:  The screwing has been going on for some time, actually. Fluke is merely a more upfront, brash representation and a slightly more repulsive manifestation, of Big Government managing to wiggle its tentacles into the most private realms.  It’s bad enough that Government now deigns to the little guys they must know the cost of my MRIs, and refer to 2500 page documents that offer absurd micromanagement of health care all the while we watch as costs rise regardless.  Now they find even more personal matters to plunk price tags onto.

She and her coed cohorts deserved to be criticized, even if some commentators went overboard. Her demands were ludicrous, lacked common protocol and decency, her tall tales about contraception unlikely, and her testimony surreal for the issue of sex being taken to a public forum.  
Fluke’s entire appearance and happenstance of name and allegations of massive outlays on pill bills amounting to thousands a year are too implausible except for the best comedic relief.

 Indeed, she is a phony as a testifier, but a very real activist and professional liar:

After all these years of feminists demanding government stay out of the bedrooms, they somehow find the time to get into others’ wallets—which is either on par with, or even more intrusive government poking than even bedroom antics per se.

Oddly, when it comes to the equality of the sexes, feminists are prone let the boyfriend’s personal bank account get a free ride and move on to the state level of solving the contraception inequality, so to speak. Should HE not chip in for committing coital congress in the back seat of a Chevy or in some coed’s dorm?  If not, then why not?  Why is that to be shifted to other taxpayers—many of them women—rather than the man actually doing the horizontal worm dance with her? Just who the hell ARE these poor malnourished naïfs who Flukesque type caliber law chicks hook up with at the local bar?  Have they no money to their names?  Or access to Mom and Dad’s, at least?  Are condoms really that damned expensive to these high-powered Alpha Males?
Fluke is woman. Hear her roar…err…meow….or…. whimper.   Or…something like that…

Like the old Virginia Slims ads had it, "You’ve Come A Long Way, Baby":  all the way to getting pills paid for by someone else as well as dinner when some handsome hunk blows into town for a couple of days for an easy hit and run.  Get in, get off, and get out.  Talk about real misogyny. Someone’s still left holding the bag.  The bag showing the receipts from the local drug store for a prescription of those magical 30 count, one-a-day, monthly pills. Girls might indeed like diamonds. Swell. Sparkly volcanic carbon. That's cute. Cute too was the old-fashioned, fuddy-duddy role of marriage.  So we're told. But as Mark Steyn has written, these days the State is really a girl's TRUE best friend.  That is to say, someone besides primarily herself.  Thus in laughable contradistinction to all those feminist catcalls of yesteryear about keeping the private, private, and keeping “government out of the bedroom”, we see now in an odd turn of priorities some ,poormouthing from rich women demanding the door to the bedroom is to be kicked wide open and left swinging in the winds of changey-change.  What’s private is now most certainly public, and what’s public now gets to peek at the private; to play semi-opaque voyeur of carnal knowledge for sums not much higher than the old quarter burlesque peep shows, where you got to see a hip wiggle or a semi-naked thigh tease---a few seconds of cheesecake---for some small coinage.

The coinage now is not much higher. Nevertheless,  the liberated 21st Century Woman (hear her roar and testify in front of Congress about her committal to reimbursing the fleshly act of “congress” in the sack) wants the taxpayers to pony up the costs of this advanced mode of conjugation, and the male actually doing the main deed makes a clean getaway.  Yet again.  It’s merely us males (and females) not in on the clusterfun who get to pay up.

Yep, you’ve come a long way, baby girl. You big baby.   Big Boy, on the other hand, gets to save his money for a dime bag and a monster kegger at the local chapter of I Tappa Keg fraternity at Georgetown U?

As a female acquaintance of mine opined when this spit first hit the fan:

“The biggest irony in the universe is when people who claim the government should subsidize their lifestyle choices call others selfish.”
Well, irony of the Known Universe might be a tad overstated.  We don’t know all of what lies beyond just yet. But certainly she’s right about the irony of the “independence” and “freedom of choice” mantras that made the rounds in feminism some decades back, but is now reduced to one issue aloe.  All else is up for grabs. From you.   If you resist,  or claim you have the freedom to withhold based on religious or ideological principle or just as a matter of rights to your own fruits of labor, you’re deemed “selfish” for not providing the bounty. Yet what is more selfish than asking government via the taxpayers to fund your lifestyle as well as MRI scans?
Long story short, then, this whole brouhaha—a totally manufactured media fantasy at that--is NOT about the illusory “War on Women.”
 This “student” (RE: Activist/Operative), if indeed that’s what she even is, and her amazingly multi-taskable active socialite gal-pals are the front lines of the culture war. They’re just the pawns on the board. It’s not really even about them per se.  It is a war of big government ideology on freedom taken to the bizarre outer limits of credulity in order to make the point about just who the final arbiter is of rights.  If you’re guessing at this point that would not be you, you get a gold star for paying careful attention to the actual war.
 It has been made plain that under O-Care in the collective pool of goodies and stipulations that range 2500 pages, you don’t have a “free market", or anything approaching making purely "personal choices" about health care.   You merely have a set of private HC markets controlled by strings from the likes of Sebelius and Pelosi, the HHS Secretary being named in the O-Care final document no less than two dozen occasions as “The Secretary shall…” 
There is no corresponding document of that size--indeed at all--other than warranty and return information and common knowledge of “caveat emptor”,  applicable to, say, buying a new laptop from the computer store,  or a basket of apples from Kroger. Documents of this magnitude passed with grift and graft under the cover of night, containing more pages than the Bible and Koran combined that no one has even read, where the push to vote was forced despite being told by the OMA and CBO it busted the budget nonetheless do NOT represent “representative democracy”.  They represent tyranny and the death of any real semblance of democratic governance.
That’s coercion in the market. Not freedom. That’s a user fee and thus a tax—even you think you’re paying a health insurance “premium” like in the old days. The very fact that a bone is being tossed to certain select groups to get benefits pulled from others’ pockets, or that (however tiny, and limited) small businesses are supposed to get “tax credits” in order to help them pay for this “mandate” to purchased health insurance for their employees or face the mighty IRS, indicates the pooling of resources is all too real, even if it’s still denied by supporters of O-Care that no one will be buying Ms. Fluke’s magic anti-bambino pills. Oh yes they will. And much more than that to boot. Granted, the small business tax credits are set to expire in 2016, merely about a year and a half past  from when the really juicy parts of O-Care kick in. And they’ll only cover 30% of the cost—at most—of forcing small businessmen to purchase most forms of health insurance. Still, it proves the primary funding method and implementation source of O-Care is ultimately the Collective Hive’s tax resources.
The primary funding mechanism then is taxation.  It’s not a difficult issue to unweave if the MSM were to tell people the truth.  The appearance of the child in an adult’s body named Fluke is no fluke; in her partial defense, she, like many people these days, including more than a few activists and bureaucrats of note doing fairly well in their own right, has her tin cup out for your money regardless of her relatively well-off status compared with most of the rest of us.  Not to mention the rest of the planet. She’s a symptom of the cultural mire that created these expectations and perhaps a brasher spokesmouth. But she’s the front line and indeed victim in one, not an aberration. This was planned.

 Paraphrasing the compu-geek types on annoying clink-bang moments upon getting a new download that mucks up your prior settings, this is a feature—not a bug.   MS. Fluke’s very clownish, almost surrealistic absurdity is THE point, not a sales pitch or side stunt or accident of looks.  It’s the point and the push against the remaining fenced-in vestiges of common sense and the mantle of adult responsibility in the age of the Permanent Child.  It’s the Velociraptor of Statism testing the weak spots on the partially electrified and more enclosed electric fence of what’s left of traditional culture and notions of protocol. 
Additionally, if you’re really 30 years of age and in college, you need--at long last--to grow up and move on with your life. It’s a very disturbing tick in our educational system that 3 decades and more would be requisite to provide the core knowledge for even the most advanced studies. Either you have the talent for chosen field—or not.  Great thinkers and physicists and artists and engineers and scientists alike have found their forte in many cases long before 30 candles were on the birthday cake.  For more quotidian jobs dealing with most things life can toss at you, unlike being an attorney or brain surgeon, high school should suffice. Fantastic feats of engineering and construction and innovation, salesmanship, and even massive portfolios for companies were, in the past, managed by people who for the most part had never so much as stepped onto a college campus other than some sports event.

Perhaps law school needs to be taken to age 26 or so, and even at that much of the credentialing is due more the needs of protection on extreme liability of the profession. The degree itself, like many these days, being requisite without really being required for the knowledge gained.
 I realize our culture (and this is particularly true about the secularized West) extends adolescence into the late twenties and thirties for many people, and this has been much-commented on and rightly damned by researchers of note like Robert Epstein. People at age 30 begging for handouts—indeed begging for anything—is all the more gallows laughable for the ill effects and reinforcement of adolescence, when in times past this type of person would have been an adult for a decade and perhaps a half that time again.  It’s a defect—not a noble feature—of a system that creates youth till what used to be called middle age, is rife with the requirements and needs of constant “credentialism”, business always having to up the ante, so to speak, due the frowsy performance of the public schools under the tutelage of teachers’ unions, and moreover and worse does these things to us with the end result the reinforcement of the Nation of Dependistan.
Conservatives’ War On Women?  Keeping them “down” and held in chains in the kitchen as mere broodmares for the next generation, as libs claim?  Nay, women can and have become anything they wished in the last several decades.

Women can choose to slop pigs,  work them over with a saw in a slaughterhouse, sell computers, rule the boardroom, conduct legal eagle sessions, fight in wars, fly planes and other dangerous heavy machines, mine coal, work oil rigs, train tigers to sit like kitty cats on chairs, have a mantel full of Oscar trophies, work the rough, smoke belching inner sanctum of Beltway, larger-than-life politics, run small and large businesses alike, doctor and operate on wounds and boo boos as MDs, run entire scientific institutes and help control the public and private money that helps SETI scan the stars, run entire foundations dedicated to relief agencies both at home and abroad. 

Barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, fussing over boiling beans, while the Mr. plops down on the sofa to watch football,  is now a choice—not a dictate. There are escape valves for this.  Which is a good thing, as NOW types and most feminists I’ve run into are NOT particularly fond of the “choice” of being a mom and homemaker.  That’s so Wilma Flintstone.

Yet for all the gale force winds about “choice” of this and that, and “Pro Choice”, nastier winds greet men and women alike who merely disagree with the proposition that the MOST paternalistic, Alpha Male of all—government power and influence---is now to become the largest part of our private lives in all of history. 
As author and political pundit Gene Healy points out, in his seminal (no puns) work Go Directly To Jail (which nails conservatives and liberals alike for wanting to control all aspects of human behavior) never before in all of human history—in what is putatively the Land of the Free, and much of the rest of the Nanny State Western world--has it been so easy to get in trouble for the slightest infractions.

Shakedown organizations like NOW (transmorphed lately into the National Orgasms for Women) have nothing negative to say on this matter of the increasing power and paunch and influence of government. Indeed, they are allied with the OWS punks and Big Government type politicians, and admire the paternalistic behavior of government as the New Sugar Daddy of the increasing syndrome of fatherless children now plaguing Western society.  
Why mess with a trend that serves---even if on a hypocritical level?  After all, in the USA and elsewhere in most of the Anglosphere and Scandinavia, single women are a very dependable voting block for liberal programs and government expansion and handouts.  (Pace Gloria Steinem, who said a wedding ring was a sign of enslavement, and that women need men like fish need bicycles, sometimes in life you do need men as well as bikes--and good Omega-3 acids from fish meat.) 

NOW says nothing, that is, unless the matter of “Choice” surrounds one issue--and one issue alone: The “A” Word. 
Other than abortion, most feminist groups are just dandy that government power is sacrosanct in stanching other flavors of real-world Choice--from boardrooms and Senate offices down to local TSA goon squad outlets at the airport, who’re literally free to run their hands on the crotches of men and women alike under the mighty and unlikely auspices of keeping little girls’  twats from harboring plane detonating C-4 packets, so as not to “offend” various groups who actually are up to no good but PC Multi-Cultism tells us to look the other direction. So we get groped, and NOW has little to say on this matter any more than they do on female genital mutilation that occurs in some ¼ of the planet of more on a regular basis, and is now making its way to NHS hospitals in Britain.   
So  NudeScan Central and GropeTopia by lumpen grunting idiots making 60K a year for free feel-ups and quite a bit of theft of passenger luggage (yes, it’s been an early Christmas for more than a few TSA agents, as many investigations have shown) stays in business. 

What about MY choice not to pay for someone else’s Anti-Stork meds?  What about my choice to homeschool my children (feminists generally HATE that concept, and are usually on board with the mantra that so-called “public education” is the best socializer to make more compliant and obedience masses who pay homage to government, et al).   Do those not count?  Feminists agitate constantly against OTHER kinds of choices.  Constantly.   “Choice” to most of them is a single issue word.
As to the “misogynist” society we live in, even here in the Deep South, supposedly the paragon of keepin’ the Wimmin-folk in their place, upon the unpleasantry of divorce, even if the reason is adultery on the female gender’s side of things, she generally get the best deal.   Like Ivana Trump said, “Don’t get mad, Dahhhling. Get it all.”  Likewise, even for hillbilly trailer trash gals, they might not get as much as the former Mrs. Trump, but they WILL be getting the trailer and custody of the kids.
Unless (after you’ve already spent money moving out)  you  can prove to a family court judge that the wife is a crack whore and have photos of a new man entering the residence every night with much expense and telephoto footwork from a P.I., AND/OR you’ve somehow shown she’s threatened to kill the children on the Blood Alter of Satan and use their guts for fish bait of dinner later in the week, or some such, she WILL be getting the kids and half of what YOU owned together, even if you’d paid for it all.  And even if she has the means to completely support herself and the little ones and work and plunk them in daycare or (if very young,  with a friend), child support will also be flowing her way, even if alimony is not due to her adultery (if that’s the reason for divorce). 

I guess that’s called “misogyny”---A jury-rigged situation in civil law where you win the bounty about 90% of the time.

 Nay, a Secularist-Progressive Piety War on Western Culture and those quaint notions of freedom.  Men (and WOMEN) under the dictates of 2500 pages held in check by bureaucrats harder to remove from office than if TNT were used, are not free people. They are subjects born and bred in a tyranny of dependency and marginalization of cultural norms that successfully guided us for millennia. Freedom of religion?   Only on paper. In real terms, in the Nanny-Statism and mawkish “tolerance” Multi-Culti mantras of the West’s chancelleries, only guys whose names are Mo get any leeway.  The inculcation of fear is a powerful cultural weapon.
The BBC's upper brass, for example, now acknowledges quite openly that Judaism and Christian bashing is still on. Nipping at the heels of the Prophet for Muslims wishing to ban dogs from Spanish parks, making the Israel flag illegal in Germany, having 3/4 of all Brit Imams on the dole, and seeing Sharia considerations (even in the US) gaining traction in the courts of the Anglosphere?   Err.  Not so much.  Why not slam the adherents of the more virulent forms of Islam for all this, and more?  Simple. They’ll kill you.   So, functionally, “Allah o Akbar” is evidently something Arab akin to “nothing to see here, folks, --move along”.   The TSA grabbing your personals to equalize the torment so as not to offend any particular group, lest grandpa’s colostomy bag be used to take down a plane? 

Same MC considerations.  It’s about power, people. Not women per se.  Government power, and not adult women who really need to move on with their lives,  and stop asking people they don’t even know to finance their fun time by inserting (no puns) the items in putatively “private” health care plans. At an historically Catholic institution at that.  Time for them to grow up. That goes for the nation as well.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, real culture wars are indeed being raged and fought, mostly at the instance of the State and popular media:

Interestingly, there IS one group of TRUE “Fundamentalists” (I’ll poke at this since the word gets carelessly tossed around a lot) who will NOT be obeying an requirements to, say, have their Islamic-oriented institutions provide contraceptives of most varieties, nor (for the few that exist) have their Islamic founded hospitals use pig flesh in fixing busted human heart valves (a common procedure, and effective).  They’ll tell you to go pound sand if you don’t like it.  Apparently, some groups are simply not to be messed with. Would that Christians have their gumption and fire in their bellies as the other Abraham-based faith that’s making most of the real noise these days.
 The Secular Progressives are powerful indeed. But as the Taliban and Al Qaida and now Muslim Brotherhood “Arab Spring” (thanks for Obama magnanimous policy of non-interference in Muslim affairs that interferes nonetheless, as opposed to that Bush cowboy clowns and neocons who mucked up Iraq and Afghanistan) types operatives say,   “The West has all the fancy watches—but we have all the time in the world.”  Funny, that.  One lesson our misadventures in the Middle East and now even at home, in the ever-broadening girth given to Islamic demands on culture and law and de facto legalization and hat tips of Sharia law in some cases trumping common civil law and the First Amendment even in Jersey, is that resistance is not always futile.

Bully for the hard lesson, even if I’m not totally on board with the US judge who ruled in favor of assaulting those who mock Islam  dressed up like “Zombie Muhammad alongside Zombie Pope (from the Catholics, the case drew the predictable typical yawn), or the outcome of ceding ground to Islamists being “Take Your Child Bride to Work” day might not just be a Yorkshire happenstance or the sour outcome of Bush’s war in Afghanistan, but will soon be a common feature in Everytown USA.
Misogyny and some conspiratorial “War on Women”, ya libs say, eh?

“Obama to women: ‘Deficit? Don't fret your pretty little heads. Here, I brought flowers and a heart-shaped box of birth control.’ "   --David Burge


Ilíon said...

"There ARE some gray areas in social welfare for the commonweal, yes. The truly indigent and poor, for example, should probably have some provisioning from a combination of state, local, federal and private enterprise outlets for their health care."

No way!

Once one (and society) accepts this premise/assertion as true, than there is no way to avoid exactly the multi-level mess we are in.

MCPlanck said...

Out of curiosity, I clicked on the "Next Blog" button on my blog... and found this. What an interesting contrast.

I can't help but remark that you seemed to have overlooked the basic concept of "common good."

Vaccines, for instance, are relatively cheap. Why not demand that every parent pay for their own child? Why subsidize vaccines with government money at all? Why should you pay for vaccines?

The answer is because vaccines really only work if everybody has them. They're not actually a magic bullet that renders the recipient immune ; rather, they are a communal strategy to lessen the incidence of disease.

So making everyone pay for vaccines is fair, because everyone benefits when everyone uses them.

The same logic applies to birth control. The kind of women you think are too cheap to buy their own birth control are precisely the kind of women you don't want having kids. So paying for their birth control is in your own best interest, as it reduces the very class of indigent and poor you agree we must provide for, and is therefore cheaper in the long run.

How did you miss your own self-interest in this matter? This is what disturbs me about modern conservatives: in their rush to issue moral judgments, they forget to look out for their own pragmatic interests. What happened to good old realpolitik?

With unlimited faith in free markets and an addiction to moralizing, Conservatives have become wide-eyed utopian revolutionaries... they are the hippies of the new millennium. Although not dirty and smelly, they seem to be having a lot less fun.

I never thought I'd say this, but it's true: I miss Nixon.

Wakefield Tolbert said...

Update on yet another (real) "War on Women" :

Not quite clit-nipping and veiling and beating/stoning/caning, no. But almost as nasty in some ways.

Wakefield Tolbert said...

More on this, for some added (and much needed) perspective:

Please read. Thanks.


hemcoined said...

I'm very happy to discover this great site the future of this discussion is getting really very good.

Load Systems

sheetal jain said...

Get your Summer Collections with over 50% discounts now!!!