Perhaps the most craven attack by liberals has been the intangible ‘war on women’, a politically contrived insult to the human race. Some person with a warped mind in the remote catacombs of some hatchery of political schemes offered this expression to win votes. It is highly probable that conservatives simply expect women to be self-confident and self-reliant.
Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University law student carried the banner of women who were being ‘attacked.’ She stated at a Congressional hearing in March of 2012 that birth control could cost her and other students $3,000 or more during their college years.
What happened to personal responsibility? Could she and other female students share the cost of the ride with the romantic partner? Is this a moral issue, a safety concern, or a matter of self-control? Are we so dependent on an all-encompassing government that we depend on legislation to supplant our impetuous emotions? When contraceptives are provided, will their use be ignored so that we end up with about the same number of unintended pregnancies and diseases?
During the 40’s, women were pressed into service to assist in the operation of the formidable industrial complex that built ships, planes, tanks, trucks and firearms to crush the axis powers of Germany, Italy and Japan. Women that took jobs in factories were often referred to as “Rosie the Riveter;” a complimentary characterization of the important roles women had taken while men were off to the war zones.
After WWII men came home to resume their careers while women enjoyed the additional pay to supplement their husband’s income. Because male-dominated businessmen conveniently overlooked their growing skills, women were employed at lower wages than their male counterparts. The ‘glass ceiling’ expression was coined when used in the Wall Street Journal in 1986. The term was adopted as a description of the transparent barrier that allowed women to see what was going on above them but prevented them from participating in the higher (paid) activities.
Women should exude self-confidence and esteem. When they have worked hard and met the employer’s expectations and yet are passed over for promotion or a raise, they can seek help. At least two laws offer protection for women in the workplace. One is the Equal Pay Act of 1963, a law that states that men and women who perform similar work must receive equal pay. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII states that employers may not discriminate on the basis of gender, race, religion or national origin
When she was born 55 years ago, Ginni Rometty’s parents had no idea what kind of an adult she would become. Now, we know that she is President and CEO of International Business Machines. At $107 billion in annual sales IBM is the 19th largest company in the U.S. according to the current ‘Fortune 500.’ All girls and boys are equal at birth but results over the years vary from abject poverty to awesome success. Rometty is a woman that overcame the stereotypical man’s role in the world of commerce.
Success stories about women are common; Indra Nooyi, 56, is Chairman and CEO at Pepsico and Meg Whitman, 56, is president and CEO of Hewlett-Packard. In politics, the South Koreans have elected their country’s first female President, Park Geun-hye, 61. Angela Merkel, 59, was elected the first woman chancellor of Germany in 2005.
One of the greatest success stories of all time is that of Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu who died on September 5, 1997. Bojaxhiu was born in 1910 and grew up to become one of the most revered persons of the 20th century. Her life exemplified the omnipotent aspirations for women in particular and for all mankind. The name by which most of us knew her? Mother Teresa of Calcutta.
– Dick Baynton
When Sandra Fluke spoke up, she just asked that the same standard, basic healthcare coverage that millions of other women receive should be included with her health insurance without interference from her job or school. She was not neglecting her personal responsibility. She just expected that the prescriptions she gets from her doctor should be covered by the health insurance that SHE PAYS FOR! That’s not unreasonable. That’s common sense.
Now, let’s be clear. Sandra Fluke was not asking a Catholic University to pay for her contraception. Students at Georgetown pay 100% of the costs of their health insurance premiums! Why should a University that makes NO requirement that students BE Catholic, think they should be able to police women’s bodies through an insurance policy that they don’t subsidize at all? Where is the fairness in that? Why should Georgetown, who have been providing their staff and faculty with an optional policy that covers contraception since 2000 deny a similar consideration to it’s students? Where is the fairness in that?
What Ms. Fluke asked for was just a little consideration and fairness. Just a little common sense.
Women should have their PRIVACY! A school or job doesn’t need to know whether or not a woman is or isn’t using contraception. A woman should never be fired for using contraception or not using contraception. They certainly don’t need to know her REASONS for using contraception. And a woman who wants to moderate her fertility has an EQUALLY VALID MEDICAL REASON for using hormonal contraception as a woman who wants to moderate ovarian cysts or endometriosis. A school or job has no need to sit in moral judgement of a woman’s private medical choices. Whether a woman pays for her insurance entirely herself, or she earns it through her job as a benefit, that insurance is HERS and what she does with it is HER business alone! Women deserve Freedom of Religion, and that includes Freedom FROM their school or boss’ Religious Interference in her personal business.
So what did Miss Fluke get for voicing her opinion civilly and respectfully? She was attacked with slanders, sexual harassment, vicious sexual bullying, disinformation, propaganda and LIES! She was labeled a “slut” and a “whore,” for having the temerity to speak up about birth control. This was not limited to Rush Limbaugh. Ann Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, Dennis Miller, Michele Malkin and a host of minor players across the Conservative Echo Chamber of Ideas piled on in a seemingly coordinated campaign of disinformation, slander and sexual degradation! It IS shameful. Because even though Rush admitted that what he had done was wrong, his slanders and attacks get repeated on a DAILY BASIS on twitter and in other social media. The fact is, you have willfully ignored those crass, misogynist attacks! You think that the “War on Women” is just limited to trying to limit access to reproductive healthcare. Nope. Who voted against the Lily Ledbetter Fairpay Act? Republicans. Who delayed renewing the Violence Against Women Act? Republicans. Heck. More than three women a day on average DIE from domestic violence. Those are REAL deaths in what can be seen as a REAL war. And Republicans delayed legislation that tries to stem that violence? Seriously?
Heck, even Erika Holder, a Republican mounting a primary challenge next March, was labeled a “street walker” by a fellow Republican. Why? Because too many people think that sexual degradation can pass for political discourse these days. Too many people do it! And too many people choose to willfully ignore it when it happens.
Take a look at this: http://peacemoonbeam.typepad.com/bighairynews/2012/11/time-editors-hoping-to-get-fluked.html
It wasn’t good enough for that troll to just call Sandra Fluke a “whore” or a “slut.” They had to make up a photoshopped image of her looking like a beaten prostitute, because only adding that level of violence with their sexual degradation would satisfy them. That photo says NOTHING about who Sandra Fluke really is, but it speaks volumes about the level of hate, fear and violence directed toward her by those claiming to be “Conservative.”
I am active on a facebook Sandra Fluke facebook fan page. That image has been spammed at the page dozens of times, probably hundreds of times, by dozens of different posters.
I can’t name FIVE Conservative Commentators that have come to the page and defended Fluke’s right to speak her peace. Hardly any Conservatives have said, “Wow! This level of hate, anger and lies is undeserved! And it sure makes Conservatives look bad too.” Conservatives do not notice those sorts of attacks when they are directed at the political opposition. Mitt Romney’s response to Rush Limbaugh vicious attacks was tepid, “that’s not the language I would have used.” That made Romney look like a coward, unwilling to stand up to Rush, or morally bankrupt for not recognizing the offensive, slanderous, sexually degrading attacks as unconscionable!
Ah ha! Some will counter that there many Conservative Women who have suffered similar misogynist attacks. And I have to say they are right. And those attacks were wrong. This is why N.O.W. spoke up when S.E. Cupp was attacked by Hustler Magazine. This is why Sandra Fluke spoke up when the actress Stacey Dash was attacked for endorsing Mitt Romney! We have to stand up for CIVILITY FIRST and our petty, partisan politics second.
Where do you stand, Dick Baynton? For you to claim that the “War on Women Never Was and Never Will Be” you have to willfully ignore the vicious, slanderous and occasionally violent attacks on our CIVILITY, directed at women like Sandra Fluke.
Response to Russ Rogers:
Thanks much for your prompt and expansive response to my column published online on June 24, 2013 in The Roanoke Star.com. I appreciate your taking the time to agree or disagree with my commentary.
The debate you have raised focuses attention very acutely. The first sentence of the fourth paragraph states that, “Women should have their PRIVACY!” I totally agree with that remark but would add that all citizens, male and female, should enjoy their privacy as well.
That raises the question of why would a law student at any university stand on a stage or at a podium and spew out such personal assertions? Why would Ms. Fluke not deal with her situation in a confidential manner with officials at Georgetown University? You apparently know the personal details regarding the university policy regarding insurance for students and others. I don’t have this information and consider it private between the two parties.
The only conclusion spectators to this bawdy controversy can draw is that liberal campaign planners and professional mudslingers searched until they found a person; Ms. Fluke that would expose her intimate activities to the public to garner sympathy from vulnerable voters. It is possible that she received some benefits for doing so.
In your final paragraph, you ask, “Where do you stand, Dick Baynton?” The answer is that I adore my wife of many years, my daughter and sons that I also revere knowing that they are the result of the enduring mutual love between my wife and myself and God’s Blessing. I respect all people regardless of gender, race, religion, political credo, ethnicity, handicap status or sexual preference.
What I resist are people who recruit susceptible people like Ms. Fluke or the man who, during the presidential campaign, parroted words that his wife died of cancer because of Mr. Romney. I reject those who say one thing and do another such as Mr. Obama’s promised but banished transparency of government, the healthcare act that is going to cost vast sums more than we were told and was unfavorable legislation by a majority of voters. I deplore people like Hugh Hefner who has built a career around dependent women who are willing to venerate the wrong body organs but I accept his legal right to do what he does. Of course I condemn domestic violence and hope that violators face the maximum legal penalties. Internationally, it is a tragedy that some nations overlook spousal abuse, spousal, date and random rape and even spousal homicide.
It is not a surprise that you and others are active on a Sandra Fluke Facebook fan page. It is interesting that an innocent, manipulated young lady is building such popularity on such a thin, sleazy base of political misinformation.
I am not going to list all the failures of liberal politics and politicians nor am I going to defend or criticize the many conservative commentators; to do so would simply protract our disagreements. Thanks again for your critical comments. My policy is that this response to yours is our last correspondence on this subject. Sincerely, DickBaynton 6/25/2013