You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘misogyny’ tag.
From the medical business to the media to idiotic women, they all got on the Angeina Jolie bandwagon. For whatever reason she chose breast surgery, plastic or medical – it shouldn’t be our business. But she decided to make it so, so here is my reaction:
A healthy woman is hailed as brave for cutting her breasts because she might get cancer (she still might now, but better odds) I don’t know who came up with the 87% and 5 % numbers and how, but people take them on faith and miss one point: without surgery she might never get cancer. With it, she still could.
Yet the move is praised to high heaven – even elevated at the rank of “a mother’s duty”. NY Times promotes the tweet with the quote about telling her kids they don’t have to fear losing her to cancer. Keep your breasts and you are a bad mommy!
It’s nice how everyone is so cavalier with a woman’s body parts. Waiting for the praise for someone cutting testicles based on an 87% chance.
I have been called ignorant, anti-woman and how do I dare criticize her. I don’t. She wanted to raise awareness, I’m aware and this is what I know:
Genetics is in its infancy – not sure how reliable their cause/effect study is – and is there only one gene involved? The numbers are highly suspicious.
Cancer patients are less and less getting surgery these days. Boosting immunity is the state of the art treatment. With all the early screening, it was noticed that the body takes care of a great number of tumors, through its immune system.
Breasts, ovaries are not just man toys, baby-making organs. They are important parts of our body. Nerves, hormones important to our overall health are there. Lopping them off based on a “maybe” is not bravery in my book.
Oh, and this woman the whole medical science defers to today, used to carry blood vials of her spouse around her neck (they both did, Billy Bob and her) for a strange reason I forgot now.
And a balancing view
Reacting to Angelina Jolie’s Breast Cancer News
Preventive double mastectomies among women in that latter group have shot up by 188 percent since the late-1990s. The steepness of the rise suggests those operations were driven less by medical advice than by women’s exaggerated sense of risk of getting a new cancer in the other breast. According to one study, such women believed that risk to be more than 30 percent over 10 years when it was actually closer to 5 percent. I am concerned that the coverage of Jolie’s decision, if not handled carefully, will add fuel to a culture of fear, to a misunderstanding of risk that could compromise women’s health choices.
.
I once thought of naming my dog MoDo because she hates all girl dogs while getting along fine with the guys. I didn’t, because I like my dog.
NY Times’ Dowd Tries To Whitewash Her Awful Hillary Campaign Coverage
It’s a good article, so I won’t add anything to it except “what happened??????”
and not afraid to say so
The Daily News fresh from their Obamagasm, shows their true co;ors by displaying the same picture
I did not watch this non-event, but got a better perspective from this source
I guess this would show the same moment that NYC tabloids relished from a better angle and you’ll have to go to the source for their priceless narrative
On edit, the Gothamist has a good comment
A One Act Play About The NY Post’s Sexist Hillary Clinton Cover
..Excerpt
Post Editor Guy 1: So are we goin’ with “HELLARY: WHO’D WANT TO BENGHAZI THIS BROAD?!” or “MIDDLE SHEESH! WACKO WOMAN GETS SNIPPY AT SENATE” ?
Post Editor Guy 2: Hmmm, whaddya think Gary?
Post Editor Guy 3: [Brushing 7-11 Taquito crumbs off double chin]
Not much I can add to this…
via The Confluence
I got that from the Os who made the lede their headline
NYT’s Blow: Palin is ‘the Zsa Zsa Gabor of American politics'; ignore her
The quote from the article follows
This is it. This is the last time I’m going to write the name Sarah Palin until she does something truly newsworthy, like declare herself a candidate for the presidency. Until then, I will no longer take part in the left’s obsessive-compulsive fascination with her, which is both unhealthy and counterproductive.
She’s the Zsa Zsa Gabor of American politics. She once did something noteworthy, but she’s now just famous for being famous.
… Yet the left continues to elevate her every utterance so that they can mock and deride her. The problem is that this strategy continues to backfire. The more the left tries to paint her as one of the “Mean Girls,” the more the right sees her as “Erin Brockovich.”
Of course, speaking of elevation, Blow (what an appropriate name), in his headline, makes her to be Voldemort
She Who Must Not Be Named
The entire article is an orgy of insults. For someone preaching that Palin be ignored, he surely has a hard time letting go of the guilty pleasure.
In another funny twist, the Os are angered by this
1. He blames it all on the left’s ” obsession” with her?
then they go right back to …bashing Palin.
I have some news for the “left”. Just as the xenophobic hatred of France was generated – or at least first aired by W, the “Hate Palin” mania comes directly from Obama – his campaign and then carried on by the Os.
It was Obama himself unable to restrain himself from demeaning her from the start. He started calling her a mayor”, a pig” and talked of her obsessively. By the time his handlers prevailed and made him stay out of this all the misogynists missing the Hillary Bone were redirected against yet another woman outsider trying to break in the power circle.Some of the feminists saw their way in the loyalty circle (and out of the PUMA identification) by jumping on the melee
So, the Bush hatred was quickly poured into Hillary Hatred, then into Palin Hatred.
One might recall hos his aides could barely contain him from such beautiful gaffes like “lipstick on a pig” and “I have more executive experience than her, because I ran my campaign which has a budget ten times bigger than Alaska”
Fresh for the successful unleashing of sexism in the primaries, Obama couldn’t resist brushing his shoulders again.
And his acolytes, who are starting to be ashamed of their blind following, are not quite lucid enough to realize where they got their “one hour of hate” from.
The New York Times is only continuing its role of Obama camapaign arm (and White House official propaganda organ).
They will transition seamlessly into Jeb’s, just like they did from W to Obama.
And while I know it will be Jeb riding to victory on the bipartisan wave of sexism in 2012, I can’t help but be amused as the fauxgressives willful amnesia.
Palin has become this magnificent obsession that they are all helpless to fight. (I am betting that Obama could use a Palin patch too)
Unlike Hillary, being a R, Palin will have at least some friendly media too and she will thrive. Until Jeb will be installed that is..
Recent Comments