This article is not wrong for not supporting its premise. It is wrong for giving this blow hard a platform. The longer we listen to what these pigs say the less time we have to talk about what is really going on.
He is most definitely misogynist, but that is not the worst of his his sins. He is the literal definition of wealth inequality and the primary reason we are at the crossroads we are.
He is an escapist that cares more about fantasy technologies than realities of policy that will solve our problems. Libertarians are just another astroturf for Neo Feudalism.
Back to the article, yeah it was severely lacking. It fails to even approach its title. I think it is a great place to start a conversation though. While I am not sure I can spin a direct attack on women’s voting rights, there is something much worse going on.
Most gains from DEI were not minorities, but women. This assault on DEI is really a thinly veiled assault on women. This combined with braindead policies like not considering sex, gender, race in medical research makes it clear women stand the most to lose in all this.
There is also the psychological effect of putting a known and unrepentant sexual assaulter in the White House. I imagine keeping women disengaged is very important for the conservative movement and boy have they perfected turning women off.
Taking away fundamental reproductive rights of women and robbing their right of redress through manipulating the courts is just the start. Their current push for voter ID will likely disenfranchise millions of women, but I am not sure that is the smoking gun.
I think the more we look for that moment or sign that this administration is anti-women is the more we continue to ignore it has always been anti-women. That is the point or feature so to speak. The unspoken truth of man up and woman down.
See, that’s a much more interesting take, with actual evidence. The article should have been about that. As is, the article is purely baseless fearmongering, and we don’t need that. If you’re going to write about how Trump is a threat to women, use the waterfall of evidence available for that.
This article is not wrong for not supporting its premise. It is wrong for giving this blow hard a platform. The longer we listen to what these pigs say the less time we have to talk about what is really going on.
He is most definitely misogynist, but that is not the worst of his his sins. He is the literal definition of wealth inequality and the primary reason we are at the crossroads we are.
He is an escapist that cares more about fantasy technologies than realities of policy that will solve our problems. Libertarians are just another astroturf for Neo Feudalism.
Back to the article, yeah it was severely lacking. It fails to even approach its title. I think it is a great place to start a conversation though. While I am not sure I can spin a direct attack on women’s voting rights, there is something much worse going on.
Most gains from DEI were not minorities, but women. This assault on DEI is really a thinly veiled assault on women. This combined with braindead policies like not considering sex, gender, race in medical research makes it clear women stand the most to lose in all this.
There is also the psychological effect of putting a known and unrepentant sexual assaulter in the White House. I imagine keeping women disengaged is very important for the conservative movement and boy have they perfected turning women off.
Taking away fundamental reproductive rights of women and robbing their right of redress through manipulating the courts is just the start. Their current push for voter ID will likely disenfranchise millions of women, but I am not sure that is the smoking gun.
I think the more we look for that moment or sign that this administration is anti-women is the more we continue to ignore it has always been anti-women. That is the point or feature so to speak. The unspoken truth of man up and woman down.
See, that’s a much more interesting take, with actual evidence. The article should have been about that. As is, the article is purely baseless fearmongering, and we don’t need that. If you’re going to write about how Trump is a threat to women, use the waterfall of evidence available for that.