War on Women

Best Supporting Actress Patricia Arquette Gives Best Performance Yet: Using Oscar Speech to Rant About Mythical Wage Gap

arquetteoscars

In a world…where women and children are being raped and slaughtered in Africa and the Middle East, where young girls are being abducted and enslaved to serve as international sex toys for wealthy lechers, leave it to Hollywood to use the biggest platform in the world, an audience of hundreds of millions globally, to bring awareness to an urgently important fairy tale.

When Patricia Arquette won the award for Best Supporting Actress for her 12-year long performance in Boyhood, she immediately went to the script, reciting a speech from a folded piece of paper. She thanked her fellow nominees, cast, crew, and her family, then, appearing to be auditioning for a role as Meryl Streep’s understudy, got confusingly political.

To every woman who gave birth to every taxpayer and citizen of this nation, we have fought for everybody else’s equal rights. It’s our time to have wage equality once and for all and equal rights for women in the United States of America.

The reaction has been predictably swift and emotional, with little data to back it up. That’s because there isn’t any.

One paragraph from the Hobby Lobby ruling destroys the entire liberal “anti-women” narrative

h

The instant the Supreme Court ruled on Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the War on Women™ was back on. Liberals from sea to shining sea had talking points, Facebook memes, and … narratives ready to go and deployed them in a cascade of messaging discipline. It was truly a sight to behold. You may have seen this particularly nonsensical but effective image shared hundreds of times within 24 hours:

1

I mean really. But apart from saying “nuh uh!”, conservatives had little effective response to this narrative. But then Julian Sanchez from the Cato Institute’s blog discovered a little-noticed passage in the Supreme Court opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito:

The effect of the HHS-created accommodation on the women employed by Hobby Lobby and the other companies involved in these cases would be precisely zero. Under that accommodation, these women would still be entitled to all FDA-approved contraceptives without cost sharing.

This refers to an exception created by the Department of Health and Human Services that forces insurers to pick up the tab for coverage objected to by religious non-profit organizations and churches. Women employed by these organizations receive the same coverage, medications, and cost-free contraceptives as everyone else as mandated by HHS, even though the organizations themselves refuse to pay for that coverage.

Sandra Fluke’s War On Reality

Sandra Fluke

Media darling and left-wing feminist activist Sandra Fluke is yet again in the news. She gave an interview to some CNN program called “Starting Point” that nobody watches, just like the rest of the programming on CNN but I digress. Ms. Fluke had some choice words for Republicans.

“I talk to women across the country, they really do feel like this is a shift,” said Sandra Fluke.

Sandra Fluke, who rose to national prominence when she was attacked by Rush Limbaugh following her testimony in favor of increased contraception access, said Wednesday that many women personally feel “they’re under attack” from GOP policies.

“When you look at the facts, quantitatively, there have been a record number of bills in the House to limit reproductive health. … Women feel that. I talk to women across the country, they really do feel like this is a shift, and not in their favor,” Fluke said on CNN’s “Starting Point.”

So once again in the mind of Sandra Fluke and other left-wing feminists, women are nothing more than vaginas and uteruses. The only issues that women care about are abortion and birth control in their minds. Something tells me that not necessarily true. Women, just like men, I’m sure care more about whether or not they will have a job in the failed Obama economy for starters. This whole “war on women” is a distraction from the real issues invented by the Democrat Party and their allies in the media and the feminist movement.

Todd Akin and the “War On Women”

I’m sick and tired of this “War on Women” meme. It portrays women as nothing more than helpless vaginas that need subsidized abortion, free birth control, subsidized daycare, special loans in order to start a business, special laws to negotiate a decent wage, and all sorts of things only sugar daddy government can provide. It is dehumanizing and insulting to the millions of strong, independent women everywhere and the millions of men who love them. If you want to see what a real “War on Women” looks like, here it is. Finally, just because someone opposes abortion and wants to cut government spending does not make them a misogynist. In fact, many feminists believe that women can and should stand on their own without the help of the government.

The War on Memes: Let’s focus on the economy, people

A few months ago, conservatives sought to gain politically by going after the contraceptive mandate implemented by the Department of Health and Human Services. This immediately became an issue of religious liberty for conservatives because it would have required religious institutions to cover contraceptives even if it was against their teachings.

Thanks to some rather nutty comments by Rick Santorum, who openly questioned the use of contraceptives, Democrats were able to spin the issue into a so-called “war on women.” The situation was exacerbated thanks to comments by Rush Limbaugh aimed at Sandra Fluke, who had argued that taxpayers should fund contraceptives. Even though Fluke’s reasoning was flawed, taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to subsidize her contraceptives, Limbaugh’s comments were completely unnecessary and wrong.

The strategy was successful in the short-term, as wedge issues usually are. However, it eventually backfired on them when Hilary Rosen, a Democratic operative, said that Ann Romney, wife of presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney, had never worked a day in her life.

Romney took to Twitter to defend herself, setting off a firestorm that caused Rosen to later apologize. The argument from conservatives is that Democrats are waging a “war on stay-at-moms,” largely silencing Democrats on the issue and swinging momentum back to Republicans — at least temporarily.

Dispatches from the #WarOnWomen: Democrat-endorsing corporation sending a party bus full of shirtless models to get out the vote

Cosmo's Bus Model GOTV Effort

Perhaps the worst, least sexy thing one can do is politicize the normal sexual tension that exists between heterosexual men and women. That is to say, short of criminal and/or deviant activity, men and women expressing sexual desire for one another — even in a public way, assuming it’s respectful of societal norms — is healthy.

Which is why it’s always so strange when the more rabid of the feminist stripe freak out over what is essentially a biological pull. The magazine Cosmopolitan knows this. They’re famous for it, in fact. So their party bus full of models they intend to use to shuttle voters from North Carolina State University to the polls next week makes sense. They’re that kind of outfit.

The bus is part of a contest won by the university, and the latest in Cosmo’s foray into political coverage. This year, the magazine endorsed candidates in 10 races — all Democrats — based on their views on abortion, contraception, and equal pay.

“On Election Day, a bus decked out with snacks, swag, and models (hi, this is Cosmo) will roll up to North Carolina State University, the winner of Cosmopolitan.com’s first-ever party bus contest,” the magazine said. “The bus will shuttle students back and forth to a nearby polling location so students can vote.”

Republicans can win single women voters by relating to “Waitress Moms” and “Alpha Strivers”

Cathy McMorris Rodgers

D.C. McAllister has a rather lengthy piece on what it will take for the Republican Party to attract more women voters over at The Federalist:

It would help the GOP and doubting pundits to realize that the war on women is really the “war on single women.” Only by grasping this reality will the GOP develop an effective outreach. But it doesn’t stop there: single women voters are not a monolithic group. They’re not all alike, and they can’t be treated the same. They have different values, and they’re affected by issues in different ways—and the GOP needs to figure out which of these single ladies they can actually persuade to vote for Republican candidates.

With these women in mind, they need to focus, hone their message, rebuild trust, be authentic, reflect strength in their advocacy of conservative principles, and communicate those principles in a convincing and compassionate way.

Yes, the Right is losing single women. But this article (and the book it stemmed from) focuses on the fact that it’s not that simple. Younger, single women are getting older every day, and it is not clear that they are getting more Republican…

There is an opportunity among to attract women voters from the groups that Celinda Lake and Kellyanne Conway call the “Waitress Moms” and the “Alpha Strivers.” Though many “Multicultural Mavericks” are libertarians, it could be that they identify more with the Democratic Party than the GOP as a result of their parents, school, or community.

Hobby Lobby wasn’t really about birth control, it was about an abuse of government power

On January 8, 2012, former Clinton spokesperson in his putative role as objective moderator of a Republican presidential primary debate fired the first warning shot in what soon became known as the “War on Women.” He asked the candidates if birth control was included in the right to privacy and if states had the right to ban it.

In what was surely a total coincidence (totally, you guys!), just days later the Obama administration would declare the federal contraception mandate for all insurance-providing companies to provide copay-free birth control in their coverage.

The War was on, contraceptives instantly became a legal right (read: entitlement), anyone who opposed forcing companies to pay for them hated women, the term “slut” became both an intolerable slur and a badge of honor, the administration and the courts both carved out religious exemptions that shrill harpies decried as emerging theocracy, and men were suddenly illegitimate politically since only women were justified in voting on health issues.

All of this is, of course, ridiculous. But the issue is now so viscerally charged that it is untouchable in the public discourse. So let’s uncharge it with a hypothetical allegory.

WHAT IF…

As part of a new Healthy America plan, Congress passed a comprehensive nutrition, exercise, and health bill, including a federal mandate for all employers with over 50 employees that requires they have a cafeteria that provides balanced meals to all employees working at least 30 hours per week.

Obama’s War on Women: White House admits it pays female staffers less than males

Josh Earnest

The very first bill President Obama signed into law after he was sworn into office was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act on January 29, 2009. Obama touted the legislation as an opportunity to extend the statue of limitations on awarding women backpay when they found out they had been paid less than their male counterparts for doing the same job.

The public bill signing was the first time President Obama mentioned women made, on average, $.78 for every dollar men make.

LearnLiberty debunked that myth back in 2011.

But five years later, President Obama’s White House is still paying women less than their male counterparts — and they finally admitted it.

POLITICO reports:

The White House defended the gender pay gap among its own staffers Wednesday but acknowledged that it still has much more work to do to get to full equity between men and women.

“I wouldn’t hold up the White House as the perfect example here,” press secretary Josh Earnest said when asked about analyses of the latest data on White House staffers’ salaries that show the average salary for women to be nearly 13 percent lower than the average salary for men.

Hillary Clinton is a terrible person: Destroying a young girl’s life is not a laughing matter

The Democrats have had great success over the years in rallying votes from women, especially single women, by claiming that the Republicans are waging a “War on Women.”

In 2012, Obama won the vote of unmarried women by 67% to 31% using this tactic (although Romney won the vote of married women by 53% to 46%, who presumably either could take care of themselves, or rejected Big Daddy Government in favor of a traditional protector and provider, a husband).

As “proof” of this war Democrats point to the oft-debunked myth of a 77% “wage gap” between men and women in the workplace, GOP opposition to forcing taxpayers to fund contraception and, of course, the long-standing GOP support for the right of unborn children to take their first breath, as opposed to Democrats, who demand an uninhibited “right” to abortion under the rubric of a “woman’s right to choose.”

Yet if one wants to see the true face of a War on Women, one has to look no farther than the presumed front-runner for the 2016 Democrat Party presidential nomination, Hillary Rodham Clinton who, in 1975, volunteered to defend Thomas Alfred Taylor, one of two men accused of raping a 12-year old girl. Despite not being a public defender, and therefore under no obligation to take the case, Clinton readily accepted the case and attacked the task of getting her client acquitted.

To be sure, every accused person deserves a vigorous defense if they are going to be deprived of life, liberty, or property at the hands of the government. However, the justice system is ostensibly in place to find the truth, and punish the guilty.

That is not the path Hillary Rodham took.


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.