What a Real War on Women Looks Like

| March 5, 2012 | 4 Replies

It has become nearly an article of faith inside the Democratic Party and the MSM (a Venn diagram that consists of one large circle) that the Republicans have launched a “War on Women”. They have come to this belief because Republicans have, in a most dastardly fashion, said it is wrong for our government to force an employer to violate their religious beliefs in order to provide one small and particular aspect of health insurance to their employees.

As I said, dastardly.  The situation has reached such a level of crisis that a sitting Democratic Senator took to Twitter to ask his followers for their support in this “war”.

That “RT” in the tweet is short for “re-tweet”. What it means is Lautenberg wants everyone who follows him to send his tweet, picture of Rush Limbaugh attached, to all of their followers. It is his hope that thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people will see it, become enraged, and leap into the “War on Women” on his side.

But let’s step back for a moment and take a look at what a real War on Women looks like. I don’t want to diminish Senator Lautenberg’s crushingly logical argument nor the calm and reasoned fashion in which he delivered it. He’s a sitting Senator and, surely, a member of that august body wouldn’t stoop to a crude attack that focused on Rush Limbaugh’s physical appearance. That would be no better than a crude playground taunt. Worse, it would be bullying and, as the administration has stressed with a considerable expenditure of taxpayer money, bullying is wrong.

So let me set Lautenberg’s jibe aside and bring this piece in Time magazine on why you will not see women athletes representing Saudi Arabia in the 2016 Olympics.

Women in the Kingdom are legally prohibited from breaking a sweat over anything more strenuous than wearing the burka in 120 degree desert heat. To exercise publicly is to risk being smacked with the sticks of the religious police, or worse. Girls don’t expect to learn to swim, ride a bike or, god forbid, do gymnastics.

For a while in the 1990s, Saudi women had gyms where they could exercise, but in 2009 the government decided that Stairmasters and their ilk were gateways to female licentiousness and shuttered 153 women’s gyms.

A few weeks ago, Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report on the Saudi prohibition on women and sports. The report noted that some forward-thinking Saudi men, specifically Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, sponsored Saudi Arabia’s first women’s soccer team, the Jeddah Kings, in 2009. “But he abandoned the effort when media coverage of a women’s soccer tournament that year involving the Jeddah Kings and five other private teams caused a public backlash, with a hostile reaction to the players by some conservative Saudis,” according to the report.

That is what a real War on Women looks like. That is what is looks like when a government bends its power to making women a permanent underclass, a group of possessions and not people. Saudi women aren’t worried about contraceptives. They’re worried about being raped, publicly flogged, or murdered because their male relatives believed they had run afoul of a moral code that was antiquated in the 9th Century. If they do have daughters, they live with the reality that their little girl could be married off to a middle-aged man before she turns 9 years old or that she will be raped almost to death and they will be unable to report the rape because of the massive shame it would bring on their family.

Contraceptives? Saudi women would weep for joy at a chance to buy their own contraceptives with their own money without fear of being stoned to death for their moral heresies. They would happily lay down the $9 a month WalMart and Target ask for prescription contraceptives.

Here in America, we are so free that Frank Launtenberg and his Democratic pals can manufacture a “war” so that they can grab just a little more power for themselves and freedom from you. Teri Christoph drilled down to the real motivation behind their fake “War on Women”.

Knowing that women voters are leaving Obama, the left has deliberately waged a war designed to scare them into thinking their birth control will be taken from them. EMILY’s List calls these disenchanted women voters “defectors” and they’ll stop at nothing to get them back.

The use of the word “defector” by the left is supremely insulting. A defector is someone who switches allegiances, usually in a manner deemed to be traitorous. Got that? If you are a woman who voted for Obama in ’08 but don’t like what he’s done as president and don’t plan to vote for him again, you are considered a traitor by the left. Newsflash: Women are not born with a genetic allegiance to the Democrat party and its liberal causes. Plenty of us prefer to think for ourselves.

Democrats are running scared knowing that a significant number of women are wise to the fact that the economy has tanked, true unemployment is around 25 percent, and our president is wholly unequipped to deal with any of it. They also know that women voice their discontent at the ballot box. So they are waging this war against women. They use people like Sandra Fluke to distract from the real issues at stake this election season. They use women as pawns in their political game.

Don’t buy it, folks. There really is a War on Women, but it’s not being fought by Republicans, Catholics, or other people whose religious beliefs mean more to them than the progressive sense of entitlement. Frank Lautenberg should be ashamed of his crass attempt to gin up a “war” where none exists and his party should feel some electoral pain in November because of it.

Tags: , , ,

Category: The Social Issues

About the Author ()