-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2008/06/do-women-really-face-highest-glass.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
fucking clintons...
THAT'S the point John was trying to make. she might've made a big leap for women... but her whining about 'its hard!' takes away some of that credit, in my mind at least.
put another way... how many years do you think it'll be before we have a gay president?
I'm sure we'll have a woman (or two, or TWENTY even) in the oval office before THAT happens. you wanna compare glass ceilings??
Rachel Maddow for President
breaking news!!!
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/diebold_a...
okay, its from The Onion... scary enough to be true though ;-)
LA Times/Bloomberg National Poll:
Obama 49%
McCain 37%
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll...
McCrazy's Florida weapon hits the skids: Crist approval down.
http://www.miamiherald.com/458/story/580784.html
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/06/house_s...
I refuse the argument that being an African American is worse than being a Woman which is worse than being an Asian or Hispanic or Muslim or Indian or a gay man or a lesbian or a transsexual or.....
This type of argument is further evidence that we chose to DIVIDE our nation instead of trying to unite. Sorry John, but your argument is more about the specific woman involved instead of the larger issue.
Please, can't we just discuss all of this as hate speech and try to correct it by NOT taking sides?
.
She is doing NOTHING so far to help.
We will see how the Clinton's handle all of this and quite frankly I don't see them doing much, but we will see...
.
How exactly does an Obama supporter act if not with reasoned response? Oh, you must mean that I should agree with everything you think I should say? Shesssh...do you not realize that you can have a broader idea about all thing politic?
There is never merely ONE response nor do I feel any need to seek your approval for what I say or think. Please, remember, that this is about HILLARY & OBAMA, not me or you.
For goodness sakes, you are misreading my text and if this is the case, you should have asked me about it before going into an accusatory tirade on it.
Shesssh.
Something tells me that he is waiting for the Clinton's actions to catch up with what they may mouth.
Where have all the Hillbots gone?
No wonder they were so loud and angry.
(and honestly... maybe they aren't as wealthy as Obama's supporters? LOL... this is the Clintons we are talking about.)
Obama's supporters are more educated on average. But they are NOT wealthy or even middle-class on average.
Don't believe the bullshit media hype about Obama's supporters being a bunch of elitist champagne-sippers.
I have met a lot of Obama's campaign-workers. They're retirees living on small fixed incomes, struggling grad students, twenty-somethings who have difficulty paying their mortgages, middle-aged people worried as hell about their kid's college tuition.
These people all contributed five, ten , twenty bucks at a time as and when they could afford.
I have met people who contributed a few hundred bucks over months of giving ten or fifteen bucks whenever they could afford.
If anyone has wealthy supporters, it's Hillary. Her supporters may be working-class but her money comes from Big PACs and special interest groups.
Obama's supporters are NOT the smug elitists that the media would have you believe.
They're tough, scrappy and angry.
Don't fall for the bullshit.
Unfortunately the current climate in feminism doesn't encourage women to define their needs and take concrete action to fulfil those needs. Rather, what's currently in vogue is to push women to rant against perceived slights. This is seen as somehow empowering and kick-ass.
Contributing real dollars is taking concrete action and literally putting money where one's mouth is. That is something that the so-called feminists are simply not interested in doing.
In other words, white feminists today would rather rant and rave against sexism than actually do something to help their pet candidate.
Why the difference?
Dear John,
You have been such an inspiration to me during this campaign -- your commitment and your boundless enthusiasm made everything we accomplished in the last 17 months possible. So as I continue to make sure your voices are heard, I wanted to say a special thank you for all the hard work you did on my behalf.
Click here to watch my video message to you.
Thank you for everything,
Hillary
Her "thank you" message to me was an outstretched palm! (Or, less charitably, something of a middle finger)
And when Harriet Christian and Geraldine Ferraro say a bunch of racist crap on national TV, NOW, Feminist Majority, EMILY's List etc. don't even say a word to contradict them. Because again. white women are the only women who count.
And when Michelle Obama is attacked publicly, again you don't hear a peep from the feminists because Michelle Obama is not a poor put-upon blonde.
Racism: when men do it, feminists use it as a fighting point to rail against the patriarchy
When white women do it, it must be okay because white women are always victims, never perpetrators.
By the way, hey there my dear, you have been missed! Been OK?
This old windbag is on every program I tune to. This morning he was on Morning Joe, right now he is on Hardball. And on Sunday he was even on PBS McLaughlin Group. Doesn't this man have a life? He pops up everywhere! If you tied his hands behind his back he couldn't talk. Watch him bounce around waiting to interrupt someone and wave his hands and try to make us believe he knows what he is talking about. Love it when someone puts him in his place and then he giggles like he knew he was wrong and just fooling around. Sorry for the rant but this man really bothers me. He repeats and repeats things about Obama that have long been put aside by everyone else; Rev. Wright, flag pin, etc. But every time Buchanan talks about Obama he has to bring all of that up again. He is a repug hack and I am tired of him. Surely there are other pundits that aren't as grating that MSNBC and others could have on. Maybe he works for free.
My opinion is Hillary should have stood up for herself. Address the sexism right away, head-on, with some humour perhaps.
And considering one of the most sexist comments came from Bill Clinton himself-they are beating up on the girl (uh, no Bill, they were beating up on the front runner).
Hillary Clinton has yet to address this so called sexism in any kind of relevant way.
She should have addressed it herself, instead of complaining after the fact.
Enough already Hillary, we hear you but this is getting tedious. Let's discuss this along with other forms of prejudice and we will be a better nation for it.
The only glass ceilings there are in this country are for the LGBT community, muslims, and atheists.
As far as the Presidency is concerned, I doubt most everyone here will ever see an Asian-American president.
Hey, how you doing? I am not on too much but once in awhile something sparks my interest.
Glad to "see" you, you have been missed!
If so I will see if I can make arrangements to attend. Let me know if you're sure you will be "around"...
I have an idea, do you have an account on eBay?
Once you send it, I will respond with email info etc.
OK? Here's the link:
http://cgi.ebay.com/LEXON-Deep-Blue-Fly-DESIGNE...
You are also comparing the wrong problem(s) - some of which are caused by race.
In my experience, today racism hinders initial opportunity in ways that result in life-long barriers to economic progress. For example, early childhood health-care, school issues and arrest/incarceration differences. But, if you adjust your survey to account for socio-economic factors, the gaps between race at each level aren't that big. The indefensible societal failure is that too many minorities are artificially "held" at lower pay/education/social attainment levels. This keeps the overall pay gap between minorities and non-minorities high.
By contrast, gender discrimination, again in my experience, largely comes at a different point in the experience. Qualified girls and women are prevented from doing things. So, a high-school girl with the classes and the interests might be discouraged from taking AP math. Or a woman with clearly exceptional hands on experience in local, state and national politics as well as several national not-for-profits on the policy side looses opportunities because people don't like her pant-suits. Gender discrimination makes a pay/opportunity gap between men and women of all races at every socio-economic level.
Racism=prevented from getting the skills to qualify. Gender discrimination= prevented from using the skills you have.
Compare
That sixteen-year old woman was first informed, as a toddler, that she was sweet and pretty and could play with dollies and saucepans- she was given a pink tricycle. (take a look at the bicycle section at Toys R us sometime). She was programmed to stay safe and not try exciting things, because a girl stays home and is quiet and agreeable, whereas a boy who tackles things is laughingly applauded as "all boy" and "a real go-getter." Sooner or later, she learns not to try. Once she started school, the focus was how good girls are in language arts- she gets told that girls just aren't good in science and math. The teacher responded to boys and tried to get them involved, and fewer girls got called on. By third grade she was worried about her weight, because that's what girls do- try to take up smaller space in the world. By fifth grade she was trying on makeup, because it's important to look your best- not like how you really look. By seventh grade she was trying to attract boys and worrying about fashion, because by then it was clear who was really important and it was also clear what girls were expected to do. In the meantime, a boy was told he was naturally smart in math and science (somehow he never got told he was less capable in language arts). A much wider range of behavior was tolerated because boys just naturally have to be rowdy, don't they? Boys also tended to get a larger geographic area to live in, because girls are natural targets and boys don't face the same risks. (Insert unladylike snort here.) Magazines for girls focus on how to interact "appropriately" with boys, how to apply makeup, how to fix hair, latest fashions, and the heartbreak of acne. Because the goal, of course, is always to look good and get a guy. Movies end with a couple getting together and for some reason, that's a lot more important for her than for him- of course, GUY movies have the hero saving the day with incredible derring-do and CGI- after which, of course, he goes off for more derring-do while she's been derring-done.
Yes, you can point to exceptions, and fairly easily. That doesn't remove the level of pressure exerted by society as a whole.
I see what you're saying, and I'd never put down the level of discrimination that young black males experience. I just think you don't understand how much discrimination any young woman has already faced by the time she's sixteen. Social pressures and expectations make it harder for her to even think about trying to gain the skills to qualify, and then after that, she's prevented from using the skills. And it's all done silently, invisibly, but in plain view for those who pay attention.
but this talking point is a little offensive to blacks
this i find offensive ... is it too much to call black people black people
blacks is not a noun
when you use the adjective as the noun it strips what's being described of it's essence ... in this case the essence is humanity ... come on
A glass ceiling is an invisible barrier based on people's inability to imagine women in certain leadership roles. A glass ceiling is not a claim that sexism in the workplace is worse or more egregious or more contemptible than racism. It just happens to be a term about women.
And the highest, hardest glass ceiling for women (since that's who the phrase traditionally refers to) is the executive -- the presidency. That doesn't mean I think it's a good reason to give Senator Clinton money now, but I don't think she's claiming what you think she is.
I think it's a given that when people talk about the glass ceiling, they are talking about women getting to the top in the business world.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=94AF_-RIl0E&feature=...
From Salon.com via Firedoglake:
there’s just no getting around the fact that Obama — when seeking the nomination — vowed to support a filibuster of any bill that contains telecom immunity, and his failure to do that here will be a patent breach of that commitment. There’s still time for him to adhere to that promise.
Obama’s offices:
Senate DC office: (202) 224-2854
Senate DC fax: (202) 228-4260
Campaign: (866) 675-2008 (choose option 6)
No, black lesbians have the highest ceiling.
That is why Barbara Jordan chose to just be a black woman.
Brilliant congresswoman.
Horrible c**t (in honor of George Carlin)