Alright, girls, that's enough
by digby
This isn't the first time I've heard this sort of thing lately...
At the end of the Times piece, Senator Roy Blunt suggests that the new champions of women may be “in serious danger of overplaying their hand,” and I actually think he has a point. While I certainly praise the support that Democrats have displayed for women’s issues in this election cycle, I’m starting to be turned off by the giddiness with which they’ve taken on the mantle of lady defender. I admit that the issue of political tone is small potatoes compared to the very important programs and services at stake in these debates, but I’m still a little uncomfortable with the unequivocal friend-or-foe rhetoric that has come to dominate this conversation.
Yes, well, he would be. This isn't about him. And everyone knows that "lady defender" is just a little bit well ... you know.
For the sake of victims of domestic violence, VAWA should be reauthorized as soon as possible, but Democrats need to remember that we all know they’re in the midst of a tough election contest, too. Fight the good fight for women, but please, leave the noble posturing at home.
That's right, it's a tough election fight and the last thing Democrats need is to look like all they care about is a bunch of whiny bitches. Let's not lose our heads here.
Believe me, this is not an uncommon reaction. How do I know this? Because I've been watching this go down for my entire adult life. Any time "women's issues" start to become prominent, a certain kind of liberal male gets very nervous. The stuff I heard during the 1992 "year of the woman" election was enough to curl my hair. And I see no reason to believe anything's changed. I've already seen plenty of evidence that it hasn't.
I'll be looking for a major Stanley Greenberg poll any day now showing that allowing all these women's issues to dominate is alienating the American Holy Grail --- the white male. We'll be back to fetishizing NASCAR and fightinterrists with our bare hands right quick.
.