Seriously, that's the title of her column today:
"Hysterical Women for Kerry" I became so angry as I read it, that I felt I should send her a letter. But I want some help with it, because it's really long. Please read her column, and then my letter (below the jump...)
Your latest column,
"Hysterical Women for Kerry", is so insulting that I hardly know where to begin. So I'll begin at the beginning, with a disclosure that I am a woman, and I support Kerry for President.
Rosie the Riveter was a great symbol and propaganda tool for the women at home during WWII. They did indeed sacrifice their "me time" for the war effort to make bombs, rockets, etc. Without that sacrifice, the soldiers might have been ill-equipped for their missions, and their service to our country should be remembered with reverence. WWII was won; Rosie is gone. Some went back to the kitchen, and some stayed in the workforce.
Today, there is another, different war that the U.S. is waging. The War on Terror is a very different kind of war. The enemy we face is not always state-sponsored. It is mobile, dangerous, and when one person is killed or captured, another (if not 2 or 3) will take the deceased person's place. This is a separate war from the War in Iraq. That war was sold to the American people, based on faulty intelligence. No WMD was found, and that Saddam's weapons programs were diminishing, yet the death toll of soldiers and civilians, as well as the cost to the U.S. is still rising. This does not seem to be a war that we can decisively win. There will always be radical fringe groups that will terrify the general public. They will always occupy states that fight terrorism, and states that "support" terrorism. Should women forever forgo women's rights issues because of this never-ending war? Should we Americans forgo our civil liberties because of this never-ending war?
I am not a celebrity. I am not self-absorbed. In fact, I am so worried about the future of our country, that I have actually had nightmares in which George W. Bush was elected. (There are too many reasons to elaborate in this letter.) I do not support banning all guns. I have no children or bodyguards. I am not a teacher, but I am in a union; although, I am by no means a "bigwig". I went to an excellent public school. I support protecting the environment, and conserving our energy resources. (I live in an apartment, and I own a Saturn coupe; no jets for me.) I thought that the Afghanistan invasion was a worthy cause, as I had been aware for years what the Taliban had done to restrict women's rights as they gained power. (Thanks to my 10th grade World History teacher, Mrs. Kay.) Not to mention that al Qaeda was thought to be there, in large numbers. Then, almost overnight, it seemed that Bush and company couldn't stop talking about Saddam, and what a threat he was to our nation. Yellowcake, aluminum tubes, and satellite photos were presented to us, talk of a smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud swirled about, and the interim reports of the U.N. weapons inspectors were disregarded because Saddam must have been misleading them. They had to leave Iraq, or face the Shock and Awe of the U.S. Well, it turns out that the American people were misled. There were no WMD, and the WMD programs and related activites were withering. Yes, Saddam was a bad guy who did horrible things, but is that the litmus test of invading another nation? I do love our troops; I know some who served in Afghanistan, and are going to Iraq. That scares me to death. Who's apologizing to terrorists? Do you mean al Qaeda or the insurgents in Iraq? I was never a human shield in Iraq, or any other country with a torture-loving dictator. I am certainly a feminist, in that I believe that the sexes should be treated equally. I don't expect men to start having babies, obviously, but I don't want to be fired because I requested maternity leave. And, I support the idea of paternity leave, as well. I have never claimed to speak for all women, so I believe they should decide for themselves with regards to their own bodies. I am personally uncomfortable with the idea of having an abortion, but I know that many women have found that it was the best option for them. Who am I to judge? I was not in their shoes. I was once an abstinent teen, but only until I thought I was in love. Silly me. I was lucky, though, and never became pregnant. I had a few scares, and I know the fear. It was then that my anti-choice position changed. If I was 18, 19, or even now, 23, the major emotion in me would still be fear and apprehension, not excitement. No matter what women decide to do with their bodies, they should have the option of abortion. It is a woman's personal choice. You take that option away, and there is only one option: Deliver the baby, or face the consequences. (Have you ever been in a room in which all the women agree on this, or any women's issue? I don't know if that's possible.) This President has indicated that he would appoint judges to the Supreme Court who would vote to restrict the rights women have. That scares me. And so does the following...
More than 250 world leaders in all fields - including 85 heads of state and government - have signed a statement endorsing a UN plan adopted 10 years ago to ensure every woman's right to education, health care, and to make choices about childbearing.
But US President George Bush's administration refused to sign because the statement mentions "sexual rights."
A decade after the landmark International Conference on Population and Development, the statement was handed yesterday to Deputy Secretary-General Louise Frechette who called it "a brilliant idea" that will renew the commitment of governments and leaders to achieve the goals that 179 nations agreed to in Cairo.
The US was one of the 179 nations that backed the Cairo plan of action. Former Colorado senator Tim Wirth, who was in the forefront of helping to draft the 20-year Cairo blueprint as a top official on the US delegation, helped spearhead the global statement in his current job as president of the United Nations Foundation.
Source
Women don't deserve this kind of treatment from this administration. For all the support W garnered in 2000 from women, I'm surprised he's treating this issue so callously.
You accuse Kerry's sister, Peggy, of trying to "scare up female voters to oppose President Bush's `war against women'", and in the next sentence you try to scare your readers with the images of "Islamofascists" chopping off heads and kidnapping, and "malefactors" crossing our own borders. You're right. How dare those women be worried about themselves, and a drastic change regarding our right to choose?! They should be more worried about Bush's lack of action to harden our borders and reckless orders that led to more terrorists being recruited.
With millions of single mothers, why shouldn't they be paid the same as a man for doing the same job? Shouldn't we pay them more, so they can keep that job, and not need or be tempted to go on welfare? (Assuming that welfare is tempting, of course. My father was a pastor, but the small church couldn't pay him enough, so my parents had to enroll in welfare for food stamps. My mother and father received welfare benefits for as short a period of time as possible because being on the welfare rolls was not something they were proud of. No, it was something that was necessary so my sisters and I could get the food we needed.)
In any event, if you have a problem with celebrities (or teachers?) speaking their minds for a candidate they support, then please just say so. Do not put all women who support Kerry in that same category as your hypothetical women or as the celebrity women. Voting is a right; one that women had to suffer and fight tooth and nail to get.
You chose to use your forum to attack those women. It is embarrassing to hear you try to demoralize what these women are saying and doing, simply because you think they should be talking about something else. Yes, I cringed a bit when I read what Cameron Diaz said, but at least she's out there, trying to mobilize women. The way your column reads, we might as well just shut up, and let the men-folk take care of this war business because what we say doesn't matter.
I disagree. We each have our own voice, and we should be free to speak about whatever subject we choose, including women's rights, the Iraq war, education, heath care, or anything else that concerns us. The noise of war should not suppress our voices, or force us to forget about what we care about. In fact, it should mobilize us to start shouting, lest it drowns us out.