À LA MODEST :: Conservative Indie Fashion Style Blogger - a la modest - a la mode st. - conservative indie style blog blogger

So Superstorm Sandy (newscasters should’ve just continued referring to it as “Frankenstorm!”) is almost over, and election campaigning will soon be back on track. (Not to gloss over Sandy—my thoughts and prayers go out to those who were in its path and were hurt or negatively affected by it.) How do you all feel about the phrase “war on women” being tossed around? Do you feel that politicians might just be using this idea as bait to get more women voters? If you consider yourself a well-informed feminist, would you vote for a candidate primarily based on social, economic, or foreign policy issues?

I personally do not like politics for politics sake, and to use my gender as a weapon for campaigning sickens me the worst. First of all, women are part of the collective human race—the same goes for every ethnic background. To decline a person from being chosen for employment primarily based on gender or race is unjust. On the flip side, to promote a person primarily based on their gender or race is also unjust. Considering that, how do you think women are being attacked from an economic standpoint—that is, if you even believe this discrimination still exists in our country?

The second reason why I hate the appeals toward women as part of a political campaign is that I care about mostly the same things men care or should care about when choosing a presidential candidate. To say anything else would be categorizing me as a separate entity not equal to men. As a woman, I should care about the economy for the future of my children and theirs as much as my husband cares about the economy to support his immediate family. To lure me in with women-only ads belittles my intelligence, leading me to believe you think this is the only—if not the primary arena I’m concerned with. For instance, these ads say that abortion is a women’s-only issue. When has it been possible to conceive without a man (or his seed) involved?

Why is it that Planned Parenthood seems to be the only place they make you think you can get affordable “women’s services,” excluding abortion? I don’t use them, but I was able to get my BCPs for $9/mo (with no insurance)! Now that I have good insurance that my husband and I picked out, I get them for free. That’s about the same deal as Planned Parenthood, if not better.

My dear fellow women, I do not need to tell you what you must do. All I want to warn you is that your world should not be limited to what they show you in a political ad. Some politicians will bait you by scaring you, making you mad, or making you feel like a victim. That is because these politicians rely on our estrogen-fueled emotions, and you need to prove that you can be as logical as men when making rational decisions. That kind of thinking, as well as our abilities, should determine our employment and our salaries—not because we are women. If your being hired is just because of your gender (or race), then you are merely part of a quota that needed to be filled.

My husband and I are not employed, but we are now proud small business owners—thank God for capitalism! Part of the reason why we felt a need to start a business together was because of his having been laid off by his job. Some of the people who weren’t laid off were arguably less qualified, but they were also definitely minorities. Maybe the company should’ve taken note that he was married to a then-jobless student minority before laying him off. I don’t need the government to make special arrangements to force employers to hire me even if I am a slacker or somehow less qualified than other applicants. I hope you get my point, despite my harsh tone.

Some time ago, during the height of my involvement with college, I used to buy into Marxist ideals. I have to say, they were always just ideals and never a plausible reality to me. Milton Friedman’s Capitalism and Freedom won me over. It is scary to see an America unfolding into a communist country, without the majority of its people even realizing it. A tactful politician can mask the ugliest thing you can think of and make you eat it up like cake.

I think the only war on women that exists (at least in the coming election) is the way that politicians make you think there is one and use it to their advantage. It’s like somebody’s trying to hypnotize us by waving pretty pearl necklaces in our faces, distracting us from all other issues and covering up huge past and pres(id)ent blunders.

You might not believe me if I say that I am not writing this politically to support a specific candidate. You’re partially right. I do know who I want to win (and so should you by now, being so close to election day). However, writing for women and as a woman, I want to preserve the integrity of our women as much as I can by telling you not to vote for a candidate because of our women’s issues. Our issues may be very important, but wise people (and even crafty terrorists like Bin Laden) know that to destroy a nation’s economy is to destroy a nation completely.

Related posts:

5 Responses to “War on Women: What Would Women Do?”

  1. Laura@forthoseabouttoshop.ca

    I’m so glad you wrote this post! “War on Women” is such a misnomer and assumes that all women want the same things! It assumes all women are liberal, pro-abortion, want to work outside the home full-time rather than raise their own children, and so many other assumptions that are anathema to many women. You’re right about America unfolding into a communist country, ever since 9/11 it has been willing to sacrifice freedom in exchange for “security” and government protection: this is the definition of communism! Thank you for posting.

  2. Matt

    First of all, Laura, can we please clarify that NO ONE is pro-ARBORTION? I think it’s safe to say that both Pro-LIFE and Pro-CHOICE voters, male and female, are for as FEW abortions in this country as possible. I hate how the both movements paint each other in the absolute worst light, and campaigns on either side are equally divisive and polarizing. It’s manipulative and unfounded in an area with so much gray.

    Secondly, in addition to affordable BCPs, Planned Parenthood offers sliding-scale checkups, tests and general OB/GYN services that many women cannot obtain anywhere else. Basically, compare a $40 sliding scale fee at PP to a $300-600 bill at a good OB/GYN. I’m not a woman, but I’ve heard you are supposed to get these kind of things checked once a year, right? Also, the physician’s at PP tend to offer consultation for women on a variety of other general health issues, because the women they are seeing cannot afford any other doctor’s visit, and walk-in facilities like Patient First charge hugely overblown prices for the “convenience” of not having health insurance. Not to mention, for men, the difference in cost of a vasectomy at Planned Parenthood vs. the private sector is absolutely staggering! For couples who simply cannot afford to have and care for any more children than they already do, and considering a woman can only safely be on birth control for so long, this is one of the best abortion deterrents out there!

    So, until there is a more viable option, this remains a HUGE concern for many women and is definitely a factor that weighs in on how women vote, regardless of their standing on the abortion issue.

    I’m not saying repairing the economy and proper stewardship of our country’s tax dollars isn’t the biggest issue in this election. I agree with you there, but you can’t discount Planned Parenthood because BCP is $9/month at Target and you don’t agree with every service PP performs… It’s a very real worry for a lot of women.

  3. Rob

    Planned Parenthood allows and even encourages abortion as a gender selection mechanism. There is proof: http://www.lifenews.com/2012/05/31/second-video-shows-planned-parenthood-urging-sex-selection-abortion/

    This behavior is despicable, and any benefits created by this evil institution are overshadowed by it. This is murder, Matt. End of story.

  4. Matt

    If you’ll notice, my comments were not weighing in on the abortion issue at all and I did say UNTIL there are other viable options besides PP for the very necessary services I described above, particularly for uninsured or profoundly poor women, this will be a factor that they will consider as women in this election. Abortions aside, some women rely on PP as their ONLY source of medical care. Stating fact, Rob.

  5. Rachel @ à la Modest

    It’s nice to hear from your point of view, Laura! I never really thought of communism primarily as sacrificing freedom in exchange for security. Although, when you think about it, communism is a form of stealing (taking away people’s opportunities to rise and choose) for the sake of control and promise of stability.

    I do no think there should be any shame in a woman’s choosing to stay at home and raise kids. That is even being attacked now by extreme leftists, rendering stay-at-home moms useless to the economy—as if “pro choice” was never these critics’ platform. It’s ironic nonetheless.

Leave a Reply

Creative Commons License
ÀLAMODEST / à la Modest / à la Mode St. / alamodest / ALAMODEST / a la Modest / a la Mode St. by Rachel Dahl is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

This site is about Indie / Conservative / Modest / Modesty / Christian / Christianity / Faith / God / Feminism / Fashion / Style / Indie / Alternative / Clothing / Conservative / Republican / Marriage