HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » “If...” A Dog Whistle Onl...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:01 PM

“If...” A Dog Whistle Only Women Can Hear

The “binders full of women” meme took over the national discourse to the point that it was referred to as “Binder-gate” by Joe Scarborough. One pundit pointed out that he didn't notice the odd phrasing, but his wife did.

And if you go back and watch that portion of the debate, you will hear the real reason why this phrase—which was just really the slip of the tongue—resonated like a high-pitched bell with women.

When asked about equal pay for equal work, instead of answering the question directly Mitt Romney sidetracked the question entirely, and said "If you’re going to have women in the workforce…”

Contrast this statement with the way Mitt talks about his run for the presidency. He almost always uses the word “when” like it's a foregone conclusion that he will win--votes be damned. He acts like this election is a hostile takeover, and he is speaking to a boardroom of people who used to be in power but are now cowering under his gaze just hoping that they can keep their jobs and that he won't declare war against their competitors.

But when referring to working women, he used the non-declarative phrasing “If...” Mitt Romney lives in a world where women don't have to work. They choose to work. Most women live in the world where they have to work to make ends meet. I know exactly one stay-at-home mom, and she works freelance while homeschooling her children.

Mitt lives in a world where you can be the CEO of a company for twenty years and still not know one woman qualified to fill a cabinet position. I can name at least ten women who hold such qualifications and that's in my family alone. Don't get me started on the talented and intelligent women who are my friends and co-workers.

He then goes on to say that he’s going to create so many jobs that employers are going to be anxious to hire women. But hiring women is the foregone conclusion. Who wouldn't want the same productivity at three-quarters of the cost? It’s a free-market dream. But it’s a financial nightmare for women.

So in the light of these statements and the ever revealing truth that the scenario he put forth was a fictional account of the events that he concocted to fit his narrative, it's easy to see that the “binders full of women” comment was a crystallization of the ridiculousness of a man who is unwilling to support equal pay for women.

So this is what we heard. This is why it resonates. “If…” is the dog whistle only women could hear.

80 replies, 12365 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 80 replies Author Time Post
Reply “If...” A Dog Whistle Only Women Can Hear (Original post)
BeliQueen Oct 2012 OP
madaboutharry Oct 2012 #1
BeliQueen Oct 2012 #2
fleur-de-lisa Oct 2012 #8
SaveAmerica Oct 2012 #23
Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2012 #28
AllieO Oct 2012 #65
whttevrr Oct 2012 #35
Blue_In_AK Oct 2012 #3
Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2012 #30
ailsagirl Oct 2012 #69
qanda Oct 2012 #4
BeliQueen Oct 2012 #5
Samjm Oct 2012 #6
SalviaBlue Oct 2012 #7
barnabas63 Oct 2012 #9
StatGirl Oct 2012 #10
obamanut2012 Oct 2012 #68
lindysalsagal Oct 2012 #11
Faygo Kid Oct 2012 #12
CitizenPatriot Oct 2012 #13
YayArea Oct 2012 #14
TahitiNut Oct 2012 #15
Chemisse Oct 2012 #18
TahitiNut Oct 2012 #42
lunatica Oct 2012 #50
Tigress DEM Oct 2012 #57
Dustlawyer Oct 2012 #16
Chemisse Oct 2012 #19
Cha Oct 2012 #17
NBachers Oct 2012 #20
ocd liberal Oct 2012 #21
Bradical79 Oct 2012 #22
Debbie357 Oct 2012 #24
Liberalynn Oct 2012 #25
XemaSab Oct 2012 #26
ProudProgressiveNow Oct 2012 #27
courseofhistory Oct 2012 #29
Stargazer09 Oct 2012 #31
xxqqqzme Oct 2012 #32
XtopherXtopher Oct 2012 #33
nyhuskyfan Oct 2012 #34
whttevrr Oct 2012 #36
Kalidurga Oct 2012 #37
DallasNE Oct 2012 #38
Blanks Oct 2012 #55
JHB Oct 2012 #56
francophile Oct 2012 #39
Nostradammit Oct 2012 #40
tclambert Oct 2012 #41
quaker bill Oct 2012 #43
murphyj87 Oct 2012 #44
bonniebgood Oct 2012 #45
TBF Oct 2012 #48
Major Hogwash Oct 2012 #46
TBF Oct 2012 #47
txwhitedove Oct 2012 #49
OmahaBlueDog Oct 2012 #51
Mc Mike Oct 2012 #52
Helen Reddy Oct 2012 #53
Patiod Oct 2012 #54
dynasaw Oct 2012 #58
louis c Oct 2012 #59
Tigress DEM Oct 2012 #60
Starry Messenger Oct 2012 #61
DirkGently Oct 2012 #62
libodem Oct 2012 #63
RainDog Oct 2012 #64
kurtzapril4 Oct 2012 #66
ProfessionalLeftist Oct 2012 #67
LiberalAndProud Oct 2012 #70
dchill Oct 2012 #71
pointsoflight Oct 2012 #72
skiptaylor Oct 2012 #73
calimary Oct 2012 #74
Lunabelle Oct 2012 #75
woodsprite Oct 2012 #76
KarenElissa Oct 2012 #77
WinkyDink Oct 2012 #78
Hekate Oct 2012 #79
patrice Oct 2012 #80

Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:04 PM

1. Did you write this?

You should send this as a letter to the editor. It is very good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:07 PM

2. Thank you. Yes I did.

I'll send it to the Washington Post today. Thanks for the encouragement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Reply #2)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:39 PM

8. It is really a great piece!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Reply #2)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:34 PM

23. I was going to say the same, I was waiting for the link to the journalist

who wrote it! Nice one!

And you're right on, someone I know was completely baffled about why there was such a fuss about the binder incident and he's a dood. I think you're on to something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Reply #2)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 11:11 PM

28. Definitely should be in print for the DC Villagers to read over their morning coffee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Reply #2)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 12:31 PM

65. Articulate and accurate

Wow - this is so on target, please do what you can to get this message out - I had a very frustrating discussion about this topic with male colleagues yesterday, who really were missing the point of the binder message and dismissed the entire topic with "neither of these guys have that much power - okay, I live in Brownbackistan (aka KS) so yes some people are still living in the past, I attribute it to denial, but I digress. Please get your message out - J

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 12:42 AM

35. My first thought too!

Whoever wrote this is definitely a writer.

Kudos BeliQueen!

I did not catch that part about 'if'. I have guy ears. Thank you for a great clarification!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:08 PM

3. I noticed that "if" as soon as I heard it.

Mitt would probably prefer the alternative, I'm sure. I don't think he has any understanding of women and women's issues at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Reply #3)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 11:13 PM

30. The main issue for women in the workplace is being treated like women in the workplace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_In_AK (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:23 PM

69. He is 65 years old and hasn't a clue about women's issues

Nor does he CARE, for that matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:12 PM

4. This is awesome, BeliQueen

And, I agree that it belongs as an editorial for a newspaper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to qanda (Reply #4)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:15 PM

5. Thanks, qanda

Notice I mentioned someone just like you in the post?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:16 PM

6. I noticed it too

Yes, I'm a woman. I heard it LOUD and clear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:23 PM

7. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:39 PM

9. I posted about this yesterday...

...although you do a better job of explaining it! Yes, I caught it too and it makes me sick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:56 PM

10. This is great! And the next word is . . .

"you". Who is the "you" that is "going to have women in the workforce"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StatGirl (Reply #10)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:23 PM

68. I caught that, too

YOU not WE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 06:55 PM

11. The big "If" stood out to me that night, and I told a friend about it.

He obviously doesn't see many women where he "works" in his private equity firms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:16 PM

12. "IF" - I noted that too, and that was the big miss by the media. Big.

That was telling. "If you’re going to have women in the workforce…”

Incredible. Maybe I'm sensitized to it as a 60+ guy because my mother had no choice but to work, to raise two sons alone.

"If you’re going to have women in the workforce…”

Where's the outrage? This is THE MOST revealing thing Romney has yet said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:21 PM

13. well said! I heard it too. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:43 PM

14. Are you talking about the same dog whistle that Mitt installed on the roof of his car?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:43 PM

15. Does that mean I'm a woman?

That's news to me. I heard the "if" and responded with a "you fucking moron!"

(Checking crotch.) Nope. Still a guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TahitiNut (Reply #15)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:52 PM

18. Good point. Many men are also tuned in to signs of discrimination against women.

Besides, 'if' women are going to be in the workplace? This screams out 'weird', just the way a lot of his other comments do.

Does he not know that the vast majority of women are already out there working? Does his circle of rich friends have all stay-at-home wives, or maybe he just came through a time warp from the 1950s?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #18)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 06:33 AM

42. It was only for a couple of years in the late 40s and early 50s

... that I actually lived in a "world" where the Mommy was at home and made lunch (while I watched Soupy Sales) and I could walk home for lunchtime and then go back to school.

Cookies.

Baked bread.

Dinnertime with all three of us around the table. SUNDAY dinners with extended family.

Even then, it was NOT "Leave It To Beaver" ... and Father NEVER "knew best" (he was abusive).

Disney brainwashed the entire country. If there's an "evil" (in the war against women), it's Disney. "Some day my Prince will come." The combination of two DISGUSTING and DESPICABLE memes ... that a female must be "rescued" and is dependent upon a male for "success" AND that there's anything 'good' about ROYALTY -- the most destructive and corrupting invention of humankind over our entire history.

I don't know why I've NEVER really known a 'normal' world where women weren't critical to both the survival of the family AND the well-being of any workplace. But I haven't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TahitiNut (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:33 AM

50. yeah, but what a guy!

Thanks for hearing the it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TahitiNut (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 10:02 AM

57. No, just a PROGRESSIVE Man with better than average hearing.

Hearing that is channeled through your brain, not your crotch or your church doctrine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:46 PM

16. You would think that with all of the people he has met on the campaign trail, men & women, that he

would have learned enough not to be so out of touch. Certainly, by now he would have learned that at least 90% of American families need both parents to work. Since he appears as out of touch, if not more, than before, it must mean that either he NEVER listens to what they have to say, or never does actually talk to voters who are not in the same social circles as he and his petty, pampered wife, or, worst of all, just doesn't give a shit. It really takes some doing to have campaigned as long as he has and still be as completely out of touch as he is!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #16)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:57 PM

19. That is so true.

To meet so many people and not really listen to them or to try and understand their lives takes - I think - a deep-rooted indifference, and most likely an outright contempt for the people whose votes he is wooing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:48 PM

17. Excellent, BeliQueen, thank you so much for

highlighting the extremely loud dog whistles from Romney that Women can hear Loud and Clear!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:13 PM

20. Excellent writing, BeliQueen, and thank you for posting this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:18 PM

21. Brilliant!

That "If" gave me a literal gut punch when I heard him say it.
If?
IF??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ocd liberal (Reply #21)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:30 PM

22. Gave me a gut punch when I read this great piece...

...and realized that the "if women are going to be in the workplace" phrase didn't stand out to me at all. Wow

Excellent piece.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:41 PM

24. WOW!!! Well said!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:42 PM

25. Excellent piece

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:52 PM

26. Really well stated... What he said would be totally progressive 50 years ago

but it's 2012, and what he said was offensive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 11:07 PM

27. Great job! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 11:13 PM

29. Also, binders full of mail order brides

Last edited Fri Oct 19, 2012, 11:45 PM - Edit history (1)

comes to mind or better yet, "catalogs". It is insulting to me as a woman that (1) he didn't know about or how to recruit women to his administration as if it were a completely foreign concept (I suppose he was surrounded by 99% men) or that his supposedly women oriented wife didn't suggest it (2) the women candidates where brought to HIM by women's groups. He didn't seek them out.

And "if" implies that although I think women shouldn't be in the workplace, "if" they insist....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 11:41 PM

31. You are right on target!

Love this post. Thank you for expressing my feelings so well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Fri Oct 19, 2012, 11:46 PM

32. 'If' made me angry.

But I was not surprised. Through his LDS indoctrination, women are 2nd class persons. Their primary function is as incubator. That is his primary 'go to' position. He would have to be actively involved in the world outside his privileged bubble. He isn't and has never has been. Which is why I do not trust him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 12:27 AM

33. I heard "if" and thought... "seriously dude?"

The first time I met a woman who DIDN'T work full-time outside the home, I was 22. A rich friend of mine had introduced me to his mother: a lovely and hardworking housewife. I thought about it for days after that, feeling a little ignorant — and underprivileged — for thinking all grown women worked a paying job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 12:35 AM

34. Not only that...

But he went from that "if" to saying that those women who are in the workforce need special accomodations to allow them to go home and cook dinner (he told a specific anecdote about one of his employees, but that was his underlying point). Stunning that he pretty much got away with that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nyhuskyfan (Reply #34)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 01:02 AM

36. Missed the "if..."

But I heard the condescension in the overall reply. I may have spoke words to my tv...

He dodged the question and insulted women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 01:49 AM

37. It's amazing how quick my ears shut down when I know...

that a speaker is about to embark on a long winded speech full of BS. It was about 3 seconds into his BS speech, which I was sure was going to be steaming pile of lies anyway. So, I heard "When I was elected Governor of Massa.." then I watched his hand gestures and facial expressions and watched the audience reaction and the reaction of the woman who asked the question. She seemed quite devastated, her question didn't get answered. The quiet discomfort of the audience was palatable. No one was buying the story. The knew they weren't buying and like me probably not sure why they weren't.

I heard the part about the woman who wanted to leave before 7 so she could go make dinner and be there for her children. And I was like yeah about that, kids get home way before 5 pm most anyway. Mine were home by 2 pm and 3 pm. middle school and high school let out an hour earlier than grade school. So, I guess he has no idea what times public schools are likely to let out either.

And his story about those binders was a fabrication anyway. He didn't ask for them. He was given them. And he apparently didn't hire anyone that had a resume in that binder anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:29 AM

38. And Made All Of The More Delicious Because It Didn't Happen As Romney Says

A group called MassGAP forced this binder on then Governor-elect Romney. His staff had nothing to do with the binder. Why he would think he could get away with somebody not blowing the whistle on his lie just boggles the mind.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1567383

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #38)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 09:37 AM

55. You'd think after the young weasely one on his ticket...

Was chastised for his marathon time; that he'd know how quickly these things can be caught.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blanks (Reply #55)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 09:48 AM

56. He's counting on simply brazening it out

After all, it's what got him where he is today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:48 AM

39. Non-discriminant

Yes - "if" was wrong. - it is not a matter of choice.
Yes - "binders full of women" was also wrong - objectifying women.
But IMHO the core issue is nondiscrimination. Why have separate binders for women?
Kathleen's declaration that she has separate binders (for organizing work) for "family, finances, office, home, dog" is apples and oranges. They are not mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive like men and women are. It is a wrong PRACTICE to have folders separate for men and women because it is DISCRIMINATORY.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to francophile (Reply #39)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 05:51 AM

40. Welcome to DU francophile!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 06:27 AM

41. If you're going to allow women to vote . . .

you're going to miss the opportunity to experience a Mitt Romney presidency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 06:36 AM

43. Nicely said

and you are right, being male, I did not hear it that way, but do recall the words. I did get that there was alot of patronizing stuff in there regardless. I got that women need to get married and be home cooking dinner or the kids will buy AR-15s and go on rampages in movie theaters.... That seemed fairly off the wall to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 07:11 AM

44. Mitt Zombie did not HAVE binders of women...

Mitt Zombie IS a binder of women, just as BTK was a binder of women. Mitt Zombie wants to bind women and take them back to the 1950s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 07:15 AM

45. But But But the poles say women are flipping to

romney in droves. the poles are tied in some swing states, and romeny is ahead because women
are flipping. "Nice reason" when the machine company they own flip all the votes. You just know all the old SS and Medicare people in florida want to end SS and Medicare. And all those women want their boss "If" they have to work, to tell them if they can have Birth control pills.
Bookmark this BeliQueen:
Romney will still Ohio, Virgina and Florida.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bonniebgood (Reply #45)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:13 AM

48. He'll win Florida -

Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina are wide open. Yes, if they are able to do something with the voting machines then we may be in trouble - but there is a bright light being shown on that now so maybe it won't be so easy for them to get away with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 07:59 AM

46. Excellent analysis.

Romney does constantly refer to his time "when I am President", as if it is a foregone conclusion.

He has a huge surprise waiting for his ass in just 3 weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:10 AM

47. Very good analysis. Women in the workforce are an afterthought

for Mitt. His preference is to hire white males very much like himself. Contrast that to President Obama. He doesn't need to have someone find him resumes and put them in a binder - he knows competent women and appoints them (Dept of Labor, Supreme Court). It isn't some big deal of "finding" women who are competent - he knows he has plenty of folks who are competent in his inner circle and he finds appropriate people for job openings - no matter what their gender or race.

Mitt views women as wives and baby-making machines first, and if they are not in that role then they might be looking for a job. If so they will be a secretary and he will pay them as little as possible. This is the way he thinks - and I'll be damned if we are going back to the 1950s again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:24 AM

49. Perfect! I heard everything he said that night and was hollering back at him. I've worked for

44 years with only one year off due to health reasons during a pregnancy. There was no "if" I would be working, it was always a necessity. Romney is completely out of touch with real American lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:35 AM

51. Very well written and insightful

The use of "if" is very revealling of his worldview.

I'll add that Mrs. OBD is a stay-at-home mom, which is a helluva lot of work. Financially, it's a sacrifice, and reality is she'll probably be returning to work in the foreseeable, as we are entering the seriously-sock-away-money-for-college phase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:47 AM

52. Top-notch analysis and writing. I missed the 'if'. +1000. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 09:04 AM

53. Good analysis

 

and dissecting of said analysis.

Well done!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 09:16 AM

54. The fact that he doesn't know any qualified women

is what got me. How do you go through a business life and not run into a ton of qualified women? I guess Private Equity is a boy's club, but is that the attitude we want at the top?

Like you, I know enough qualified women to fill half a government - people at the top of their field who are women: engineers, investors, marketers, business owners, computer security experts, you name it.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Patiod (Reply #54)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 10:03 AM

58. How do you go through a business life and not run into a ton of qualified women?

It's called the gorilla in the room syndrome. You see only what you are conditioned to see and that's the most dangerous part of things. What Romney can't and probably won't ever see because of who he is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 10:37 AM

59. I am very impressed

I love when I can read something and learn something new, especially from a different perspective. Often, I read something that I already knew, but it's phrased better than I could have said it.

Rarely do I actually read something in the political arena that is absolutely a new way to look at things.

This is a very insightful post. I really didn't pick up on the "if" thing. Now I know exactly what you mean from a woman's perspective.

You taught me something new, and I thank you for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 10:50 AM

60. I'm a woman but I didn't "hear" it. The stench of lies pouring out of his mouth overwhelms me.

I will sit and listen respectfully to so many people whose views are different than mine and hope for common ground and diplomacy, but when someone is SO greedy, SO disrespectful of hardworking people, SO dishonest from sun up til sun down..... all I want is duct tape to shut their stinking pie hole, a copy of the transcript and someone like you to pin point WHERE in the pounds of crap that spewed out of his mouth are the bits and pieces that betray his slanted world view.

So I appreciate the complete and intelligent analysis you have done. I'd like to make a copy of it and show it to a co-worker of mine. He's a guy and he correctly gets that Mitt is a fool, but he doesn't understand HOW offensive what Mitt said was or fully why and we're at work so I can't go really deeply into it.

My co-worker made the mistake of teasing me... with the idea that because I know he is against Mitt, against discrimination of all kinds that I'd think he was only being funny. He sent me an instant message, "Oh settle down, or I'll have to put you in a binder." I got very mad, but I really like the guy and just wanted to disabuse him of the notion that it is ok to talk to me like that.

I said something to the effect that he was welcome to try but that better men than him have found themselves missing important parts of themselves trying to put me in my place. I'm a computer support tech, so I've had to be tough at times to establish that odd type of respect one gets being a woman in what lots of people think is more of a man's job.

He said, "OK Miz Bobbit" and I said, "Not like that ewwwww" and he came back with "Nobody puts Baby in a binder" which I also found offensive. I said, "No one puts ME anywhere I don't want to be." We mostly laughed it off. I was disappointed that he didn't get it, but haven't given up on him really understanding it if I could get OUT of the place of being offended and find the words to explain it.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 11:47 AM

61. k&r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 12:05 PM

62. Great piece. We heard "if" here as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 12:30 PM

63. A fine piece of writing

Very written and informative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 12:31 PM

64. k&r n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 01:45 PM

66. A very well written article

but the title is kind of awkward, IMO. If it's a dog whistle, and only women can hear it....does it follow that women are dogs? That's how it struck me at first glance. I know what your meaning is, though, so please don't flame me. I agree with the article 100%, and I heard that "if," too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:02 PM

67. You should really submit this to - I dunno - Huffpost, NYT, or somewhere.

Really. It's a fine piece.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 02:56 PM

70. Yes yes yes yes yes!

I have little to add. That phrase more than any one thing that Romney had to say during the debate spoke to me about exactly where Romney will take our society if given the chance. He finds women in the workplace distasteful. This worldview grows from his privileged, conservative background, and from his religious tenets. His carefully concealed religious fanaticism peeks through in these telling phrases. Women who failed to hear this whistle have a shock in the future should Romney be elected, may the gods prevent.

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 03:20 PM

71. If... you're going to let women have the right to vote-

Then... you're toast, Willard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 09:53 PM

72. Well done, but as a man, I certainly heard it too....

But then again, I was raised by my grandmother and single mom, in a house of only sisters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 10:30 PM

73. Blind/Deaf/Dumb

I dont understand how people cannot see Mitt is anti-female

Are they blind? deaf? dumb?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sun Oct 21, 2012, 12:17 AM

74. I knew he didn't support it. His very reluctance to say so, for one thing.

He's famous, by now, for blurting. So somewhere in the past decade we should have video or audio somewhere of his expressing sympathy or support or understanding of this concept - equal pay for equal work. A simple "yes." That he hems and haws and then deflects. "What about equal pay for equal work?" "Oh, look over here! I collected BINDERS full of women!" Didn't even answer the question.

Besides that, he's a BUSINESSMAN. That's the filter through which he sees everything. How a BUSINESSMAN would see things. Uppity, annoying women having the nerve to demand something. They think "they're ENTITLED..." as he told that quiet room of elites and high-rolelr donors, who all see the world the way he does. Of course they all feel that way. These demands are very low, if not non-existent on their priority list, because any accommodations like that cut into their profits. Typical of business and the corporate world - they only do something decent for these farther down the food chain when they HAVE TO. Or when they're forced to - usually by an equally large and powerful rival entity: the federal government. They don't automatically do the correct or ethical or moral thing because such things usually cost more money.

And a douchebag like him CERTAINLY doesn't want to have to waste any of his precious time considering equal pay issues WHEN HE'S MADE HIS MONEY CHISELING WORKERS, AND OUTSOURCING THEIR JOBS TO CHINESE WORKERS WHO GET MAYBE A DOLLAR A DAY. He doesn't want to bother with you, you demanding American women. What's wrong with you that you can't get a husband like him - so you can sit on your ass all day and go play horsey and chair PTA meetings and get your hair done and your mani-pedi and go to lunch with the other girls. Why are you complaining? It's your fault you aren't living like we do!

That's his attitude. No wonder he likes those Chinese women working for $1.00 per day. That beats the hell out of having to cut into his profit margin because he has to pay decent wages to those annoying, demanding American women - who think they're ENTITLED.

I find him utterly repulsive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sun Oct 21, 2012, 07:29 AM

75. Excellent post

I didn't even catch the "if".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sun Oct 21, 2012, 07:36 AM

76. Sounded like he was anxious to hire Chinese women for awhile,

But even then it was until they could get married.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sun Oct 21, 2012, 09:10 AM

77. New song that helps people understand Mitt Romney "See Mitt Run" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_qc

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sun Oct 21, 2012, 03:21 PM

78. Excellent analysis!!! And the "going to be anxious" is interesting phrasing, too, for to be anxious

is first and foremost NOT a good condition:
adjective
1.
full of mental distress or uneasiness because of fear of danger or misfortune; greatly worried; solicitous: Her parents were anxious about her poor health.

2.
earnestly desirous; eager (usually followed by an infinitive or for ): anxious to please; anxious for our happiness.

3.
attended with or showing solicitude or uneasiness: anxious forebodings.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Moreover, using the best definition, it is a phrase revealing that Romney doesn't think employers are NATURALLY "eager" to hire women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sun Oct 21, 2012, 05:38 PM

79. Thanks for hearing what I heard

When I heard Mittwit say that I did a double-take. IF?!

IF?! Where has he been the past 30 years? With stagnant wages for men, the middle class only continued to exist at all because women were in the workforce supplementing family income. With outsourcing, families were only able to hang on by their fingernails as long as they did because mom was already in the workforce. As things got even worse, the middle class began to disappear, with both mom and dad working for less and less money.

IF?! Women's work is a necessity, not a luxury, for the vast majority of Americans who live outside the Country Club 1950s bubble of privilege.

And he and his ilk think that half the country just wants a handout...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeliQueen (Original post)

Sun Oct 21, 2012, 11:26 PM

80. Since Republican business models DEPEND upon wage/salary DISPARITY, I don't understand what's "IF.."

about it. Women work out of economic necessity, because there aren't enough good paying jobs for a stay at home parent in many 2 parent households and also because many businesses need/want cheaper workers, who are usually women. It's a vicious circle.

Because their dependence upon tax breaks and loopholes, insider deals, pork, lobbying, and various kinds of subsidies has advanced mediocrity into positions of economic power, Republicans promote vampire capitalism, which relies on debt and high profits and bonuses, rather than Real Value and talent, to fuel poor business models that cannot pay for the human (and other) resources that they use. Hence there is an economic NECESSITY of finding those who will do more for less, women and illegal immigrants and the young.

There's no "If..." about it; lower paid women/immigrants/anyone will always be used against better paid men, in order to milk more profit out of enterprises up front and for other profit takers and, thus, to avoid investing for the long-run, to avoid investing in the sorts of things that would make it un-necessary to depend upon systemic guarantees that pay un-equally for the same work.

When Republicans use the word "redistribution," THIS is the kind of redistribution we should be talking about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread