Woe is me. I can not see the vaginal equivalent of Ms. Ashely. Judd that is. Not Maguire.
Must comment. Must opine. People offended by the term term Pussy, much less the tactile engagement of said organ, now, sport woolen hats termed same?
I am pretty much of a pussy, where hearing about the sanctity of the region and accepting with nodding conviction that hats representing all that area of anatomy offends is a sign of good living and moral lordosis. Standing tall for the pussy!
No thank you.
You see, I am most uncomfortable sharing thoughts about any woman's womb and breasts. Call me old fashioned. Call me a gender criminal and a toxic male - guilty.
I ,for the life of me, can not make sense of feminists who desire nothing more than the continuation and strengthening of the abortion industry.
Between me old ears, I know that all identity politics merges, but in my heart, Vagina's do not Monologue, Dialogue, Trialogue, or , much less Diatribe. Cue Ashley Judd.- Ashley Judd
“Our p—ies ain’t for grabbing, Our p—ies are for our pleasure and they are for birthing new generations… of nasty women.”
I think we have more than enough nasty women; thank you.
Ovaries, vaginae, breasts are topics reserved for one gender - the one's wearing the equipment.
I could offer a Homeric catalogue of similar sobriquets, but reserve those for my bumptiously bawdy boy boon chums.
From the day that the late Brenda Vaccaro offered her unsolicited advice to mothers with teen aged daughters about the importance of plastic applicators ( "I think that's important!") in being a total woman, I have cringed when women turned a woman's body into a road map for power and romance into cringe-worthy function.
Mother of God! But, that's just me.
Hollywood bimbos ran to the front of the line of this vanguard.
Ashley Judd is a movie star, but I am completely unfamiliar with the canon of here work.
In order to understand the offense caused by toxic guys like me, and the Orange Man in the White House, Bubba Clinton, Martin Sheen's kid, Warren Beatty and Anthony Weiner, I decided to seek some scintilla of thought form the Metro sexuals at Vox.
Vox was begun by one of the lisping lords of journalism, founding partner of Obama's Journo-List club, and along with Chris Hayes, Don Lemon and so many other voices that sound like "Steam-escaping" to quote Mel Brooks, and is the pan-identity androgynous voice of America.
You see, my voice sounds more like a Knights of Columbus meeting and sometimes it gets lost in the competing tones.
Their ( Planned Parenthood et alii) goal, although they’re not officially pitching it as such, is to send a message about women’s rights that will provide a counterbalance to the political and personal values espoused by incoming President Donald J. Trump.
And by "women’s rights," organizers have taken care to make it clear that they mean all women of all backgrounds: The official platform the Women’s March on Washington places the demonstration in the context of not only suffragists and abolitionists but the civil right movement, the American Indian movement, and Black Lives Matter.
Just two paragraphs into the four-page document, they note that "women have intersecting identities and are therefore impacted by a multitude of social justice and human rights issues." Examples of this, including the especially urgent need for equal pay among women of color and the way they’re uniquely victimized by the criminal justice system, follow in the rest of the platform.
Sounds reasonable, right? But it’s that idea of "intersecting identities" that’s been at the core of criticism of the march, both by would-be participants and by conservative critics.
Sorry sillies, some Sallys sail solitary, like women who can not accept this nation's continued slaughter of children at the hands of Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry. Another Ashley, Ashley Maguire is a feminist who was shunned by the "intersecting identities."
As a young woman living in Washington, D.C., I could easily attend the Women’s March on Saturday if I wanted to.
Except that I am not invited, despite my unambiguous status as a member of the female sex. That’s because I am pro-life. As the organizers of the march made clear in a statement earlier this week, the Women’s March’s on Washington “platform is pro-choice” and “has been since day one.”
“We look forward to marching on behalf of individuals who share th[at] view,” they went on, and stated that the since-revoked partnership of New Wave Feminists, a secular group with pro-life values, was an “error.”
The march might as well have placed scare quotes around the word “Women’s,” or better yet, have renamed itself “The March for Abortion.” Then it would have cleared up any confusion about pretending to represent all women, when almost half of us self-identify as pro-life and would probably feel more at home at the March for Life, set to take place the following week. The March for Life is open to women of all political stripes and will include groups like Democrats for Life of America.
Yes, Ma'am. It was a March for Abortion. Offended protesting women and metro sexual males sported knit wool Pussy Hats in a show of meaningless solidarity.
Woe, woe, woe,woe. That's good to know.