New York Times criticises white women conservatives as "gender traitors" 12 replies

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Danny Über Admin

I'm spending a year dead for tax reasons.

275,711 XP

15th December 2002

305 Uploads

22,735 Posts

1,869 Threads

#1 8 months ago

I'm not a conservative, but uh, not sure what to say about this...

These women are gender traitors, to borrow a term from the dystopian TV series “The Handmaid’s Tale.” They’ve made standing by the patriarchy a full-time job. The women who support them show up at the Capitol wearing “Women for Kavanaugh” T-shirts, but also probably tell their daughters to put on less revealing clothes when they go out.

They’re more sympathetic to Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, who actually shooed away a crowd of women and told them to “grow up.” Or Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, whose response to a woman telling him she was raped was: “I’m sorry. Call the cops.”

These are the kind of women who think that being falsely accused of rape is almost as bad as being raped. The kind of women who agree with President Trump that “it’s a very scary time for young men in America,” which he said during a news conference on Tuesday.

But the people who scare me the most are the mothers, sisters and wives of those young men, because my stupid uterus still holds out some insane hope of solidarity.

We’re talking about white women. The same 53 percent who put their racial privilege ahead of their second-class gender status in 2016 by voting to uphold a system that values only their whiteness, just as they have for decades. Since 1952, white women have broken for Democratic presidential candidates only twice: in the 1964 and 1996 elections, according to an analysis by Jane Junn, a political scientist at the University of Southern California.

If women want to "stand by the patriarchy" , then they should be able to do so with out being labelled. The same applies to women who dont want to "stand by the patriarchy". Not sure why we have to give labels to everyone. The US is meant to be a democracy, so people regardless of gender, age, race should be able to vote the way they want without fear of a backlash. Or are they only allowed to vote without fear of backlash, as long as they vote how you want them to?


Danny King | Community Manager | GameFront.com



Serio VIP Member

The Dane

149,954 XP

11th November 2006

3 Uploads

12,512 Posts

38 Threads

#2 8 months ago

I don't understand why women would support someone like Trump or Kavanaugh, but labelling them as "gender traitors" is just ridiculous. Just call them stupid. That's the time honored term used for anyone who actively support people that despise them.


Also, the NYT is fucking weird. Some days it seems supportive of the administration, other days it criticises it.




Superfluous Curmudgeon VIP Member

AOE2 Addict

12,478 XP

22nd December 2007

0 Uploads

842 Posts

12 Threads

#3 8 months ago
Posted by FileTrekker


I'm not a conservative, but uh, not sure what to say about this...

I am sorry sir, this makes you an alt-right member and a danger to society.




Andron Taps Forum Mod

Faktrl is Best Pony

261,812 XP

10th September 2007

4 Uploads

21,762 Posts

1,754 Threads

#4 8 months ago

“In America, anyone can become president. That's the problem.” ~ George Carlin.


I'm willing to bet the majority of this bullshit could have been avoided if it weren't for Drumpf.


"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.



MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

217,298 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

20,016 Posts

7 Threads

#5 8 months ago

Looks like the left wants to compete with the craziness levels of the right in the US.




Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

357,014 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,696 Posts

780 Threads

#6 7 months ago

Seems like a better term for them to have used would be 'collaborators'. 

It is weird whenever a group sides with the very people who are actively working against their interests, but meh. People are idiots sometimes. What can you do.




Lysdestic VIP Member

Dr. Professor Logic, PhD.

46,131 XP

11th November 2003

0 Uploads

4,323 Posts

100 Threads

#7 7 months ago

Collaborators would definitely be a better term. Traitors is taking a lot of liberty with hyperbole, obviously...

Still, while I may disagree with the extent of the hyperbole, it is an opinion piece from an outside writer -- one whose work has focused primarily women's rights issues in the US.




Redlin5

That Team Rocket Guy

1,700 XP

1st November 2017

0 Uploads

130 Posts

9 Threads

#8 1 month ago

"are they only allowed to vote without fear of backlash, as long as they vote how you want them to?"


I think this sums up popular frustration with democracy these days best.  Freedom of choice IS WHAT WE WANT except YOU MUST CHOOSE MY CHOICE to be valid.  Death of compromise is the death of functional moderate government.  Wedge issues aside, "this idea was from the opposition so it is by its very nature wrong" is a mentality that is pushing policy swings with every government change.


Gender Traitor is an incendiary concept and I hate it.


Unrepentant Hoser



Lindale Forum Mod

Mister Angry Rules Guy

242,303 XP

1st February 2010

0 Uploads

23,524 Posts

5 Threads

#9 1 month ago

Exactly. Democracy means people you don't like are going to say things you don't like. You just need to deal with it, because freedom of speech means everyone has that right. Either everyone has it, or no one has it. There is no middle ground. That is one thing Liberals fail to understand. Rights apply to everyone, not just Liberals. Liberals only want to take away rights.


Here is the other half of how democracy works. The majority vote decides. Since straight people makes up roughly 90% of the population, straight people are the majority, which means straight people are the dictionary definition of "normal." Homosexuals are the ones in a miniscule minority. They can campaign all they want, but they still need to be aware that they are outvoted. If one thing is for certain, we are not going to tolerate them throwing childish tantrums, just because they don't get their way. Until they start behaving in a civil and accepting manner, we are not going to support them, so they will only continue to be outvoted. If they want us to ever accept them, then they need to start accepting being straight is every bit as correct.


filesnation_by_lindale_ff-da1kplo.png



Lysdestic VIP Member

Dr. Professor Logic, PhD.

46,131 XP

11th November 2003

0 Uploads

4,323 Posts

100 Threads

#10 1 month ago

Exactly. Democracy means people you don't like are going to say things you don't like. You just need to deal with it, because freedom of speech means everyone has that right. Either everyone has it, or no one has it. 

As a bleeding heart liberal, very much agreed. But as to the second half of what you have to say...wow. I didn't know that simply being a minority is enough to allow the votes of the majority to deprive you of basic human rights or to justify various forms of discrimination. Moreover, you took a lot of liberties in that post, too. Implying that the entire gay population thinks that to be straight is wrong, or that gay people are simply throwing tantrums. And I don't even want to bother with your "libruls" nonsense, because that's just more divisive speak into the discourse that I suspect you know isn't going to bring about any common ground.

Good faith, that post is not.




Last edited by Lysdestic 1 month ago

  • 1
  • 2