Showing posts with label women. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women. Show all posts

Friday, April 4, 2014

6 Biggest Myths About Women Who Have Lots of Sex



The truth is that having lots of sexual partners and self-esteem aren"t necessarily correlated.








Nothing irritates me more than persistent half-truths and complete fabrications hyped as fact. Myths about women"s sexuality are continually refurbished and bought by the masses; old mores sold as shiny new tools to be hurled as weapons of control. It"s time to expose reality by shattering outdated perceptions of women who have a lot of sex.


Myth: Women Who Have a Lot of Sex are Easy


Fact: Women who engage incasual sex set higher standards on their new boy-toy than they place on men considered relationship potential. This is one element of casual sex where men and women"s approaches differ greatly. Men tend to lower their standards when looking for a hook-up while women seek better looking, more successful, and all-around awesomeness. So, bad news for the fella who tries to pick-up a lady because he thinks she"s “easy” — unless you are all that and a bag of chips or have serious A-game, odds are you"ll go home solo… not because she"s a bitch or a tease but rather because you weren"t up to snuff!


Myth: Women Who Have a Lot of Sex Have Low Self-Esteem or Self Worth


Fact: Although evidence shows many women and men who have diagnosable disorders or emotional troubles tend to have frequent indiscriminate sex, having multiple sexual partners is a side-effect of their disorder not the cause. Women who engage in casual sex, while maintaining healthy practices, tend to have higher self-worth and less hang-ups surrounding body image. There are wounded souls and damaged goods on both sides of the gender aisle but to assume a woman is “broken” based on how she chooses to express her sexuality says more about how you perceive yourself than how she really is.


Myth: Men are Wired to Have a Lot of Sex, Women to be Monogamous


Fact: There are multiple examples throughout history and in modern times where women, free from patriarchal dogma, have sex with multiple partners or even multiple husbands. If the females who have a lot of sex were limited to depraved, damaged or improperly wired ladies, then these societies would not exist or persist. Granted these cultures are few and far between but frankly, so are matriarchal societies! Nevertheless, they serve as an illustration that the number of sexual encounters a woman has is determined more by societal and social norms than wiring.


Myth: Women Who Have a Lot of Sex are Commitment-Phobic or Incapable of Monogamy


Fact: Research suggests men and women equally seek the loving arms of a committed partner. Studies indicate when a low sex-ratio is present (more marriage-aged men to marriage-aged women), infidelity in committed relationships decreases because women are in demand and set the rules in which sex and relationships occur. When contrasting with instances of high-sex ratio (higher number of marriage-aged women to marriage-aged men) where men are in demand and have more options, the rate of cheating increases. Still having doubts? Consider sexual satisfaction and why women cheat. When measuring the BIG O (orgasm) women report a much higher level of gratification when sex occurs in a committed relationship rather than casual hook-ups. As for why women cheat, if having a lot of sex were the defining factor then you would assume that most women would be unfaithful for the novelty, thrill or pure opportunity. However, that is not what the data shows and you would be wrong! The majority of women betray their spouses to fill an emotional void or to feel a deep connection with another.


Myth: American Women Have a Lot of Sex Compared with Rest of the World


Fact: The media wants us to believe that the U.S. is the land of sluts; slamming down our throats in tasty 30 second sound-bites, not only are we the land of the free but the home of casual sex. In reality the land of ball parks and amber waves of grain isranked thirteenth globally for number of sexual partners and 24th for frequency of sex per week. So much for us being liberated sex mongers!


Myth: Women Today Are Having More Sex than 10 Years Ago


Fact: Hook-up culture is all over the news and dominates the perspective we have on the modern woman"s sexual behavior; however, looking at stats from the CDC paints a different story entirely! The number of sexual partners a woman between the ages of 15-44 in 2002 versus 2008 have remained virtually the same. Not buying it? Recently,research from Paula England delve into this very issue by asking college students, who we can all agree are at the center of the hook-up culture storm, how many hook-ups they have had during their college career. Based on the hurricane of media attention you would assume this number would be well in the double digits for a female undergrad. The number? Drum roll please, 4-6. That"s right folks, an average of 4-6 hook-ups within 4-5 years of college. The other tidbit worthy of mentioning, nearly 30-40 percent of what these hormone raging young adults consider hook-ups does not involve intercourse!


It"s almost inconceivable how an article like this is relevant in 2014 and a case needs to be made to defend women who explore their sexuality. Truth is, even if women today were having more sex than their mothers, why should it matter? As long as a woman knows why she is having sex, has consensual sex within those parameters to maintain her emotional health and sustains physical health by using protection… why does everyone care so much?


The next time you see an article on the evils of the hook-up culture notice that the focus is on the behavior of women. Who do you think most of these women are having sex with? Are you worried about your son"s ability to commit in the future? Oh, that"s right. “Boys will be boys.” What do you think your attitude says to your son about his sexuality? Isn"t his body just as special a gift to share as your daughter"s?


 

Related Stories


AlterNet.org Main RSS Feed



6 Biggest Myths About Women Who Have Lots of Sex

Monday, March 31, 2014

Mi’kmaq women shut down NS Energy Minister event

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Mi’kmaq women shut down NS Energy Minister event

Ukrainian women get their guns ready for Putin, with a song

At Hey WTF? News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Hey WTF? News and how it is used.

Log Files

Like many other Web sites, Hey WTF? News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons

Hey WTF? News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie

  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Hey WTF? News.
  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Hey WTF? News and other sites on the Internet.
  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Hey WTF? News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

Hey WTF? News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Hey WTF? News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.


Ukrainian women get their guns ready for Putin, with a song

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

MSNBC"s Joy Reid: Religious Freedom Could Be Used To Exclude Women From The Workplace





JOY-ANN REID, MSNBC HOST: However, a business, a corporation you form, is separate from yourself, meaning that if your corporation, for instance, were to violate one of the Ten Commandments, if it were to covet another corporation’s products or if it was to steal another corporation’s patent, it could not suffer the wrath of God, right? So how is it possible for a corporation to somehow violate the religious tenants of its faith if it is not a person and doesn’t have a soul?


LORI WINDHAM, BECKET FUND FOR RELIGIOUS LIBERTY: Well, you know, I think that really gets into a theological family. The Green family believes that they are going to be responsible to God and that they have to answer to God for the things that they do through their family businesses. And so for them, it’s not as simple as saying, ‘Oh, well, the corporation’s doing it, it’s okay. And I think that many Americans would really pull back from the idea that, hey, if I’m just doing this as part of a corporation, if I’m just doing this as part of my job, I don’t have any moral agency here. I think that’s a very difficult argument to make.


REID: Except that Christians who own businesses, let’s say lay people off around Christmastime, right? People do things all the time, that they may personally find morally sort of questionable, but they do them for the business. People lay people off at christmastime.


WINDHAM: I think that what we want to encourage here in the U.S. is people who are willing to have social consciences and who are willing to consider their beliefs in the way they run their business. That’s what the Green family has done. They have raised their minimum wage, every year for the last five years. They’re now nearly double the federal minimum wage, because they said, ‘You know what, that’s the right thing to do.’ I think that’s the kind of behavior we want to encourage rather than discourage.


REID: Let me ask you about another business that thinks that the federal minimum wage is usury and they don’t want to comply with federal minimum wage laws because it violates their religious tenants. Or what if you had another business whose owners believe that women’s place is in the home, so therefore they don’t feel they should be compelled to consider women for employment?


WINDHAM: You know, we’ve heard all of these wild hypotheticals and I think Congress has already answered that with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. What they’ve said is, when there’s a compelling government reason, like protecting the minimum wage or stopping discrimination or protecting life, that the government can win in those cases.


The question isn’t who gets to exercise the rights. The question is, how strong is the government’s interests? Here, the government’s interest is really weak, because they have already exempted plans covering tens of millions of Americans from this same mandate. So how can they exempt so many millions of plans on one hand and yet fine the green family on the other?




RealClearPolitics Video Log



MSNBC"s Joy Reid: Religious Freedom Could Be Used To Exclude Women From The Workplace

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Is multiculturalism bad for women in Canada?

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Is multiculturalism bad for women in Canada?

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Dear Mr. Harper, we need to talk about violence against Indigenous women

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Dear Mr. Harper, we need to talk about violence against Indigenous women

Monday, March 10, 2014

The GOP"s Other War on Women: 5 Gender Battlegrounds Beyond Abortion and Contraception



Women care about more than birth control. From guns to poverty, here"s why the party is doomed.








Republicans are having a tough time shaking the “war on women” label, probably because they can’t stop themselves from sounding — and voting — like a bunch of raging misogynists. But when they do try to deflect this particular brand of sexism, it usually goes something like, “[Women are] more than just a set of reproductive organs, and I’d like someone to talk to me about how they’ll help my pocketbook and keep my health care plan that I like.”


Despite evidence to suggest that plenty of Republicans very much view women as a set of reproductive organs, this is verbatim what a Republican strategist told the New York Times last week in an attempt to challenge the idea that the GOP is a party of caveman bigots. It’s also what Mike Huckabee tried to communicate when he argued that the GOP opposes insurance coverage for contraception because it trusts that women can “control their libidos.” Rand Paul — a man who a majority of conservative tastemakers believe should be the next president — views the GOP’s problem with women as something of a nonstarter, mainly because there are lots of them enrolled in his niece’s veterinary program.


And you can be sure that this is the message that the organizers of CPAC were shooting for with a panel called, “Why Conservatism is Right for Women: How Conservatives Should Talk About Life, Prosperity & National Security.” (Undercutting their pro-woman rhetoric was the fact that the conference only featured a handful of women speakers on the main stage, and the organizers’ decision to go heavy on outdated cartoon villains like Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter rather than relevant conservatives like New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez.)


The Republican-led assault on basic medical care has had devastating consequences for women, transgender men and gender non-conforming people who need safe, reliable access to abortion, and there’s no doubt that it’s a losing issue with the voters that the party is ostensibly courting. But what changes when you “look beyond” reproductive health issues like contraception, abortion and access to maternal and prenatal care? Precisely nothing. The GOP remains, as ever, a party that appeals largely to white men and married white women while falling further out of step with everyone else. While spitting vitriol about reproductive healthcare certainly alienates women voters and their allies, being vindictive about poverty, civil rights and other issues virtually annihilates the GOP’s chances of expanding its base.



Below, some of the battles in the GOP’s assault on women that don’t have to do with contraception or reproductive healthcare (though let’s be real, these issues are all connected):


Poverty.One in 3 women are living in or on the verge of poverty — nationwide, that’s 42 million women and 28 million children who depend on them. Black and Latina women face particularly high rates of poverty, and trans women — particularly trans women of color — are also disproportionally likely to live in poverty at some point in their lifetimes. So it seems pretty obvious that women would be paying attention when Republicans (aided in many cases by Democrats) slash food assistance programs at a time of record need.


Congress voted in February to cut $ 9 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program over the next ten years, just two months after $ 11 billion had already been slashed from the program when a 2009 benefits increase expired. These reductions have cost families an average of $ 90 each month, a heavy hit for those already struggling to keep food on the table.


As Salon’s Blake Zeff noted just before the cuts passed in February, what was hailed by lawmakers as a shining example of bipartisan compromise was actually just a measure that will “make hungry people hungrier at a time of rampant poverty.”


And managing on less often means women will be going without. “What we find in our research is that when someone is going to have to do without, it’s usually women,” Lindsey Spindle, a communications officer at an anti-hunger nonprofit recently told Glamour. “They sacrifice their meals for their children, for their spouse, for their parents. So what we’re anticipating with these cuts is that families will be left vulnerable, but women in particular will do a lot to shield their families.”


Republican indifference to the millions of women facing food insecurity becomes that much more striking when you consider that the $ 9 billion in cuts in the final bill was a dramatic reduction from the outrageous $ 40 billion House Republicans originally demanded.


Women’s views on poverty and social services aren’t any great secret, either. A recent poll revealed that 56 percent of women surveyed “disapproved” or “strongly disapproved” of gutting food assistance programs at a moment when people need them more than ever.


Voting rights. Women care about voting rights because women vote. More than men, actually.


As Reid Wilson at the Washington Post recently pointed out, women are statistically more likely than men to not have a form of accepted identification at the polls. Low-income women may struggle to obtain the necessary ID because accessing birth records and other documentation can be costly and out of reach for many. Women over the age of 65 — who outnumber men over the age of 65 — are also less likely to have a form of identification required by these new laws. Women are also more likely than men to be enrolled in college, and students who attend out of state universities are disproportionately impacted by voter ID laws.


These laws threaten the votes of married women who may have changed or hyphenated their names. They jeopardize the rights of trans women, who can face several obstacles while trying to obtain an ID that reflects their name and gender. Voter ID laws are, generally speaking, bad for women.


But voter suppression efforts are, generally speaking, good for Republicans.


The fact that these laws disenfranchise women voters seems to be part of the point, and the GOP seems to know this. As Imani Gandy at RH Reality Check notes, women of color — particularly black and Latina women — have long been and continue to be crucial voting forces, particularly in contentious elections, both nationally and in states like Virginia.


As Gandy points outs, if black women had stayed home in 2012 (or disenfranchised through bogus voter ID requirements), “We would be face-palming our way through a Mitt Romney presidency right now.”


Work. Two out of every 3 minimum wage workers is a woman, and many of those women are also mothers or the primary caregivers in their households. Despite widespread support across gender and party lines, Republican lawmakers almost uniformly oppose a modest raise to the minimum wage, making the party’s appeals to women’s “pocketbooks” particularly laughable.


Raising the federal minimum wage from $ 7.25 to a meager $ 10.10 an hour would boost earnings for 28 million workers, and would help lift millions of women out of poverty. More than 25 percent of low-wage and low-income workers are single mothers, but at the current minimum wage, a woman who works full-time can expect to make an average of $ 14,500 each year. That’s $ 4,000 dollars less than the poverty level for a mother of two children.


Republican intransigence on equal pay measures is — surprise — also wildly out of step with voters.


Women, on average, still make 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. The gap is even more drastic for women of color; black women make an average of 64 cents on the dollar, while Latina women make an average of 55 cents. A recent study from the Williams Institute also revealed that trans women face up to a 30 percent drop in wages following their gender transition.


Almost across the board, women’s earnings have stalled for much of the last two decades, and Republican opposition to equal pay legislation means they can expect more of the same in coming decades. As New York Democrat Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand remarked on the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act, “If you’re not paying a woman dollar for dollar for the exact same work, you’re not really tapping the full potential of the economy.” You’re also, it seems, bound to hemorrhage all but a narrow segment of women voters. Whoops.


And yet Bobby Jindal called raising the minimum wage “waving the white flag of surrender” on the economy, and Rand Paul thinks women are doing just fine making poverty wages for full-time work. “I think some of the victimology and all this other stuff is trumped up,” Paul said recently when asked about women’s status in 2014. “And we don’t get to any good policy by playing some charade that one party doesn’t care about women or one party isn’t in favor of women advancing or other people advancing.”


Guns. This time last year, Gayle Trotter, a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum, became something of a conservative celebrity when she testified at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun violence that “guns make women safer.” Trotter celebrated what she called the power of “scary-looking guns” to help women defend themselves against “hardened violent criminals.”


As I argued at the time, Trotter’s views on women and guns are not based in reality.


According to recent data, more than 60 percent of women killed by a firearm in 2010 were murdered by a current or former intimate partner, many of whom are able to keep their guns despite their violent records because of weak laws and even weaker enforcement. And far from protecting women, the presence of a firearm during a domestic violence incident increases the likelihood of a homicide by a staggering 500 percent.


Women — along with most other people in America — overwhelmingly support the kind of gun reform that Republican lawmakers oppose.



A poll released earlier this month by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal found that 55 percent of Americans support tougher gun measures, and that 65 percent of women support such reforms. “It’s easily one of the largest policy gender gaps we’ve seen in years,” researchers said of the findings.


This kind of gap should give the GOP pause the next time it blocks modest reforms to gun laws, but, if history is any indicator, it won’t.


LGBTQ rights.The recent Republican fight in Arizona and elsewhere in the country to let private companies discriminate against LGBTQ people puts them out of step with even moderates in the GOP, but it puts them even further out of step with LGBTQ women voters and their allies.



But it’s not just about Arizona. Despite widespread support for the Employer Non-Discrimination Act, House Speaker John Boehner has said that he sees “no basis or need” for the legislation to protect workers from discrimination based on sexual or gender identity. The measure passed in the Senate, but has yet to come to a vote in the House because of Republican opposition to the measure.


Republicans are equally out of step with a majority of Americans when it comes to marriage equality. Equal marriage has more or less ceased to be a controversial issue for most Americans, with a historic majority now favoring it. But you wouldn’t know this by listening to the Republican leadership. Conservative lawmakers — at the state and federal level — continue to fight tooth and nail to resist momentum behind equal marriage.


Conservative lawmakers — with the support of virulently anti-LGBTQ groups — have also advanced measures in states like California to roll back basic protections for transgender young people. And it is, of course, a Republican lobbyist who is currently working on a bill to ban openly gay players from the NFL.


Members of the GOP may continue to take etiquette classes and eventually get better about not calling women “hosts” for a fetus or describing female candidates as “empty dresses,” but no amount of reform school will change the fundamentals of the party’s platform.


The GOP is wrong about most things, but they’re right when they say that women care about more than just birth control. What they don’t seem to realize is that this is precisely the reason they have lost women voters.



 


 

Related Stories


AlterNet.org Main RSS Feed



The GOP"s Other War on Women: 5 Gender Battlegrounds Beyond Abortion and Contraception

Saturday, March 8, 2014

Inside Alaska"s New "War on Women"

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Inside Alaska"s New "War on Women"

Thursday, March 6, 2014

VIDEO: Bachelor Juan Pablo Galavis Broke and Living with His Parents!







The rejected bachelorettes teamed up to rip Juan Pablo Galavis apart on The Bachelor’s Women Tell All episode. And now we’re hearing more about the former soccer star’s life off camera. Forget the exotic islands and the private planes. When Juan Pablo isn’t on The Bachelor, he’s just a 32-year-old single dad who still lives with his parents in Miami! An insider tells the new issue of Life and Style, “Money must be tight, because he lives in a three-bedroom apartment with his mom and dad.” As for finalists, Clare and Nikki, a friend tells the mag, “The winner is about to be very surprised. She has no idea what she’s in for.” Yikes!













Thanks for checking us out. Please take a look at the rest of our videos and articles.







To stay in the loop, bookmark our homepage.







VIDEO: Bachelor Juan Pablo Galavis Broke and Living with His Parents!

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Wake Up America! - Women wake up. The

At A Political Statement, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by A Political Statement and how it is used.

Log Files

Like many other Web sites, A Political Statement makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons

A Political Statement does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie

  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on A Political Statement.
  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to A Political Statement and other sites on the Internet.
  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on A Political Statement send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

A Political Statement has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. A Political Statement"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.


Wake Up America! - Women wake up. The

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

WIRE: Few Army Women Want Combat Jobs...

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



WIRE: Few Army Women Want Combat Jobs...

AP Exclusive: Few Army women want combat jobs








FILE – This Sept. 18, 2012 file photo shows female soldiers training on a firing range while wearing new body armor in Fort Campbell, Ky. Only a small fraction of Army women say they’d like to move into one of the newly opening combat jobs, but those few who do, say they want a job that takes them right into the heart of battle, according to preliminary results from a survey of the service’s nearly 170,000 women. (AP Photo/Mark Humphrey, File)





FILE – This Sept. 18, 2012 file photo shows female soldiers training on a firing range while wearing new body armor in Fort Campbell, Ky. Only a small fraction of Army women say they’d like to move into one of the newly opening combat jobs, but those few who do, say they want a job that takes them right into the heart of battle, according to preliminary results from a survey of the service’s nearly 170,000 women. (AP Photo/Mark Humphrey, File)





FILE – In this Jan. 27, 2012 file photo, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno speaks at the Pentagon. Only a small fraction of Army women say they’d like to move into one of the newly opening combat jobs, but those few who do, say they want a job that takes them right into the heart of battle, according to preliminary results from a survey of the service’s nearly 170,000 women. The issue is going to be the propensity of women who want to do some of these things,” Odierno said in an interview with The AP. “I don’t think it’s going to be as great as people think.” (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — Only a small fraction of Army women say they’d like to move into one of the newly opening combat jobs, but those few who do say they want a job that takes them right into the heart of battle, according to preliminary results from a survey of the service’s nearly 170,000 women.


That survey and others across the Army, publicly disclosed for the first time to The Associated Press, also revealed that soldiers of both genders are nervous about women entering combat jobs but say they are determined to do it fairly. Men are worried about losing their jobs to women; women are worried they will be seen as getting jobs because of their gender and not their qualifications. Both are emphatic that the Army must not lower standards to accommodate women.


Less than 8 percent of Army women who responded to the survey said they wanted a combat job. Of those, an overwhelming number said they’d like to be a Night Stalker — a member of the elite special operations helicopter crews who perhaps are best known for flying the Navy SEALS into Osama bin Laden’s compound in 2011.


Last year top Pentagon officials signed an order saying women must have the same opportunities as men in combat jobs and the services have been devising updated physical standards, training, education and other programs for thousands of jobs they must open Jan. 1, 2016. The services must open as many jobs to women as possible; if they decide to keep some closed, they must explain why.


The Army says that about 200,000 of its 1.1 million jobs are either direct combat or related jobs such as field artillery, combat engineers and so on. That’s roughly 20 percent of the force, though the direct-combat front-line fighters make up roughly half of that or about 9 percent.


Throughout last year, the Army emailed questionnaires to active duty, reserves and Army National Guard members to gauge soldiers’ views on the move to bring women into combat jobs. The results from the survey sent to women showed that just 2,238 — or 7.5 percent — of the 30,000 who responded said they would want one of the infantry, armor, artillery and combat engineer jobs.


Army officials also polled men and women on their concerns about the integration. And they asked senior female leaders to say whether they would have chosen combat jobs if they’d been given that chance 10 or 20 years ago.


All agreed the physical standards for the jobs should remain the same.


“The men don’t want to lower the standards because they see that as a perceived risk to their team,” David Brinkley, deputy chief of staff for operations at the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command, told the AP. “The women don’t want to lower the standards because they want the men to know they’re just as able as they are to do the same task.”


Brinkley’s office at Fort Eustis is filled with charts, graphs and data the Army is using to methodically bring women into jobs that have been previously open only to men. The surveys are helping to shape the education and preparation that women, men and top leaders need to put in place to insure the integration goes smoothly.


The questionnaires, and the focus groups that followed them, showed that younger men and those who have served with women in the last two years are more open to the integration, while mid-level soldiers — particularly those in units such as infantry and armor that have not yet included women — were more hesitant.


And there were nagging stereotypes. Male soldiers fretted that their unit’s readiness will be degraded because of what they term “women issues,” such as pregnancy and menstrual cycles. Or they worried that women incapable of the physical demands would be brought in anyway.


Officers were concerned about sexual harassment and improper relationships. And the idea of integrated units bothered both military wives and husbands.


Plagued by an increase in reported sexual assaults, the military is putting a much greater emphasis on training, reporting and treatment. But that increased focus, said Brinkley, has prompted some troops to say they are worried to be in the same room together.


The men, said Brinkley, worry that anything they say could ruin their careers.


“Did we have a problem? Yes. Are we aggressively solving it? Yes,” said Brinkley. But, he added, “we’ve kind of created a little environment of fear, which we fear might frankly hinder integration.”


The solution, said Brinkley and other Army leaders, involves education, training and good leadership.


Women across the Army have been getting pregnant for years and those units have dealt with it. And, while inappropriate relationships do happen, they are a violation of regulations. So it is up to unit leaders to enforce the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the combat arms units, just as they do in others.


Army leaders were unsurprised by the small number of women interested in combat jobs.


“The issue is going to be the propensity of women who want to do some of these things,” Gen. Ray Odierno, chief of staff of the Army, said in an interview with the AP. “I don’t think it’s going to be as great as people think.”


According to the survey, the vast majority of the women who expressed interest in combat jobs were in the lower ranks, age 27 or younger.


Some of the more experienced soldiers said that if they had it to do all over again, they might choose one of the combat arms jobs.


The limited interest also is in line with what other countries, such as Norway, have seen as they integrated women into combat roles, Brinkley said.


But, what surprised even him was what the women named as their preferred combat career.


More than 30 percent of the survey respondents pointed to the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment.


“I went back to the analysts and I said, ‘is there a glitch in this?’” said Brinkley.


But adding women will help the unit fill some spots. The 160th commander has said he is struggling, for example, to get mechanics, but even though there are many in the Army, he can’t bring them on because they are women, Brinkley said.


The 160th is a specialized unit used to fly forces fast, low and deep behind enemy lines under cover of darkness. Seventeen women already work in the unit in administrative, intelligence and logistics posts. And there have long been women aviators and aircrew in the conventional Army, just not on the special operations teams.


Hundreds of pilot and crew positions in the 160th were formally opened to women last June. And, as of Monday, officials said a number of women had applied and a handful have gotten the initial favorable assessment that allows them to begin moving through the process that includes a rigorous training course.


The second most popular choice was infantry, followed closely by combat engineers. Far fewer said they wanted to be in the field artillery, where unit members move and work with massive rocket and cannon systems. And the least popular branch of the Army they named was armor — jobs that involve working in the hulking tanks and armored vehicles.


“We’ve got to utilize the talent that we have available,” Odierno said. “We have some incredible female talent that we’ve been ignoring for a long time. We’ve got to get it in the right place.”


Associated Press




Top Headlines



AP Exclusive: Few Army women want combat jobs

Friday, February 14, 2014

Dear Susan Patton, Single Women Don"t Need Your "Straight Talk"

At Hey WTF? News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Hey WTF? News and how it is used.

Log Files

Like many other Web sites, Hey WTF? News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons

Hey WTF? News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie

  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Hey WTF? News.
  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Hey WTF? News and other sites on the Internet.
  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Hey WTF? News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

Hey WTF? News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Hey WTF? News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.


Dear Susan Patton, Single Women Don"t Need Your "Straight Talk"

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

For the gun industry, women are the next big thing

For the gun industry, women are the next big thing
http://yarpp.org/pixels/c6bb0b5b7ce803685f4ea949415b8bfd


Aaron Smith
CNN
February 10, 2014


Guns with slim profiles, pink stocks and glittery grips are aimed at one of the industry’s fastest-growing clientele: women.


“Make it pretty and make it purple,” said Tori Nonaka, a purple-haired competitive shooter and “Glock Girl” at the SHOT Show.


Nonaka and her colleague Michelle Viscuzi, an Army veteran, were selected by the Austrian gun maker to demonstrate and sell Glock guns to distributors at the extravaganza hosted by the National Shooting Sports Foundation in Las Vegas last month.


Read more


Below, watch Second Amendment advocate and survivalist Bunny Hunter give Infowars’ LeeAnn McAdoo a lesson in real feminism.


This article was posted: Monday, February 10, 2014 at 7:53 pm










Infowars




Read more about For the gun industry, women are the next big thing and other interesting subjects concerning NSA at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Thousands of women illegally detained by Iraq, facing torture, abuse - HRW



Published time: February 07, 2014 06:04

Iraq Women.(Reuters / Kareem Raheem)

Iraq Women.(Reuters / Kareem Raheem)




Iraqi authorities are holding thousands of women illegally, subjecting many to torture, abuse, threats to their family and rape, according to a Human Rights Watch report released Thursday. The findings come amid Baghdad’s promises of judicial reform.


“When I insisted that I am not guilty, he tied me up to a column. Then they started using electricity on me. I was blindfolded but it felt like an electric baton,” a former detainee and journalist going by the name of Fatima Hussein told Human Rights Watch (HRW). She stood accused of involvement in the murder of a parliamentarian’s brother and being married to an Al-Qaeda operative. “When they finally untied me, I collapsed,” she recalled.


A man she identified as ‘Colonel Ghazi’ invited her to sign a blank piece of paper, and after she asked whether they would add other charges, her feet were tied up and hit with cables containing high-voltage wire. She continued to refuse.


“He put out cigarettes on my arms and hand. The whole time he was calling me, ‘Bitch, whore, slut,’” she stated. She was then violently raped. “There was blood all over me. He would relax, have a cigarette, and put it out on my buttock, and then start again,” she said.


‘Fatima’ chose a false name in order to remain anonymous. She said that her daughter was threatened with similar treatment by Ghazi, and she even fielded a phone call from her child as proof they could identify her, forcing Fatima to confess to a crime she did not commit. “I filed a complaint, but so far I have not seen any results,” Fatima stated, adding that she was still afraid. In September 2013, seven months after meeting with HRW, she was executed.


The 105-page document, entitled “‘No One Is Safe’: Abuses of Women in Iraq’s Criminal Justice System,” was released on Thursday and explored the extent to which cases such as Fatima’s occur. Some women have been held for months, and even years without charge before seeing a judge, according to the document.


In the “vast majority of cases”, women had no access to a lawyer before or during interrogation, contrary to Iraqi law, according to the group.


HRW’s research spanned interviews with a cross section of 27 women and seven girls, both Sunni and Shia, between December 2012 and April last year, while further interviews with their families and other officials, including lawyers, medical service providers in prisons and UN staff in Baghdad. “We also reviewed court documents, lawyers’ case files, and government decisions and reports” stated HRW.


Many of the women who spoke to the US-based human rights advocacy group described beatings, being kicked or slapped, hung upside down, electrically shocked or subject to rape or threats of sexual assault.


“They called me daughter of a bitch, daughter of a whore. They pointed a gun at my head and threatened to rape me and continue the electricity if I didn’t agree to everything the judge read from his papers.” Stated 70-year-old Ibtihal Ahmad (also not her real name), in another interview with HRW.


Iraq Women.(AFP Photo / Ahmad AL-Rubaye)


Girls as young as 11 were held under suspicion of terrorism or covering up terrorist acts, and one boy, only six years old, was forced to watch his mother be beaten and suffer electric shocks, according to an interview with his sister. One child of unspecified age, who was imprisoned with his mother – on death row – remained incarcerated himself for several weeks after her execution.


Ibtihal Ahmad’s daughter, Sundus Abd al-Razzaq, was interrogated over her husband’s activities, and was told “Yes, say it, even if it’s a lie,” when she asked if that was what they wanted – for her to be dishonest.


“Iraqi security forces and officials act as if brutally abusing women will make the country safer,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at HRW. “In fact, these women and their relatives have told us that as long as security forces abuse people with impunity, we can only expect security conditions to worsen.”


Islamist militants have frequently alleged that the mistreatment of women is a justification for their attacks. The release of those who are detained was a main demand of demonstrators who protested throughout predominantly Sunni-populated areas in Iraq for most of last year.


The group called for judicial and security reforms in the battle-scarred country.


“Iraq’s weak judiciary, plagued by corruption, frequently bases convictions on coerced confessions, and trial proceedings fall far short of international standards. Many women were detained for months or even years without charge before seeing a judge,” stated HRW in a release which accompanied the report.


Failure by the courts to investigate allegations of abuse and torture, holding those complicit completely responsible just serves to perpetuate abuses and the falsification of confessions, HRW added.


Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki promised to reform the criminal justice system in January last year. However, just one month past the anniversary of his statement, the tactics of the security forces appear to remain very similar, and hundreds remain illegally detained.


“The vast majority of the more than 4,200 women detained in Interior and Defense Ministry facilities are Sunni, but the abuses Human Rights Watch documents affect women of all sects and classes throughout Iraqi society,” said the organization, adding that while both men and women suffer injustices, women suffer twice on account of their second-class status.


“We don’t know who we fear more, Al-Qaeda or SWAT,” one Fallujah resident told the group, referencing the special forces unit that undertakes counterterrorism operations. “Why would we help them fight Al-Qaeda when they’ll just come for us as soon as they’re done with them?”




RT – News



Thousands of women illegally detained by Iraq, facing torture, abuse - HRW

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Paul: Women winning "War on Women"



Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said Sunday that women are winning the so-called “War on Women,” and that political rhetoric from the left that paints Republicans as anti-women prevents lawmakers from working on policies that help move the country forward.


“The whole thing of ‘The War on Women,’ I sort of laughingly say, ‘Yeah, there might have been — but the women are winning it,’” the potential 2016 Republican presidential contender said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”


 ”Over half of the young people in medical school and dental school are women, law school the same way. I think women are doing very well, and I’m proud of how far we’ve come. And I think some of the victimology and all of this other stuff is trumped up. We don’t get to any good policy by playing some sort of charade that somehow one party doesn’t care about women or one party is not in favor of women advancing.”


He was responding to a question from CNN’s Candy Crowley, who had asked him about former GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee’s controversial comments last week.


Huckabee said at the winter meeting of the Republican National Committee: “If the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it — Let’s take that discussion all across America.”


Crowley asked whether Paul thinks Republicans need to address their “words and tone” when reaching out to women and minorities.


“Somewhat,” Paul said. “And I think also a lot of the debates we have in Washington and in the public, generally, are dumbed down. They’re mischaracterized and we get to the point where we’re talking about stuff and throwing stuff back and forth and we’re never getting to the truth.”


Read more about: , , ,




POLITICO – TOP Stories



Paul: Women winning "War on Women"

Real war on women: Rand Paul bashes Bill Clinton for ‘preying’ on Monica Lewinsky



Rand PaulSen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) took a hard hit at former President Bill Clinton on Sunday, bashing him for ‘preying’ on his then-intern Monica Lewinsky in the ’90s.


Paul spoke with David Gregory on Meet the Press this week, where the two discussed recent remarks about women by former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.). Many on the Left criticized Huckabee, pointing to his remarks as proof that the GOP has a war on women. Paul, however, brushed aside that allegation.


“This whole sort of war on women thing — I’m scratching my head because if there was a war on women, I think they won,” Paul said, noting that the women in his family are very successful.


The Kentucky Senator said that, as a whole, women are doing well and outperforming men. He then blamed Democrats for creating the war on women rhetoric and dumbing down the debate about gender equality.


Additionally, Paul could point to at least one obvious instance of disrespect toward women coming from the other side of the aisle: Clinton.


Slightly later in the interview, Gregory asked Paul about the potential 2016 presidential contenders, including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Gregory asked if she should be judged on the foibles of her husband while he was President, something Paul’s wife, Kelley, seemed to suggest during an interview with Voguecalling Clinton’s actions “predatory.”


Paul stood by his wife’s remarks, blasting the former President.


“I mean — the Democrats, one of their big issues is they’ve concocted and said Republicans are committing a war on women,” Paul said. “One of the workplace laws and rules that I think are good is that bosses shouldn’t prey on young interns in their office.”


The Senator said the media had given Clinton a pass for his behavior. Paul also indirectly slammed Clinton supporters and the general public, with whom the former President is still well-liked, saying that people shouldn’t want to associate with Clinton because of his “predatory” behavior.


“Then they [Democrats] have the gall to stand up and say Republicans are having a war on women?” Paul questioned. “So yes, I think it’s a factor. It’s not Hillary’s fault, but it is a factor in judging Bill Clinton in history.”




Red Alert Politics



Real war on women: Rand Paul bashes Bill Clinton for ‘preying’ on Monica Lewinsky

Real war on women: Rand Paul bashes Bill Clinton for ‘preying’ on Monica Lewinsky



Rand PaulSen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) took a hard hit at former President Bill Clinton on Sunday, bashing him for ‘preying’ on his then-intern Monica Lewinsky in the ’90s.


Paul spoke with David Gregory on Meet the Press this week, where the two discussed recent remarks about women by former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.). Many on the Left criticized Huckabee, pointing to his remarks as proof that the GOP has a war on women. Paul, however, brushed aside that allegation.


“This whole sort of war on women thing — I’m scratching my head because if there was a war on women, I think they won,” Paul said, noting that the women in his family are very successful.


The Kentucky Senator said that, as a whole, women are doing well and outperforming men. He then blamed Democrats for creating the war on women rhetoric and dumbing down the debate about gender equality.


Additionally, Paul could point to at least one obvious instance of disrespect toward women coming from the other side of the aisle: Clinton.


Slightly later in the interview, Gregory asked Paul about the potential 2016 presidential contenders, including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Gregory asked if she should be judged on the foibles of her husband while he was President, something Paul’s wife, Kelley, seemed to suggest during an interview with Voguecalling Clinton’s actions “predatory.”


Paul stood by his wife’s remarks, blasting the former President.


“I mean — the Democrats, one of their big issues is they’ve concocted and said Republicans are committing a war on women,” Paul said. “One of the workplace laws and rules that I think are good is that bosses shouldn’t prey on young interns in their office.”


The Senator said the media had given Clinton a pass for his behavior. Paul also indirectly slammed Clinton supporters and the general public, with whom the former President is still well-liked, saying that people shouldn’t want to associate with Clinton because of his “predatory” behavior.


“Then they [Democrats] have the gall to stand up and say Republicans are having a war on women?” Paul questioned. “So yes, I think it’s a factor. It’s not Hillary’s fault, but it is a factor in judging Bill Clinton in history.”




Red Alert Politics



Real war on women: Rand Paul bashes Bill Clinton for ‘preying’ on Monica Lewinsky