Ann Romney: Praises Moms - insults women?

MadsL

IrishAm wrote: »

Eh, Romney has an awful lot of non white family members. I suppose he is anti them too.

Shall I quote Barry Os anti white quotes and comments?

Sure why not.

<snip>

Only if you put a lot of faith in quotes out of context describing Obama's feelings in his own words about events and experiences he had as a young man and want to drag this that far off topic.

I don't however feel Romney is a racist. His father may or may not have marched with MLK on the same or different days in the same or possibly different cities.

Either way Mitt saw it happen.

Dubhlinner

Daisy M wrote: »

I also have to ask when you say "Ann Romley praises moms but insults women" you are implying that moms are not women, why?

you can insult & praise at the same time.

Anyway yes this is offensive (my first thought patronising) to women. Also offensive to men. Particularly fathers who take the homemaker role in a family

Very annoying reading

IrishAm

MadsL wrote: »

Only if you put a lot of faith in quotes out of context describing Obama's feelings in his own words about events and experiences he had as a young man and want to drag this that far off topic.

Bollix. The lad is anti white. Read his books. He was brought up by white folk, whilst his black relatives done a runner. Yet, his racial loyalty is with the blacks and from his writings, he absolutely despises whites.

Mad really,as he is as white as he is black. If it wasn't for his white upbringing, he would not be POTUS.

Ickle Magoo

IrishAm, this is the Ladies Lounge - and this is a thread about Ann Romney. Could you please stop trying to drag the thread off-topic ie in respect to being insulting to women.

Please read the charter if you are unsure what the purpose and ethos of this forum is.

Cheers.

meeeeh

MadsL wrote: »

And saying that that choice makes you better than everyone else is offensive in my view. That's Ann Romney's "moms" speech in a nutshell.

Oh god, as somebody pointed out, every graduation ceremony has the speech about how young people are the future and the biggest asset we have blah blah blah...

You can be insulted by this, but I'd rather be insulted by proper inequalities in society, how western society is biased towards white males and how few women can make it to the top. Besides who even knows Angela Merkel's husband's name. The only reason we know Hollande's ex wife is because Royal was a socialist party candidate herself. Did Enda Kenny's (or anybody else's) wife ever have to make a speech at party meeting and would actually anyone care what she says?

And if we want to discuss Ann Romney's speech about mothers, she is talking from her point of view. I'm not a great fan of a "stay at home mum" role but then I also have no desire to have five children (I'd go mad). I don't feel Ann Romney is addressing someone like me and I also don't feel I should care what she says. She is not running for a position, her husband is. And I think it is wrong that somebody's private life is even an issue in politics unless they are doing something illegal. So we should first ask ourselves why do we even care what partners of the candidates think?

Ellsbells

MadsL wrote: »

Oh, so that thread on the Quiverfull movement should be locked then?

havent a clue as I havent read it.

MadsL wrote: »

not interested in gender politics

So pitting woman against woman is gender politics?

As another poster stated, if you are that easily offended then every person on the planet, other than mothers should also be offended. Its pretty obvious she was speaking to her own audience. Its not that big of a deal. I dont feel like a better mother because of her comments and in fact her comments have no interest for me.

LittleBook

You can trust Mitt. He loves America. He will take us to a better place, just as he took me home safely from that dance.

:pac:

I do see what you're getting at Mads (and I do think it's an interesting topic for this forum) particularly when taken in the context of this retrograde attitude towards women which seems prevalent in Republican policies.

But I can't say I'm particularly "insulted" by this, patronising "hearts and flowers" drivel that it was. Does any working class woman (mother or not) really believe she knows what they're going through? Has this speech actually won over any voters??

I dunno, stranger things have happened I suppose. But to be insulted, I'd have to take something personally and there is no way this woman was speaking to me. I wonder what childless Republican women think of the speech?

MadsL wrote: »

A 2004 U.S. Census study found that 18.4% of U.S. women age 35–44 were childless.

What I find interesting about it is that, as I understand it, the speech was designed to appeal to women voters (in a way that her husband and his colleagues clearly cannot) and may have served to alienate a significant percentage of them ... even without addressing any women's issues.

I just hope that that 18.4% of women (and more!) can see right through her empty rhetoric.

MadsL

meeeeh wrote: »

Oh god, as somebody pointed out, every graduation ceremony has the speech about how young people are the future and the biggest asset we have blah blah blah...

Imagine a graduation speech that pointed out how wonderful 4/5ths of the graduating class were and rather pointedly ignored the other 5th.

You can be insulted by this, but I'd rather be insulted by proper inequalities in society, how western society is biased towards white males and how few women can make it to the top.

I had no idea it was an either/or choice. Is there a quota of things I can be insulted by?

Besides who even knows Angela Merkel's husband's name.

Herr Merkel :P

The only reason we know Hollande's ex wife is because Royal was a socialist party candidate herself. Did Enda Kenny's (or anybody else's) wife ever have to make a speech at party meeting and would actually anyone care what she says?

I don't believe she did. However if she did and for example suggested that the economy would improve if mothers would stay at home and let the unemployed have a crack at their jobs, should we ignore that?

And if we want to discuss Ann Romney's speech about mothers, she is talking from her point of view.

As if she actually wrote that, that was very carefully crafted by the Romney campaign to chase the Mommy vote make no mistake.

I'm not a great fan of a "stay at home mum" role but then I also have no desire to have five children (I'd go mad). I don't feel Ann Romney is addressing someone like me and I also don't feel I should care what she says.

That's fine. All I am doing is pointing out the implications of what she said, I'm not asking you to be offended, just pointing out that it is offended.

She is not running for a position, her husband is.

You see she kinda is, the First Lady is a very visible role in US Politics.

And I think it is wrong that somebody's private life is even an issue in politics unless they are doing something illegal. So we should first ask ourselves why do we even care what partners of the candidates think?

I agree, but the whole thrust of Romney's speech was about how great hers and Mitt's personal life was. If a candidate wants to run on how perfect their home life is then they make it a campaign issue and fair game.

Ellsbells wrote: »

So pitting woman against woman is gender politics?

Now I am "pitting woman against woman" oh please. If you have no interest in this thread then don't read it or post in it. Trying to say that I am "pitting woman against woman" is ridiculous. I didn't start the "Mommy Wars" in America, I'm just commentating on it. Unless you feel every woman should have the same gender political outlook then of course there will be disagreement, that is healthy, and what discussion and debate are for.

Now, please, as you have already been advised if you have a problem with the content of this thread, please PM a mod.

As another poster stated, if you are that easily offended then every person on the planet, other than mothers should also be offended.

Yep, a good few stay at home dads are royally pissed off by her comments.

Its pretty obvious she was speaking to her own audience.

In the hall yes, In general, her comments were aimed at America via the huge coverage the RNC gets here.

Its not that big of a deal. I dont feel like a better mother because of her comments and in fact her comments have no interest for me.

That's strange, because me commenting on them seem to have got you right upset.

meeeeh

LittleBook wrote: »

:pac:
What I find interesting about it is that, as I understand it, the speech was designed to appeal to women voters (in a way that her husband and his colleagues clearly cannot) and may have served to alienate a significant percentage of them ... even without addressing any women's issues.

I just hope that that 18.4% of women (and more!) can see right through her empty rhetoric.

She is appealing to a certain demographic. Left wing liberals won't be voting Romney no matter what she says. I think that every marketing campaign has to have target audience in mind, you can try target everybody but then you will reach none. Somebody already mentioned P&G Mum campaign which was excluding large parts of society but it was very effective in targeting their main consumers. In the same light Ann Romney's speech was actually fairly good imo.

I would prefer to have political campaign that actually deals with issues that matter but it doesn't happen anymore, if it ever did. The image, look, personalty, showmanship, charisma all come into play and there is very little of substance left. Even Obama or especially Obama offered a whole pile of waffle about hope in his previous campaign. Don't get me wrong I fell for it like never before and I still like him a lot. But I also don't think you can win election just with substance.

Giselle

If you go to a Women in Business conference, the addresses will refer to, and laud, women in business. Thats their audience, the target demographic. It doesn't insult homemakers by leaving them out of the focus, because they aren't the focus of any address.

Ann Romney, Stepford Wife extraordinaire, has an audience of soccer and stay at home moms, and chose to deliver a speech at focused on them. I don't think all other women are de facto insulted by their omission, the speech wasn't addressed to them. She just went for her target audience.

To be honest, if Ann Romney came out and condemned all women who aren't Mormon mothers of seven who bake cakes with their left hands, and wipe their husbands butts with the right, while cartwheeling pregnant into church to praise Jesus, it would barely register on my radar.

The only thought I have in connection with her or her husband is that I hope to all get out that they don't get in the White House.

MadsL

Giselle wrote: »

If you go to a Women in Business conference, the addresses will refer to, and laud, women in business. Thats their audience, the target demographic. It doesn't insult homemakers by leaving them out of the focus, because they aren't the focus of any address.

That might be fine if you are speaking to a conference, make no mistake that Ann Romney was speaking to the nation.

Ann Romney, Stepford Wife extraordinaire, has an audience of soccer and stay at home moms, and chose to deliver a speech at focused on them. I don't think all other women are de facto insulted by their omission, the speech wasn't addressed to them. She just went for her target audience.

Yes, she did. And ignored almost 20% of American women in the process.

To be honest, if Ann Romney came out and condemned all women who aren't Mormon mothers of seven who bake cakes with their left hands, and wipe their husbands butts with the right, while cartwheeling pregnant into church to praise Jesus, it would barely register on my radar.

and yet here we are.

ppink

When I read this the only thing I thought is how she is playing/trying to play a group- pretty much like Oprah.......stay at home mom, hardest job in the world......

Giselle

MadsL wrote: »

Yes, she did. And ignored almost 20% of American women in the process.

Thats sort of my point. There's nothing the likes of Ann Romney has to say thats going to sway that 20%, so she chose to consolidate her target and reinforce her position.

A bird in the hand needs flattery, if its not going to join its two friends in the bush.

Its either canny or cowardly, and to be fair to her I think its probably the former. She doesn't speak to the lives of that 20%, so chasing that vote is all but a lost cause.

Stheno

Heard a bit of her speech tonight, and really didn't like her statement that she stood before them as "an american"

Feeds right back into the whole "where was Obama born" debate, something Romney has been involved in.

I often wonder if presidential candidates of either gender in the US actually sit down and ask if their partners are willing to go through the rigour of a campaign.

Given it's almost exclusively male orientation I suspect not. And when does that ambition start? Does it influence the lives of potential presidents from a very young age?

Wompa1

MadsL wrote: »

Imagine a graduation speech that pointed out how wonderful 4/5ths of the graduating class were and rather pointedly ignored the other 5th.

My graduation featured a priest talking about faith and that stuff. I hadn't thought about it until I saw that quote and thought hmmm who spoke at mine. I didn't care that he spoke to others and not to me as I'm not religious. This is politics, her speech would have been approved. They are targeting the women they can try to get to vote. Statisacly women vote democrat. So they are trying to target mothers to get a chunk out of that demographic.

mood

“Eat, Pray, Love” author Elizabeth Gilbert
Ended up divorced over not wanting children.

How can a couple get married when they have not had a serious conversation about if they want children or not!

IvyTheTerrible

mood wrote: »

“Eat, Pray, Love” author Elizabeth Gilbert
Ended up divorced over not wanting children.

How can a couple get married when they have not had a serious conversation about if they want children or not!

Denial.

Or the partner that doesn't children fudges for time and doesn't declare right out that they don't want them.

mood

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

I really think that depends on the mother and on the child. I'm just a mother of 6 months, and maybe my baby is particularly easy going, but I found doing my doctoral thesis, while childless, and with no other responsibilities, a million times harder, than being a mother to my baby has been so far! I don't like women being lumped into categories like "mothers" or "childless", as the experiences are so different between individuals.

I agree it all depends on the mother, the children and the situation they are in etc. My parents had a VERY large family and she complained less that most mothers I meet through out my life (most who had VERY small families).

meeeeh

mood wrote: »

“Eat, Pray, Love” author Elizabeth Gilbert
Ended up divorced over not wanting children.

How can a couple get married when they have not had a serious conversation about if they want children or not!

Surprisingly enough people do change their minds occasionally.

lazygal

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2012/09/17/120917sh_shouts_allen?currentPage=all


Thought this was an interesting follow up.

gara

Ann Romney making conservative statements to a conservative audience is hardly remarkable -in fact, she is doing exactly what she says on the tin.

At the end of the day, she is equally entitled to peddle her own political agenda the same way her opposition is. Regardless of whether you like it or not, the woman has done nothing wrong

MadsL

gara wrote: »

At the end of the day, the woman has done nothing wrong

FYP

(Holds out hand for a slap for suggesting raising kids with millions in the bank is doing nothing)

Teyla Emmagan

Does no one else find it odd that she always calls her husband 'Mitt Romney'. 'When Mitt Romney and I got married', 'The family Mitt Romney and I have raised' etc etc.

Does she think people will forget whose wife she is? Or is it some sort of branding thing, whereby he always has to be referred to by his first name?

Sparklygirl

I fail to see what is so terrible with celebrating the great job Mothers do. My Mum was great growing up and I only really appreciated all she did when I became a Mammy myself. She continues to be the most amazing influence in my life. What is wrong with celebrating one of the many things women excell at?

Honey-ec

Sparklygirl wrote: »

I fail to see what is so terrible with celebrating the great job Mothers do. My Mum was great growing up and I only really appreciated all she did when I became a Mammy myself. She continues to be the most amazing influence in my life. What is wrong with celebrating one of the many things women excell at?

Have you read the entire thread? The issue people have is that by singling out mothers in her speech, she implied that women who are childless, whether by choice or not, are somehow "lesser" than women who have managed to reproduce themselves.

Personally, the opinion of an ultra-conservative politician's wife means next to nothing to me, but I can see why people might take issue with her tone.

Sleepy

Be honest MadsL, do you regard the woman as a moron?

I would. She believes in one of the most ludicrous religions around and supports a political party that's more focused on interfering with people's lifestyle choices than any of it's stated aims (small government, financial prudence etc.).

If you'd agree, why does it bother you when a moron says something stupid?

gara

Honey-ec wrote: »

Have you read the entire thread? The issue people have is that by singling out mothers in her speech, she implied that women who are childless, whether by choice or not, are somehow "lesser" than women who have managed to reproduce themselves

No, it is not the implication. It's the implication if you're looking to be offended and choose to deduct that meaning. A more rational person might deduce that she simply knows her audience and is addressing what's relevant to them.

I sincerely doubt Ann Romney actually cares if a woman reproduces or not

Honey-ec

gara wrote: »

No, it is not the implication. It's the implication if you're looking to be offended and choose to deduct that meaning. A more rational person might deduce that she simply knows her audience and is addressing what's relevant to them.

I sincerely doubt Ann Romney actually cares if a woman reproduces or not

Nice selective quote.

Welcome to Ignoresville, you've been flirting with it for a while.