2 Comments to 'Women belong in the House…unless they’re pregnant?'
Subscribe to comments with RSS
:: Trackbacks/Pingbacks ::
No Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Women belong in the House…unless they’re pregnant?
Posted By katie allison granju
Via Silence is Golden, we get a glimpse into the mind of the postmodern (third wave?) male chauvinist:
Ladies and gentlemen, via a friend of mine in Upstate NY, we have found a winner for the dumbest letter to the editor ever written. And I am pleased to say that it did NOT come from the Tennessean!
Instead, it comes from the Glens Falls Post Star (Glens Falls is near Albany), and it regards their Congresswoman, Kirsten Gillibrand, and her recently announced pregnancy. It’s the third letter down:
Editor:
Regarding a story that appeared inThe Post-Star
on Dec. 6: “Rep. Gillibrand announces she is pregnant.”
First of all, I must admit that I am a male chauvinist and that there are, thankfully, differences between men and women. There are many occupations suitable for women and their physical attributes. Carrying a weapon while serving in the Armed Forces and firefighting are not suitable lines of work for women to prove that they are physically equal to men. How many male police officers feel comfortable with a 100 pound female backup?
And now, I have to add serving in the U.S. House and Senate as an occupation that may not be suitable for women.
Ms. Gillibrand’s current pregnancy makes a strong case for my opinion. Ms. Gillibrand was elected to serve her constituency, and while she is away from her elected office she cannot perform those duties. The taxpayers who were duped into voting for her will have to pay for her medical benefits. Yes, Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer, Ms. Gillibrand receives excellent health benefits, courtesy of her constituents. We will be without representation in Congress for a time leading up to and following the child’s birth. There will be times when she and the new baby will visit doctors. You can add those days to the total that she will not be serving her constituents.
The current base salary (2006) for members of the House and Senate is $165,200 per year. I wonder if Ms. Gillibrand will do the right thing and reimburse the U.S. Treasury in the amount of $452.60, her daily salary, for each day that she is unable to perform her elected duties. For some reason, I doubt it.
RON BLACHUT
Queensbury
I shouldn’t even need to do this, but let’s break this down point by point:…
Dec 23rd, 2007
He just set men back 50,000 years. Apparently he’s a couple evolutions behind some men.
While I agree with KAG and the commenter, I don’t even try to fight these anymore. We know they’re there, we can’t change the hardcore ones no matter what we say, and if we try they just use our arguments to make us look radical and extreme. To quote my Dad, “It’s like trying to teach a pig to dance, you only end up looking foolish and the pig gets mad and hurts you.”
It’s sad that people like this are still a part of our world, but they are and they’re happy with their views, “thankyouverydamnedmuch.”