Republican women say GOP is pro-woman

The GOP women in the House want you to know that the Republican party is pro-woman. Gosh, I can’t imagine what might have given you the impression that it wasn’t, but let’s hear them out.

I will just echo Vanessa quoting Ann from the other day: “A woman candidate is not the same thing as a woman’s candidate.” Just because a woman supports anti-woman policies doesn’t mean that they aren’t anti-woman. And all this Republicans talk about jobs jobs jobs doesn’t change the fact that they have, in fact, been “focused like a laser on your uterus.”

I like to see women politicians speaking out–I just like to see them speak out for the right things even more. As Jess McIntosh of EMILY’s List said, “Women speaking on behalf of the anti-woman policies of a party of men just doesn’t deliver the same punch.” No kidding.

Transcript after the jump

Transcript:

Mr Speaker my agenda and the Republican agenda is indeed pro-women. It is pro-woman because it’s pro-small business, pro-job creater, pro-family, and pro-economic growth.

I’m here tonight to politely decline the anti-woman label that some who must not have better things to do have pushed our way.

I’m proud to serve my state and my country as a Republican woman.

Because the women here in this chamber, on this side of the aisle, are incredibly diverse.

But more importantly as a Conservative committed to doing my part to get our country back on track.

You see just as my dad taught me years ago, women in my home state of South Dakota and all across this country, we care about the same things that men do.

We know that we need solutions, and the most important solution we can find is bringing more jobs to folks at home.

Mr. Speaker our Republican conference has rolled out a jobs plan. It’s pro-woman and it’s pro-man because it does exactly what we need to get our economy back on track.

and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

6 Comments

  1. Posted June 23, 2011 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

    Maya,
    Would you consider a different method of linking than you used in the “Gosh, I can’t imagine what might have given you the impression” sentence? These non-descriptive single word links are difficult for screen readers to interpret. (A screen reader is a software application often used by people who are blind, visually impaired, illiterate, etc.)
    Thanks!

  2. Posted June 23, 2011 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    “You see just as my dad taught me years ago, women in my home state of South Dakota and all across this country, we care about the same things that men do.”

    And this is precisely why they are anti-woman. The Republican men support anti-women policies, so the Republican women do as well. They’ve been conditioned from a very young age to think that the white male protestants have all the answers and should not be challenged.

    • Posted June 24, 2011 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

      I’m not sure that’s true, since alot of these policies hurt men too but it doesn’t stop them.

      Posts like this make me very uncomfortable b/c you are basically infantizing women and saying they have no agency. I seriously doubt any of these women would take kindly to such an assertion. Beyond that we see on this very site MANY women who grew up in conservative households who have gone on to reject such ideals and embrace things like feminism.

      • Posted June 25, 2011 at 10:35 pm | Permalink

        “Posts like this make me very uncomfortable b/c you are basically infantizing women and saying they have no agency.”

        No, I am not infantilizing women by saynig they have no agency. I am stating that Republican women are more likely to support anti-woman policies because of the way the Republican men support them. Whether you’d like to believe it or not, some women have in fact been socially conditioned to follow the “status quo” of their political party when it comes to politics (which in this case is anti-woman policies).

        “I seriously doubt any of these women would take kindly to such an assertion.”

        Well of course not, they truly believe that they’re helping women, when in reality they are not. They’re lying to themselves, whether that be consciously or subconcsiouly.

        “Beyond that we see on this very site MANY women who grew up in conservative households who have gone on to reject such ideals and embrace things like feminism.”

        Let’s get back on track here. I’m referring to Republican women who serve in government, not your average everyday citizen, so this statement really has no leverage in that context (unless you can point me to a government official who happens to be a female Republican who doesn’t advocate anti-woman policies?). Anyway, yes you’re right that there are women who once considered themselves conservatives but later realized they weren’t, but isn’t that a little irrelevant? I mean after all, they aren’t truly conservatives, as you’ve already pointed out, and they do not support anti-woman legislation.

  3. Posted June 23, 2011 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    Yeah? But what are you doing FOR women?

    I knew somebody during the 2008 elections who said “I’m not voting for Hilary Clinton because she’s a woman, I’m voting for her because I’m a woman.” Whether or not Hilary had made commitments to work for women’s rights had no place in her vote. She is a woman and so is Hilary, therefore apparently this equals a deserving vote. Having a vagina does not mean you do or do not care about other people with vaginas. Caring about people with vaginas means you care about people with vaginas. It’s such a no brainer.

  4. Posted June 24, 2011 at 1:21 am | Permalink

    Interesting. With candidates who are anti-choice, pro-Creationism, anti-science, anti-same sex marriage, homophobic, transphobic, and who are trying their utmost to roll back hard-won women’s rights, they are pro-women. Their logic seems a little lacking to me.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

180 queries. 0.307 seconds