<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Right-whingers shocked feminists aren&#8217;t pandering</title>
	<atom:link href="http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/</link>
	<description>creating a new liberal-left force</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:14:00 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: MrX</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-22274</link>
		<dc:creator>MrX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:28:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-22274</guid>
		<description>The root of feminism is about equality, not if your are liberal or conervative, not if you are for god or against god, not if you are for abortion or against abortion.

If you think feminism should be about abortion, political affiliation, and religion...then it is not a civil right fight, but basically an ideaology your are pushing...nothing different than radical islam and fundemtalist christianity.

I want to teach my daughter that you can be a feminist of any race, with different views, and that the real calling of a feminist is to believe that they have been created equalt to a men.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The root of feminism is about equality, not if your are liberal or conervative, not if you are for god or against god, not if you are for abortion or against abortion.</p>
<p>If you think feminism should be about abortion, political affiliation, and religion&#8230;then it is not a civil right fight, but basically an ideaology your are pushing&#8230;nothing different than radical islam and fundemtalist christianity.</p>
<p>I want to teach my daughter that you can be a feminist of any race, with different views, and that the real calling of a feminist is to believe that they have been created equalt to a men.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19871</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:26:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19871</guid>
		<description>&quot;...especially when Palin so vigorously opposes gay marriage for just that reason.&quot;

Uhhh... maybe she just has a different concept of what sanctity means than you, one that isn&#039;t based on personal autonomy but on the assumption that a child is a blessing (whatever the circumstances of the conception) and that the right thing to do in those circumstances is to ensure they have a family life. I don&#039;t agree with it myself, but it makes more sense to me than the left&#039;s apparent position on the family: don&#039;t make any demands on parents and let the state fill in the gaps (poorly).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;especially when Palin so vigorously opposes gay marriage for just that reason.&#8221;</p>
<p>Uhhh&#8230; maybe she just has a different concept of what sanctity means than you, one that isn&#8217;t based on personal autonomy but on the assumption that a child is a blessing (whatever the circumstances of the conception) and that the right thing to do in those circumstances is to ensure they have a family life. I don&#8217;t agree with it myself, but it makes more sense to me than the left&#8217;s apparent position on the family: don&#8217;t make any demands on parents and let the state fill in the gaps (poorly).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: septicisle</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19867</link>
		<dc:creator>septicisle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 01:21:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19867</guid>
		<description>I think the more worthy of attention part of the daughter&#039;s pregnancy story is the fact that she&#039;s going to marry the father.  Now, whether she was intending to or not is obviously unprovable, but I don&#039;t think there&#039;s anything that debases the &quot;sanctity&quot; of marriage more than a shotgun wedding because someone&#039;s fell pregnant, especially when Palin so vigorously opposes gay marriage for just that reason.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the more worthy of attention part of the daughter&#8217;s pregnancy story is the fact that she&#8217;s going to marry the father.  Now, whether she was intending to or not is obviously unprovable, but I don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s anything that debases the &#8220;sanctity&#8221; of marriage more than a shotgun wedding because someone&#8217;s fell pregnant, especially when Palin so vigorously opposes gay marriage for just that reason.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Whatever Your Moral Perceptions, Exploiting Bristol Palin&#8217;s Pregnancy Won&#8217;t Help You&#8230; &#171; Back Towards The Locus</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19865</link>
		<dc:creator>Whatever Your Moral Perceptions, Exploiting Bristol Palin&#8217;s Pregnancy Won&#8217;t Help You&#8230; &#171; Back Towards The Locus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:07:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19865</guid>
		<description>[...] tip of the hat to Liberal Conspiracy   Posted in Uncategorized [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] tip of the hat to Liberal Conspiracy   Posted in Uncategorized [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sally</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19864</link>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19864</guid>
		<description>So because her daughter “made a mistake”, or perhaps wasn’t in the 100% authoritarian grip of her mother…Palin is suddenly incapable of being a politician and is also a hypocrite?


No you get real Lee. This is another typical Republican hypocrite who  preaches abstinence only teaching . This policy has been backed by the Republicans, and has failed badly in places like Texas, where huge amounts of tax $ have been spent. Now we have a Republican Governor who also backs this policy ,but it does not  even work in her own family.    Seeing as people like her also oppose abortion, it is a very stupid and dangerous policy. 

She’s the worst type of Christian fundamentalist hypocrite.  

I think Lee you are a pit of a concern troll.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So because her daughter “made a mistake”, or perhaps wasn’t in the 100% authoritarian grip of her mother…Palin is suddenly incapable of being a politician and is also a hypocrite?</p>
<p>No you get real Lee. This is another typical Republican hypocrite who  preaches abstinence only teaching . This policy has been backed by the Republicans, and has failed badly in places like Texas, where huge amounts of tax $ have been spent. Now we have a Republican Governor who also backs this policy ,but it does not  even work in her own family.    Seeing as people like her also oppose abortion, it is a very stupid and dangerous policy. </p>
<p>She’s the worst type of Christian fundamentalist hypocrite.  </p>
<p>I think Lee you are a pit of a concern troll.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Griffin</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19862</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Griffin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:48:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19862</guid>
		<description>&quot;And while some might think that persuading a 17-year-old to go through with a pregnancy for the sake of morality Jeebus her mum’s career is a respectable and worthy thing, they’re wrong.&quot;

If you can argue it was for her career, which I have no opinion on. My point is much as Aaron&#039;s has been...politically it&#039;s a non-starter that will divide opinion more than provide ammunition against the republicans. I find it laughable that it keeps getting brought up as any kind of serious point, because it isn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;And while some might think that persuading a 17-year-old to go through with a pregnancy for the sake of morality Jeebus her mum’s career is a respectable and worthy thing, they’re wrong.&#8221;</p>
<p>If you can argue it was for her career, which I have no opinion on. My point is much as Aaron&#8217;s has been&#8230;politically it&#8217;s a non-starter that will divide opinion more than provide ammunition against the republicans. I find it laughable that it keeps getting brought up as any kind of serious point, because it isn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: douglas clark</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19861</link>
		<dc:creator>douglas clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19861</guid>
		<description>Re John Blads post above, is this a new form of devowelling?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re John Blads post above, is this a new form of devowelling?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Band</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19860</link>
		<dc:creator>John Band</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:06:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19860</guid>
		<description>(blimmin&#039; HTML purging. Imagine &quot;morality&quot; and &quot;Jeebus&quot; are strike-out-ed...)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(blimmin&#8217; HTML purging. Imagine &#8220;morality&#8221; and &#8220;Jeebus&#8221; are strike-out-ed&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Band</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19859</link>
		<dc:creator>John Band</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:05:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19859</guid>
		<description>The &#039;pledge&#039; story and the &#039;trooper&#039; story are true though.

And while some might think that persuading a 17-year-old to go through with a pregnancy for the sake of morality Jeebus her mum&#039;s career is a respectable and worthy thing, they&#039;re wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8216;pledge&#8217; story and the &#8216;trooper&#8217; story are true though.</p>
<p>And while some might think that persuading a 17-year-old to go through with a pregnancy for the sake of morality Jeebus her mum&#8217;s career is a respectable and worthy thing, they&#8217;re wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Griffin</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19858</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Griffin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:56:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19858</guid>
		<description>&quot;Palin has big problems. She has an un married daughter who is pregnant, despite Palin’s belief in abstinence only teaching. Maybe if she had taught the basics of the facts of life and contraceptives, her daughter may not be up the duff.&quot;

So because her daughter &quot;made a mistake&quot;, or perhaps wasn&#039;t in the 100% authoritarian grip of her mother...Palin is suddenly incapable of being a politician and is also a hypocrite? Get real already, the actions of someone else, and the subsequent fall out and managing of the situation are COMPLETELY independent of her beliefs on abstinence. If she&#039;d had got her daughter to abort the baby and covered that up maybe you&#039;d have a shred of a point. For once.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Palin has big problems. She has an un married daughter who is pregnant, despite Palin’s belief in abstinence only teaching. Maybe if she had taught the basics of the facts of life and contraceptives, her daughter may not be up the duff.&#8221;</p>
<p>So because her daughter &#8220;made a mistake&#8221;, or perhaps wasn&#8217;t in the 100% authoritarian grip of her mother&#8230;Palin is suddenly incapable of being a politician and is also a hypocrite? Get real already, the actions of someone else, and the subsequent fall out and managing of the situation are COMPLETELY independent of her beliefs on abstinence. If she&#8217;d had got her daughter to abort the baby and covered that up maybe you&#8217;d have a shred of a point. For once.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sally</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19857</link>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:41:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19857</guid>
		<description>Palin has big problems. She has an un married  daughter  who is pregnant, despite Palin’s belief in abstinence only teaching. Maybe if she had taught the basics of the facts of life and contraceptives, her daughter may not be up the duff. 

She is now having to lawyer herself up against accusations that she had a state trooper fired because of a family  dispute.  She also does not know the basis of the pledge of allegiance. She claims that ‘Under God’ was put in by the founding fathers.  It was  actually put in in the 1950s.

She is a  typical, simpleton religious fundie nut,  so it is no wonder Hitchens  and Dale like her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Palin has big problems. She has an un married  daughter  who is pregnant, despite Palin’s belief in abstinence only teaching. Maybe if she had taught the basics of the facts of life and contraceptives, her daughter may not be up the duff. </p>
<p>She is now having to lawyer herself up against accusations that she had a state trooper fired because of a family  dispute.  She also does not know the basis of the pledge of allegiance. She claims that ‘Under God’ was put in by the founding fathers.  It was  actually put in in the 1950s.</p>
<p>She is a  typical, simpleton religious fundie nut,  so it is no wonder Hitchens  and Dale like her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: septicisle</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19856</link>
		<dc:creator>septicisle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:59:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19856</guid>
		<description>Does anyone apart from the likes of Iain Dale take Peter Hitchens seriously?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does anyone apart from the likes of Iain Dale take Peter Hitchens seriously?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: redpesto</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19821</link>
		<dc:creator>redpesto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 11:32:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19821</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s going to be fun watching the US work through its &#039;Margaret Thatcher&#039; moment re. Sarah Palin. It seems that all she brings to the table is that she&#039;s (a) right-wing, and (b) female, so it&#039;&#039;s hard to see how the choice helps McCain with anyone outside the hardcore Xian Republicans. It also puts all the pro-Clinton &#039;PUMA&#039; types on the spot: do they want a female president so badly they&#039;re prepared to vote for McCain and then hope he snuffs it (maybe they&#039;ve been watching &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander_in_Chief_(TV_series)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;i&gt;Commander in Chief&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/a&gt; instead of &lt;i&gt;The West Wing&lt;/i&gt;)? As for feminists, I agree with Zohra&#039;s comment - but so much &#039;pop feminism&#039; and lazy writing about gender (not just by men) regard women/feminist as interchangeable that it makes such right-wing opportunism inevitable. To paraphrase Bill Clinton&#039;s campaign: It&#039;s the ideology, stupid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s going to be fun watching the US work through its &#8216;Margaret Thatcher&#8217; moment re. Sarah Palin. It seems that all she brings to the table is that she&#8217;s (a) right-wing, and (b) female, so it&#8217;&#8217;s hard to see how the choice helps McCain with anyone outside the hardcore Xian Republicans. It also puts all the pro-Clinton &#8216;PUMA&#8217; types on the spot: do they want a female president so badly they&#8217;re prepared to vote for McCain and then hope he snuffs it (maybe they&#8217;ve been watching <a HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander_in_Chief_(TV_series)" rel="nofollow"><i>Commander in Chief</i></a> instead of <i>The West Wing</i>)? As for feminists, I agree with Zohra&#8217;s comment &#8211; but so much &#8216;pop feminism&#8217; and lazy writing about gender (not just by men) regard women/feminist as interchangeable that it makes such right-wing opportunism inevitable. To paraphrase Bill Clinton&#8217;s campaign: It&#8217;s the ideology, stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rupert Read</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19815</link>
		<dc:creator>Rupert Read</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 09:03:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19815</guid>
		<description>Colleagues may be interested in my challenge to Dale, Hitchens et al, here:
http://rupertsread.blogspot.com/2008/09/palins-paleo-con-backed-by-tories-in.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Colleagues may be interested in my challenge to Dale, Hitchens et al, here:<br />
<a href="http://rupertsread.blogspot.com/2008/09/palins-paleo-con-backed-by-tories-in.html" rel="nofollow">http://rupertsread.blogspot.com/2008/09/palins-paleo-con-backed-by-tories-in.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19813</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:17:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19813</guid>
		<description>Difficult isn&#039;t it. Such a shame we can&#039;t have a candidate that is both pro-choice AND anti-rape: http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/twoways_s.jpg</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Difficult isn&#8217;t it. Such a shame we can&#8217;t have a candidate that is both pro-choice AND anti-rape: <a href="http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/twoways_s.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/twoways_s.jpg</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: douglas clark</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19809</link>
		<dc:creator>douglas clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 01:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19809</guid>
		<description>DK,

Well, you won&#039;t agree with a word I have to say about you on the other place. Consider this a football match in no mans land during the first World War.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DK,</p>
<p>Well, you won&#8217;t agree with a word I have to say about you on the other place. Consider this a football match in no mans land during the first World War.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mystery Dyke Squadron (Bombing Division)</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19807</link>
		<dc:creator>Mystery Dyke Squadron (Bombing Division)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:01:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19807</guid>
		<description>Doubtless much of the criticism aimed at Palin is sincere.

One can&#039;t help but think that at least part of it must be mixed with concern, though - if the reactionary parties have taken to ascending women to such high positions then does what this say about the beloved &quot;Patriarchy&quot; that feminists are entirely ideologically dependent upon?

Well, in reality, it displays its shattered and ended state. The Republicans use women as a means to win an election, thus displaying the power which women in contemporary society possess. This was a victory, incidentally, of the very First Wave of feminism. Let us not speak out against that, or minimise what was a feminist achievement of a feminist goal. But to pretend that the model of male dominance remains in power after this development is nothing short of laughable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doubtless much of the criticism aimed at Palin is sincere.</p>
<p>One can&#8217;t help but think that at least part of it must be mixed with concern, though &#8211; if the reactionary parties have taken to ascending women to such high positions then does what this say about the beloved &#8220;Patriarchy&#8221; that feminists are entirely ideologically dependent upon?</p>
<p>Well, in reality, it displays its shattered and ended state. The Republicans use women as a means to win an election, thus displaying the power which women in contemporary society possess. This was a victory, incidentally, of the very First Wave of feminism. Let us not speak out against that, or minimise what was a feminist achievement of a feminist goal. But to pretend that the model of male dominance remains in power after this development is nothing short of laughable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Devil's Kitchen</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19805</link>
		<dc:creator>Devil's Kitchen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:40:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19805</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I don’t like the incidence of abortion, or any of that stuff. But I accept that it is the lesser of two evils.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

douglasclarke, I absolutely agree with you. And I never thought I&#039;d write &lt;i&gt;that&lt;/i&gt; sentence...

DK</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I don’t like the incidence of abortion, or any of that stuff. But I accept that it is the lesser of two evils.</p></blockquote>
<p>douglasclarke, I absolutely agree with you. And I never thought I&#8217;d write <i>that</i> sentence&#8230;</p>
<p>DK</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sunny Hundal</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19803</link>
		<dc:creator>Sunny Hundal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:53:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19803</guid>
		<description>Peter, you say:
&lt;i&gt;Where does he call for women specifically to back her on grounds of her sex? &lt;/i&gt;

Hitchens says:
&lt;i&gt;Which just goes to show that ultra-feminists are not actually interested in promoting women because they’re women. They pretend they are, but really their agenda &lt;/i&gt;

If he agrees with the feminist stance, then what is he going on about? Of course feminists are not going to promote women just because they&#039;re women.

Feminists are interested in issues that advance female choice and equality. What&#039;s there to cry about? Why in the world should feminists support a woman who is anti-abortion full stop... not even counting her support for creationism teachings?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter, you say:<br />
<i>Where does he call for women specifically to back her on grounds of her sex? </i></p>
<p>Hitchens says:<br />
<i>Which just goes to show that ultra-feminists are not actually interested in promoting women because they’re women. They pretend they are, but really their agenda </i></p>
<p>If he agrees with the feminist stance, then what is he going on about? Of course feminists are not going to promote women just because they&#8217;re women.</p>
<p>Feminists are interested in issues that advance female choice and equality. What&#8217;s there to cry about? Why in the world should feminists support a woman who is anti-abortion full stop&#8230; not even counting her support for creationism teachings?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: douglas clark</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19802</link>
		<dc:creator>douglas clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19802</guid>
		<description>QuestionThat.

&lt;blockquote&gt;You don’t have to be an ultra-feminist to be pro-choice, Hitchens!&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Agreed.

I think one of the best debates that there &lt;i&gt;ever&lt;/i&gt; was on here was over abortion. And the consensus - here - got it right. I was swayed, if you like.

Christopher seems to have other ideas. Perhaps he should try to persuade us we were wrong?

I am a fairly socially conservative male. I don&#039;t like the incidence of abortion, or any of that stuff. But I accept that it is the lesser of two evils.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>QuestionThat.</p>
<blockquote><p>You don’t have to be an ultra-feminist to be pro-choice, Hitchens!</p></blockquote>
<p>Agreed.</p>
<p>I think one of the best debates that there <i>ever</i> was on here was over abortion. And the consensus &#8211; here &#8211; got it right. I was swayed, if you like.</p>
<p>Christopher seems to have other ideas. Perhaps he should try to persuade us we were wrong?</p>
<p>I am a fairly socially conservative male. I don&#8217;t like the incidence of abortion, or any of that stuff. But I accept that it is the lesser of two evils.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: QuestionThat</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19800</link>
		<dc:creator>QuestionThat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:47:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19800</guid>
		<description>Not sure what all this &#039;cracks in the glass ceiling&#039; stuff is about. Geraldine Ferraro 24 years ago, anyone?

You don&#039;t have to be an ultra-feminist to be pro-choice, Hitchens!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not sure what all this &#8216;cracks in the glass ceiling&#8217; stuff is about. Geraldine Ferraro 24 years ago, anyone?</p>
<p>You don&#8217;t have to be an ultra-feminist to be pro-choice, Hitchens!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: douglas clark</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19798</link>
		<dc:creator>douglas clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:19:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19798</guid>
		<description>Peter, no worries, it&#039;s an easy thing to do. Sorry if I sounded a bit short there. This is a debate where I haven&#039;t made my mind up on the candidate one way or the other. Which is an interesting place to be, given that almost every commentator seems to be be treating Sarah Palin as a tabula rasa, if you see what I mean. And the conspiraloons seem to be out in force too. Not, I hasten to add, on this site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter, no worries, it&#8217;s an easy thing to do. Sorry if I sounded a bit short there. This is a debate where I haven&#8217;t made my mind up on the candidate one way or the other. Which is an interesting place to be, given that almost every commentator seems to be be treating Sarah Palin as a tabula rasa, if you see what I mean. And the conspiraloons seem to be out in force too. Not, I hasten to add, on this site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19797</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19797</guid>
		<description>Douglas, mea culpa, you&#039;re right. Obviously I did intend to quote the last paragraph too, and nothing it implies the shock or the call for women to back ANY woman that the post suggests.

Amrit, again, I don&#039;t understand how what you say is supposed to contradict Hitchens. He is saying precisely that one can disagree legitimately with a woman&#039;s politics as much as one can disagree with Brown&#039;s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Douglas, mea culpa, you&#8217;re right. Obviously I did intend to quote the last paragraph too, and nothing it implies the shock or the call for women to back ANY woman that the post suggests.</p>
<p>Amrit, again, I don&#8217;t understand how what you say is supposed to contradict Hitchens. He is saying precisely that one can disagree legitimately with a woman&#8217;s politics as much as one can disagree with Brown&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: douglas clark</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19795</link>
		<dc:creator>douglas clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19795</guid>
		<description>Peter @ 5,

Please don&#039;t say you are quoting someone, in this case Hitchins, &lt;b&gt;in full&lt;/b&gt; when you leave off the final para, which says:

&lt;blockquote&gt;Not least because they are the bigots - merciless when it comes to a choice between their own convenience and the life of an unborn baby.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

That is all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter @ 5,</p>
<p>Please don&#8217;t say you are quoting someone, in this case Hitchins, <b>in full</b> when you leave off the final para, which says:</p>
<blockquote><p>Not least because they are the bigots &#8211; merciless when it comes to a choice between their own convenience and the life of an unborn baby.</p></blockquote>
<p>That is all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amrit</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/08/31/right-whingers-shocked-feminists-arent-pandering/#comment-19794</link>
		<dc:creator>Amrit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:11:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1193#comment-19794</guid>
		<description>Peter - judging by your comment, I smell troll. However, I&#039;ll aim to give you a response nonetheless.

P.Hitchens gives no evidence whatsoever of these &#039;ultra feminists&#039;. Who are they? Where are they? I can&#039;t help thinking that if you construct everything you&#039;re saying around mere assertions, no-one has to take you seriously even for a minute.

The feminists Sunny has mentioned, who probably fall within his bizarre category (&#039;ultra&#039;) simply by being openly feminist, merely said that they don&#039;t need to agree with all that Palin believes in, just because she&#039;s a woman. Much like Hitchens himself wouldn&#039;t necessarily agree with everything Gordon Brown says, just because GB&#039;s a man.

@ Kate: I have to say too that &#039;tart&#039; was really not the best choice of word. I think that Palin is a somewhat deluded have-her-cake-and-eat-it type (feminist AND pro-life, anti-corruption while being investigated over accusations of political interference herself...) and her hair scares me a little with its somewhat unnatural height at times (Hillary had &#039;power hair&#039; too ;-P). However, calling her a &#039;tart&#039;, &#039;bimbo&#039; or otherwise plays into the hands of Hitchens and his ilk!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter &#8211; judging by your comment, I smell troll. However, I&#8217;ll aim to give you a response nonetheless.</p>
<p>P.Hitchens gives no evidence whatsoever of these &#8216;ultra feminists&#8217;. Who are they? Where are they? I can&#8217;t help thinking that if you construct everything you&#8217;re saying around mere assertions, no-one has to take you seriously even for a minute.</p>
<p>The feminists Sunny has mentioned, who probably fall within his bizarre category (&#8217;ultra&#8217;) simply by being openly feminist, merely said that they don&#8217;t need to agree with all that Palin believes in, just because she&#8217;s a woman. Much like Hitchens himself wouldn&#8217;t necessarily agree with everything Gordon Brown says, just because GB&#8217;s a man.</p>
<p>@ Kate: I have to say too that &#8216;tart&#8217; was really not the best choice of word. I think that Palin is a somewhat deluded have-her-cake-and-eat-it type (feminist AND pro-life, anti-corruption while being investigated over accusations of political interference herself&#8230;) and her hair scares me a little with its somewhat unnatural height at times (Hillary had &#8216;power hair&#8217; too ;-P). However, calling her a &#8216;tart&#8217;, &#8216;bimbo&#8217; or otherwise plays into the hands of Hitchens and his ilk!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
