Weiner Gave Us the Shaft - Comments Page 3

Rep. Anthony Weiner's distribution of lewd photos of himself via cyberspace destroys his credibility as a leader.

To say the least, Rep. Anthony Weiner has angered me. I have been extremely impressed with him over the past couple of years since I first became aware of him. He is intelligent, dynamic and articulate. He has proven to be a firebrand in the House, and I felt that he had great potential. I honestly didn't think he would ever be president I joked before that the U.S. is not quite ready for President Weiner. But, I did believe that he could rise (no pun intended, but what the hell, go with it) to be a strong force in Democratic politics, ultimately becoming a strong party leader and more importantly, a truly involved and sincere representative of the American people, at least as much as any politician is capable of sincerity.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

  • 76 - Glenn Contrarian

    Jun 09, 2011 at 9:24 pm

    Hi Cindy - welcome back!

    I would like to say that my position seems to give women a free pass. I don't actually do that, in the full scope of my thinking.

    Actually, in my experience women are often much tougher on women then men are. As for myself, it was always very difficult to supervise women - I always had the almost-irresistible impulse to give them the work that was less physically demanding...and if I did that, then no matter how chivalrous my intentions, I'd have been guilty of sex discrimination. Fortunately, in my experience the women seemed to have a stronger drive to prove themselves in a man's world - I very, very rarely had to counsel a female subordinate on her work performance.

    Of course there are men who are tough on women, too - we call them insecure misogynistic jerks.

    I think I've told you before that I honestly think that women are generally smarter than men...and that we men are just lucky that women haven't yet discovered that they don't need us anymore.

  • 77 - Jordan Richardson

    Jun 09, 2011 at 9:50 pm

    Hurrah for Breitbart for exposing Democrat creeps!

    Yeah! And hurrah for Breitbart carrying around a picture of Weiner's kibbles and bits on his cell phone. Too bad he couldn't resist the lure of Opie and Anthony long enough to keep the pic on lockdown.

    That, too, is better than a Hollywood script.

  • 78 - Irene Athena

    Jun 09, 2011 at 10:27 pm

    onomatopoeia
    Guys, Irv of 'Irv & Al' was in the hospital.

  • 79 - STM

    Jun 09, 2011 at 10:58 pm

    Russia is a matriarchal society, believe it or not. Of course, as history will show, it doesn't always wortk that way in practice, but it is nevertheless.

  • 80 - Glenn Contrarian

    Jun 09, 2011 at 11:37 pm

    Irene - thanks. I thought that's what it was, but I was too lazy to look it up...but the word was priceless.

  • 81 - Dr Dreadful

    Jun 09, 2011 at 11:49 pm

    Irene (78), thanks for the notice. I hope he'll be OK. Whatever one may think of his behaviour here, I wouldn't wish hospitalization on anyone.

  • 82 - Irene Athena

    Jun 10, 2011 at 12:06 am

    OK Glenn and Dr. D. Russia a matriarchal society? That's interesting. Well, goodnight.

  • 83 - Dr Dreadful

    Jun 10, 2011 at 12:24 am

    I have insufficient data to argue either for or against, Irene.

    Although I will note that Russia did produce, in Catherine the Great, one of the most formidable female monarchs in world history.

  • 84 - Cindy

    Jun 10, 2011 at 6:20 am

    I don't get how Stan considers Russia to be matriarchal, in any sense of the word, and especially in the sense that I mean. Men have dominated in Russia just as they have elsewhere.

  • 85 - Cindy

    Jun 10, 2011 at 6:21 am

    (Hiya Glenn :-)

  • 86 - roger nowosielski

    Jun 10, 2011 at 10:00 am

    Stan is right, Cindy. Read up on Wolff's five-part series on capitalism. In the twenties, there was a nationwide movement to liberate women from the chores associated with household. Look up Wolff's personal website. I believe part III deals specifically with the situation in post-revolutionary Russia.

  • 87 - Irene Athena

    Jun 10, 2011 at 10:46 am

    Roger (HI!) A movement to free women from household chores sounds, not like evidence of a matriarchal society, but more like feminism, the kind you'd find here in the paternalistic US of A in the 1950's

    Well...maybe not. Some mid-twentieth c. Household Appliance Salesmen advised, "Get more wife, less housewife."

    What you're describing sounds more like the "Husbands, Why Don't You Unload the Dang Washing Machine Once in Awhile, Now that I'm Working a Full-Time Job Outside the Home, Too" movement of the 1970's, and that truly WAS feminist, but again, within the context of a paternalistic society.

    I'd be interested in hearing more about what Stan was talking about. He was qualifying his answer right off the bat, so it sounds like he's thought the matter through a bit.

  • 88 - Irene Athena

    Jun 10, 2011 at 10:57 am

    Not that you haven't, Roger, but he dropped that intriguing bit of information and then we heard nothing else!

  • 89 - roger nowosielski

    Jun 10, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Wasn't quite like that, Irene. Women were very much a part of the revolutionary vanguard. The brief phase I'm referring to had less to do with feminism but with a recognition, yes, by the males, that women were being exploited in the course of performing their household chores. And it accorded with Marx's theory of labor as surplus value.

    Anyway, I'm keeping my fingers cross concerning an upcoming article. Will let you know as soon it's a done deal.

    Good hearing from you.

  • 90 - Glenn Contrarian

    Jun 10, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Roger and Cindy -

    I'm not sure that we can call Russia matriarchal, but just last night I was watching a PBS documentary called "The Desert of Forbidden Art", and there was a part of it that addressed how the Soviets brought freedom to the women of Uzbekistan. It was the Soviet version of 'freedom' to be sure, but it was a heck of a lot better than four wives per husband, veils at all times (except for in front of the husband), and education for all.

    For those BC cons who would consider it reactionary and even treasonous to give the Soviets credit for anything, that particular segment was the only nice thing the documentary had to say about the USSR. Of course, since this was PBS, maybe saying lots of bad things about the USSR was their way of trying to keep away from the GOP's budget ax since it's been declared that Sesame Street has a gay liberal agenda....

  • 91 - Irene Athena

    Jun 10, 2011 at 11:05 am

    I wish these interesting comments were not attached to the Weiner thread. It was good for a few semantic giggles at first, but I think the matter is now one for New Yorkers, and Mr. & Mrs. (who is pregnant) Weiner to work out. But the author Baritone did bring up the question of male/female differences here, so I guess this is where it will be continuing. I have to go now though.

  • 92 - Irene Athena

    Jun 10, 2011 at 11:11 am

    Glenn, didn't see your ? to me about race until just before I had to leave this a.m. but an answer is there, now. See you later...again.

  • 93 - Baritone

    Jun 10, 2011 at 12:30 pm

    I think calling a society "matriarchal" may vary depending on the perspective. I wouldn't say what the Soviets did for women would render their society matriarchal. Again, it sounds more like a liberation, although the result was likely that it freed up more women to work in the factory or the fields rather than tending to house and home. Not sure just how "liberating" that was.

    One of my collegial forays was into the world of anthropology. Studies of social structures was at the crux of much of the course content. Labeling a society "matriacrhal" had a lot to do with inheritance. In most patriarchal societies, inheritance has traditionally followed the male family line. The female family line is usually followed in a matriarchal society. Also family relationships are, in a matriarchal society determined through - well, the matriarch.

    I think what is being considered here has more to do with who traditionally "wears the pants" in the typical family structure.

    It DOES follow that in some true matriarchal societies that women are more often at the top of the hierarchy and are more often considered the leader of the family unit and are awarded posts of leadership in the community more often than men. The men are sent out to bring back dinner while the women consider the agenda for the next Rotary Club meeting. :)

  • 94 - roger nowosielski

    Jun 10, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    The Soviet women of the period wanted to work in factories, etc. in order to advance the cause of socialism. USSR was under severe economic pressure from the Western powers which were intent on proving the Soviet system to have been an experiment that was destined to fail. The Soviet workers, men and women, were acting out their patriotic impulses, not unlike the German workers in the period preceding World War II.

  • 95 - Baritone

    Jun 10, 2011 at 1:41 pm

    That may be Roger, but it still doesn't make it a matriarchal society. Just one which bamboozled everyone - women included - into believeing that it was their patriotic duty to serve the Union by slaving in a factory instead of in the home.

  • 96 - roger nowosielski

    Jun 10, 2011 at 2:12 pm

    How much more bamboozled can you get than believing that slaving in the factory or wherever is going to secure for you the American dream? USSR was in dire straits under constant economic pressure from the West. Economic development was not a luxury but a matter of the nation's very survival. Most of the Russian people accepted these realities and their participation was not imposed from without but voluntary; they considered it their duty. But I'm talking of the early stages, not going beyond the 1930 anyhow.

  • 97 - Baronius

    Jun 10, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    Russian culture has traditionally had a just-under-the-surface contempt for everything masculine. The men have their work and government and armies and other stuff to keep them busy during the day, but the women run the household and that's what matters. So STM is right.

  • 98 - Leroy

    Jun 10, 2011 at 3:17 pm

    Most human societies are matriarchal.

  • 99 - Dr Dreadful

    Jun 10, 2011 at 3:26 pm

    Stan and Dave would be best equipped to expand on this matriarchal Russia idea, since they've both lived there. But it strikes me that Russian women are fairly invisible in public life unless they need to be exploited for something. A good illustration is the role of women in the country's space program.

    Only two Russian women ever flew in space during the Soviet era, and both were selected primarily for propaganda purposes. The first woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, was selected because the USSR was at that time engaged in a "let's see what we can do that the Americans can't" one-sided tit-for-tat war.

    The second, Svetlana Savitskaya, first flew in 1982, shortly before Sally Ride became the first American woman in space. She flew again two years later, shortly before Ride's scheduled second flight (which would have made her the first woman to go into space twice). On that second mission, Savitskaya also became the first woman to do a spacewalk - beating astronaut Kathryn Sullivan, who had been scheduled to achieve that historical first on the same flight as Ride.

    Savitskaya was later named as the commander of an all-female mission to the Mir space station, but the flight was cancelled, ostensibly for logistical reasons.

    To date, even though post-Soviet Russia still has the most reliable, efficient and cost-effective manned space program, only one other Russian woman has ever gone into space. Although the Russian space agency has trained more female cosmonauts, there seems to be a strong cultural resistance to actually letting them fly.

  • 100 - Baritone

    Jun 10, 2011 at 5:07 pm

    How so Leroy?

  • 101 - Baritone

    Jun 10, 2011 at 5:21 pm

    Bar - maybe so. But again, it depends upon what sphere you are talking about. It's certainly true that Russian women appear to have very little impact in public life. Typcially, when they are seen, it has been historically a means to manipulate international perception.

    I don't pretend to know all that much about Russian society, or any foreign society for that matter. Obviously, women in every society have power and influence at some level - even presumably in radical muslim societies. But, from an anthropoligical point of view, there are very few truly matriachal societies and none that I know of amongst any countries of the world.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.