You know who’s hurting women? Rich women like Ann Romney

posted at 8:01 pm on June 16, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

I’d like to confess right up front that I follow Elizabeth Wurtzel on Twitter. But in my own defense, a lot of people from the conservative side of the aisle do as well. And I originally thought she might have been my good friend Nathan Wurtzel’s sister or something. That’s why I was more than a little surprised when I saw the following headline.

1% Wives Are Helping Kill Feminism and Make the War on Women Possible

When my mind gets stuck on everything that is wrong with feminism, it brings out the 19th century poet in me: Let me count the ways. Most of all, feminism is pretty much a nice girl who really, really wants so badly to be liked by everybody — ladies who lunch, men who hate women, all the morons who demand choice and don’t understand responsibility — that it has become the easy lay of social movements. I am going to smack the next idiot who tells me that raising her children full time — by which she really means going to Jivamukti classes and pedicure appointments while the nanny babysits — is her feminist choice. Who can possibly take feminism seriously when it allows everything, as long as women choose it? The whole point to begin with was that women were losing their minds pushing mops and strollers all day without a room or a salary of their own.

It goes rather pear shaped from that point on, and you can draw your own conclusions, but this was the one portion which really jumped up and grabbed me later in the article.

I have to admit that when I meet a woman who I know is a graduate of, say, Princeton — one who has read The Second Sex and therefore ought to know better — but is still a full-time wife, I feel betrayed. I’m not much of a moralist — I have absolutely no right to be — but in the interest of doing what’s right both for me personally and for women generally, I have been strict with myself about earning my keep. For the longest time I would not date anyone who would now be called a one-percenter because money and power are such a potent combination, and if I am going to be bossed around, I don’t want that to be the reason. When it’s come up, I have chosen not to get married. Over and over again, I have opted for my integrity and independence over what was easy or obvious. And I am happy. I don’t want everyone to live like me, but I do expect educated and able-bodied women to be holding their own in the world of work.

I’m sorry, but this type of atitude is precisely, as I see it, what keeps setting independent women back. It goes back to that entire generation of trying to put everyone into a specific pigeon hole and the idea that one person’s idea of what a woman “should do” defines whether they are on the right side or the wrong side. I’m married to a wonderful woman who has been both a full and part time worker and a full time, stay at home wife. I’ve encouraged her to follow her dreams and share her life with me, whether that is working and bringing in money or working to build our home and our life. If she makes her own choices in this, is she not the real feminist in the bunch?

And when it comes to disparaging mothers who happen to be well enough off to afford help with taking care of the house and the children, this is somehow a disqualifier? Wasn’t that one of the benefits of succeeding and allowing yourself to multi-task, taking on charity work, a job or any other endeavors you found worth your time?

Speaking from the fully unqualified position of those not having a womb, I have to say that this sort of thinking isn’t helping anyone. And women who talk about “choice” for women need to realize that choices go both ways and cover many more issues than just childbirth and voting.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

is she not the real feminist in the bunch?

Hence, the proof of leftist stupidity and hypocrisy. The actual War on Women.

98ZJUSMC on June 17, 2012 at 1:30 AM

Thanks, Jazz, for reading this cr*p so we don’t have to. You deserve hazard pay for this extra special craptacular screed.

It’s always amusing to read women who have bought into the “feminist” lie attempt to take down others.

kim roy on June 17, 2012 at 1:38 AM

Axe on June 16, 2012 at 11:13 PM

I am sure there might be all sorts of reasons less petty and more valid than my comment. That said I have had a front row seat to the minimization of men in society at the hands of these types. Men have been devalued and deemed unnecessary to the world in the name of equality. Watching TV will introduce you to an idiot buffoon worthy of any disrespect and berating. I’m pretty sure even his act of sperm donor was done poorly. I use the singular term because it seems pretty universal. As you can tell I feel pretty strongly about this because I think it has done much to hurt the world. I hope the type of men I know personally and are, for the most part, represented at Hot Air will soon out number and become the examples instead of the liberal model now in vogue.

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2012 at 1:05 AM

Here I was just enjoying the general snark on this thread, and you go and make a thoughtful and serious philosophical comment.

You’re right, of course. Too much of ‘feminism’ has amounted to a war of rage against men, and it ultimately backfires.

We’re created male and female, and it’s a fool that picks a fight with half the human race.

In all seriousness, men need women, but women also need men. Feminism all too often has just encouraged women to act more like men, thereby impoverishing the entire human race. By emphasizing that women should pursue sex like men and have jobs like men and be career-driven like men, selfish men have been encouraged to use women for sex without making commitments and to think only of their own needs. If a man does marry a woman, he’s much more likely to expect his wife to also hold down a job no matter how she does around the house.

In effect, feminism tells women, “It’s not good enough to be a wife and mother. You also have to compete with men in the workplace, or you’re a failure.”

That’s a lot of pressure.

So yes, I’d say Elizabeth Wurtzel and her type hurt a lot more women than Ann Romney.

There Goes The Neighborhood on June 17, 2012 at 1:45 AM

Liberalism defined;

You have a Choice, only so long as you make the RIGHT Choice!

jaydee_007 on June 17, 2012 at 2:59 AM

I read articles like these and I thank my lucky stars that I was born a middle-class white guy.

I have political views, thoughts and ideas… none of them make me “unacceptable” as a middle-class white guy.

If I went 180 on ALL of them tomorrow; still not unacceptable as a middle class white guy. Both sides of every political argument are allowed for me. All jobs/fields/relationships/etc. are permissible.

I could be a stay-at-home dad, or a man about town who will sleep with anything with a pulse and never marry. You might disagree with my position, but never on the basis of my class/race/gender/social standing… I’m still accepted.

I have REAL FREEDOM OF THOUGHT. Either side of any argument is allowed for me, and nobody says I’m not a “real middle-class white guy” or a “traitor to my whatever” for my position.

Yes ladies, I know you fought for equality and freedom. Looks to me like you missed the mark by a mile. Maybe give that another try and see if you can get the freedoms I enjoy.

That or admit that actual real freedom was never the goal, and isn’t something you want women to have.

African-Americans, guess what… this goes for you too.

gekkobear on June 17, 2012 at 5:48 AM

I’m not much of a moralist — I have absolutely no right to be — but in the interest of doing what’s right both for me personally and for women generally, I have been strict with myself about earning my keep. For the longest time I would not date anyone who would now be called a one-percenter because money and power are such a potent combination, and if I am going to be bossed around, I don’t want that to be the reason. When it’s come up, I have chosen not to get married. Over and over again, I have opted for my integrity and independence over what was easy or obvious. And I am happy. I don’t want everyone to live like me, but I do expect educated and able-bodied women to be holding their own in the world of work.

Is anyone else reading between the lines here and coming to the conclusion that no man has ever asked this woman to become his wife?

I feel so sorry for women (and men too) who see CAREER as the only truly important thing in their lives. Women who are consumed by their own egos.

disa on June 17, 2012 at 7:13 AM

c’mon, this silly cow just never met the person whom she could love and hate enough to laugh about their lives together. the rules she lives by get in the way of her real life. the best life is one that is shared, from finding ways to survive to the smells of closeness, you either learn to be partners or you suffer by yourself, ultimately, it’s your choice to be lonely, and the 1st killer of happiness and life, is loneliness, poor idiot sap, stupid woman.

tm11999 on June 17, 2012 at 7:26 AM

I think when she gets older, she will have many regrets. There will be no one around to pat her on the back for being so “strict with herself about earning her keep”. No one will care that she opted for her “integrity” over what is obvious or easy, whatever that even means. She sounds like someone who has already begun to feel regret and is trying to talk herself into believing there was some reason for wasting her life as she has, proving something totally pointless. Sad.

Night Owl on June 17, 2012 at 7:35 AM

I feel really sorry for this woman, but she is dripping irony all over my computer. Who is more free? Who is more independent and liberated? The drug addict or the stay at home mom?

From amazon.com:

More, Now, Again: A Memoir of Addiction by Elizabeth Wurtzel

“I crush up my pills and snort them like dust. They are my sugar. They are the sweetness in the days that have none. They drip through me like tupelo honey. Then they are gone. Then I need more. I always need more.
For all of my life I have needed more.”

So…. She spent her youth snorting Ritalin and cocaine while I spent my youth building a family, but I am the one damaging women. Oooooh-Kay then.

bitsy on June 17, 2012 at 7:37 AM

When it’s come up, I have chosen not to get married. Over and over again, I have opted for my integrity and independence over what was easy or obvious. And I am happy.

Look on the bright side…at least she will never reproduce.

John Hill on June 17, 2012 at 7:53 AM

If women’s sole measure of worth is their value in the workplace, then why are they saddled with that pesky uterus?

Shouldn’t Ms. Wurtzel be advocating mass hysterectomies to “liberate” women from this machinery of servitude inside their own bodies?

John Hill on June 17, 2012 at 7:56 AM

Who can possibly take feminism seriously when it allows everything, as long as women choose it?

who can possibly take feminism seriously when it refuses to confront the treatment of females under islam and focuses instead on stay at home moms, pro life women , and women with rich husbands in the free western world ? To follow their logic along the trail of those women they opt to ignore, we can therefore rather allow everything as long as a muslim male has chosen it for his women. It’s feminist you know to promote cultural and social relativism vis a vis the human rights of women but how dare you stay at home , not bother anyone, have babies, and happily make… cookies!

the children of the wealthy and titled for centuries have been raised by servants- and many of those who fought through out the years for women’s rights have come from their ranks. but because they had money, they’re just not real women, certainly not real feminists, and have no moral right to make decisions of their own free will other women disagree with. It’s defining others by what may be right for you. It’s personal tyranny posing as avatar of liberation- something our painfully narcissistic cultural and political discourse is set adrift amid. It’s a freedom killing disingenuous semantic maneuver when applied politically as leftist are want to do.

It’s all about power, not anyone’s freedom to do what they wish with their lives. the left doesn’t want those who espouse freedoms outside the leftist defined construct to have any political power whatsoever even if that power is limited to making their own decisions about their own lives without government interference. Government defining of and meddling in the freedoms of americans is power- it’s the entire wellspring of leftist power. They broadcast their often frightful and twisted faults in reasoning to justify themselves. they lie to themselves in order not to give up all that tasty tasty power that is every bit as monied and tied primarily to men as anything on the right.

just like “real “ african americans have no right to call themselves such and disagree with the left and race manipulator-exploiters. If one thinks for oneself, one is an aunt jemima or a house slave certainly not an african american fully endowed with the freedoms of the constitution. There’s no freedom to disagree with the self appointed thought police.

even the best intended of these liberal relativists find themselves arguing from the position of tyranny- their apparently god given right to demand others think as they do or else. it’s a state of psychological and ethical dysfunction which they conveniently project onto the opposition.

Their idol of clay is crumbling. A significant amount of vocal citizens do not believe their bs anymore.

Their fall is going to be uglier than their rise.

mittens on June 17, 2012 at 7:58 AM

John Hill on June 17, 2012 at 7:56 AM

Not to worry, much. I grew up in the 60′s and 70′s, and I can honestly say I don’t remember meeting ANY women like her, and I have lived or worked all over the country. Like you said, the people with her mindset won’t be reproducing, so eventually they will die out.

Night Owl on June 17, 2012 at 8:00 AM

This woman seems like a mass of psychoses, screaming at the world to distract herself from the possibility that she made a mistake.

Count to 10 on June 17, 2012 at 8:14 AM

This woman seems like a mass of psychoses, screaming at the world to distract herself from the possibility that she made a mistake.

Count to 10 on June 17, 2012 at 8:14 AM

Pretty much.

bitsy on June 17, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Elizabeth Wurtzel ‏@LizzieWurtzel
I can’t figure out if my cat is a practitioner of Santeria or if she just likes to kill birds for fun. Or is she simply being a typical cat?

Another one of her tweets shows just how “intellectual” she really is.

Flange on June 16, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Obviously, the cat is a vicious right-wing racist who lives to oppress and savage the “at risk.” What other explanation could it possibly be?

disa on June 17, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Shouldn’t Ms. Wurtzel be advocating mass hysterectomies to “liberate” women from this machinery of servitude inside their own bodies?

John Hill on June 17, 2012 at 7:56 AM

No, they must evolve to uterusless existences. Remember, Darwin is your friend ;-)

disa on June 17, 2012 at 8:26 AM

And I am happy.

i.e. I am a miserable nag who expects others to conform to my view of what is their proper role in the world. If you are an ignorant moron who’s only ability is to procreate, then by all means stay at home. I don’t want to see you anyway. Otherwise, you must work in a corporate job just like me, but only for a company that is socially resposible. See how happy I am?

drocity on June 17, 2012 at 8:37 AM

I dare anyone to click on the link to her twitter account and read some without an airsickness bag handy. for example

Elizabeth Wurtzel‏@LizzieWurtzel

The Republican Party is un-American. (Not that any other country has done anything to deserve it.) And bad. And it loves Rush Limbaugh. Yuck

mover over Sophocles there is a new wordsmith in town.

deimos on June 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM

If a woman has never been on a career path, she may not be in a position to make an optimum decision about work and stay-at-home mom status; but as long as she knows what is involved, whatever decision she makes is honorable. My Mother got a degree in Journalism and after working for the Army in Occupied Japan she did public advocacy to end the trade restrictions against Japanese exports that were stifling their immediate postwar economy. Then she worked for Life magazine for a year. In the end, at age 28 she decided shaping four boys by staying home with them was more important than the career she had plenty of experience at to understand. I am grateful.

Ann Romney overcame serious illness and raised 5 boys who seem to have turned out well. Doing this is not a reason for her to be hated. Also, if no woman in free societies that acknowledge women’s rights choose to be mothers because they are too wedded to a career, the future will belong to those societies that enslave women to just be baby-making servants to their husbands.

KW64 on June 17, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Conflicted woman for sure…….. But does she need free contraception as well?

FlaMurph on June 17, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Who can possibly take feminism seriously when it allows everything, as long as women choose it?

Of course. As we all know, women can’t make their own decisions, they must be told by feminists what’s allowed.

See how feminists have taken the place of husbands in our enlightened, modern age?

What do you call it when a woman takes your place in your wife’s world?

Akzed on June 17, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Also, if no woman in free societies that acknowledge women’s rights choose to be mothers because they are too wedded to a career, the future will belong to those societies that enslave women to just be baby-making servants to their husbands. KW64 on June 17, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Your lack of respect for women who choose to have a career rather than a family is only surpassed by your contempt for women who stay home and manage their households and raise their children, comparing them to slaves.

Or maybe it’s just that the spectacles through which you see the distaff side block out everything between hard-charging feminist career women and Muslims.

Akzed on June 17, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Also, if no woman in free societies that acknowledge women’s rights choose to be mothers because they are too wedded to a career, the future will belong to those societies that enslave women to just be baby-making servants to their husbands. KW64 on June 17, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Your lack of respect for women who choose to have a career rather than a family is only surpassed by your contempt for women who stay home and manage their households and raise their children, comparing them to slaves.

Or maybe it’s just that the spectacles through which you see the distaff side block out everything between hard-charging feminist career women and Muslims.

Akzed on June 17, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Did you miss that great big “if” in KW64′s comment?
It makes the statement closer to a tautology than an opinion.

Count to 10 on June 17, 2012 at 12:44 PM

I graduated from college – a women’s college. I’ve read The Second Sex. I used to have a subscription to Ms.

This morning the first thing I did upon waking was scrub out my 3 month old’s cloth diapers. It’s work. Running a household is real work. Raising children is real work. It’s the work I have chosen. I think I am fortunate that my family has just enough money to allow me to be a stay at home mom.

myrenovations on June 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Both Ann Romney and Laura Bush chose motherhood over careers, and fortunately for them, had the financial means at their disposal to allow it to happen without substantial financial sacrifice by their families. Bully for them. They are not a problem

BUT….the REAL feminists, the REAL heroines, are those who choose their family over career and financial security, and stay home because they feel their most important and rewarding job, and the job which gives them the most freedom, is raising their children and promoting a stable family. The family may have less of the world’s goods, but they certainly contribute more to the stability of our society, than a woman like Wurtzel.

jclittlep on June 17, 2012 at 2:09 PM

But in my own defense, a lot of people from the conservative side of the aisle do as well.

First off, from reading enough of your posts it is clear that you are not on the conservative side of the aisle, but are apparently of the same poseur mentality as this child of wealthy, liberal new york and the ivy league (you just pretend to be on the other side than she). She is just another loudmouthed, spoiled self annointed elitist spewing her obnoxious opinions in books published by like-minded people and in the magazines pubished, edited and read by the same angry,phoneys. You, she and the purported “conservatives” that “follow” this dimwit on twitter are all astounded by the brilliance that your mothers have been gushing about since the day you were born. Sorry, hate to break it to you, but your mom was just overly enthusiastic.

peacenprosperity on June 17, 2012 at 2:40 PM

I’m for supporting stay-at-home moms and stay-at-home dads.

bmmg39 on June 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Cindy Munford on June 17, 2012 at 1:05 AM

Right on, Cindy. The flip side of the coin is true also, “female liberation” created the paradise that this sad blowhard is living in. To listen to these harpies, you would think that prior to the 1970′s all marriages were arranged, that women were beaten regularly and legally, that no woman ever accounted for anything due to the oppressive paternalistic, militaristic society that was the US. The true liberation has been of the worse natures of men; now that there is no stigma to walking away from a relationship and children,how offering to pay half the fee to murder an unborn baby is somehow chivalrous, acting on the belief that “girls just want to have fun” and they should be used as receptacles to be tossed aside. Civilization has been degraded by the type of people that created this woman and the environment that celebrates her spewings as “intellectual” and know one has benefited.

And by the way, here at “conservative” website HA, regular poster Jazz Shaw confesses to being a fan. Shows you where this iste is going.

peacenprosperity on June 17, 2012 at 2:52 PM

jaydee_007 on June 17, 2012 at 2:59 AM

No – it’s more like this – you have the right to make a choice as long as it is the same choice that I would make. They don’t want independent thinkers….they want little automatons that all act, think, look and talk alike. The feminist version of a Stepford Wife.

LL

Lady Logician on June 17, 2012 at 2:57 PM

But in my own defense, a lot of people from the conservative side of the aisle do as well.

First off, from reading enough of your posts it is clear that you are not on the conservative side of the aisle…peacenprosperity on June 17, 2012 at 2:40 PM

One should be forgiven for assuming he’s a liberal based on his sentence structure, forgetting content for the moment.

He says that he does something that conservatives do “as well,” rather than e.g. “other conservatives” do.

Come on, Jazz, pay attention.

Akzed on June 17, 2012 at 4:39 PM

I think she has that Empty Place.

faraway on June 16, 2012 at 8:16 PM

And it’s right smack between her ears.

PatriotGal2257 on June 17, 2012 at 6:25 PM

For the longest time I would not date anyone who would now be called a one-percenter because money and power are such a potent combination, and if I am going to be bossed around, I don’t want that to be the reason.

And now, she can be bought, and has been, by the people who think that Julia is the height of feminism.

unclesmrgol on June 17, 2012 at 6:48 PM

I have to admit that when I meet a woman who I know is a graduate of, say, Princeton — one who has read The Second Sex and therefore ought to know better — but is still a full-time wife, I feel betrayed.

What she is really saying is that, like in Brave New World she is uncomfortable about being near a Mother, especially one who hasn’t killed any of her children.

RobBert on June 17, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Married couples have a right and an obligation to put their marriage and their children ahead of the wishes of grim prigs who need to see all women trudging off to jobs.

Ms Wurtzel, get over yourself.

ansonia on June 17, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Liberals are so incredibly stupid………. not ignorant, stupid.

ultracon on June 17, 2012 at 10:50 PM

Interesting, isn’t it? On one hand we have the 1% female that should reject motherhood and pull her weight in the world of work even if her husband is making enough money so that she could choose to stay home with her children. On the other hand you have Julia the composite 99% gal who is encouraged to depend on the government for her entire life and feel free to have fatherless children she cannot afford.

magicbeans on June 18, 2012 at 9:31 AM

I am getting so tired of being lectured to by women who have never had to care for anyone but themselves. Seriously, they are perpetually 12 years old and free to work and play and dictate to other women, despite their sad lack of experience.

At some point in the maturation process many women discover that they are capable of so much more than keeping their own little life in order and they spread their wings to include a mate, and maybe one day, children. What happens when you find you don’t want to have to care for anyone else but yourself…maybe because it’s toooo haaard? You turn your lack of selfless endeavour into some weird soapbox from which you imagine people give a crap what you are saying, or are actually taking it to heart. Remember, the people you are addressing are MORE evolved in maturity, responsibility and selflessness.

When I started dating my husband I met his great aunt…let’s call her Elizabeth Wurtzel. She was a single career women too. Probably very cutting edge for her day (or maybe she was just an old fashioned spinster?) Anyways, guess where she spent Christmas each year? Yes, with her niece and family, the stay at home one, who had the time to take her to appointments, manage her finances, arrange for home cleaning etc. etc, etc. None of her own family to do it. Her life was not one of being a link between generations, but more of a dead end, where she had to rely on the charity of those she might have criticized when it suited her as she got older, or ill. Luckily those charitable souls are usually mature enough to know when they need to pick up the responsibility of caring for another person.

If that is what Ms. Wurtzel calls integrity, she can keep it. It’s really called a “convenient life” It’s McDonald’s, played out as a lifestyle.

mojowt on June 18, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Is she talking about Michelle Obama who does not work out side of her taxpayer subsidized home and who graduated from a fancy college?

HOOLiBAR6 on June 18, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Husband/Wife teams, dividing the work of the marriage in whatever way each team sees fit, aren’t permitted in Ms Wurtzel’s world. Why, they’d be able to take care of their own and strengthen the communities in which they live. They’d be pursuing happiness, for God’s sake. We can’t have that.

ansonia on June 18, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Comment pages: 1 2