According to the conversation in the Twitter-verse, some on the left have declared that there is an ongoing War on Women because of disagreement over political issues. Amazingly, a column run in a major newspaper mocking a gathering of women who have differing views on issues like the Second Amendment, hunting, and self defense can be run and it is not counted as part of the offensive in this so-called War on Women.
But on April 13 (yes, a Friday), [Ann] Romney, Karen Santorum and Callista Gingrich will join in “A Conversation Off The Campaign Trail†for the ladies of the high-powered National Rifle Association. …
The three—minus Ron Paul’s wife Carol, whose status as an invitee is the subject of some disagreement—will headline a women’s leadership luncheon at the 2012 NRA convention in St. Louis. …
With the format and talking points of the luncheon still being worked out, we are left to speculate on what the wives might discuss.
As Mitt Romney marches closer to the nomination even as Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum refuse to quit, will the wives act as policy surrogates? Will they tackle such hot-button issues as women’s reproductive rights, the budget, health care and, of course, gun legislation? …
Will the wives keep it light and chatty, how gosh-darn fun and in touch with voters their guys are?
Will they joke about the rigors of campaigning, while offering helpful hints on no-wrinkle travel clothing, hurricane-proof hair products and staying slim while enduring endless rubber chicken banquets and ethno-regional food-fests? (Thank heavens for elegant culinary interludes such as the NRA luncheon at the Four Seasons Hotel).
As an added bonus—perhaps playing into the stereotype that women just love to shop, there will also be silent and live auctions.
Yes, shocking that a fundraiser for an organization will feature auctions.
There’s a lightly mocking tone when items are highlighted like the mink fur teddy bear made from damaged pelts and leftovers from recycled garments using eco-friendly materials. I’m sure the author also used the tone to get a good laugh at the folks from Paul Newman’s Camps for Children with Cancer who used the teddy bear to raise funds. Or maybe the bear used to support the San Diego Children’s Hospital got a hearty laugh out of the folks at the Washington Post. As long as they are mocking those who would fundraise with something as outrageous as a fur teddy bear, the WaPo needs to set their sights upon the Epilepsy Foundation, Make-A-Wish Foundation, and the Albany Symphony.
Amazing how the WaPo‘s Annie Groer picks and chooses from the auction catalog to make it sound as though women from the NRA are mindless bimbos mostly interested in non-serious topics like haircare and shopping. She chooses to ignore the other auction items such as the Sabre pepper spray training classes for the winner and 12 friends or the signed copy of SHOOT: Your Guide to Shooting and Competition by top competition shooter Julie Golob. Groer makes mention of the purses designed to hold a concealed firearm, but chooses to ignore that women might take this right to carry seriously with any number of the 15 handguns on the auction block such as the Smith and Wesson Model 638. And of course the WaPo would never take any woman seriously if she actually bid on the 5 day defensive pistol course at Gunsite.
Overall, the column isn’t anything close to the openly misogynistic Eric Heyl who ran anti-woman columns just before last year’s NRA convention. I am curious about why these columns always seem to appear right about this time every year. It’s amazing how the number of women participating in the NRA Annual Meeting makes the absolute worst of the mainstream media come out when they must confront the fact that women can be independent thinkers on issues like self defense without feeling the need to turn to the gossip pages and opinion columns to find out what they are “supposed” to think.
As a side note, I’d be all over the bid sheet for that mink teddy bear if I wasn’t going to be too busy speaking at the Grassroots Workshop at the same time as the women’s luncheon.
Just wow. I’ve taken part in several Women in Leadership events and I know the ladies that worked very hard to put this event together. They are all serious powerhouses and amazing, strong women. Demeaning both the women and the event like this is off-the-charts offensive.
It’s funny that they want women to have a ‘choice’ except when it comes to defending themselves, there they want women dependent on a male dominated society for protection.
I have yet to figure out why some subgroups in our culture, when presented with the success of a fellow member of that subculture, would rather attack the successful person and drag him or her back into the morass instead of following that person’s example and achieving some measure of success for themselves.
I like how the article speculates that, at a women’s leadership event, the headliners are supposed to talk about their husbands’ politics. Sigh…