On The Five on Monday (3/12/12), Gutfeld said:
There’s a bigger principle going on here, with NOW and other feminists groups- I call it the ‘Triple P’ effect. If you’re a progressive and a pig, you get a pass, which is why if you’re Bill Maher and you say horrible things about Sarah Palin… it’s ok because you buy into feminism, and you buy into progressivism, It’s why most guys in the ‘70s got into feminism- because they were looking for easy sex without commitment- and you can get that, as long as you march with them, you believe in abortion… it’s the ticket to get away with everything.”
So how do you know, Greg?
Kimberly Guilfoyle said, “Very interesting” somewhat skeptically but without questioning Gutfeld’s misogynistic “humor.”
By the way, Gutfeld seems to have conveniently forgotten that NOW chided “supposedly progressive” men and women for degrading women of any political persuastion. In fact, the admonition was posted on Foxnews.com last year. It reads: “Listen, supposedly progressive men (ok, and women, too): Cut the crap! Stop degrading women with whom you disagree and/or don’t like by using female body terms or other gender-associated slurs.”
FoxNews.com also included a NOW statement seemingly directed pointedly at themselves:
“You’re trying to take up our time getting us to defend your friend, Sarah Palin. If you keep us busy defending her, we have less time to defend women’s bodies from the onslaught of reproductive rights attacks and other threats to our freedom, safety, livelihood, etc. Sorry, but we can’t defend Palin or even Hillary Clinton from every sexist insult hurled at them in the media. That task would be impossible, and it would consume us. You know this would not be a productive way to fight for women’s equal rights, which is why you want us stuck in this morass.”
In other words, the organization has better things to do with their time than go after everyone who insults a female politician, whatever her politics.
Gutfeld also left out how NOW defended Michelle Bachmann against Newsweek, saying that even though they hope she’s defeated for her politics, they were standing by her because they felt the magazine made an inexcusable assault on her as a serious female candidate
Or is he, as Newt would say, in a committed but OPEN relationship with the Palmer twins?
“You can say a lot about Michele Bachmann… my God, you can say a lot about her. But one thing you can’t say is that she doesn’t take a good picture. They had to find the most demeaning shot they had for that, and the wording on the text can’t even be accused of political bias, as much as that they just wanted to demonize her, based on gender.”
Bachmann and Palin both got a lot of support from NOW, including that when they were the victims of gender-based attacks, they were protected more times overall than Clinton or Pelosi. Part of why NOW started leaving them to rot is because they began expecting a full-time detail just for protecting them from critics who resort to sexism.
They also lost any and all pity they had for Megyn Kelly regarding the “maternity leave” thing fast, due in part to that she wanted to enable men who do it to other women, yet still be a victim herself. But I really don’t want to get into that particular can of worms past this mention of it…
â[Planned Parenthood’s Ludwig Gaines] is confusing an opportunity for life with the promise of dependency. This is a very old, cliched argument. Pro-life doesnât mean you have to provide the life with cradle to grave services for somebody whoâs born. Blacks, 33% of abortions, theyâre 13% of the population. Racists would love that statistic. And heâs defending that statistic. He should get a medal from the KKK!â
In case you aren’t offended enough by Gutfeld saying a planned parenthood official should be honoured by the Klan, this is the Ludwig Gaines he’s talking about:
Bachmann was NEVER a “serious female candidate.” She was a shill for an agenda that would ultimately turn back the clock on ALL women’s rights (pretty much Phyllis Schlafly redux).
Gay or straight,
Love is great!
Lets take a look at some facts here. Rush and his 3rd wife Marta divorced on December 21, 2004 and Rush and Kathryn Elizabeth Rogers were married on June 5, 2010. Yet in June 29, 2006 Rush became the Viagra spokesmen. Since there is one and ONLY one use for Viagra. Who’s the real f@%kin slut ?
Given what seems to be some lurid fantasy and “projection” on Gutfeld’s part, one wonders if he tried to hit on some feminists and they told him to go you-know-what himself.
But once again we see the hypocrisy of the right that whines constantly about how right wing women are maligned by the left. But it’s fine for sexist creeps like Gutfeld to slut shame liberal women.
I posit they all don’t have brain cell one amongst them. Let’s look at this whole ‘sexy’ feminist arguement. Feminists are liberated,strong,thinking women who do what THEY think is right for themselves. I suggest that it would be harder to get a feminist in the sack than some passive woman who is used to a ‘big honkin’ daddy’ figure.
In which case,would it be safe to assume that feminists are (by choice) getting the shaft(rofl) less than non feminists?
Seems like a valid argument to make,IMO.