Hilary Rosen is just another typical slut feminist, all and every trait of the typical attributes, that the slut feminists have, can be applied to this hypocrite. Be it goggle visioned outlook, refusal to look at the whole picture, blinded by political tunnel vision or demonstrating outright hate and malice towards anyone daring not to follow it's disingenuous, narrow minded, dyslexic mindset that the slut feminists have already demonstrated via copious examples. To state otherwise, would just be denying the nose on your face..
Update.. The DNC accused conservatives of attacking Rosen for being a lesbian. The adoptive mother of two children, Rosen split up with her long-timepartner and co-adoptee Elizabeth Birch in 2006.
Not to be mistaken for Hanna Rosen and "The End of Men"..
This poisonous marxist and professional hypocrite, once again demonstrates that women are their targets as well. That is, any female who has the temerity to think normally and not blindly and obsessively hate everyone, spread the appropriate malice that is. Rosen is the typical example of the slut feminist supporter and enabler, while completely disowning their blatant lie that they are for 'Equality", where in actual fact they just continually push the progressives agenda without considering outcomes, effects or it's destructiveness. Being a typical progressive ensures that those changes must be made for the sake of it and has nothing to do with improvement or practicality. We have already witnessed what women do when they have the necessary allocated power to fulfill their own level of narcissism and achieving their own outcomes, regardless of the lives they destroy while giving no consideration to the damage they cause..
They believe in change for change sake and there are no limitations to that aim..
Here is a statement from Slate's XX's misandry site -
The real problem with what Rosen said is the way it feeds into some voters’ assumptions about daaangerous feminism. It reinforces the conviction Rick Santorum wrote about when he suggested that “[r]espect for stay-at-home mothers has been poisoned by … radical feminism’s misogynistic crusade to make working outside the home the only marker of social value and self-respect.” I don’t think Santorum’s is a fair assessment, but I'm also not an undecided voter in a swing state that Barack Obama needs to win over. By pitting working moms against stay-at-homes with divisive language, Rosen feeds Santorum's argument. She makes feminists seem angry instead of inclusive. And she makes Obama's appeal to women of all types that much harder.We already know that the slut feminist movement hate "stay at home mums", for the single reason being that they want them in the workforce, slaving for the dollar, just like everyone else. They are also very aware of the fact that mothers actually enjoy that well practised method of living and the harmony that it brings. How many times have we witnessed high flying female executives resigning to do just that. How many more times does that have to happen for that hate movement to actually change their misogynistic attitude, which contradicts their entire doctrine and demonstrates clearly what hypocrites they really are. That they are just pushing their own political agenda..
Rosin buying votes..About a decade ago, that misogynistic movement tried to mend the fence they trampled down by claiming that they were working for the "SAHM", another lie ofcourse, as they were gathering plenty of flack and they had to adjust their usual hypocrisy to cope, as they normally do. After the storm quietened down, they just went beck to their farcical existence and just recommenced destroying the family unit plus went right back to playing that same game they were before concerning themselves with the SAHM issue. So it is another case of "Rinse, Repeat, Rinse, Repeat". That practice is so far ingrained into that movement as to make it their normally practiced, standard procedure..
Stated Rosen: “When I gave $1,000 or $2,000 to a lawmaker, I wanted him to listen to my business proposition. And when I helped organize an event that raised $50,000 or $100,000, you bet I expected their vote.”
Applying the "Carrot before the Donkey" principal.
The other flaw that Rosin demonstrates is that have no apparent ability of seeing exactly "what women want", because if they did, they would leave the SAHMs alone and let sleeping dogs lie. But as they claim to speak for every single female on the planet, not by popular demand or any democratic process. They just demanded and assumed that to be the case. Not too many women have taken the opportunity to state otherwise, sadly, as they continue on their path of partner, sex and societal alienation..
That hate movement have relied on the "look at what we have done for you" argument and thereby demand that anything else they do, should also be supported without question, regardless of it's intentions, aims or goals..
What we do need to see on any recognisable scale is a movement from women that states "Feminists Do Not Speak for ME". That general statement has been continually stated on comments and articles I have come across. Maybe it is about time those women being continually malogned by those misogynists, started to get a little more serious about given that hate movement some opposition, as in reality, they are not for harmony or honour or dignity or equality and that being the case, they need to be removed from the equation..