Michael Moore on “the biggest ‘fuck you’ ever recorded in human history” and the righteous anger of the dispossessed American Trump supporter


While I’m helping Arlo get his pterodactyl costume ready for tomorrow night’s YpsiGlow event, I wanted to share this video with you. It’s an excerpt from Micahel Moore’s new film Trumpland. As it’s been making it’s way around the internet for the past day or two, I suspect that most of you have probably already seen it. If you haven’t, though, you should.

After saying that he personally knows “a lot of people in Michigan who are planning to vote for Trump,” and adding that these folks aren’t racists, but rather “actually pretty decent people,” Moore launches into the following explanation as to why Trump’s message is resonating with voters in the heartland of America. While I don’t like the fact that this specific clip is now being used by conservatives to rile people up on Trump’s behalf, I think it’s probably the most articulate, succinct and thoughtful analysis I’ve heard to date explaining why it is that Trump’s message is resonating with Michigan’s working class.

[Yes, you could argue that Trump has significant support among the non-dispossessed as well, and that his base actually skews more well off financially than Moore and others would like to think, but it’s hard to deny that he’s gotten significant traction with those being squeezed out of the middle class over the past several decades.]

As I’m told that copies of this video are being removed from YouTube (likely because they’re being shared by conservatives as part of their last ditch “Trump’s election is going to be the biggest ‘fuck you’ ever recorded in human history – and it will feel good” turn-out-the-vote strategy), I thought that I’d transcribe it, just in case. So, if you can’t see the video above, here’s what Moore had to say. Read it out loud with a Michigan accent to get the full effect.

Donald Trump came to the Detroit Economic Club, and stood there, in front of the Ford Motor Company executives, and said, ‘If you close these factories, as you’re planning to do in Detroit, and build them in Mexico, I’m going to put a 35% tariff on those cars when you send them back, and nobody’s going to buy them.’ It was an amazing thing to see. No politician, Republican or Democrat, had ever said anything like that to these executives (before). And it was music to the ears of people in Michigan, and Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – the Brexit states…

Whether Trump means it or not is kind of irrelevant. He’s saying these things to people who are hurting. And it’s why every beaten-down, nameless working stiff who used to be part of what was called the middle class loves Trump. He’s the human Molotov cocktail that they’ve been waiting for – the human hand grenade that they can legally throw into the system that stole their lives from them. And, on November 8, election day… although they lost their jobs, although they’ve been foreclosed on by the bank… next came the divorce, and now the wife and kids are gone, the car’s been repo’d, they haven’t had a real vacation in years, they’re stuck with a shitty Obamacare bronze plan where you can’t even get a fucking Percocet, they’ve essentially lost everything they had, except one thing… the one thing that doesn’t cost them a cent, and is guaranteed to them by the American constitution – the right to vote.

They might be penniless. They might be homeless. They might be fucked over and fucked up. It doesn’t matter. Because it’s equalized on that day. A millionaire has the same number of votes as a person without a job. One. And there’s more of the former middle class than there of the millionaire class. So, on November 8, the dispossessed will walk into the voting booth, be handed a ballot, close the curtain, and take that lever, or felt pen, or touchscreen, and put a big, fucking “X” by the name of the man who has threatened to upend and overturn the very system that has ruined their lives. Donald J. Trump.

They see that the elites who ruined their lives hate Trump. Corporate America hates Trump. Wall Street hates Trump. The career politicians hate Trump. The media hates Trump… after they loved him, and created him. And now hate him. Thank you, media…

‘The enemy of my enemy is who I’m voting for on November 8.’

Yes, on November 8, you, Joe Blow, Steve Blow, Bob Blow, Billy Bob Blow, all the Blows, get to go and blow up the whole goddamned system, because it’s your right. Trump’s election is going to be the biggest ‘fuck you’ ever recorded in human history – and it will feel good.

For what it’s worth… and the conservative media channels sharing the above quote don’t also mention this… after Moore says all of that, he then goes on to say that they’ll regret it. “Voting for Trump will feel good for a day,” Moore says, “Maybe a week. Possibly a month. And then. Like the Brits, who wanted to send a message, so they voted to leave Europe only to find out that, if you vote to leave Europe, you actually have to leave Europe. And now they regret it.” Moore then went on to say that over 4 million UK voters had since signed a petition asking for a do-over, saying that they didn’t realize the consequences of their “fuck you” vote. But, as he says, “It’s not going to happen. Because you used the ballot as an anger management tool. And now you’re fucked.” But, like I said, the folks who run Breitbart aren’t sharing that quote. They’re just sharing the part where Moore talks about how “good” it will feel to send that giant “fuck you” on November 8 to all of those people who you perceive as being responsible for your terrible circumstances.

A friend of mine, who I’ll just call Adam, as he hasn’t responded to my message asking if I can use his full name here, had the following to say upon seeing the above video. Regardless of whether or not you share his opinion as to who the Democratic candidate should have been, I hope you’ll agree that his suggestion as to what Clinton should be speaking about in these remaining days of the campaign is worth discussing.

Just finished reading Hillbilly Elegy. Similar sentiments. When Michael Moore is telling you this, be scared. I’m voting for Hillary, but this is EXACTLY why Bernie shoulda gotten the nod. He could beat back Trump more convincingly with the disenfranchised ex-middle class poor. Without being a racist dickbag. Hillary needs to emphasize affinity with this group as much as possible in the next few weeks to try and steal back some of those folks. I think there are still many who could be brought back to the fold, if she said the right things.

One last thing… This election, for the reasons mentioned above, has me scared shitless. I can’t help but think that, despite the most recent polling, Trump could really win this thing. I keep thinking that there could be a total upset. I keep thinking that this could be Brexit all over again… that we could see people turning out in record numbers on November 8 just to say “fuck you” to a system that they feel has stopped working for them. And that terrifies me.

The good news is, the more I read about the so-called Brexit “upset,” the less it looks like a legitimate upset, so I don’t know that it’s really all that predictive of something similar happening here in America. According to what I’m reading right now, it looks as though the polling was actually pretty close right before the Brexit vote, so it’s not like people really thought that it was going to easily fail, which I think is how it was presented to us here in the American media. It also looks as though our polling here in the states might actually be more accurate. This isn’t of course to say that we don’t have anything to be concerned about. I still think there’s risk, and we can’t afford to let up, but at least, based on what I’m reading about Brexit right now, it may not be the perfect analogy that I thought it might be, pointing directly toward the election of Donald Trump.

This entry was posted in Michigan, Politics, Predictions and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. Jean Henry
    Posted October 26, 2016 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    Average income of a Trump supporter is $72.000 a year. And that was in the primaries. I bet it’s higher now.
    Moore weaves a good narrative. He always does.
    It’s partly true. It feel emotionally true. His narratives always do.
    It just plays loose and fast with the facts. He always does.

  2. Jean Henry
    Posted October 26, 2016 at 10:11 pm | Permalink


  3. Posted October 26, 2016 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    Why is Michael Moore stumping for Trump?

  4. Jean Henry
    Posted October 26, 2016 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

    Please also note that Sanders and Clinton;s average primary voter income levels are idnetical. I know we now live in a post factual age, but there is zero validity to the idea that Bernie’s policies appealed more to the working class than Hillary’s. In fact, it’s verifiably untrue. Do you think the people who vote for Trump are going to vote for someone who calls himself a socialist. Are you out of your mind? I understand that he’s not THAT kind of socialist, but as this post and Mr Moore has exhibited, when conformted with a compellingnarrative what is true is inconsequential.

  5. Stephen
    Posted October 26, 2016 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

    It may be a narrative that Moore is weaving but it certainly rings true based on the family members of mine here in the Midwest who are supporting Trump, none of whom have been polled about their incomes as far as I know.

  6. Stephen
    Posted October 26, 2016 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

    Furthermore, I think Adam is right about Clinton needing to move left. The centrists are already onboard and the never Trumpers aren’t a threat. She needs the Sanders people and if she doesn’t go after them Stein will get them.

  7. Posted October 26, 2016 at 10:57 pm | Permalink

    Down in Mississippi, it was obvious to me how artificial all those over compensated factory jobs were.

    What I’m hearing on this site is that we need to give people without education money, simply because they have no education. It is worth asking, why does society owe a debt to people who chose not to go to school and get educated?

    Note here that I’m not talking about black people, I’m talking about white people, who grew up in a system designed for them, but failed to take advantage of it and are now angry that they didn’t get what they wanted.

    I could have been like my brother, who dropped out of school in 9th grade and is now in and out of prison. Does society owe that bag of shit anything at all? Does he deserve “UBI” or even food stamps, for that matter?

    It’s a valid question. Not all poor people are my brother, but there are a lot of people like my brother out there.

  8. Jean Henry
    Posted October 26, 2016 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

    Oh Pete…
    It doesn’t matter because most of the people who vote for Trump aren’t like your brother.

    (And no society doesn’t owe your brother anything but it might be cheaper for us to support him than not to. Prison’s expensive.)

    The people who express so much concern for the working poor, do so to validate their belief in Bernie’s righteousness and legitimacy. Number’s don’t matter in a cult of personality. I cant tell you the number of people who supported Bernie, who express fear at the idea of encountering any Trump supporters. They wax poetic about labor but never worked in a factory. So I think they shed crocodile tears. I really do. They care less bout your brother than you do.

  9. Posted October 27, 2016 at 12:24 am | Permalink

    My brother can’t get it together to register to vote. Actually, as a felon, he can’t vote anyway. Even prison is a waste of money on that piece of shit. Mississippi was filled with people like him. Giving that idiot $40,000 a year for free would be a disaster for the world, but great for drug dealers.

    But we like “UBI” because it makes us feel better about ourselves, since my idiot brother is the product of the plutocrats and the oligarchs in some Marxist fantasy that ignores how stupid poor people can be. Again, $40K a year to that bag of refuse would be an absolute disaster.

    From Ann Arbor, it is really easy to see ALL poor white people as victims, or even all of humanity as a set of victims because you never experience that. Sure, there are people who don’t have a lot of money who struggle and work and want a better life for their kids. and those people are to be supported.

    But then there’s another side to poor and middle class white America, people who didn’t deserve it but got propped up by all levels of government (through segregation before and after civil rights) and organized labor and got all kinds of promises that they would be on top forever and now that those promises and guarantees are finally gone and they no can no longer slack, people like Bernard Sanders and Donald Trump are there to bring it all back again.

    People wondered why Sanders didn’t get support from African-Americans. My sense is that they’ve heard these promises before and seen benefits go exclusively to white people to protect white lives and white jobs.

  10. Posted October 27, 2016 at 1:47 am | Permalink

    Back to the subject at hand, while Moore might be right about some people voting for Trump, he is wrong about others.

    I can’t get behind all th eemotional bullshit here, and he’s speaking of people who lost their jobs, when? Back in the 70s, 80s? If they were under 40 at the time, they’ve probably found something else by now and moved on. If they were over 50, they are probably dead.

    Moore (and Trump and Sanders) acts like the loss of all these overpaid union jobs happened yesterday.

  11. Jcp2
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 5:19 am | Permalink

    Demographics is destiny. Comrade Larson sees this before us (really, you) because that is his business.


  12. Jean Henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    I wasn’t suggesting UBI. Healthcare seems relevant. Adequate mental health and addiction services. There are not enough beds; not enough psychiatrists. My guess is they would need to drug test for UBI if they did it. You are right, an addict will run right through that $. Current social benefit support is still inadequate. Terribly inadequate. There is some middle ground.

  13. Demetrius
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 7:06 am | Permalink

    I think Moore is largely right.

    Trump is a narcissist, a liar, a racist and a sexist – and he is totally unfit to be president.

    But that doesn’t mean Trump is *always* wrong, or that some of his positions aren’t really resonating with some legitimate grievances held by many poor, working- and middle-class Americans.

    I agree with your friend Adam: The fact that Clinton is still struggling in states like Ohio and Iowa … and that she is still polling by fewer than 10 points ahead in what should be “landslide” states – like Michigan and Wisconsin – says a lot.

    While both candidates clearly have their die-hard supporters – I think overall support for both is fairly weak. At this point, it seems the thing that is really driving this election is that a majority of people want Trump to lose MORE than they want Clinton to lose.

  14. Jean Henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    The fact that Moore is wrong about who he says Trump voters are demographically does not matter I guess. Inconvenient.That the ENTIRE premise of what he’s saying is inaccurate.

    It’s the right narrative for the right crowd.

    Thank you Demetrius for weighing in with the party line once again despite all evidence to the contrary. You are extremely consistent.

  15. Jean Henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 7:16 am | Permalink


  16. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 8:00 am | Permalink

    Moore is speaking to and about a specific subset of voters he thinks are likely to vote for Trump. Moore is not trying to capture the thing that all Trump supporters have in common. There are a lot of people who feel like their lives were negatively effected as a result of NAFTA. Trump will be getting a lot of votes because: a) His name is not Clinton; and b) He goes out of his way to make promises, false or not, that he is going to punish the companies taking manufacturing south of the border. At this point, in my opinion, the votes that Moore describes are money in the bank for Trump….I am not sure if Moore is going to convince anyone away from voting trump, although, he does a good job of pointing out the reason why a specific subset of voters will be voting Trump.

  17. Anonymous
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    I agree with Frosted Flake. Michale Moore did not say all Trump supporters are dispossessed Joe Blows. He did not say that all Trump supporters are poor former factory workers in the midwest. He was only trying to explain why this one group of people is so angry and so solidly behind Trump.

  18. Lynne
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 9:30 am | Permalink

    Re: “I could have been like my brother, who dropped out of school in 9th grade and is now in and out of prison. Does society owe that bag of shit anything at all? Does he deserve “UBI” or even food stamps, for that matter?”

    I think so. But you do point out one hurdle to such a scheme that is one of the biggest ones. People cannot stand the thought of giving poor people money and then letting them do whatever they want with it. Would some people take it and squander it? Yes, but so far in real world tests of this kind of social welfare program, it looks like most people will be ok.

    Re: “My guess is they would need to drug test for UBI if they did it.”

    Yeah, that really is one of the issues. Americans love to use benefits and such to mold people in the way they wish. It is true that with a UBI or GMI, not everyone will spend the money wisely. Just like not everyone who is provided the opportunity of free K-12 schools makes the most of it.

    I think this is a message that absolutely resonates with a certain segment of our population but what Moore and those who claim that Sanders would be a better choice because he would have a better chance of resonating with this population are missing is the bigger reason why these folks don’t like Clinton. Clinton talking to these people about jobs (which btw, she has been doing) isn’t going to change how they feel. They are not voting for a woman. Which is why I hope like hell that women get it together and turn out in big numbers in this election. I am scared about the outcome too.

  19. Lynne
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    Re: “Thank you Demetrius for weighing in with the party line once again despite all evidence to the contrary. You are extremely consistent.

    As are you Jean. I predict that in about 50 more responses you are going to complain about the tone here and then act all innocent about how it could possibly happen followed by some statement about how you get called names and it was better when you were gone. So I am noting here that you are the one who usually starts this crap because you don’t usually see it.

  20. Bob
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    This link seems to have been hacked. It keeps diverting to Jeanhenry.com.

  21. Glenn Ross DeMason
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    Michael Moore is right about why the Trumpletons love their Glorious Leader. It’s poignant, but bitterly ironic.

    Reminded me of an anecdote: A slave, having become angry at his master, prepared to kill himself. His friend asked “Why are you doing this?” The Slave replied “So my Master will suffer the pain of loss”

  22. Kim
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 11:54 am | Permalink

    “Trump Jr. Thinks Michael Moore Endorsed His Dad.”


  23. Posted October 27, 2016 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

    Why are you giving this airtime?

    Moore should have thought this through. But maybe he did. Because, in the end, its all about Michael Moore. Even with the edits.

    What has Michael Moore really done for anyone at all?

  24. Kristin
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    What accent?

  25. jean henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    Lynn– I have a single point to make here (And it’s not that bernie is an asshole). I make it over and over again, it’s true. Frosted Flakes may be right. Wounded white men are not my concern. The are an increasingly small part of the electorate. They can’t turn this election. But even if Moore did not intend to have this clip represent the mass of Trump electorate, I think that Mark presented this counter-factually, as are most people who share it on social media. I think he presented it in such a way that it legitimized this nutty idea that Bernie still represents the hearts and minds of the people. ‘The people’ being apparently defined as white men making 30 to 100k a year.

  26. Anonymous
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    “I think that Mark presented this counter-factually, as are most people who share it on social media. I think he presented it in such a way that it legitimized this nutty idea that Bernie still represents the hearts and minds of the people.”

    Mark didn’t mention Bernie. Adam mentioned Bernie. Mark merely quoted him, along with the following sentence.

    “Regardless of whether or not you share his opinion as to who the Democratic candidate should have been, I hope you’ll agree that his suggestion as to what Clinton should be speaking about in these remaining days of the campaign is worth discussing.”

    He did not “counter factually” say that “Bernie still represents the hearts and minds of the people.” He said that it’s worth discussing whether or not Clinton should be devoting more of her time these next few weeks to addressing the concerns of people who have been forced out of the middle class. That seems clear to me.

  27. Lynne
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

    I don’t disagree with the idea that Sanders isn’t the voice of the downtrodden many claim he is although I do believe that his policies would be better for the poor than Clinton’s. Thing is though, Clinton’s aren’t bad and even though I preferred Sanders and voted for him, I always felt he was just slightly better than her. I deeply admire and respect both of them. Sanders admittedly in a large part due to a kindness he showed my brother when he worked for Cynthia Mckinney

    I think FF is right on the money but I will admit that like you, wounded white men are not a big concern of mine. Still, this and listening to the few people I know who are voting Trump has made me wonder if perhaps they should be more of a concern of mine. Is it even possible to make people feel better about a loss of privilege? What if they are a large enough demographic to swing this election?

  28. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

    The side that has the strongest impulse to say “fuck you” will win by a narrow margin of “fuck you’s” despite some misguided efforts by people on both sides who advocated for people inside and outside their respective parties to refrain from saying “fuck you”.

  29. Demetrius
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

    I find the assertion that all Bernie supporters (along with anybody who is not 100% behind Hillary Clinton) are merely “wounded white men” – along with the increasing dismissal and denigration of white, rural, working class voters (and citizens) by certain smug mainstream Democrats – to be nearly as offensive as Trump’s overt racism and xenophobia.

    If the DNC-led “third-way” Democratic Party is so confident they can build a winning coalition based mostly on feminists, minorities, and well-educated urban sophisticates … and therefore they no longer need the votes of poor and middle-class whites, rural dwellers, union members, etc. … then so be it. But then they shouldn’t be surprised when somebody like Trump comes along and tries to woo these voters by speaking to their issues.

    They also shouldn’t be toosurprised if they regularly win the White House … but continue to fail to win House and Senate seats throughout “flyover country” – and therefore struggle to maintain majorities in either house of Congress.

  30. wobblie
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

    DBL where have you been for the past 20 years, “I can’t get behind all the emotional bullshit here, and he’s speaking of people who lost their jobs, when? Back in the 70s, 80s? ” NAFTA was passed in in 1994. The big sucking sound Periot predicted didn’t happen until after the passage of Most Favored Nation Trading Status for China in 2000. Both of these were passed by Democratic Congresses and Bill Clinton.
    The UAW did not submit a single Trade Adjustment Assistance Petition because of auto workers being displaced because of foreign competition between the late 80’s and 2001. Only after the parts industry began moving in mass to China in 2001 did UAW jobs begin disappearing. In 1994 there were over 800,000 UAW members. Today maybe 300,000. In the Great Recession membership fell to around 150,000.
    Anybody in retail in Michigan will tell you the economy has never recovered, and the slump began in 2001. 15 years of declining and stagnate wages brought to us by 3rd way Clintonite Democrats and Bushway Republicans.

    500000 jobs at approx 40,000 a year vaporized and replaced with contingent, self-employment and contract labor that maybe pays 2/3 rds of what a UAW job paid, before you pony up your self-employment taxes.

  31. jean henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

    Woe betide the people who don’t feel bad for the white middle class male.
    We’re cold and heartless coalition of people of color and women and functional older adults with something to lose and some concern for the truly marginalized. We make up a sizeable majority of the population now. Nope. No tears for white dudes. Sorry you’re unearned hegemony is ending. Not.

  32. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

    Lynne and Jean,

    2015 Labor stats for the auto manufacturing industry:

    27% female, 15% black, 5% Asian, 9% Hispanic.

    Just my opinion, but many people on the left have a false sense of comfort if they believe people are going to give Hillary vote just because they happen to be female or black. For example, I read polls where it estimated that only 1% of black voters will vote for Trump. I don’t believe it at all…

  33. jean henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous (Mark) — when you quote someone in your post without qualification and in did with some amplification of your point, then it can be and will be assumed you support that statement.
    You did not present the other MM bit without qualification about exactly how many Trump voters do or do not fit the profile of white make working poor. And so it was a bunch of propaganda repeated. It’s. It like you are alone in this.
    As for HRC appealing to them: 1) how? She’s a globalist. She’s never going to be a protectionist promising a return of their old union jobs (which is a fantasy anyway). 2) they are thecseat of the worst propaganda and sexist misinformation about her, on the left and right. They hate her and they never admit they are wrong. Also, fuck them.
    She’all be more successful getting moderate Republicans who hate Trumps duck you to their party then trying to court people whose political position if Fuck You. I’m sure this will displease Moore.
    But fuck Michael Moore then.
    HRC will be elected by a broad coalition of people– likely a broader cross section than Obama. She won’t be elected by white males . Thank god!!
    That will be the most progressive thing to happen in this country in a while.

  34. jean henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

    FF– we’ll see about that. Despite the narrative of the young progressives that the clinton administration was a disaster for people of color and gay people and women, most the people in those voting blocks, who actually remember the 90’s, understand the clinton policies in context and don’t buy the lefts narrative, and believe that HRC has their interests at heart. They support her. The early voting looks like her support by people of color is underestimated. But we’all see soon enough.
    I’m more worried about what happens after she wins–from left and right–than whether she wins.
    Sorry for typos etc as always..,

  35. Lynne
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

    The problem though is that what a lot of those Trump supporters, but especially the white, rural, working class male ones, seem to want is to maintain their privilege which they cannot do if we are going to have a country that is egalitarian in terms of gender, sex, sexual orientation, etc. A large part of what they are crying ‘Fuck you’ to is the progress of others. As a woman, I just can’t take those concerns seriously except to say that if there were a way to make them feel better about women or minorities having the same power and privilege as they do, I would support it. It might be impossible. The Democrats very well may not have much of a choice if catering to this demographic means losing their core values.

    This is why when I hear someone suggest that Sanders would have been more electable than Clinton, I hear “…because he has a penis” right after that. I think that is what it is too. There are a lot of men for whom this seems to fit although obviously not all male Sanders supporters would qualify. Probably just a minority of them.

    As for flyover country…yes, the Dems could stand to spend more money on downticket races. I hope that Obama can do something with gerrymandering as he seems to want to do. If they continue to fail to win House seats, it may not be because of a lack of overall support but rather, gerrymandering of the districts. Not sure what to do about that other to impress upon the feminists, minorities, and well educated urban sophisticates the importance of voting in midterm elections.

    FF, I can honestly say that I have not run across any black people who are going to vote for Trump. I only know one black republican though and not well enough yet (new inlaw) to ask him who he is voting for. That includes the black women I know who work in the auto industry. When I saw the polls that showed 0% of Detroit voters are going to be voting for Trump, it didn’t seem far fetched at all. Sure there are women who are going to vote for him but by and large, most women will not. Even the republican women I know will not. They are either voting for Johnson or Clinton. Now I understand that “people lynne knows” is in no way any kind of scientific sample but I think more scientific polls are coming to the same conclusion. I guess we will see on election day.

  36. jean henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

    ‘Just because they happen to be female or black’ — that’s such a bullshit way of putting it. As though there is no other reason to vote for HRC. As though she hasn’t supported women and people of color in meaningful ways forever. They know of their children had health care for 25 years because of her program. They know they did experienced greater mobility under Bill than at any other time. They hear her taking to them and see her meeting with their advocates. You can add to the list– gay people and people with disabilities and their families. Also Non-Christians and all people of color.
    Still it’s not like voting for her simply because of their identity as part of an oppressed group is not legitimate cause. It is and it will be for many many people.

  37. Posted October 27, 2016 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

    People only vote certain ways because of demographics. They never vote any particular way because they things that is the best place to put their vote.


  38. Demetrius
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

    I honestly don’t understand the “zero sum game” thinking that suggests that, somehow, if some people or groups assume a greater role in the political sphere (women, minorities, etc.), it automatically means that other groups must be diminished or marginalized (white men, rural residents, union members, etc.)

    Even more, I don’t understand the arrogance (and bitterness) some here seem to be expressing toward whole swaths of people (and voters) that used to be considered a fundamental part of the “big tent” Democratic coalition. When people say things like “… (Hillary Clinton) won’t be elected by white males . Thank god!!” … they are basically suggesting that they (the Democratic Party) no longer want nor need the support of white males. In other words … pushing them away from the Democratic Party, and toward the Republicans.

    (I also suspect many male West Virginia coal miners, Iowa farmers, and Michigan auto workers would be either confused – or amused – by claims that their “unearned hegemony” is ending.)

    It is unfortunate that Republicans – led by Trump – are trying to win votes by dividing Americans based on gender, race, and ethnicity. Unfortunately, some “Democrats” on this blog seem to be trying to do the same thing (but in reverse).

  39. Lynne
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    Re: “I also suspect many male West Virginia coal miners, Iowa farmers, and Michigan auto workers would be either confused – or amused – by claims that their “unearned hegemony” is ending.”

    I know that is the case. My experience with a lot of people is that they don’t see their own privilege at all. They just see the privilege as normal and completely deny it to the point of acting like they are oppressed when things start to shift and they have less privilege than before. They rage. And they would rather vote for a rapist than a woman? And then wonder why women might not take them seriously? Sorry, you throw my ass under the bus politically and ‘fuck you’ as far as I am concerned. Your needs no longer matter to me (at least politically). I want Clinton to metaphorically kick those motherfuckers in the goddam balls on Nov 8

    Although to be fair, there is a bit of a zero sum game when it comes to political power. There are only so many seats in congress, so many top executive positions, so many judicial positions, etc. You put women in half of those positions and suddenly the opportunities for men have dropped by 50%. Which of course should be meaningless to most people since most people have no chance of taking one of those jobs but people seem to really feel it. I get it that they are feeling a loss but I don’t know how to be sympathetic because a good bit of what they lost was something they were never really entitled to in the first place.

  40. Jean Henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

    Not zero sum game. At all. Just not kissing their asses, soothing their wounds.

    Dude, it’s not divisive to point up that other have been bigoted. Check yourself.

    Sexism and bigotry is the reason for our anger.. It’s been a long campaign. I grew up among the people of whom you speak. Mostly the kind of people who vote for Trump, a lot of them the working poor. Most of them. When Bethlehem Steel closed in the 70’s, a boatload of these men were suddenly roaming around in the daytime, feeling lost and wounded, unemployed and angry. Did they paw at me on the playground? Yep. (I was 9) Did they corner me in stores?Yep. (still 9) Did they ogle me in the supermarket after yelling at their wives who were holding calculators trying to figure out how to feed their families on unemployment? Yep. (maybe 10) Did they beat the shit out of their kids, who showed up at school with broken arms and black eyes? yep. Did they get more than a few of their daughters and nieces and grand-daughters pregnant in middle school? Yep. Were they racist as fuck? Yep. Did most of them without addictions recover and get jobs eventually? Yep. Will the women and children and neighbors they abused recover? Well, they’ll survive, mostly.
    By no means does this paint a picture of most of the people who worked at Bethlehem Steel. But when I see the Trump supporters at Trump rallies. The ones who get airtime. They are familiar to me. What I heard from the alt left and right during the campaign, and even from you in this forum, re HRC was very familiar to me as bigotry in the form of sexism. It had the same outrage and self-importance. The same puffed up anger. These are the people Michael Moore wants HRC to cater to. Should she respond to their threats and assaults of hte vocal minority (or the tacit approval of same by the vast majority) by kissing their asses now?

    You all did nothing? Said nothing? Saw nothing? Thought it was amde up by HRC’s campaign for political purposes? Yeah, you are in part responsible for it going this far– left and right.

    Do I think white men will suffer because they will be in a minority majority country very soon? Because women are assuming their rightful power to seek full representation in government and elsewhere? No I do not. I think they’ll do just fine.

    Which is why I cry no tears for them. They can fuck off. They’ve been assholes. Micheal Moore can feel sorry for them. So can you. I welcome their diminished power.

    The system is organized to benefit them. They’ll be fine. Even when they are fine, if they are not on top, they will be angry. I don’t give a shit. No tears for white dudes. They’ve been assholes this whole campaign– whether loud or silent. They do not deserve my pity.

  41. Jean Henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

    we should feel sorry for these people:
    sorry no.

    Mark you should have shown this instead that Michael Moore, white dude apologist. She takes the high road, but she’s angry. She shows respect for the working poor– a very specific group of the working poor. The kind of working poor who have voted for Hillary all along, who supported her quietly, in numbers much higher than they supported either Trump or Sanders. She’d not kissing the ass of the people who say ‘Fuck you’ to government. She’s kissing the ass of people who work their asses off to get ahead, and have a lot to lose from ‘revolution’ and a lot to gain from incremental change to make their lives better. Some people cant afford ‘fuck you’ disruption… or just dont want it. Hillary is never going to bend over backwards to appeal to the ‘fuck you’ crowd. Because she’s too smart to bother.


  42. Smith
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

    “Hillary is never going to bend over backwards to appeal to the ‘fuck you’ crowd. Because she’s too smart to bother.”

  43. jean henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 10:33 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, see what I did there?

  44. Jean Henry
    Posted October 27, 2016 at 10:44 pm | Permalink

    Boo hoo.


  45. Posted October 28, 2016 at 12:09 am | Permalink

    I thought that Roger and Me was interesting when it appeared. As one watches more of Moore’s movies, you understand that it is really just Moore talking to himself. In many ways, his movies are as truthful as the Borat movie. Entertaining, yes, but newsworthy analyses, no.

    Moore and Trump are a lot alike, they both create their own reality and expect the viewer to accept it without question.

    I know that you all love Michael Moore.

  46. Posted October 28, 2016 at 1:44 am | Permalink

    I fucking hate Michael Moore. This was better and won’t be chopped up for Breitbart to use (as Moore must have known his would.)

    “If you don’t live in one of these small towns, you can’t understand the hopelessness. The vast majority of possible careers involve moving to the city, and around every city is now a hundred-foot wall called “Cost of Living.” Let’s say you’re a smart kid making $8 an hour at Walgreen’s and aspire to greater things. Fine, get ready to move yourself and your new baby into a 700-square-foot apartment for $1,200 a month, and to then pay double what you’re paying now for utilities, groceries, and babysitters. Unless, of course, you’re planning to move to one of “those” neighborhoods (hope you like being set on fire!).

    In a city, you can plausibly aspire to start a band, or become an actor, or get a medical degree. You can actually have dreams. In a small town, there may be no venues for performing arts aside from country music bars and churches. There may only be two doctors in town — aspiring to that job means waiting for one of them to retire or die. You open the classifieds and all of the job listings will be for fast food or convenience stores. The “downtown” is just the corpses of mom and pop stores left shattered in Walmart’s blast crater, the “suburbs” are trailer parks. There are parts of these towns that look post-apocalyptic.

    I’m telling you, the hopelessness eats you alive.

    …”But Trump is objectively a piece of shit!” you say. “He insults people, he objectifies women, and cheats whenever possible! And he’s not an everyman; he’s a smarmy, arrogant billionaire!”

    Wait, are you talking about Donald Trump, or this guy:


    You’ve never rooted for somebody like that? Someone powerful who gives your enemies the insults they deserve? Somebody with big fun appetites who screws up just enough to make them relatable? Like Dr. House or Walter White? Or any of the several million renegade cop characters who can break all the rules because they get shit done? Who only get shit done because they don’t care about the rules?


  47. Demetrius
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 5:53 am | Permalink


    I’ve been reading and commenting on this blog for a long time – but I’ve rarely experienced such negativity, bitterness, and condescension.

    I’ll be back on Nov. 9 …

  48. Dirt Bag
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 6:48 am | Permalink

    Enjoy life. There are many pleasant things that people experience, occasionally.

  49. jean henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    And so we see how limited the commitment to real social justice is among many leftists. It’s not about actually getting into the root of systemic injustice– which, as it’s systemic, requires self examination. It’s about blaming the other guy– the fat cats for it. This resistance to owning our own shit– this will to believe we are good (or better) because we are liberal, is exactly why addressing income inequality alone isn’t enough. Demetrius feels the bitterness of working class white dudes as a call to empathy, but can’t deal with anger at those same men for their abuses. I woke up this AM feeling such to my stomach having told those tales in this forum. But I know I was far from alone. And I was just skirting the edges. I think efforts to alieve poverty might help prevent abuses like that. Employment certainly does. It’s not something inherent to their character. It’s something inherent to their powerlessness in larger society, but it’s also something inherent to their power over their wives, and people of color. The sexism and racism on the other hand extends throughout this country. And I don’t think HRC or any of us should excuse it because we understand how it works. We certainly shouldn’t cave to it or cater to it to get elected when there are decent hard working moderate republicans who are waiting to be wooed. To say otherwise is to confuse political strategy with idealism.
    Angry white men saying fuck you to government and civilization really are not heroes. They aren’t even anti-heroes. And reality isn’t a cartoon or a tv show. I’m not rooting for them until they figure out how to advocate for themselves without abusing others.

  50. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    I think Moore’s movies are filled with fake one sided arguments. I don’t care for him but he is saying something true.

    The problem, Jean, is that if we follow your suggestion and kick all those people in the nuts that Moore was talking to,( those people who, right or wrong, have the perception that The Clinton’s are responsible for taking their manufacturing jobs overseas), then we will find out that many of those people are not white and have vaginas. The loss of those jobs hurt minority groups and their extended families worse than it hurt white males.

    In what will probably be a close race, I do think it is unwise (strategically) to dismiss–even villanize (as you have done) in such a fantastical way– the people that once were strongly Democrat, who will now be voting Republican. It does not mean kissing anyone’s asses. It very much could mean that we figure out ways to identify their real motive for wanting to vote trump, which, as Moore describes, has more to do with hateful feelings than self interests..A smart person like you might be able to talk a few Trump supporters, of this specific class, to vote within their own self interests! It would be helpful…

    I know it is controversial to shoot for a moderate choice between the decision of 1) ass kissing an entire group of people; and 2) kicking that same group of multiethnic/multigender people in the private parts–but maybe we can agree that it might be a close race and we might need as many votes as we can get. What’s the word? Was the word “Discourse”? Maybe the alternative to discourse feels too good for you? Maybe even if Trump wins it really is not going to effect a couple of well off white girls living in Washtenaw county–so their is less at stake for you?

  51. Posted October 28, 2016 at 7:54 am | Permalink

    Affect and effect are different in meaning, though frequently confused. Affect is chiefly used as a verb and its main meaning is ‘to influence or make a difference to’, as in the following example sentences:

    The pay increase will greatly affect their lifestyle.

    The dampness began to affect my health.

    The weather will affect my plans for the weekend.

    Effect, on the other hand, is used both as a noun and a verb, although is more commonly used as a noun. As a noun it means ‘a result or an influence’, as in:

    Move the cursor until you get the effect you want.

    The beneficial effects of exercise are well documented.

    Over time the effect of loud music can damage your hearing.

    When used as a verb effect means ‘to bring something about as a result’. It’s most often used in a formal context as oppose to everyday English:

    Growth in the economy can only be effected by stringent economic controls.

    The new policies did little to effect change.

    The prime minister effected many policy changes.

    The key thing to remember is that effect is most commonly used as a noun, whereas affect is typically used as a verb.

  52. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:05 am | Permalink

    Urban Dictionary has some insightful entries under the word “douche”.

  53. Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:07 am | Permalink

    I was trying to be helpful. You have made that mistake three times in the past week.

  54. Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:09 am | Permalink

    If I am noticing it on this blog, people in your professional life are definitely noticing.

  55. jean henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    trump voters are wealthier than Dems. social mobility in my hometown is higher for the poor and than it is in Ann Arbor according to that Stanford study last year (Mark had a post or two on it). People there growing up poor can expect to make about $3500 more than their parents and achieve a higher level of education. This seemed to be true across the board in red places, while people of color are not experiencing any recovery from the 2008 recession and it’s devastating and disproportionate impact on them. My hometown city is not small. It’s not Philly or even Lancaster but rents are very cheap and it’s growing. They have a community college in town now. People don’t have to go to Harrisburg. The town is increasingly integrated as people from the big cities cone there to escape chaos and improve their lot in life. They deal with racism wherever they go. The drug problem is worse no. Open racism, which the Cracked article underplays, was better but now is worse with Trump running. It’s not like these people want to integrate. But no ones burning anyone’s houses down. People of color certainly aren’t. Absent many Black and Latino churches, they go to church together. Not all places are the same. Wherever the TV shows peddle, social mobility is better in red places generally. In part because the representatives of people in those places block aid to the big cities. In part because of racism.
    Still no tears for white dudes here.

  56. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:20 am | Permalink

    I have been given that correction before. Fixing grammatical glitches is important to me. It has been a process. I have tried to correct myself with the effect/affect difference before. For some reason I can’t seem to wrap my head around it in a way that I use it correctly–especially when speaking. I will take a look at your list, look at a few different resources, and try to do a better job.

    Seriously though, you need to look into the douche thing that you do. I don’t care. You can act in ways that seem condescending if you want. I think you are hilarious–but you seriously undermine your credibility and take focus away from your argument when you fail to treat people in ways that are considered “polite”by most. You have a lot of positive things to offer and I think your ideas are undermined by the tone you take sometimes.

    No worries.

  57. Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    I was trying to be helpful. If I make grammatical mistakes, I appreciate people correcting me.

    affect/effect is easy to confuse.

    Spelling “lose” as “loose” is entirely annoying.

    I am not well liked by most people. It isn’t something I worry about. I am a pretty awful human being. Repulsive, really. Thank you for trying to say something kind.

  58. Westside
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:33 am | Permalink

    If I win the dinner and movie you can have it. It seems like it might cheer you up a bit to have someone do something nice with you. Enjoy!

  59. jean henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:38 am | Permalink

    FF– I don’t want to kick poor rural whites in the nuts. (Well not most of them) I said in my posts that they’ll do fine under Clinton. They have actually been well served by government relative to the urban poor. I said I think poverty programs would help alleviate abuse and anger. I just don’t think HRC needs to be ‘feeling their pain’ while they abuse her. A lot of women feel sorry for and excuse their abusers in order to survive. I don’t think we want our first woman president modeling battered woman syndrome for the nation. On order to get votes. When she doesn’t have to. The white working class needs Wall Street reform, some tax relief, and more economic improvement. Thry don’t need closed borders and a leader who appeals to their worst nature. That’s not caring either. They need HRC not Trump– whether they know it or not. Change is hard. They’ll get over it.

    And I think this is an ok place to make grammatical errors. Since I type these missives quickly on an old phone with poor eyesight, I make mistakes all the time. We all make mistakes.

  60. jean henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 8:56 am | Permalink

    A reminder here FF that the old Democratic Party that had the unequivocal support of labor and the rural working poor was also racist as hell. That alliance was as compromised as the GOzp alliance with the Christian Right. They tried the GOP and it gave them lip service but didn’t serve them. (Though it did starve out cities to help them a little… See how that works) Now they are trying an old school racist xenophobic populist as a fuck you to the GOP as much as the establishment. I get that they like protectionism, just like they like starving out cities. I don’t think it will serve them though. I know you do. I know that’s a persistent narrative on the left which is why the tears for the white working class narrative is so appealing. I just don’t see their suffering from free trade in the numbers. I think maybe flat wages (due to many causes) for a bit and some economic transition to other industries is worth it for a 50% reduction in world wide poverty. Again– no tears for white dudes.

  61. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    You talk like Clinton has won already. I don’t share your confidence that this race is in the bag.

    Did you predict Trump would make it this far? Sanders as far as he did? I seriously, can’t remember.

    Also, I think you might be wrongly assuming that the people who attend Trump rally’s are a good representation of the average Trump voter. My evidence is anecdotal, but even if I am wrong, I think it is good to be cautious. I don’t want Trump to win… For a minute there, you and Lynne seemed to be running your pre-victory victory lap with middle your middle fingers in the air….

  62. Smith
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    “No tears for white dudes.”

    Really? No empathy whatsoever for those “white dudes” who got the short end of the globalization stick, who lost their jobs and everything else? No tears for those who are gravitating to Trump out of fear? Weren’t you the one who used to argue here that we needed to be more inclusive, to listen to the poor and downtrodden? How did you go from being that person to someone who would say, “Hillary is never going to bend over backwards to appeal to the ‘fuck you’ crowd. Because she’s too smart to bother.”

  63. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    I actually agree with a lot of what you are saying in terms of policy, Jean. I wish you understood that. I don’t think Clinton needs to, or should, make promises, concessions, pander or change her platform, but I do think it is dangerous, completely unwise and very juvenile for her supporters to create these caricatures of Trump supporters and then to talk about how they are going to physically abuse them–as you have done. Trump supporters are not just saying “fuck you” to policy, some, maybe most, are saying “fuck you” to you, far left people, and many people on this blog. You beat the “discourse” drum so hard, for so long that it was honestly annoying but many of us endured it because many of us believed you were right and were saying something important. Such a quick turnaround. Are there two Jean Henry’s? I am confused.

  64. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    No tears when they insist their suffering is greater than others. No tears when they insist they be the policy priority over others. No tears when they make their argument from bias and support policy that would harn others to their benefit. No tears when their standard response to hearing about the abuse of others is to pretend they have it worse. White male fragility. You can google it. The rest of us have had to be resillant while kicked in the teeth. They an learn it too.
    I’m not without empathy for them. I’m not worried about them either. I defended my case why their voices should not be catered to. I also said why I think Bernie made a mistake in catering his campaign to them. The numbers don;t support the narrative of how bad they have it. They just weren’t doing better than their parents. Why is it assumed that social mobility can always go up without any cost to others. Besides, their kids are doing better than they did.
    I think globalism will help them eventually, and signs are it already has in many cases. (I blame wage stagnation on quarterly profit demands in wall street not globalization btw)

    White dudes don;t need my tears. I’m not saying I hate them. I’m saying they don;t need my pity. They are in fear of their loss of power, but they’re going to be fine. Lot’s of straight people thought gay marriage would be a threat to straight marriages but they’r fine. Resistance to change is natural, and useful in some ways, but it needs to be understood for what it is. Fear. The Trump critique of what is wrong is all wrong. I’m not going to legitimize hatred to make some whit dudes feel better.

    I’m moving from Ann Arbor to Whitmore Lake this summer. My friends who proclaim to ‘feel for the working man’ are horrified. That’s Trump land. It’s 10 miles door to door to my house in A2. Closer than Ypso or Dexter, but it;s a different world. Because it’s full of the kinds of people you say I hate or should feel sorry for. They are just people. And people are often wrong. I have never had any trouble treating poor white men and women and kids with respect. Part of that is that if they say something racist or sexist, I’ll talk to them about it. They usually modulate around me. They don;t lose respect for me. I’m not a child any more. I have nothing to fear from them. I’m ok if they laugh at my feminism. I’m moving to Whitmore Lake to be around people who don’t think like me. I’m love Ann Arbor but don;t like where it’s headed. Maybe being there will make me more empathetic to their plight.

    But right now, I don’t think they politically deserve to be catered to. And I know them well enough to know most of them will never ever ever vote for HRC anyway. Just like Bernie or Busters– It’s asking to much of them to admit their criticism is largely based on misinformation, lies and sexism.

  65. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    With the “white dude” thing you are mis-classifying tens of thousands of people who happen to not be white and happen to not be male, yet, who in one major aspect of their experience, addressed by Mark and Moore, share a common aspect of experience with a specific group of white men.

  66. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    FF– I see your point. It IS confusing. If victimized by some poor white men with a big chip on their shoulder and their kids as a child, routinely– having grown up in a community that encouraged expressions of bigotry and would harass and beat me after school for countering their ideology, having seem the victims of their victimhood, it becomes clear that the chip is as much a part of the problem as their position in society. Their sense of their own victimhood is inflated. Many of them are victims of alcoholism. Many of them just didn’t want to work very hard. It’s not easy for them to rise up, but it;s not as hard as for many people. And the system is rigged in their favor. As I showed above, the rural poor are now doing better, better than poor people in cities. And yet they want to be considered the victims. Just like many men feel they are the victims of female agency. They are not. It’s just fear of sharing power. I can;t support any political action that legitimizes outsized fears of sharing power.
    I have empathy. I’m just not going to show it. I have empathy for others too. The concerns of poor white males are not my priority, because I believe they’ll be fine. And, critically, because I believe confirming their narrative of oppression will allow the oppression of others to continue.

    As I said above, most people who are the working poor are not abusers. But they do exist in a culture that accepts abuse. I don’t accept it. I had to learn not to and I’m not going to unlearn that. Many of the working poor who don’t accept abuse also support HRC. While all abuse comes from an assertion of power. Not all people with power abuse, and abuse doesn’t all stem from the people with the most power. It also can come from people with very little power and a lot of anger. Which is why I see populism as as easily corrupted as the oligarchy. Most Trump supporters are not the working poor anyway.

    Ok Ive said enough. I’m bowing out. If you have questions about my position, I feel certain I have already answered them.

  67. Lynne
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    Yeah, but that one thing they share is that is they are upset that black people, women, gays, and Mexicans are becoming equal to them. There might not be a real way to be inclusive of them politically if what they want is so awful.

  68. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    Tens of thousands of women, gay people, black people, asian people and Mexican people hate that women, gays, blacks, asians, and Mexicans are becoming equal to themselves?

    This is as hilarious as when Mark claimed that Ann Arbor Public schools was 1% Black and had to double check to see that he was wrong…

    We all get that the group of people Moore was talking about is mostly comprised of white men. However, it is a big fucking group with a lot of representatives that are non white, non male, non straight.

  69. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    Ok– didn’t see some of that last bit FF before I posted. Last post. promise.

    You are right some fates are shared– but not all. Not at all. My point is that the shared fates of all working poor will be served better by HRC than Trump. And Trump and his followers as well as Sanders and his followers abused Clinton. I don’t think Moore’s perspective or Mark’s or Sander’s ilk understands that she is not going to cowtow to abuse for a reason. She’s not going to apologize ever for making the same amount of money as other men in her position. She’s not going to tell a group of people that regularly call her Killary that she feels their pain. Sounds nice and buddhist to do that and Obama tried it, but it doesn’t work and it undermines the more critical message. They will still hate her, like they hated Obama, because they are bigots. Because sexism is a factor. And denying it is like a full time job for parts of our majority culture. . Because they would love to see Hillary and Obama cowtow, (and honestly white liberal like to see it too) Obama can never do it enough. Trump supporters will always degrade him and her. They will demand apology and it won;t ever be enough. We saw that in Sanders camp treatment of Hillary. She did cowtow to them. It’s not ever enough. Sexism allows that. And populist political cunning enables it

    The problems of sexism and bias will not be addressed by seeing the working poor as a class unto themselves– as a monolith. They are separate problems with separate solutions. Bernie failed because he didn’t see that. People of color and other marginalized people, especially older ones, did not believe his revolution would include them. I’m not convinced that efforts to lift up the middle class will help the poor as a group, much less poor people of color. I don’t think we can assume they will if we look at who has recovered from 2008

    Now that the middle class have felt systemic exclusion from wealth, they believe they feel empathy for the poor. I’m not sure they do. I think the turn of Sanders campaign after New York says they don’t. They are more interested in their own problems than anyone else’s. The shared boat still has levels– and the lowest level floods first. And I’m not sure the people safely up on deck even see that, until the water rises to their level. Now when white male leftists of privilege see themselves as sharing the boat with poor working class white males… well yes it really really bothers me. I see it here, once again, as a denial of racism and sexism and other forms of bigotry as their own very legitimate issues. Issues that appear to be at odds with the systemic favoring of white men.

    When I say no tears for white dudes, I’m expressing frustration with the way white men generally tend to feel victimized by, or at least fear of, the ascent of other kinds of people. I have a lot of privilege, but I have also been a victim. Many people are the same. Most. You can rise to the challenge of real empathy– seeing how others are victimized by your own privilege. Seeing how it works, not externalizing blame. Or you can use your privilege to deny and overtake the stories of others, and assert your problems over theirs. I don’t believe that works. I’m not interested in enabling those kinds of beliefs. I believe in sharing power and many nuanced not simplistic but also ot destructive or exclusionary paths to greater equity. I know that’s not as inspiring a vision as the 99% shared boat, we’re all in this together and they are the bad guys thing.

    I appreciate your point FF. It’s a hard question and a good one. Actually a couple of hard questions. I really appreciate that anyone bothers to read while I work these ideas out. I appreciate the indulgence. I’ll think about this for a while. I’ll probably contradict myself while arguing for balance somewhere else. But meanwhile I’ll cede this conversation to others. Thanks all. Sometimes a woman just has to express her frustration.

    But seriously, Trump supporters are not the working poor, by and large:) Most aren’t openly racist or sexist either. They just don’t stop it. They participate in a system of exclusion. I’m not feeling sorry for anyone who does that.

  70. Lynne
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 11:11 am | Permalink

    Tens of thousands of women, gay people, black people, asian people and Mexican people hate that women, gays, blacks, asians, and Mexicans are becoming equal to themselves?

    That isn’t really the demographic here is it though? I think we all know that if we took white men out of the equation, Clinton would win in a landslide. The point is that Trump is running on a platform of misogyny and racism. The economic concerns of poor white people ARE something to consider and frankly, I think Clinton addresses them well. I don’t see how she could address them better without outright lying to people as Trump does. She certainly cannot appeal to their fears of losing privilege in the way Trump does without alienating all of the people who are gaining power. What do you think she should do?

    I don’t think Moore or other white men get how fucking upsetting it is to hear men who think of themselves as liberal going on about how Clinton is ignoring this demographic when they are screaming shit like “Trump that Bitch” and “Lock her up”. And EVERY Trump voter is the type of person who is going to go into the voting booth and proclaim that voting for a RAPIST is better than voting for Clinton. That is absolutely insulting to the point where as I have said before, they lose the right in my mind to be catered to in the same way they have always been catered too in the past.

  71. M
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 11:53 am | Permalink

    I appreciate your comment, Lynne, but I think you’re falling into the same trap of seeing Trump supporters as a unified mass of ugliness and I don’t think that’s the case. The Trump supporters that I know aren’t yelling “Trump that Bitch”. They aren’t mean people. What they are is terrified of the future. I agree with you, however, that Hillary has spoken to those concerns.

  72. Posted October 28, 2016 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

    I hope this is a new use of the word because I think it is cool.

    Spinel crystallizes in the isometric system; common crystal forms are octahedra, usually twinned. It has an imperfect octahedral cleavage and a conchoidal fracture. Its hardness is 8, its specific gravity is 3.5–4.1, and it is transparent to opaque with a vitreous to dull luster. It may be colorless, but is usually various shades of red, blue, green, yellow, brown, black, or (uncommon) violet. There is a unique natural white spinel, now lost, that surfaced briefly in what is now Sri Lanka. Some spinels are among the most famous gemstones: among them are the Black Prince’s Ruby and the “Timur ruby” in the British Crown Jewels, and the “Côte de Bretagne”, formerly from the French Crown jewels. The Samarian Spinel is the largest known spinel in the world, weighing 500 carats (100 g).

  73. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

    The role of tacit approval via silence has not been addressed.
    Systemic bias is not a few guys.
    They are just the loudest expression of society’s illness.
    The symptom not the cause.

  74. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    Should the fear of middle and upper middle class white people who make up the bulk of Trump’s supporters be a major concern for Hillary? Is the fear justified? Do they fear struggle or losing their advantage.

  75. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    There is no doubt in my mind that Trump purposely uses anti-woman rhetoric that hints at domestic violence against women. I think I wrote about my experience, on here, sleeping on the couch in front of one of Trump’s speeches and I kept waking up in these weird fight or flight responses because I thought that I was in a domestic violence situation and it was triggered by him saying things like “we are going to beat her down”. It is scary stuff….Scarier that it is probably orchestrated….Trump is highly manipulative and smart in some evil ways….

    For the purpose of this discussion, I distinguish between what Hillary should do differently and what some of her supporters should do differently. As I was saying to Jean, I don’t think Hillary should make false promises or concessions to the group Moore was addressing–which has a great number of non white, non male, non straight people in it. I do think some Hillary supporters should: stop alienating people within that group by simply misidentifying who they are because they are not all male and white. It is inaccurate. It makes no sense strategically. It is just a form of emotional venting. It is counterproductive.

    I think it is simple enough to understand that a woman does not liked to be called a man. A gay person does not like to be called straight. A black person does not like to be called white. None of this matters of course if no women, gay people, or black people vote for Trump anyway. But, as I have said I think the left, especially the sheltered left, have a false-sense of security in that regard….As Jean said “We will see”. No sense in arguing about it because I am going off of anecdotal evidence….

    That is just the first layer. The second layer is the abusive language from the left which talks about kicking people in the balls. Is it metaphorical kicking or metaphorical balls? Sorry Jean, I was attributing that to you, but I just double-checked and it was Lynne said it. It is just a recent example of crazy stuff people on the left says, in my opinion. Trump supporters say a lot of crazy stuff too but I think we can do better.

    Anyway, I appreciate a lot of what you have said in this discussion and in the 500 comment discussion so I apologize if it feels like I am nitpicking and being repetitive. You have offered a lot of good information and points. I don’t have much more to say on this topic…

  76. Meta
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

    The Bradley analogy may be better than the Brexit analogy.

    From Politico.

    Those battleground state polls that paint such a grim picture of Donald Trump’s prospects against Hillary Clinton? Most Republican insiders don’t believe they’re accurately capturing Trump’s true level of support.

    That’s according to the POLITICO Caucus — a panel of activists, strategists and operatives in 11 key battleground states. More than seven-in-10 GOP insiders, 71 percent, say the polls understate Trump’s support because voters don’t want to admit to pollsters that they are backing the controversial Republican nominee.

    With Trump falling behind in the majority of swing states, an overwhelming polling error may represent his best hope to win next month — and even that may not be enough. At the same time GOP insiders say there are “shy Trump” voters out there who aren’t showing up in the polls, a 59-percent majority still say Clinton would win their state if the election were held today.

    “I’m not sure how big a factor it is, but there is definitely a ‘Bradley effect’ going on out there,” said a Virginia Republican, referring to the African-American mayor of Los Angeles who led in polls but lost unexpectedly in the 1982 California gubernatorial race. “I personally know many Republicans that won’t admit that they are voting for Trump. I don’t like admitting it myself. It won’t matter if Hillary is up more than 5 points, but we might be in for a surprise if Hillary’s lead is less than 5 points on Election Day.”

    Read more:

  77. Lynne
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

    M, but the *are* a united mass of ugliness. Every single one of them is willing to overlook the fact that he is abusive towards women and others. I get it that it is because they are scared but that does not justify it. Look. I know that not all Trump supporters are bad people but they are OK with misogyny and racism. I dont thing being nice to them is going to help but do find it telling that so many liberal white men seem comfortable with being critical of the anger marginalized people feel in the face of this election and frankly that is a problem too.

  78. jean henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    Generally speaking you will not find me advocating for violence or degradation of any gender’s genitals. Although I certainly think in this case it could be argued as turn around and so fair play.

    I want to see the demographics you are looking at FF because I don’t see lots of support for trump by people of color and it’s dropping rapidly among women. It seems that the idea that women and people of color and people with disabilities could turn an election inspires anxiety among white men. But they do it all the time. The division is just much more striking with an open bigot as candidate.

    White men are super anxious lately. They don’t want to be excluded from the club. But it’s just a club that hates bigotry and won’t tolerate it for the sake of other political concerns. White men have joined the club and do. It hurts to hear oneself and ones demographic singled out for derision. Well duh. And it’s not a lot of derision. Seems a fair trade for the privilege you enjoy.
    These voter demographics are from before pussygate. The demarcation among supporters of Trump are even more clear now. No need to exaggerate.

    The Sanders results were clear. He lost because he did not win the support of people of color especially women. White men did not accept that result. By and large white men. No one on the left really analyzed what that meant about their single minded focus on income inequality. Voting Blocks are not absolute monoliths, but when they come close, when they turn elections against a leftist progressive you might want to look at what that means. Mark believes the interests of white poor males are aligned with all other poor people. The voters are saying no. . Now I hear you FF denying that Trunps support is a monolith. When it is more so than any other national election ever.

    And I think you need to start asking yourself about your attachment to that false narrative. I think white men need to examine their defensiveness. The rest of us see it clearly.

  79. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

    I agree the Bradley effect may be a factor. It could be that more white males will vote for Trump. And maybe more women. Or, it could be that many many women who say they are going to vote for Trump or write in a candidate, will, with total privacy, end up voting for Clinton. Moore’s piece does not help that effort.

    Another Trump scandal would.

    I’m certain the polls will be a bit more off this election than most. I just don’t know which way it will fall. I do think Clinton needs to widen her lead before Nov 8th. The BrExit polls were fairly accurate. People didn’t believe them. I still think it’s incredibly important to get out the vote, to canvas, to encourage our friends who would like to lodge a protest vote to do otherwise.

    I’m planning a big party. I’m trying to keep this fucking thing positive.the left’s need to constantly take down HRC or criticize her, and continue to lift of Bernie without question is definitely not helping. White male anxiety is not going to win the election for HRC. Duh.

  80. Lynne
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

    FF, maybe you need to step back and ask yourself why you feel that women like me need to take this bullshit abuse from these guys without showing any anger? Yes I want Clinton to metaphorically kick these guys in the balls. They have it coming.

    It isn’t just Trump and his supporters. It is a-holes on the left like Michael Moore and YOU who are chastising people for being angry in a situation that should make them angry. Sorry but FUUUUUUUUCK YOU and fuck Michael Moore too. And any white man who feels entitled to tone police people about their reaction to being abused.

  81. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

    I think the thing that you are missing is, in the context of this discussion, I am not worried about white men getting disrespected and I am not standing up for them or calling for people to be nicer to them. Not once have I done that. I am saying that you are insulting women, people of color, and gay people when you assume that everyone who feels like there is a correlation between The Clintons and NAFTA must be a white male. I am not worried about how the white male feels, in this discussion–forget about them for a minute. It was a huge huge group of people that *felt* wounded by the Clintons/Nafta. That class of people is not all white male. That class of people have a theory about the cause of that wound. I don’t know what polls Moore is looking at, maybe he is running on anecdotal evidence, which quite frankly might still be somewhat reliable if we consider Flint to be a model of a town that was effected by manufacturing going across borders, but he seems to be concerned. His concern is not a concern for anybodies feelings!!!! He is concerned with winning.

    Again, you talk like someone who is either poor at strategy or who has not much to lose…

  82. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

    Sorry Lynne,

    This will piss you off even more, but I am not objecting to your tone as much as your inaccuracy.

  83. Lynne
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

    I am aware that not everyone who is going to vote for Trump is a white man but even the non white men have a lot to answer for in terms of sexism and racism. I get it that with a lot of folks it is largely implicit and I even have some sympathy for their feelings. I get those same feelings sometimes when one of my black friends tells me to check my privilege too. I just know from a lot of experience that they are usually right when they are pointing out that something I have said or done is not ok so I make a point not to challenge them on their tone.

  84. Lynne
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

    Also for the purposes of this discussion, I understand that a lot of people feel harmed by NAFTA but the thing is that NAFTA has been a bit of a boogie man and never even caused the harm they think it did. I don’t know how to explain that to them though. I get it that there is real economic pain here. I even want to do something about it.

  85. Lynne
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    And really, the number of African Americans who are going to vote for Trump is so low that it is statistically non-existent. I was just reading about how just one black guy in Illinois is messing up one of the polls because he is voting for Trump. LOL.

  86. Jcp2
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    Jean and Lynne are on point. In two more presidential terms, pro-Trump Frank will be seeing Dr. Johnson-Williams for his prostatism, with Maria taking his pulse and Terrence helping him out of the van. Pro-Sanders Frank Jr. will be deciding whether to send Franklin III to PS 101, St. Ignatius, or Oak Arbor Academy. The kids that are majority minority now will make up the new recruits of the army in the future. There will be no revolution.

  87. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

    It will be a gentle transition of power. If our leader is benevolent and serves us well. If she is allowed to implement incremental change with pressure from outside but not obstructionism from within (from both sides). Or if the pressure from outside is smart enough to apply pressure to the right places. Incremental change is gentle and leaves fewer victims. And we know who the victims of disruption usually are.

    My son is obsessed with the idea that Canada NEGOTIATED its independence from Britain, while we fought a bitter war. He thinks that’s why they are objectively, just a kinder gentler people. Sure they rode on our coat tails. But maybe now we should be trusting that the systems we set up in opposition to tyranny, if properly used, will show us the way to avoid tyranny and provide for the welfare of all.

    Crazy talk. She’s evil, greedy, a sociopath, a hawk, a <> neoliberal… Blah blah blah.

  88. stupid hick
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 7:04 pm | Permalink

    Jean, I’m sorry you were harassed as a child, also sorry if you are not well, as suggested in the other thread. Sorry to hear you’re leaving A2 too.

  89. Jean Henry
    Posted October 28, 2016 at 7:49 pm | Permalink

    Thanks Stupid Hick. That’s very kind. Truly appreciated. Nice to hear a kind voice in this space. I want to make clear though that my experience as a child is not at all unusual. Ask any woman. We don’t talk about it much. We were counseled to just deal with it. It’s part of growing up.Most women have visceral memories but a lot of self-doubt. They have learned to minimize the experience as a means of survival. And because society minimizes it. I told the story because I was adjacent to poverty not in it. My experience doesn’t warrant anyone’s sympathy. I was lucky. But there are kids and wives in those homes. And, for their sake, we need to end the tacit approval of abuse. Which means we need to look for it.

    Abuse of women and children is not exclusive to people in poverty or the uneducated. Or to women. It exists in all strata of society. Those conditions exacerbate it. But it is its own problem. It’s not excused by poverty. My brother went to a very exclusive boarding school that had systemic abuse of students. It’s now in the courts. Same lawyer as in Spotlight. My brother is part of the lawsuit. It took a lot for him to join in. His life has dramatically changed because he and the others have been heard and validated. And they have each other. If we could all talk openly about it, there would be lots of company. Thanks to trump, ironically, that’s starting to happen.

    Lynne is right. We can’t make excuses for people who support a serial abuser. We also need to stop turning a blind eye to sexism among our peer group and on our political side of the fence. Sexist banter is no different than racist jokes, they feed into a culture of abuse and excuse it. I have devoted myself to talking about sexism this election. When I saw it on the left, I was ridiculed. When I saw it on the right, I was cheered. If I brought up parallels between alt right and Bernie Bros, I was told I just can’t let go of my Bernie hatred. No I can’t let go of my hatred of his campaign. I really hate that people saw it as beautiful when it was so clearly abusive to HRC– sexist, yep. Populist campaigns work best hinged on hatred and bias.

    Some people, like Mark here, repeatedly. felt a need to minimize sexism on either side– choosing to see systemic bias as a few bad apples kind of thing. It’s not. It’s pervasive. Locating the issue in a few people and attacking them minimizes the problem. It gets us off the hook. The problem is cultural. The solution is cultural. I don’t see how it will end until we are all willing to see what our part in it is. Even when politically inconvenient. Especially then. Maybe the pattern is more apparent now to many people because they saw it while they were in opposition to and then in support of HRC. That was my hope for this election. As much as HRC’s victory.

    I’m moving 10 miles away. It’s really not leaving. My illness is chronic and manageable. I just need to be able to work less sometimes and more at other times, so it made sense to move someplace less expensive. I’m figuring it out. When I am not battling illness, I won’t be here so much. We’ll all be happy.

    But I appreciated the company the last couple weeks. Most of the time.

  90. Posted October 29, 2016 at 1:04 am | Permalink

    Christopher Hitchens take down of Moore was entertaining.


  91. Bob
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:19 am | Permalink

    Moore is still here. I’d say he wins.

  92. jean henry
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:42 am | Permalink

    Bob.. that sounds like Trump.

  93. Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:50 am | Permalink

    So what?

    So is Robert Mugabe.

    And Trump.

  94. Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:51 am | Permalink

    Hell, I’m still alive.

    Doesn’t change the fact that I’m a loser.

  95. Bob
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:08 am | Permalink

    Jean, you are just the definition of pedantic. A total bore. Even worse, completely humorless. Mark seems to be mostly avoiding his own blog these days. I wonder why?

  96. Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:31 am | Permalink


    In a word:


  97. jean henry
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:16 am | Permalink

    Oh Bob. Your cunning insights are so reliable.

    Since you never actually contribute an actual idea, except that I suck, I’m wondering why you continue to read. We must annoy you in all the right ways.

    PS– Mark contributes by M, Anonymous, Site Mamger and Mark. He’s still here; he’s just sporting costumes as fits the season. Also contributing to a cat fight is a bad idea.

  98. Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    Bob and kjc are similar. They just show up to insult people.

    I mean, I find it entertaining, but I’m not sure what they get out of it.

  99. Lynne
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    Yeah. I was really upset by the Bernie Bros, which was a real thing. It put me in the awkward position of constantly defending HRC even though I was myself a Sanders supporter. What should have been polite discussions about ideologically similar candidates often turned into really sexist attacks on HRC and her supporters. Things got pretty racist too as white people speculated about why black people were voting for HRc. I even heard people suggest the DRC not count the delegates from southern states because “the democrats in the south dont represent democrats demographically.” I really felt betrayed by those men because I had previously thought men on the left had women’s backs. Um wrong!

    And fwiw, you will have a hard time finding a woman who hasnt been abused by men in some way. When I was 14 and waiting for the bus to school, men would regularly stop and ask us how much we charged. Ew. But that is 8 mile and Woodward for you. It was scary enough that no one would wait at that stop alone.

  100. jean henry
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    The slander was a defense against actual policy discussions. The righteousness of the alt left knows no bounds. I just had another person tell me that they can’t say anything seated in racial bias because they are liberal. Same dude said Vulture would not produce click bait pieces Redding on bias because it was not geared to ‘white supremacists.’ Some version of this liberal political identity as bias invisibility cloak argument is repeated almost daily to me.
    I appreciate that you called the sexism out. I found it very disturbing that progressives would deny and defend sexism-validated degradation and misinformation just because it was politically expedient. No one thinks their friend could be sexually abusive either. My son today told me I just like to defend the under-dog. I said “HRC is not the under-dog.” He said ‘she’s been bullied for 25 years. That’s an underdog.”

  101. Bob
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    I think I’ve contributed plenty of longer winded “ideas” over the years. Whatever that means. Generally more substantial than Peter’s standard “interesting.”

    I honestly don’t know why I log on here at all anymore, other than Mark contributes occasionally interesting arts content. That has become increasingly rare however. Markmaynard.com has pretty much become the “Jean Henry babbles endlessly about her unconditional love for Hillary blog.” You’re probably a good person Jean, which is why friends should tell you that you are embarrassing yourself. You cut and paste long passages of barely substantiated opinion, and present it as fact. You pop-off on many of us, with responses to posts that are error filled. You clearly read things and react, so quickly that you often get wrong what was even said. My calling Clinton “Shillary” a while back, for example. You quickly reacted to my sexist characterization of “Shrillary.” For her shrill voice. Getting things wrong is bad enough. Obnoxiously chastising people all the time based on your knee-jerk misreading of their comments is just ridiculous.

    Mostly I feel sorry for you. I’m going to reluctantly vote for Hillary and feel no surprise when she governs as a corporate Republican. I suspect you are going to be crushed when she inevitably escalates ground wars in Syria, or other places. Or allows the Prime Minister of Israel to dictate our middle east policy. Or any one of a dozen terrible things she is likely to do. But that’s me. Maybe you’ll love her sticking it to the “alt left.” Whatever the fuck that means. As long as she’s a woman. That’s all that matters.

  102. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    Oh Bob. I hope this doesnt embarass you. But it wasnt Jean who made the mistake with “Shrillery/shillery”, it was me. But I can see you dont like strong women speaking up about politics. Maybe you dont like strong women in general which is why you were calling Clinton names in the first place or maybe something else is rubbing you the wrong way? Who knows?

    I do know that if you are going to accuse someone of obnoxiously chastising others after getting things wrong, it has more of an impact if you yourself havent just gotten it wrong and then obnoxiously chastised someone. Just sayin’

  103. Demetrius
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    I appreciate Mark’s posts on many interesting, diverse topics, and how he often uncovers important news that local journalists no longer have the bandwidth to cover. Over the years, I’ve also enjoyed the many free-wheeling discussions and arguments that have taken place here.

    That said, I basically agree with Bob’s post above. I enjoy lively disagreements and sharp differences of opinion as much as the next person … but lately, some prolific commenters here have been so bitter, negative, and dismissive (not to mention hyperbolic and hypocritical), that reading and responding just seems less and less appealing.

    If *any* criticism or even questioning of Hillary Clinton (even from among those who most likely will end up voting for her) is immediately dismissed as “sexist,” or as just another example of white male “privilege,” that certainly tends to shut down, rather than encourage, useful dialogue.

    Or – on a blog where most people would never dream of criticizing women, African Americans, Hispanics, or gays and lesbians – certain posters feel completely free to bash “white men,” and snicker about how unemployed mine workers or factory workers *deserve* to lose their jobs (i.e., their “unearned hegemony.”) After all “no tears” for those assholes, right?

    Meanwhile, others here seem to specialize in demeaning less-educated and lower-income people – essentially blaming them for their own difficult plight – for not having the foresight and ambition to get a higher education, update their skills, etc., so they can become more useful cogs in the shiny new global economy … while mocking others for being “more familiar with the Ypsilanti farmers’ market” than perhaps they are aware of complex geopolitical realities.

    I think many people visit this blog because they appreciate the opportunity to engage in intellectual dialogue and lively debate, and I don’t think anybody here wants to be accused of being thin-skinned – but lately, some of this commentary has become incredibly angry and mean-spirited … and I think, in some cases … has even crossed the line into bullying.

  104. Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    Interesting views on a complex topic of interest to a small group of people.

  105. Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    “while mocking others for being “more familiar with the Ypsilanti farmers’ market” than perhaps they are aware of complex geopolitical realities.”

    For the record, I wasn’t mocking her.

  106. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    Here is the thing, Demitrius. When someone is a member of an oppressed group, and you are a member of the group doing the oppressing, it doesn’t come off well if you decide to tone police those members of the oppressed group for speaking up. In other words, unless you are a woman, don’t fucking tell a woman that she needs to be more nice when discussing the huge amount of sexism we are seeing in this election (even from men on the left). It wasn’t *any* criticism of HRC which was called sexist. It mostly was actual sexist criticism of HRC and the fact that you are falsely trying to paint a different picture really says a lot.

    Did it ever occur to you that maybe some of those white guys really do deserve to lose jobs that they only held because of discrimination against other people? I.e. these white men are angry about losing jobs that have been denied to a lot of people in our culture for a long time and then they are upset when those people aren’t sympathetic? Why do you feel a need to shut down legitimate conversations about sexism and privilege? Can you accept that maybe people who have experienced oppression might be angry about it and might carry that anger into conversations and that anger in such circumstances is valid?

  107. Jcp2
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:08 am | Permalink

    I feel bad that some people, like Bob and Demetrius feel bullied. I thought that Mark had implicitly set up a safe space for discussion. It’s almost like going to Hawaii to experience paradise, only to feel uncomfortable because you feel like an outsider.


  108. Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    I feel bad for Bob.

  109. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    FF may appreciate this. I was very recently chastised by a black friend for saying that women were going to save this country by voting for HRC. She pointed out that if this election where left up to white women, Trump would win and that it is really women of color who are going to make the difference. I got so angry that I had to go look that shit up. Turns out, she was right. Most white women are voting for Trump and it is only when you include women of color does it change. Luckily as a white woman myself I can go crazy being critical of such women. I suppose it might make some of the guys feel better if they are left out of the charges of sexism. Considering the male fragility that pops up so often, it could be that focusing on the sexist ideas that *women* hold could be less threatening?

  110. Jcp2
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:24 am | Permalink

    On a vaguely related tangent, Marvel has changed its superheroes around because its readership is changing and in order to grow, the company is also changing.

    Ms. Marvel is Kamala Khan.
    Thor is Jane Foster.
    Spider Man is Miles Morales.
    Iron Man is Riri Williams.

    A lot of people are very unhappy, but sales and new reader acquisition are up.

  111. Jcp2
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    I forgot, Hulk is Amadeus Cho.

  112. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:36 am | Permalink

    The irony for me is that, relative to most industries that actually provided a middle class existence,Michigan auto manufacturing was an exceptional opportunity for a lot of POC and women. Based upon what I have read here, I question whether or not Lynne and Jean really know much about the people Moore is addressing and talking about… The demographic of job holding-blue-color-Bethlehem-worker (which I believe was vastly white and male) is different than blue collar auto industry of Detroit, Flint, etc…The further irony, for me, is that the demographic that Lynne and Jean seem most sympathetic toward, and rightfully so, also happens to be the demographic that was hurt worse by the shipping of jobs across borders because of racism and sexism,naturally….We are talking about a lot of people whether or not you know them or not. Maybe Moore is alerting us to something important? The confidence you guys have is maddening. If Hillary loses I am blaming Lynne. I would blame Jean also but it is nice to have her back…I hope you are able to manage your illness…

  113. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    Most women do not consider themselves to be feminists and do not feel oppressed. They consider themselves intelligent and capable and they graduate from college at higher rates than men and with higher GPAs. Many are very politically astute and would never vote for someone based only on their sex or race, but carefully consider the political views of each candidate and vote with consideration of the future for the well being of their families.

  114. Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    Why is it always assumed that all women have families?

  115. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    Because they are human.

  116. Demetrius
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

    There’s no doubt there has been a lot of hateful, ugly, sexist criticism of Hillary Clinton merely because she’s a woman. I doubt there’s anyone on this blog who would disagree, or who isn’t appalled by that kind of behavior.

    But is there any chance whatsoever that some Hillary supporters have begun to see *all* criticism (even when it involves legitimate issues or policy differences) as essentially coming from the same place?

    Among some here, it seems that if anyone criticizes Hillary, he (or she?) is automatically sexist. If someone tries to counters charges of sexism, they are merely “mansplaining.” If then, they feel offended because they feel they’ve been mischaracterized, it is only because the dissenter is a “wounded white male,” who is flaunting his “unearned hegemony.”

    At some point, it just seems like so much of this really about shutting down legitimate discussion and/or neutralizing potential opposition – rather than any genuine attempt to enlighten detractors.

    Let’s get real: Hillary Clinton went to Wellesley, and has a law degree from Yale. As First Lady, she was actively involved in Clinton Administration policy decisions. She has served on the boards of directors of major multinational corporations, been a U.S. Senator, Secretary of State, the first female major-party presidential nominee – and in all likelihood is going to be our next President.

    Despite claims by some that she’s a “underdog,” many of us see her as the living embodiment of “the establishment.”

    That said – as she prepares to become the leader of the free world – if every time someone criticizes her, her ideas, or one of her policy decisions, they automatically get labelled “sexist,” or a “wounded white male,” it is going to be a long four years …

  117. Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:18 pm | Permalink


    Not all women have families. Not all women have children.

  118. Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

    Believe it or not, some women choose to not have children.

    EOS must not consider them women.

  119. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

    But they have parents and therefore family. I didn’t say children, but if she has children, they would also be considered family.

  120. Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

    Regardless of what you said (or how you attempt to revise it), you must understand how the statement can be construed and then ask yourself, why it is illegitimate or unreasonable for some women to feel as though society denies them agency.

    While I can’t speak to feminism, I have an appreciation for why people hold such a viewpoint given statements like yours.

  121. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

    It’s the Democratic way. We’ve had 8 years of labeling any criticism of Obama to be racist.

  122. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    Dirt Bag,

    Once again you’ve jumped to the wrong conclusion. I didn’t revise anything – you misconstrued.

  123. Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

    I don’t mean to imply that the statement was offensive. It was not.

  124. Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    I knew what you meant, simply attempting to illuminate how it might appear to others.

  125. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

    Dirt Bag,

    Try it, “You are right, I was mistaken. I didn’t consider siblings or spouses either.” It would help your credibility.

    We are all better off without your “illumination”.

  126. Posted October 30, 2016 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    I was polite.

  127. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

    Bob– I don’t copy and paste much and never without attribution or appropriate punctuation. I write these things super fast and without much editing which is obvious given the glaring spelling and grammatical errors, not to mention autocorrect word salads that appear on every one.
    I was away for 6 months or so. Have only been back 2 weeks or so. On my way back out the door now.
    I was still reading while not commenting and I didn’t notice a whole lot of interesting conversations developing here. Mostly it was people agreeing with one another and participating in some kind of competition to be most ideally progressive. Anyway, you can have your space back. I am feeling better and need to get some stuff done now.

    I’m all for critiquing Hillary on policy. I just criticized cured her no. Statement on standing rock yesterday. I’ve been plenty critical of Obama. When you say she’s a war monger or a hawk or a corporatist, that’s not criticism. That’s personal attack that you need to back up. I just think we actually don’t know how to be critical usefully any more.

    Spin is so pervasive it has become ideology and identity.

    My 10 year old son is navigating between his mom’s year long Election fueled anti-sexism tirade and 5th grade boy humor. I don’t prescribe to him what to think or say. I tell him what I think. I encourage him to have his own opinions. He has to mediate between what his friends say and what his mom stands for. He’s figuring it out. We are having an ongoing conversation about equity. Yesterday he made the connection between bullying and sexism. He said the kids who laugh are just as bad as the kid who bullies. If he can get it and see it, than you can. If you aren’t examining criticism of HRC for bias, you aren’t doing the work required by progressive identity.

    EOS isn’t progressive and so can’t reasonably be asked the same. I’m less concerned with EOS’ sexism than sexism on the left.

    Not all criticism of HRC is sexist but lots of it is. Lots of it is misinformation that is validated and spread by sexism. At some point critics can be legitimately be asked why they are so invested in attacking her. Same as Obama. In the end, all I ask of anyone is that they challenge themselves to back up their criticism of her with something other than unsubstantiated moral or ethical approbation.

    FF Trumps supporters are overwhelmingly white. I have lived in MI since 84. Ive known and supported Grace Boggs since 1987. I worked for the national lawyers guild in Detroit in the early 90’s. I have done entrepreneurial training in Detroit. Among my students were quite a few former auto workers. None of these people are voting for trump. Further it’s not like the UAW fought that hard to keep jobs in Detroit…. racial justice is not top of its priority list. Moore was not appealing to us to care about the working poor but to cater to the white working class voting for Trump specifically. I’m not classist. It’s one of my few established good qualities. I know the people he wants HRC to cater to. I get along great with many of these people. I can shoot a rifle and know farm work, sewing, cooking, canning, the Bible etc. I can hold my liquor and know my country music. We have plenty to talk about without talking politics. And if they do decide to talk politics, and more than a few enjoy arguing with me, I don’t bullshit with them or kiss their asses. I can feel their pain without believing I protectionism. Moore fucked up this race with that piece. He’s the one who needs to fix it, not HRC. Moderate republicans are an easier catch anyway.

    I’d rather she compromise on fiscal issues than social justice. In the end, that’s the choice she faces between going for the white working class or moderate republicans. I don’t fear for the fate of working class whites.As Moore himself said, she’s their best candidate by far.

  128. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

    re:” Based upon what I have read here, I question whether or not Lynne and Jean really know much about the people Moore is addressing and talking about… The demographic of job holding-blue-color-Bethlehem-worker (which I believe was vastly white and male) is different than blue collar auto industry of Detroit, Flint, etc…”

    I am not sure how much I know about that demographic either. My grandfather worked in an auto plant. That is why he and my grandmother moved their family to Detroit from Pennsylvania where he had been a coal miner. I also knew many families growing up where the father worked on the line. I dont think the auto industry has ever been especially friendly to women. I know that I am routinely horrified by the stories of straight up racism and sexual harassment that a friend of mine who is a woman of color experiences at her job in an auto factory. It is true that by the time I was in high school, because I wasn’t in my neighborhood school but rather in one of the special high schools for high achievers, not many of my peers ended up working in factories but that might be also related to automation and globalization making those jobs hard to get at the time most people were choosing what to do after high school.

    I am pretty sure, however, that the demographic Moore was talking about doesn’t include many people of color although it does include a lot of women. I don’t agree with EOS’s statement that most women don’t consider themselves feminists but it is absolutely true that there are many women who are not interested in smashing the patriarchy. It is also true that HRC is saying as much as she can short of lying to appeal to blue collar workers.

    The confidence you guys have is maddening. If Hillary loses I am blaming Lynne.

    There is some truth in this. I think that the ‘fuck you’ that Moore is talking about is at least partly directed at women whose confidence is threatening to some people. Believe me I *know* how confidence in a woman can be threatening to a man. Good for you for acknowledging that is how you feel without getting nasty about it. Often it comes out in the form of rape threats or other threats of violence. I am flattered that you somehow think that I am so powerful that my confidence can affect elections but I assure you that isn’t the case. You probably really hate Samantha Bee though. LOL.

    I can assure you that when I come into contact with Trump voters though, I usually just STFU or try to talk them into voting for Johnson or, more recently, McMullin. I don’t challenge them on their sexism or racism too much because I know that it could increase the likelihood that they will vote for Trump. I guess I am counting on the MarkMaynard.com audience to skew left but that may be a mistake on my part as there certainly are plenty of left leaning men who are threatened by a strong woman.

    But is there any chance whatsoever that some Hillary supporters have begun to see *all* criticism (even when it involves legitimate issues or policy differences) as essentially coming from the same place?

    Yes. Of course that is possible. Everyone has their biases. However, I can tell you that a woman will see legitimate sexism much more easily than a man will just like black people have an easier time seeing racism than white people do. When you are the one who is being oppressed, it is much easier to see the oppression. So while it is possible that women can develop a bias, it is also pretty likely that they are seeing actual sexism that you simply don’t see. Coleman Young once famously compared racism to high blood pressure in order to illustrate this phenomenon.

    “Racism is like high blood pressure—the person who has it doesn’t know he has it until he drops over with a goddamned stroke. There are no symptoms of racism. The victim of racism is in a much better position to tell you whether or not you’re a racist than you are.” -Coleman A Young.

    Re:Among some here, it seems that if anyone criticizes Hillary, he (or she?) is automatically sexist. If someone tries to counters charges of sexism, they are merely “mansplaining.” If then, they feel offended because they feel they’ve been mischaracterized, it is only because the dissenter is a “wounded white male,” who is flaunting his “unearned hegemony.”

    I can’t speak for others but right now, anything that you might do that will give someone a pause when voting for HRC could be considered sexist simply because she is the ONLY candidate who has a chance of defeating Trump at this point. If you are a white man, I don’t know if you can understand the terror a lot of people are feeling right now at the prospect of a Trump presidency. I know that I have actually considered getting some anti-anxiety medications because of it and I am privileged enough that short of getting us nuked, I will most likely be able to ride it out. I know that I plan to criticize the fuck out of her and to hold her accountable for her actions *after* she is in office. I don’t think we are going to have four years of no one being able to criticize her just like, contrary to what EOS has said, we have not had 8 years where all of the criticism against Obama has been dismissed as racist.

    Most women do not consider themselves to be feminists and do not feel oppressed. They consider themselves intelligent and capable and they graduate from college at higher rates than men and with higher GPAs. Many are very politically astute and would never vote for someone based only on their sex or race, but carefully consider the political views of each candidate and vote with consideration of the future for the well being of their families.

    I actually agree with this although I will say that while most women don’t consider themselves feminists, a lot of that has to do with the smear campaign against feminism from the right. I know that when I have talked to women who reject the label and I say “Huh? You don’t think women should have the same rights as men or the same value in our society?” they assure me that they do. Then they will say something like they aren’t a feminist because they want to wear lipstick or do something else that is traditionally feminine. Almost always, once they are assured that you can be a really feminine women fulfilling a traditional gender role like housewife and still be a feminist, they are more willing to accept the label. Just my personal lived experience though.

  129. Jcp2
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

    Captain America is Sam Wilson. Sam used to be Falcon.

  130. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 4:28 pm | Permalink


    Most people consider the term “feminist” negatively. It is associated with angry lesbians who dislike men and those who believe it is OK To kill a baby at full term. Most men and women believe the opposite sex is needed far more than a fish needs a bicycle. The term is dated and those under 30 are even less likely to identify as feminists. While about 18% of the population identifies as feminist, nearly 85% consider men and women to have equal rights and nearly 100% believe than men and women should receive the same pay for equal work. (Although there is considerable variance concerning what constitutes equal work). Women with higher levels of education and achievement in the workplace, and most who choose motherhood and full time work at home, are both strongly associated with a rejection of the label. Those who consider themselves to be feminists are the ones most likely to treat a traditional homemaker with disdain and contempt. Feminists have a strong tendency to blame men for their lack of achievement. This has been my personal lived experience but is also supplemented by numerous academic research studies.

  131. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

    ‘Just my personal lived experience though.’ –Very good.

    FF I think you got Lynne and I all wrong. I’ve been in MI since 84 on and off, but mostly on. I worked for the NLG in Detroit in the Early 90’s. I marched with Jimmie Boggs and knew Grace for years. I have worked with people transitioning from factory jobs in Detroit. I very comfortable around working class people of all stripes. I have no problem being the token liberal in a crowd of working class conservatives or people of color. Neither is an unusual experience for me. We have plenty to talk about without talking electoral politics. If the political comes up, they know where I stand. I can back up what I say and they respect that, even if they are marxists or Trump supporters.

    You are simply wrong about that. The black working class and white working class aligned behind unions and so in the old Dem party pre-Reagan. But it wasn’t an easy alliance. And as racial and gender equity started to be somewhat realized in Unions, the white working class ran the Reagan. Even though he was terrible for them. Because they liked his Atwater populist message– which was racist. Period. This is a group that does not want to give up their open bias. Just like many on the left don’t want to admit their implicit bias.
    And the only answer is the self-advocacy of the group’s who experience bias.
    We are used to resistance. We recognize it’s patterns. We just keep repeating ourselves, because that apparently works if one wants to be heard.

    If you believe that economic equity is the single unifying path forward, then what Moore says resonates. If you believe that there will never be anything approaching economic equity without also dismantling systemic bias, then Moore’s message is part of the problem.

    Bob– as I said before I don’t clip and paste. I write super fast on my phone with few edits as my mistakes would attest. I would never take someone’s words without attribution and quotation marks. I’m not sure why it bothers me you would say otherwise.

    Demetrius I was gone for 6 months and I’ll be gone again shortly and then you guys can go back to repeating the alt-left narrative without fear of counterpoint. It seemed kind of boring to me, but if that makes you happy then by all means you can have your bubble back. I don’t care that much. I’m feeling better and my points have been made. It will soon be safe to go back to waving the banner of self-congratulatory political ideology. All implicit bias will be safe here.

  132. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

    ‘Just my personal lived experience though.’ –Very good.

    FF I think you got Lynne and I all wrong. I’ve been in MI since 84 on and off, but mostly on. I worked for the NLG in Detroit in the Early 90’s. I marched with Jimmie Boggs and knew Grace for years. I have worked with people transitioning from factory jobs in Detroit. I very comfortable around working class people of all stripes. I have no problem being the token liberal in a crowd of working class conservatives or people of color. Neither is an unusual experience for me. We have plenty to talk about without talking electoral politics. If the political comes up, they know where I stand. I can back up what I say and they respect that, even if they are marxists or Trump supporters.

    You are simply wrong about that. The black working class and white working class aligned behind unions and so in the old Dem party pre-Reagan. But it wasn’t an easy alliance. And as racial and gender equity started to be somewhat realized in Unions, the white working class ran the Reagan. Even though he was terrible for them. Because they liked his Atwater populist message– which was racist. Period. This is a group that does not want to give up their open bias. Just like many on the left don’t want to admit their implicit bias.
    And the only answer is the self-advocacy of the group’s who experience bias.
    We are used to resistance. We recognize it’s patterns. We just keep repeating ourselves, because that apparently works if one wants to be heard.

    If you believe that economic equity is the single unifying path forward, then what Moore says resonates. If you believe that their will never be anything approaching economic equity without also dismantling systemic bias, then Moore’s message is part of the problem.

    Bob– as I said before I don’t clip and paste. I write super fast on my phone with few edits as my mistakes would attest. I would never take someone’s words without attribution and quotation marks. I’m not sure why it bothers me you would say otherwise.

    Demetrius I was gone for 6 months and I’ll be gone again shortly and then you guys can go back to repeating the alt-left narrative without fear of counterpoint. It seemed kind of boring to me, but if that makes you happy then by all means you can have your bubble back. I don’t care that much. I’m feeling better and my points have been made. It will soon be safe to go back to waving the banner of self-congratulatory political ideology. All implicit bias will be safe here.

  133. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 4:52 pm | Permalink


    For the first time I stopped reading one of your posts, when you said “good for you for acknowledging how you feel”….

    I am sorry either I suck at expressing myself or you just can’t stop twisting everything constantly…

    You are exhausting…So off the mark constantly…

  134. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

    EOS just because most people believe something does not mean it’s accurate. Your statements are absurd. There are no full term abortions. That’s a birth. Please show me the ‘academic research studies’ that suppprt your assertions about feminists. The term feminist is not popular precisely because of the misperceptions you assert. You can take comfort that your position was validated by many progressive people on the left during the primary– whose response to accusation of sexism was reliably 1) see no, hear no, speak no evil about the left 2) I’m a feminist so I can’t be sexist 3) if you say the Sanders campaign is sexist than you are the problem. Also you’re a bully and not nice. Like Sanders and crew who are impossibly beautiful. That’s how people respond to Movements that tell people what they want to hear without barrier of feasibility– like Trump.
    There is nothing about feminism that tells anybody what they want to here. Since most women live lives very integrated with men, it’s not terribly convenient to be disruptive. All the women who are successful at work or in school or are living lives with greater choice and opportunity than their mothers– all those women owe that freedom to feminism. Ive known a lot of older women who don’t use the word but who acknowledge systemic bias and live by feminist principles. I don’t care if they use the word. I care that they feel validated in their voice and their right to full agency. The work of feminism is not any one path; it’s simply the right to female agency over their lives and bodies. Derision is always, always a tactic of suppression. Suppression is the enemy of agency and voice.

    Those older women become feminists without using the word or attending any meeting or any other form of ideological indoctrination. They do so by living women’s lives– by suffering assault, bias and unequal access to opportunity. What’s unfair is obvious to the losing end.

    Feminism is a big tent movement. When any group within it tries to make it exclusionary, the movement reliably opens up. This has been consistent. It’s a better movement now than it was 70, 40, and 20 years ago. I don’t join things easily. I tend to feel constrained by belief systems, but feminism has progressed and allowed me to progress within it. It’s a gorgeous thing. I’m sorry you find it frightening or off putting. There’s really nothing to fear from it and so much to gain.

  135. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    I’m a feminist because bias against women is everywhere. https://t.co/CWXcKwbSjg
    Gender bias is limiting to men as well as women. It’s stupid.

  136. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    Right. Most people dislike the term “feminism” because of decades of people telling lies about feminism such as that it is a movement of angry man-hating armpit-hair-waving lesbians who are ok with killing babies. While those types exist sort of (No one is ok with killing full term babies. When such pregnancies are terminated, the term is “birth” and everyone does their best to keep the baby alive), it is as part of a larger movement. If you define a feminist as anyone who says they believe in the equality of genders, then it is clear that most women are feminists. Most men too.

    I dont know if it is true that women who identify as feminist are more likely to treat traditional homemakers with disdain. I have seen quite the opposite actually with feminists working hard to make society realize the value of homemaking. I know several homemakers of both genders who call themselves feminists. I know that it is married republican women who usually treat my lifestyle choices with disdain and contempt although I also know lots of married republican women who celebrate my lifestyle choices as I do theirs. I also have a few in my family who pity me because they think the reason I am single and without children is that I can’t get a man. LOL It always makes me laugh.

    Feminists tend to blame the system for a lack of achievement, and rightly so. It really is harder for women. However, it is obvious to me that my grandmothers both had it easier than their mothers. My mother had it easier than her mother. And I have many fewer impediments to success than my mother had. We are getting there even though it can be harder to see when in the middle of a backlash brought on by that very progress.

  137. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    FF I am pointing out that I think that when you say that you don’t like my confidence, I think it is probably due to a general disdain for confident women that you harbor. I am cool with writing you off as a hopeless sexist and racist guy who can’t see his own privilege. I am sure that otherwise you are a very good person and I know that you probably don’t see yourself that way. I get it too. Being forced to confront implicit biases *is* really exhausting because you have to think. You have to ask yourself if maybe the bias that has been pointed out to you is true or not. Maybe it isn’t. Maybe it is *their* bias? But maybe it is true. Whatever conclusion you come to, right or wrong, it isn’t without some mental work.

  138. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

    Jcp2 — but black widow and especially scarlet witch are still getting the short end of the marvel stick.

  139. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

    FF of Hillary loses everyone will be blaming everyone. Like Brexit. You can blame me. I don’t care. Talking about sexism in this presidential race was never going to be in HRC’s favor. Just like Taking about racism in Obamas racism didn’t help get him elected. I personally have other reasons for talking about it than advocating for a candidate.

    I have never been very comfortable with the requirements of persuasion. I’m just interested in everyone having a voice including me. Plus I have kids. I thinks it’s good to model self-advocacy to kids. I was never very good at modelling the other stuff anyway.

  140. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 6:29 pm | Permalink


    OH. That actually makes sense to me now. I was wondering why you were accusing me of not liking confident women. I can see that we can chalk that one up as me sucking at expressing myself, because I did say that your confidence is maddening… What I meant was that you are confident that Hillary would win. Like I said before, it is like you are already making your victory lap with your middle finger in the air. I found your confidence annoying, but more so dangerous right before the elections, because people are still making up their minds. Your confidence, I think, is making you sloppy…Sloppy arguments tinged with overgeneralized ill will toward large swaths of people. You are not being convincing.

    I apologize for all the repetitions. I am definitely repeating myself. The crazy thing about the thread that went of 500 is just how bad people are at understanding what the other person is saying…

  141. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

    Well, then you are misreading me. I am not at all confident that Hillary will win. I am terrified that she will lose. I am not trying to convince anyone here to vote for her because most already are. I have my middle finger in the air because I had, previously to this election, convinced myself that liberal men were generally not too sexist and I am angry to have been proved wrong. over. and. over.

    I dont think that my core argument is sloppy. It is that this segment of the Trump electorate which is voting for him as a ‘fuck you’ are angry at the loss of privilege as much as they are angry about their economic prospects. If it were just economic prospects, they might be more inclined to vote for HRC as she has a better actual plan.

    Is it true that these people also have real economic fears? Yes. Should HRC address those concerns? ? Yes, and she has.

  142. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:15 pm | Permalink


    I know you don’t care but I regret saying I would blame you. Dumb thing for me to say. That statement did not accurately reflect what I believe 99% of the time about you and the ideas you share here. Sorry.


    I am just now reading your last response. Not that it matters to you personally, but I do lump you in as a sort Konald J Crump jr. I think most of the rest of the world is turned off by the presentation of your ideas, and rightfully so, because there is often no balance between your idealism propped up by an over-reliance of theories and fueled by a shit-ton of convenient assumptions. It’s the inaccuracy we dislike.

    Demetrius was right to point out that you often resort to a form of bullying. I guess we could more accurately call it sophistry. Not a big deal if there is only one or two of you but I believe your forms of reasoning and style of discourse are fairly representative of forms employed by the extreme left, which is so lacking, that it will, in my opinion prove to push many people to vote for Trump and against, not Hillary, but against people like you.

  143. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:22 pm | Permalink


    Did you watch the last debate? Hillary defended Partial Birth Abortion and she calls herself a feminist. That’s a procedure where the abortionist rips the limbs off a baby as late as a day before natural birth, and then crushes the skull before pulling it through the birth canal. And contrary to what she said, there is no medical emergency where the mother’s life can be saved by this procedure. In an emergency, they would perform a C-section. It’s quicker and safer.

    When a baby is born during an abortion attempt, the medical staff place it on a side counter and neglect it until it dies of exposure and/or starvation. Obama supported the “Born Alive” bill as a Senator.

    Your grandfathers had it easier than their fathers as well. What’s your point?

  144. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:25 pm | Permalink


    I doubt anybody would have a problem with how you just stated your position.

  145. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

    I should have written that Obama opposed the Born Alive bill. He thought the baby should be left to die. I was mistaken in my earlier post.

  146. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

    EOS, if you have to lie, you don’t have a good argument.

    FF, I dont agree that I have been bullying anyone although do find it amusing that you think so in the same way I find it amusing when members of dominant groups act persecuted whenever their privilege is challenged (e.g Christians who get angry if someone say ‘happy holidays’ to them) . Nor do I think I have been making arguments from bad premises in an attempt to fool anyone as you suggest. Or did you mean something like ‘snarky’,’ smug’,’ pedantic’, or ‘sanctimonious’ which all would be much more fair than ‘sophistry’

    Re: ” I believe your forms of reasoning and style of discourse are fairly representative of forms employed by the extreme left, which is so lacking, that it will, in my opinion prove to push many people to vote for Trump and against, not Hillary, but against people like you.”

    That is a valid fear. It isn’t because the far left have bad arguments though. I mean there are bad arguments on the far left but those aren’t why people like me might drive people to vote for Trump. People like me get get people like that to vote for Trump because we make it clear that we are working hard to dismantle their privilege. If we bring good jobs, they are going to go to women and minorities too which actually really does make it harder for them to then get those jobs as they will have to compete for them based on their own merit and not their status in society. That seems to scare a lot of people. Trump’s message isn’t just that he is going to bring the jobs back. It is that he is going to bring the jobs back for white men and women (as long as they are cool being sexually harassed at work).

    Women like me are just by our very nature challenging to many Trump supporters, I am old, fat, and ugly, maybe a 1 or 2 on the Trump scale and I have the audacity to act like I deserve a voice and a place at the national table. I don’t need them and so can ignore them when they try to put me in what they consider to be my place. I raise my middle finger to them and don’t accept their authority over me and that threatens the fuck out of them. That isn’t a bad argument, that is who I am.

    Yes, it is true that there are a lot of people out there who are like me. We tend to be well educated and have a snarky wit that admittedly is not appealing to all people. I imagine that when you say you are worried about people like me, you are worried about all those Gen X famous liberal personalities as well? There certainly are many Trump supporters who say that they are voting for Trump because they hate Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Seth Meyers, Samantha Bee, et al. I get it, they hate being laughed at. They hate the smug humor and sanctimonious attitude. I love it of course.

    Here is the thing though. For everyone one of me (and I deliberately don’t get into arguments with too many of the conservatives I know in real life because I know that my argument of equality threatens them), there are two of them out there wearing “Trump that bitch” or “Hillary for Prison” or whatever. They *all* are supporting a candidate who said he likes to grab women’s pussies without their permission. Surely that must be moving many more people towards HRC than snarky smug sanctimony is moving people towards Trump. I honestly don’t think I could possibly convince them to vote otherwise even with the best arguments in the world because they are not yet ready to accept women or minorities as equals. I simply am not willing to say what they want to hear and I never will be.

    They aren’t threatened by me because my arguments are bad.

  147. jean henry
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:24 pm | Permalink

    EOS– your concern is not late term abortions; it’s abortion. Even if Roe v wade were overturned, except under draconian and likely unconstitutional laws, most late term abortions (1.3% of all abortions occur after 21 weeks –and genetic testing– and just .01% in the last trimester only due to risk to the mother or unviable fetus) would still be legal, because following through produces risk of suffering or death to the fetus or the mother. You don’t have to make up horror stories to support your anti-abortion position. It’s a poor strategy for all but the religiously indoctrinated. Ironically the restrictions on abortions in red states like Texas have lead to more Kate term abortions because of inadequate and expensive access to abortion and contraceptive care, whereas planned parenthood’s other work had prevented countless abortions.

  148. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

    Neither of you have a clue. Exactly what do you think is made up? Yes, I oppose all abortions, but killing a viable fetus or a living baby is especially heinous. There is such a thing as a third trimester abortion. Please tell me of a single medical condition where a woman would need to abort a viable fetus to save her life and why a c-section is not preferable.

  149. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

    And removing a non-viable fetus from the womb is not considered an abortion unless action was taken to willingly make the fetus non-viable.

  150. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:08 pm | Permalink


  151. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:13 pm | Permalink

    Maybe I am not picking up on the humor but I have never thought that you remind me of Stewart, Colbert, or Bee. They are funny as hell. Sorry. I will try hard to see the humor in the future.

    Do what you want with the criticism. Not a big deal. Many people have offered criticism to you. Think about it or not, I guess.

    I sometimes agree with your core arguments. In my opinion, you create all sorts of madness on the periphery of those arguments. Often your core argument gets lost in defensive maneuvers. In your mind, or so it seems, any criticism against your argument is the result of your opponents warped worldview, which is a result of their social status, class, gender and race. (You can save the response to this last sentence as everybody knows the ways our worldviews are influenced.) The problem is, our social position, although a piece of the puzzle, does not explain the whole story of who we are and where our arguments are coming from. Although it should be kept in mind, in my opinion, a person’s social position, should not be used as an ultimate tool for identifying the “reason” that there is an objection to your (Lynne’s) arguments in the first place. You give a hell of a lot “reasons” for why people are disagreeing with you. Isn’t that odd when pointed out? Do you not see how neat and tidy of a defensive maneuver that is? It becomes hilarious (not in a Jon Stewart way) when we realize that you ** are often guilty of just assuming your opponent particular social position** whenever, and wherever it helps your argument. Basically, you are taking a very valid tool given to us by critical theory,which ought to be used to help understand where people are coming from, and ought to be used to help understand one’s own biases, but you instead are misusing that tool to prop-up and deflect criticism or silence detractors. It smells like Konald J Crump to me…

    I think “sophistry” is an ok word choice, although, it often feels like something even darker and uglier is happening and although you might not be successful at deceiving others I do think the underlying function of employing these mechanisms is often self-deception. Whether or not you are successful at deceiving yourself is only a question you can answer I guess.

  152. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    The made up part is that women are aborting viable fetuses in the final months of pregnancy. A C-section is major surgery so it is often preferable that a fetus which is still alive in the womb be delivered vaginally by an induced labor. Most people call this a birth if the fetus is viable or a stillbirth if it is not. Late term abortions often happen in the second trimester after the parents find out that the fetus has severe birth defects. It is usually a heartbreaking and difficult decision and not one where the gov’t needs to get involved.

    Watch the video Jean posted because Samantha Bee, while not without some snark, explains it quite well.

  153. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

    Be sure that you don’t miss the video “medically necessary?” That’s a little lower on the page I linked to.

  154. EOS
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

    No Lynne,

    Killing a baby that has a birth defect is not necessary to save the life of the mother. Most babies delivered at 20 weeks or later are able to survive outside the mother’s womb. That’s the second trimester. (Through week 26). Although some states have more restrictive laws, the Federal law allows abortions up to the time of birth – throughout the entire third trimester. Again, tell me a medical emergency that exists during the third trimester where an abortion saves the life of the mother.

  155. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

    FF, I wasnt claiming their humor, just their general tone.

    Honestly though, right now I am done with this. I don’t agree with your assessment of my thought or my arguments but I also don’t care enough about your opinion to try to convince you otherwise.

  156. Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    Once, again, the comment section of mm.com has now turned into a sounding board for EOS and abortion. Whenever this comes up, I am reminded that there are people out there who do not value the agency of human females.

    I am going to give to the National Network of Abortion Funds which helps get abortions who cannot otherwise afford. it. You should, too.


  157. Lynne
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

    I like that idea. I admit that abortion arguments often get me donating because it is always such a reminder of how important it is to me that woman have agency over their bodies and medical decisions.

  158. jean henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 5:58 am | Permalink

    There are many first hand accounts of late term and a few third trimester (extremely unusual) abortions available on the internet. The times published one last week. You can judge for yourself EOS. Since I support the right to choose, I don’t judge the actions of other people when facing the care of a baby who will never have a moment of peace. I have friends raising kids with severe health complications and disability. One friend’s son is 5 and was not expected to make it to 2. She takes every day one at a time. That’s not what this is. These are babies who never leave the incubator, never eat, talk, or sleep because of the struggle. You can judge their parents’ choice. I won’t. With unviable babies the health of the mother may also require early extraction of the fetus late term. It’s still called abortion.

    I hired a taco truck for election evening. We are closing off my block (William between 3rd & 4th, A2) and having a party from 5 to 9. Taco sales benefit Planned Parenthood and SOS crisis center…
    There will be kids performing skits, hip hop dancing, a pant suit parade and a drag queen emcee. There may be live music if anyone brings instruments and feel so inclined. You know Sodom and Gomorrah type stuff to mark the end times…
    Everyone is welcome, regardless of political affiliation, just be prepared to reach hands across the dance floor to those with whom you disagree politically.
    If it rains, it’s just the truck. I’m not inviting the world into my house. But still come by. Many of us will need company. Oh and it’s BYOB: bring your own beverages and bring your own better selves.

  159. Posted October 31, 2016 at 6:16 am | Permalink

    I hope you will be cooking late term fetae and having a ceremony for Satan.

  160. jean henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 7:02 am | Permalink

    Who knows what kind of meat those evil Mexicans make their tacos out of? Americans love to question the source of the meat in ‘ethnic’ restaurants while chomping down hot dogs. I think the Russians co-opted that whole Satan thing to a new level, but we’ll have a fire pit going for spontaneous pagan ritual of any kind. Maybe we should just offer abortion services in the back room. We all miss those days. Self-abortion rates are up in states with limited access. Pence would like to put those women in prison for feticide.

  161. jean henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 7:22 am | Permalink

    Who knows what meat will be on tacos made by those evil Mexicans. Americans love to speculate about the meat used in ‘ethnic’ foods while munching on hot dogs.
    Maybe we should offer abortion services in the back room. I hear their increasingly popular these days in places where abortion access has been restricted. I think the Russians have co-opted that whom Satan thing with their new nuclear missile but there will be a fire pit, and being a freedom of religion advocate, I would not be inclined to prevent any pagan or other rituals. Satan ain’t hatin’.

  162. Posted October 31, 2016 at 7:46 am | Permalink

    We need to encourage people to have more abortions. I am thinking that we should have federally funded abortion providers in every strip mall with under 50% occupancy. They should be required to provide abortions without question to anyone, regardless of stage of pregnancy. Even those not pregnant should receive abortions.

    The fetae will be converted into meat for a new Mexican restaurant which will provide free food to be paid for out of State budgets.

  163. Jcp2
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    The worst is when you find out that the meat isn’t really meat at all, but some form of vegetarian meat. The vegan conspiracy is real.

  164. EOS
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:05 am | Permalink

    While I concede that most women have abortions earlier in their pregnancy, there are enough who do so that any doctor who performs late term abortions is assured of being a multi-millionaire. And regardless, whether you kill your baby in the first week or the 40th week, it is still a murder and condemned by the 10 commandments.

    Do what you want with your own body, but the fetus is a separate being, with it’s own heartbeat and DNA sequence and more than half the time is even a different sex. There is no scientific evidence to suggest that a woman and her baby are one individual. A fetus is not a part of her body. It is a sin against humanity to kill another human and far worse to celebrate it or encourage others to participate. And there’s certainly no concession given if you do it because your baby isn’t perfectly formed. No one is perfect.

    Still, there is hope, forgiveness, and healing for those who repent. Check out Rachel’s Vineyard.

  165. EOS
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    @ Jean,

    Only God judges. I’m merely providing information and trying to save the unborn and rescue the unrepentant.

  166. Westside
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:28 am | Permalink

    Will the two of you be dancing in the street together on November 8th ?

    Everyone is welcome, regardless of political affiliation, just be prepared to reach hands across the dance floor to those with whom you disagree politically.

  167. Jean Henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    EOS– a multi-millionaire? Please. There aren’t enough performed in total in the country to meet that level. Also where are those academic articles you promised?

    I look forward to seeing how it is you propose government assist the parents of these babies once they are born? A quarter of US children are growing up in poverty now. I assume your concern for the sanctity of life includes providing equal opportunity for all children to meet their potential. I assume you voted for all recent school millages that help support the educational needs of kids with disabilities because you are prepared to help support exponentially more. I’m okay with people who personally oppose abortion but also oppose the death penalty and support increased funding for social safety net and public educational services. I can not understand how people with the politics of EOS reconcile their positions.

    I’ve had two abortions, two full term pregnancies and three miscarriages. I don’t regret any of it. I’m grateful for my abortions and my children and my miscarriages to the extent that they spared me and those babies a life of struggle and suffering. I’m not repenting anytime soon. Nor would I ask anyone else to do so.

    But to divert back to the subject of the post. Mr Moore did not counter Trump’s assertion that MM had endorsed his candidacy for a few days, because conservatives were downloading his movie like crazy “at $5 a pop.” Number one on itunes, Baby. Now he has more to say. It’s nice he thinks HRC got a bad rap. He thinks people aren’t enthusiastic about her candidacy. But some of us, many of us are. She has one hell of a ground game going. That’s not an indication of lack of enthusiasm. We are all a little too scared to celebrate, but I’m tired of this idea that a stadium full of people screaming from hatred and fear and demonization (left or right) is enthusiasm.

    Michael Moore is part of the problem. Still too little to late. What a prick. I guess if he came to my baby-killer Satanic election party, I’d have to welcome him. But I’d still tell him I think he f’d up.

  168. Jean Henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    Westside– I have never had any issue with anyone with whom I disagree politically. There’s a lot more to life. White Men, in my experience, are by far the most likely to take political disagreement personally. I have my theories as to why. They’ve been well discussed here. White men will be welcome to my party too, so long as they don’t hog the mic.

  169. Jean Henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

    I stole a page from Pete’s book and suggested I would donate to fund abortions now every time I had to deal with anti-abortion rhetoric on my posts. Which naturally drew the negative attention of my middle school debate rival. He was happy to go toe to toe with me, but when a local 18 year old jumped in a explained to him point by point just how wrong his thinking was on the subject, he deleted the comment that began a 40 post thread. But by the time we were through $350 had been donated by FB friends to Fund Abortions Now in his name. I suggest we do the same for EOS every time she posts about abortion.

  170. Lynne
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

    I think it is nice that you are having a party for everyone, Jean. I won’t be there because I am planning to take some Ativan that my doctor Rx for me for flying and then I am going to curl up in a ball on my bed to sob the night away while clutching my poor dog for comfort.

    As for the abortion idea. I am so down with that idea. I love donating to organizations which help women. I have no reason to argue with EOS on this issue as my mind is made up completely as I imagine hers is and also, I have had this argument so many times over so many years that I highly doubt anyone here could possibly present me with an abortion argument that I haven’t heard before. If there is a political issue where I can be accused of being closed minded on, it is this one.

    The one good thing though for the EOS’s of the world is that in a some ways I am anti-abortion. I know a lot of people who have had them and they are not pleasant. The choice is not always pleasant either but procedure definitely isn’t for anyone. It is really best if it can be avoided and a lot of the places that I donate to, including Planned Parenthood, work hard to prevent abortions by providing access to good methods of birth control. And, at the risk of starting up a dormant conversation, one of the reasons that I think things like single payer health care and a basic income are good ideas is that I know that it will give young pregnant women more options and more choice.

    At any rate, if you haven’t heard of her, I suggest that you read anything Rachel Held Evans has written on the subject of abortion. I think she makes a pretty good case for those who consider themselves pro-life to support efforts of people like me to reduce abortions. That is the whole stupid thing about this issue. We all want to reduce abortions and if we can work together we can really do it. Consider that the medical technology is changing and soon, most abortions will be done by taking a pill. That is already what is happening in places that outlaw the procedure. Outlawing abortion is increasingly not going to reduce abortions. Birth control will. A culture that supports poor young mothers if they choose to raise the child would help too.


  171. EOS
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 7:44 pm | Permalink

    I don’t advocate for people to engage in sex until they are in an economically stable relationship. However, if a person chooses to have sex outside of marriage, then by all means use contraception, preferably multiple forms. So long as the mechanism of action is to prevent fertilization. However, if the contraception is the type that prevents the implantation of a fertilized egg, then it is merely a very early form of abortion and morally wrong.

    You can give as much money as you want to fund any despicable practice, but you own the guilt. You can’t silence my speech because of your willingness to fund the killing of innocents. Ask Dirtbag. It’s not as if he hasn’t tried this idiotic tactic on multiple occasions.

  172. Kat
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:11 pm | Permalink

    “I don’t advocate for people to engage in sex until they are in an economically stable relationship.”

    So it’s not sin if you have money?

  173. jean henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:27 pm | Permalink

    I have no guilt whatsoever. I guess we’ll just have to see about the damnation thing.
    That’s another $25 for abortions EOS. The poor sinners of the world thank you.

  174. jean henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

    Last I checked no one was waiting around for EOS advocacy before they have sex. Autonomy and all that…
    Lynne– I’m not here to win an argument. Just messing around. Something about my childhood leads me to relish hearing all that fire and brimstone bullshit now, knowing it has zero effect on me as a grown person– knowing I am free of all of it.

  175. Jean Henry
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 8:54 pm | Permalink

    What do you hope to teach students through these after-school Satan Clubs? Is it about teaching Satanism?

    No, it’s about having a club that teaches rational thought, critical thinking. But the Satanism label isn’t arbitrary to that. We’re executing the club in the name of the Satanic Temple with self-identified Satanists being the ones teaching the curriculum.

    Why are you only trying to establish these clubs in schools that already have Good News Clubs?

    They teach kids about the horrors of everlasting torture as the wages of sin and those other counterproductive superstitious messages. We feel that the presence of civic-minded, pro-social, productive Satanists presenting a different curriculum sends a clear message that there’s differences of religious opinion, and the school isn’t necessarily endorsing one over the other.


  176. Frosted Flakes
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

    Free speech is ok.

    Money as a form of speech is sorta great.

    Money used to suppress the speech of others is super cool.

    $hut up! What’s not to love?

  177. Posted October 31, 2016 at 10:15 pm | Permalink

    ““I don’t advocate for people to engage in sex until they are in an economically stable relationship.””

    This is fucking hilarious.

  178. Posted October 31, 2016 at 10:18 pm | Permalink

    I give the National Network of Abortion Funds because it is harder and harder for people of little means to get abortions now, thanks to self-righteous people like EOS.

    The National Network of Abortion Funds thanks you, EOS. I would have never even known of their existence and the great work they do unless I came into contact with you on this site.

  179. Jean Henry
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 4:00 am | Permalink

    I’m not trying to suppress EOS speech. Nor am I doing that according to EOS. I’m trying to encourage EOS to stay on the subject at hand, rather than diverting into anti-abortion spiels. Since my dislike for Bernie so enflames people here, someone might want to take the same approach. Maybe throw Move-On.org a couple bones every time I mention Bernie’s name. Wouldn’t bother me a bit.

  180. Jean Henry
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 5:36 am | Permalink


  181. Posted November 1, 2016 at 5:59 am | Permalink

    It is impossible for Ms. Henry to suppress EOS’ speech as she is not a moderator of this blog.

    If she were, there would be nothing at all illegal about deleting EOS’ comments.

    EOS is mostly just somewhat annoying, throwing out generic conservative talking points here and there, but occasionally entertaining. Her idea of sex approval until financial stability made me laugh.

  182. Frosted Flakes
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    I understand not wanting to engage, especially when someone is middle aged and their mind is made up. However, I wonder what the difference is between: 1) Having a policy to not engage in abortion topics, if you don’t feel like it, and donating to a charity to help fund abortions as much as you want, without regard to an outside trigger ; and 2) creating a trigger to fund abortions everytime someone speaks out against abortions. Gee whiz, I don’t know, I guess my mind just likes to ponder great mysteries…

    I wonder why lots of decent people don’t use the form of “encouragement” you guys are using for their own causes. Maybe you guys are onto something.

    After Jean brought up her young friend and her old debate team opponent it got me to thinking. Why don’t public schools just take money that would be spent on the debate team and just fund the opposite sides of classic debate questions. Kids wouldn’t have to show to debate team anymore. No more annoying debates. It would free kids up to do something more productive and important.

  183. Lynne
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    FF, people use donations as a form of encouragement (or discouragement as it were) all of the time. I just saw someone post a picture of a sign on their lawn that says they will donate $25 to the Clinton campaign every time someone vandalizes their Clinton signs.

    Attaching consequences to someone’s speech is not at all the same as infringing upon their right to freedom of speech.

    Anyways, I can understand why a guy like you who doesn’t have good skills with debate and argument might want to keep schools from teaching children those skills but really, it would be better for all if we continue to teach students how to form a good argument. What you seem to be missing is that donating to some charity in response to someone’s stated position is not an argument in the first place and I am not sure if anyone other than you sees it that way. At any rate, your response is itself an argument for teaching debate in schools, fwiw.

  184. Frosted Flakes
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    Can you put a “winky face” after your sentences where I am supposed to “lol”?

  185. Lynne
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    Isn’t that a bit like explaining a joke?

  186. Frosted Flakes
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    What do we have to lose?

  187. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    It’s never the baby’s choice.

  188. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    Nothing trumps the right to life. Not even the inconvenience of the mother.

  189. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    If abortion were illegal, Democrats would win every election. They are missing 59 million votes.

  190. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    Half the patients entering an abortion clinic never come out alive.

  191. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    Some babies die by chance, none should die by choice

  192. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    Abortion: One heart stops, another heart breaks

  193. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    A woman has the right to her body, even if she’s still in the womb

  194. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    There are no unwanted children only unwilling mothers.

  195. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    Real Doctors Don’t Kill Babies

  196. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:36 am | Permalink

    Abortion makes you the mother of a dead baby

  197. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    Abortion: A Doctor’s Right to Make a Killing

  198. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    Every unwanted child a dead child. Doesn’t sound so nice anymore, does it?

  199. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    You might forgive yourself, but a dead baby sure can’t

  200. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    How much are you willing to spend to kill more babies? Hope you have deep pockets.

  201. Lynne
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    Thanks EOS! See FF? It is perfectly possible to post jokes without using ‘LOL’ or wink emojis

  202. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:48 am | Permalink

    $400 so far from you alone.

  203. Jean Henry
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    That’s 4 abortions funded EOS. Thanks!

    FF– My school did not have a debate team. They definitely did not have funds for much other than football. They only got into Title IX compliance in the late 70’s when forced to run women’s teams beyond softball and cheerleading. My 7th & 8th grade teacher was a Christian Conservative who liked to have us debate issues in class. We chose up sides according to what we believed. We weren’t assigned positions like in a debate class. I was very often the only kid representing a liberal point of view. When the Athens v Sparta debate came up I was alone in representing Athens against 5 boys for Sparta with the rest of the class cheering the boys on. My friend MJ took pity on me, and switched sides. I was still under 5′ tall until 9th grade. I looked and dressed like a boy. I won every one of those debates in my own mind, even though the game was rigged. Mr Pennypacker loved seeing me go down.

    This was the ‘gifted’ class back when tracking was still a thing. Those assholes are doing very well financially now. They’d like to do better. They never had anything but condescension for the poor and working class. Even when they were apart of it. They are all voting for Trump. My female friends from home–Many of whom rode Title IX funds to athletic scholarships– none of them are voting Trump. There’s an almost straight divide. My middle school debate challenger said I hadn’t changed a bit.”Still all in– all the time.”

    I relish fucking with EOS righteousness. I don’t think that’s suppression. Maybe it is. This seems an open forum and EOS has not been chastened. I doubt she cares about my approbation any more than I care about hers.

  204. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    4 abortions? Not likely, even if you have the integrity to follow through on your promise to donate funds. According to Planned Parenthood, a first trimester abortion can cost between $350 and $900 for an in-clinic procedure, and between $350 and $650 for a medication abortion (which must be done within 9 weeks of the first day of your last menstrual period.) Abortions performed within a hospital typically cost more. The cost of a second trimester abortion will be significantly higher than a first trimester abortion. And if you want to wait till after viability, you’re going to pay through the nose.

    You can’t alter another person’s righteousness, but you can bring condemnation on yourself.

  205. Jean Henry
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    Also Dr Larson, how are you certain that I’m not the moderator of this blog? I could be another Mark pseudonym. I do say ‘for what it’s worth’ a lot.

  206. Jean Henry
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

    According to the donation site $100 is the average grant needed by clients. You are correct about the total costs however. If ou like, you can think of it as 4 abortions done early enough to not qualify as late term and carry those extra costs and risks so associated.

  207. Lynne
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

    It is an interesting question though. Is fucking with someone the same as suppressing their speech? I think it depends a lot on the power differentials involved. If someone with power over another tries to punish speech or otherwise fuck with another’s speech, that is one thing but obviously isnt the case here.

  208. ytown
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

    You are one angry lady Jean.

  209. Jean Henry
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

    Thank you.

  210. Posted November 1, 2016 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    EOS can donate to a pro-life group is she wishes.

    There is nothing wrong with donating to a cause in opposition to views one takes issue with.

    I will continue to donate the National Network of Abortion Funds as a response to EOS views on abortion. I think it is a good response. Every time EOS brings up these topics, the National Network of Abortion Funds receives more money and helps to provide women with access to safe and professional abortion services, which people like EOS are working to eliminate.

    I think that is a good thing.

  211. Posted November 1, 2016 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

    Remember when EOS’ stupidity got Ozone House a sizable donation?

    People like Ozone House and the National Network for Abortion Funds should be thanking EOS for existing. People like EOS are the best thing they have going for them.

  212. Posted November 1, 2016 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    This really was great. EOS’ finest moment.


  213. jean henry
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

    So when Mark does it it’s a heroic coming together of community against a troll, but when I do it, I’m angry. Is that how it works, ytown? You failed to clarify your position on well anything but my person. I don’t walk around with resentment if that’s what you’re thinking. I don’t hold on to much. I have my voice. I speak to injustice where I see it. I’m not creating the injustice by doing that. I’m not creating the anger either.

    It’s always so nice to be here. What a charming group.

  214. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

    And it’s always a pleasure when you post. I especially like your idea of a party with abortions in the back room and mystery meat in the tacos.

  215. EOS
    Posted November 1, 2016 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

    Dirt Bag,

    I think that post was generated after I suggested that Charles Pugh was a pedophile and then was subsequently ostracized for being a bigot. Did you happen to notice that he recently plead no contest and was sentenced to jail?

  216. Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:17 pm | Permalink

    No、I know nothing about that.

    Regardless, it was a great moment for for you. I hope you mobilize people again.

    That’s the problem with having extreme views that violate peoples’ liberty, people tend to push back.

  217. Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:21 pm | Permalink

    “ostracized for being a bigot”

    Ostracised? From what? Markmaynard.com?

    Stop playing the victim. Here you are.

  218. Westside
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 8:19 am | Permalink

    It’s fascinating not only what a hard time people have communicating but also the chasm between how they see themselves and how others see them.

  219. jean henry
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    Very passive aggressive Westside. Please clarify.

  220. Posted November 2, 2016 at 10:48 am | Permalink


    People think I a loser, an asshole and a pretty awful person. All being true, I have accepted that. Since Mark doesn’t ban people, this is the only place that will have me. I am under no illusions that anyone would think anything different.

    Mark gives EOS a space to speak. Mark is a pretty good guy, I think.

  221. jean henry
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 11:08 am | Permalink

    For a few months there, no one with a differing opinion on anything (except EOS) was commenting about anything here. If you come here for engagement, the quick jump to personal attack (absent any larger point) becomes wearisome. More boring than upsetting. For a while even EOS was gone. There were posts here that begged for her response– crickets… and then people asked where’s EOS. What will we do without some scapegoat to hang our righteousness on? What happens when we are all left re-enforcing each other’s beliefs? Every point of view needs its counterpoint. It’s good for thinking things through, even if you never change your mind. It’s just sad when the response to opposition is just dismissal. It’s not like we haven’t all done it. I’m just seeing a difference in skepticism about it.
    I have an Uncle by marriage who inherited 30 million bucks after not doing much his whole life. He supports Trump and walks around in a navy blazer with an ‘Im a deplorable’ button. He has spent too much time reading LeCarre novels and watching Fox News. He’s not so much racist as ignorant (despite an advanced degree). He saw the twin towers come down, lost friends their and his kids lost friends in the war that followed, and he has not been the same since. He veered from moderate right to hard right. He hunts big game, is overweight and smokes camel unfiltered. And I love him. And the rest of his family. They know my politics. We sometimes talk politics. He likes to goad me into it. I’ll never call him an asshole for his misguided ideology. Because he’s a great guy. A happy gregarious, funny and loving man. I don’t expect any of you to understand.

    I’m glad I love a bunch of people with whom I disagree politically. It’s a valuable perspective.

  222. jean henry
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    “Why this sudden restlessness, this confusion?
    (How serious people’s faces have become.)
    “Why are the streets and squares emptying so rapidly,
    everyone going home so lost in thought?

    Because night has fallen and the barbarians have not come
    And some who have just returned from the border say
    there are no barbarians any longer.

    And now, what’s going to happen to us without barbarians?
    They were, those people, a kind of solution.”
    –CP Cavafy

  223. jean henry
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    Westside’s issue is with my ‘angry’ feminism Pete. He seems to have sympathy for your self-loathing. It’s my apparent conceit that gets too him. Another uppity feminist frightening the children. The attacks were so vague or generalized that it only became clear after dialing back to a little snipe that actually addressed an issue– tensions between Warren and HRC. would we feminists would be calling Warrens critiques sexism? I’m sure that rhetorical fallacy could be found in The Baloney Detection Kit but I can’t bother to look.
    Westside, I’m happy to function as the fearful old hag of female agency in your personal cosmology. You know the one you shared with your son? I’m fond of Medusa but any of those old hags will do.

  224. Lynne
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    I worry too about being in a bubble ideologically but luckily I do have some contact.

    My folks live in a neighborhood filled with Trump supporters. They are both sexist and racist but entirely implicitly. They certainly don’t treat anyone badly although I do sometimes wonder what would happen if a black family moved into the neighborhood. Probably nothing as long as the family was a good fit for the neighborhood otherwise. I feel completely comfortable having my black friends out there and my more flamboyantly out gay friends too and no one has ever been anything less than welcoming and polite. At any rate, I love some of them. I was laughing last night because I got into a HUGE facebook private message argument with one of my parents’ neighbors about why I was voting for HRC that ended with him saying “Hey, you gonna be around this weekend? ”

    We will most likely have a beer and not talk too much about politics.

  225. Jean Henry
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

    As opposed to Moore’s position, there’s some data behind this analysis of Trump supporters motivation. And also, to satisfy Pete’s criteria, plenty of subjective on the ground, direct interaction confirmation of this position. I mean if you aren’ inclined to dismiss it as the ranting of millions of angry hysterical women, you know…


    There is also data showing they are motivated by xenophobia and other forms of racism.
    I want to be clear that I don’t think it is exclusively Trump supporters who are sexist, racist or xenophobic. I think I’ve made that clear, right? I think many many people on the left, were they surrounded daily by Trump supporters rather than say Sanders and Hillary supporters, would find Trump’s message really compelling. I mean.. he just seems so real.

  226. Jean Henry
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

    And more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/world/americas/brexit-donald-trump-whites.html?smid=tw-nytpolitics&smtyp=cur&_r=0

    Also this one goes out to Westside and Demetrius: http://www.damemagazine.com/2016/11/01/why-i-have-no-sympathy-angry-white-men

    I want to be clear that when I say no tears for white dudes, I was not limiting that to one subset of white dudes. The anxiety white men, rich or poor, feel about the loss of their privilege does not move me. Sorry, but no. The media loves that story. Bernie loved it. Time to start asking why.

    The minority majority can not come fast enough. The only thing saving us from Trump is the votes of people of color. I hope to hell they show up at the polls. Although I couldn’t blame them for being sick and disgusted about the whole process.

  227. Frosted Flakes
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 8:42 pm | Permalink

    Regarding the article “hostility toward women is one of the strongest predictors of Trump support”: Is it a surprise that people who have “hostility toward women” are not likely to vote for a woman? The graph showing that those people “hostile toward women” are voting for Trump in 16 at a greater rate than Romney in 12 seems to want the reader to assume that the feminist cause has not changed in intensity, tone and demands, since 12.

    I don’t doubt the general conclusion but the way they get to the conclusion does not seem convincing. The phrase “hostility toward women” makes sense only if not agreeing with the feminist movement, as it currently is, somehow translates into hostility toward. What percentage of women even consider themselves part of the feminist movement.

    The article seems like a lame piece of evidence to me.

  228. Demetrius
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

    “Although I couldn’t blame them for being sick and disgusted about the whole process.”

    If so, we have that in common.

  229. Jean Henry
    Posted November 2, 2016 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

    The feminist cause has not changed in demands since 12. Intensity rises in concert with offenses. And there have been many of late. I have no idea what you are talking about FF. If anything the feminist cause has become looser and more inclusive of all kinds of people. 80% of progressive social media is produced by white men. There’s still some work to do.Maybe you guys are just now starting to hear us.

  230. EOS
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 3:41 am | Permalink

    78% of women today don’t consider themselves to be feminists. The methodology of the grad students cited in the Vox article is extremely flawed. By their definition, the majority of women are sexist, but to conclude that they are motivated to vote for Trump because of their hostility to their own sex is not valid. A vast majority of Trump supporters are motivated by their aversion to lies, corruption, and the deceit of elected officials who consider themselves to be above the law.

  231. Posted November 3, 2016 at 4:11 am | Permalink


    When then they are severely deluded. Trump isn’t the solution.

    But you know that, right? Or, maybe not.

  232. Jean Henry
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 6:00 am | Permalink

    Basically, FF what you posited, as far as I can tell is that gender bias is a result of feminism. Am I missing something?

  233. maryd
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 7:35 am | Permalink

    Whether or not women identify themselves as feminist, they most certainly are. Women expect to be respected not objectified, to not be harassed on the street, to be paid equally and to pursue the work we want to do, to have their work at home recognized regardless if it is caring for young children or aged relatives, and to decide for ourselves what happens to our bodies regarding reproduction. Women voting for trump are greedy, racist or deluded about the life issue, period.

  234. EOS
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 7:49 am | Permalink

    No maryd,

    You can’t claim all women are feminists when they specifically reject the category label. It is time we stopped using all collectivist labels, and instead, we should treat all individuals with equal respect for their unique characteristics. Everyone is valued, even those who have different opinions.

  235. Jean Henry
    Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    I agree with EOS– on that one point. “we should treat all individuals with equal respect for their unique characteristics. Everyone is valued, even those who have different opinions.” Although people can label themselves or not however they want. You can’t argue for the value of diverse opinions and suggest we “all” stop doing something. Depending on how studies are worded, between 18 and 40% of women identofy as feminist, and another 20 – 30% or so are unsure if the label applies. But 85% of women and 55% of men support greater gender equity. So it’s not like the country as a whole rejects feminist principles. They just don’t like what the label implies. I would chalk that up to sexism. I’m sure EOS has another explanation.

    Disagreeing with someone validates their voice. It’s far more respectful than disagreeing and holding that opinion back– where it is safe from disruption. Many people on this site don’t get that. Many people on the left don’t get that. The difficult conversation is where all the growth happens.

  236. Jean Henry
    Posted November 4, 2016 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    Relevant: http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/2/13497320/louis-ck-michael-moore-hillary-clinton-benevolent-sexism-liberal-men

  237. Jean Henry
    Posted November 6, 2016 at 9:17 pm | Permalink


  238. Jean Henry
    Posted January 5, 2017 at 9:28 am | Permalink


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Sidetrack ad Aubree’s ad BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Nanook