Posted on 01/29/2008 8:21:52 AM PST by fweingart
Marcia Pappas will probably consider me a male chauvinist pig for saying this, but her attack on Sen. Edward Kennedy yesterday was idiotic and suggests she is unfit to lead her organization.
Pappas, president of the New York State chapter of the National Organization for Women, accused Kennedy of committing the "ultimate betrayal" of women everywhere.
And what was his heinous offense, pray tell? Advocating reversal of Roe vs. Wade? Calling for repeal of women's suffrage? Supporting female circumcision?
No. Endorsing Sen. Barack Obama for President instead of Sen. Hillary Clinton.
"He's joined the list of progressive white men who can't or won't handle the prospect of a woman President who is Hillary Clinton," Pappas said in rambling, incoherent statement e-mailed to the media.
After this, her second nutty outburst in three weeks, Pappas should consider stepping aside and letting someone with a cooler head speak on behalf of women's rights.
The fact is that Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat and liberal icon, has spoken up for women's rights throughout his career. He's currently the lead sponsor of the equal rights amendment in the Senate.
"I truly wish we could clone him and keep him around forever," gushed Massachusetts NOW Co-President Melissa Walsh a few years ago.
But a decades-long track record of feminism means nothing to Pappas. Kennedy is pro-Obama; therefore, he's anti-woman.
This is not the first gender grenade Pappas has lobbed into the Democratic race. Earlier this month, she portrayed Clinton as the victim of a "psychological gangbang" in the leadup to the New Hampshire primary.
"Gang raping of women is commonplace in our culture, both physically and metaphorically," she wrote on Jan. 11. "Last week, we witnessed just such a phenomenon involving men who are afraid of a powerful woman."
Pappas does neither her candidate nor the cause of women's rights any good with such shrill rhetoric. To the contrary, she only shreds the credibility she and her organization need to take on the really important fights.
And, by the way, such rhetoric is downright insensitive to victims of actual rapes. A feminist should know better.
Imagine the uproar if the leader of the NAACP in New York accused Obama's opponents of engaging in a "psychological lynching."
Pappas' statement was just as outrageous.
To her credit, Clinton is not the type of feminist who is quick to play the victim.
"I don't think they piled on me the other night because I'm a woman," she said of the events Pappas referenced. "I think they piled on me because I'm winning."
And her campaign quickly disavowed Pappas' attack on Kennedy.
"This statement does not at all reflect her views or the opinion of the Clinton campaign," spokesman Howard Wolfson said.
So who, exactly, does Pappas speak for? My guess is, almost no one. The Democrats I know and the women I know long to choose a presidential candidate based on his or her merits - not on skin color or reproductive organs.
Pappas told me that she speaks only for NOW's state chapter, not the national organization. NOW officials in Washington issued a statement defending Kennedy's record but not repudiating Pappas.
Here's what they should have said: Pappas' statement was unacceptable.
If anyone is betraying the cause of women's rights in this situation, it's Pappas herself - by bringing shame and ridicule down on NOW - an organization with a proud history.
The women of New York deserve a better advocate than this.
Mary Jo Kopechne = the ultimate betrayal of women
You forgot the *mega-barf-hurl alert*
What’s funny is that this writer thinks NOW has some interest in “women’s rights,” rather than pro-abortion activism.
Pappas is a mean feminist. NOW’s support for Kennedy and a philandering Bill Clintoon long ago blew up any scintilla of credibility they might have.
Even the dem leading Daily News is disgusted with her. Even the Democrats are disgusted with Hillary.
It sems that Dems and Dem leaning publications are realizing the hypocrisy of these agenda groups and are realizing how corrupt the Clintoons are as party standardbearers.
This had some credibility until that line.
NY ping
Marcia Pappas
Arf.
I half agree with the article —
Agreed that Marcia Pappas is an unhinged raving feminist lunatic, and is entirely unfit to lead anything.
Disagreed that Kennedy is some champion of women’s rights. It remains absolutely inexplicable that so many feminists will continually back womanizing, harrassing, woman-killing, suspected-rapists like Kennedy and Clinton.
They’re just liberal women — they’ll bitch endlessly about sexism and objectification from conservative men, and drop to their knees for a liberal man (as that one female journalist offered to do for Clinton because of he’s pro-choice).
H
define “quick”....
Is it immediate and kneejerk, like some use the race card,
or is it only used when it is deemed politically advantageous?
“To her credit, Clinton is not the type of feminist who is quick to play the victim. “
Naaaa, never done that.
Everyone who journeys to this website knows after the first few sentences that this is, indeed, a piece to make you puke up your breakfast.
We musn’t forget the writer lives in New Yarkansas.
(Woof, woof)
Marcia, Marcia, Marcia!
Ran across some weird rumors on google - something about her an "Jan"...
There. Fixed.
It doesn’t take one long to realize that the author is a genuine wanker.
Why are these feminazis so stinkin’ ugly and sour looking?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.