Objective observers can agree that President Obama's debate performance two weeks ago fell far short, but the setback featured one saving grace: there was no moment. Obama was off his game, but there wasn't a major, high-profile, embarrassing setback that could be replayed over and again.
By this measure, Mitt Romney's defeat last night was even worse, because he teed up all kinds of moments. He embarrassed himself on Benghazi; he was laughed at over the size of his pension; and of course he offered the political world the gift of "binders full of women."
The question was excellent: "In what new ways do you intend to rectify the inequalities in the workplace, specifically regarding females making only 72 percent of what their male counterparts earn?" It was an easy one for Obama -- he signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act into law and has an excellent record when it comes to appointing women to key positions.
It's more of a problem for Romney, who refuses to even give an opinion on the Ledbetter law; who suggested last night that some women need to leave work early to "make dinner" for their kids; and who defended his record by saying he sought and received "binders full of women" when looking to fill his gubernatorial cabinet.
The ridicule is still going strong 12 hours later. It shows no signs of abating.
Let's quickly set the record straight.
First, Romney's story about seeking women applicants was a lie. Second, during Romney's tenure at Bain Capital, there were exactly zero women partners (not enough binders?). Third, during his one term as governor, he invalidated a half-dozen executive orders establishing affirmative action policies for women.
And this doesn't even touch on the fact that Romney won't endorse the pending Violence Against Women Act; Romney took the coward's way out when Limbaugh targeted Sandra Fluke; Romney has offered support for a "Personhood" measure that's so extreme it would ban some forms of birth control; Romney intends to destroy the Affordable Care Act, which would be a huge setback millions of women; and Romney's running mate has one of the worst voting records on women's issues in Congress.
BindersFullOfWomen.com, which American Bridge put together with blinding speed last night, has more.
Leave a Comment:
"Binders of women."
This is how Mitt Romney defined women in his debate response about gender pay
equity. Women as “things” is not a new idea in American culture. Women have
historically been defined as objects in every major aspect of our society. At
work, church or temple, campus, and home we have been valued as things. We sit
stand beneath glass ceilings, at the back of the room, on the bottom rung of
the ladder, and outside closed doors. Today I say, unequivocally that we do not
accept our postion as things.
I call women in Ohio and across the country to speak out against the continued
definition of our humanity as a thing. We will no longer allow our interest to
be co-opted and dominated by misogyny disguised as concern. Note to Mitt
Romney: the national issue of gender pay equity has nothing to do with how many
women you cherry picked for your Massachusetts cabinet. We are intellectually
gifted humans who understand our value and unrewarded contributions to this
society. We will not allow you to sidestep this issue. Pay equity is not
achieved by women being in the room. Both access and equity are essential to
the survival of our families. We will no longer support policy discussions that
ignore our humanity, and right to equality and full protection. Not only did
you fail the call to action, but you reinforced our place as things. The
ideology of women as things is the fundamental justification for women's
economic, social, religious, educational, and political disadvantage. Mitt
Romney delivered more than misstatement, he shared a philosophy.
This old idea of women as things is why our grandmothers had never heard, much
less uttered the words, marital rape. Our grandmothers took vows that extended
themselves to their husbands as property. Men could rape their wives in much
the same way that they could steal their own car, or break into their own
house. When women are things, our humanity is revoked. Our devalued pay
reflects our devalued worth. We desire complete occupational equity, not just a
flexible day that allows us to retreat to homes for dinner preparation. Despite
the fact that women, working in and outside the home, provide almost all of the
direct care parenting, when they are heads of household, their families are
called broken. A man's presence, regardless of his emotional or physical
contribution, is sufficient to validate a family as whole. Mitt Romney reinforced
this messsage when he said that a family needs a mother and a father. He did
not recognize that families, many of whom are headed by women, need equitable
wages. No, Romney says that all they need is a man. Another good old call to
the days of yesterday. He ignored the fact that most lesbian families have
children. He ignored the fact that children living in traditional families with
emotional and/or physical abuse suffer many short and long term consequences.
Rather, he hailed to the mythical notion that all two parent, heterosexual
families are good for children and society. This failure to offer more
intellectually complex discourse is what allows him to support legislative
discrimination against women (opposition to Lilly Ledbetter/ Blount Amendment/Personhood
Act) and lgbt communities (support for Defense of Marriage Act/funding of Prop
8 legislation). Rather using critical thought to navigate these important
issues, he resorts to the simple, age old ideology of women as things.
Binders of women. Women as things. Women as objects of legislation. This idea
allows men to make decisions about women's reproductive health as a matter of
policy rather than persons. The control of our bodies is farmed out to distant
places and becomes polling points. The focus on the "bean" (per Ryan)
rather than the being ignores the breathing, thinking, feeling woman at the
center of the discourse. The woman whose personal and economic future is
forever changed by childbearing and childrearing becomes nothing more than
object for other's political actualization. Ryan and members of the extreme
Republican Right fulfill their personal, political and religious commitments by
stripping women of control over their bodies. Women have become a
"thing" to be manipulated in service of ambitions. Republicans are
willing to risk millions of women's lives by defunding Planned Parenthood and
overturning Roe vs. Wade. Reality: in countries where abortion is inaccessible,
women suffer high rates of premature death and illness. Reality: millions of
women rely on Planned Parenthood for essential health screenings and vital
services. Without these services millions of middle and low income women would
die of preventable illness, and undetected disease.
Binders of women. Women as things to serve men's sexual needs. Every minute in
this country a women is victimized. How are people desensitized to women's
suffering? How are men emboldened to view women as objects for the taking? When
the person becomes a thing. A consistent theme in a society with dozens of
words that describe women's bodies as things--jugs, piece, chicks, dimes, and
tens. A place where this objectification is celebrated and neutralized in
Hooters, Titled Kilts, and Racks around the country. Where the rape victim is
asked, "What were you wearing?" Where the just the sight of a women's
body is treated as a rightful offering to any man in view. We should be equally
valued across society for our humanity.
Binders of women. Women as things to have, rather than persons who have. Women
make 72 cents to every dollar that men make. Women with education, job
experience, professional backgrounds that are equal to men are payed less. When
Mitt Romney says that he has to go out and "find qualified women" the
assumption is that competent women are infrequent and atypical. The ideology of
women as inferior is central to the issue of pay inequality, violence against
women and women's poverty. The ideology of women as things--clearly iterated by
Mitt Romney--is central to women's disadvantaged social position. Mitt Romney
did not suffer a slip of the tongue. He expressed his, and the dominant
society's, framework of women's inferior value. Women are a thing to be
manipulated, ordered, organized and dominated.
Binders full of Ohio women reject the idea that we are things. We will voice
our ultimate rejection of this ideology, expressed last night by Mitt Romney,
on November 6th with our vote for President Barack Obama.
Binder Full of Ohio Women Against Romney ask the question: If marriage is the solution to poverty and gun violence and most lesbian couples have children, shouldn't poor gay couples be able to marry to? Just sayin' Vote Obama!
I think someone told Romney that when the clock time runs out it doesn't mean your turn to talk is over, it means it's time to start bad mouthing Obama.
But...but...this 'binder full of women' deal smacks of Affirmative Action! Oops
During the Pres debate last night, there was a woman who asked Mitt Romney a question that she is an undecided voter because she is not satisfied with the last 4 years. After the end of the debate, the very same woman, came up to Anne Romney, appeared to greet Mitt but then she and Anne Romney kissed! AS IF THEY NOT ONLY KNEW EACH OTHER BUT THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY FRIENDS! I thought this was fishy!!!
Like those "undecided" Ohio voters on the panel at MSNBC, most of whom leaned toward Romney. Sure they were "undecided". It was embarrassing looking at the women who said they liked Mitt because he was so great economically. Apparently they were ok with being forced to have rape babies and have less pay then men for the same job. I hate dumb women.
When Mitt said he would get back about whether he thought women should get equal pay to men for the same jobs, that reminded me of Sarah Palin, who was going to get back about which Supreme Court cases she disagreed with besides Roe v Wade. I'm still waiting to hear what Sarah disagreed with. I suspect I'll also have to wait about whether Mitt supports equal pay for women.
Let's all mail him a nice binder with our resumes.
Romney took pride in claiming how he personally inspired binders of women. I am guessing that if we were to put other binders out there he would also take quick ownership. So here are my suggestions.
Binder of qualified: 47 percenters, illegal aliens, mexicans, cubans, negroes, old sick people, homosexuals, religious leftist .........
If anyone is looking for the perfect binder to hold all their women, many people have taken to Amazon to give their opinion: http://www.amazon.com/Avery-Economy-Binder-1-Inch-Round/dp/B000V99JYI/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
My favorite review thus far, "I am so excited to order this binder! My husband said that I've been doing such a great job of cutting out of work early to serve him meat and potatoes all these years, and he's finally letting me upgrade from a 2-ring without pockets to a binder with 3 rings and two pockets! The pockets excite me the most. I plan to use the left pocket to hold my resume which will highlight my strongest skills which include but are not limited to laughing while eating yogurt. The right pocket will be great for keeping my stash of aspirin, in case of emergencies when I need to hold it between my knees."