While her comments did not merit censorship (and anyone who pays attention knows they cut out god.. not damn in tv shows) her comments were pretty damned sexist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

she is only correct in one respect. She should have said DEMOCRATIC mothers. Republican women seem just as hypocritical and self centered as their husbands-and do all
they can to keep THEIR little bastards out of the military.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

a perfect name for this media corporation who mimics a sly and cunning carnivourous mammal, clothed in beautiful fur with a bushy tail, that is known for craftiness (deception), and who preys on small animals.

Congress must withold money to support the war and we should Boycott Fos stations and inform the advertisers we will not support their products as long as they support Fox. Money is the only thing they instictively nurture!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and Fox to shove this trophy up their ass, that would be the talk of the week!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's a nice thought, mothers in charge of the world. We would be like children again, protected and loved. Actually a lot of mothers are terrible, and really stupid, abusive, selfish people. Many women hate being moms. It's true. I saw that on Oprah. It'd be the good ones though, and not the ones you could imagine thinking that maybe it'd do their little asshole some good to go to boot camp and "learn to be a man".

Seriously, what is even the point of saying stuff like this - "If mothers ruled the world.."? There you are, on TV, thousands watching -you have a microphone and can say something meaningful, something really powerful, and speak out against mass murder... and you say that. I see no evidence that if women -and in this case- mothers had all the power, there would be no war. All too often women support their countries wars and just the fact they haven't held political power like men is not convincing to me they would not be as awful. Just about every time a person that isn't white or doesn't have a penis gets a high ranking office in the government they're as bad as their wasp male counterparts. But the idea is if women had complete power and dominated the political system, then they'd really change things and give peace a chance. That's silly to me and a pointless thing to say. I guess I do wish it were true and it's a nice thought. We have to get real about how people really are though.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For Pete's sake, they were able to change it from "... there would be no Goddamned war" to "...there would be no God"! Anti-war to anti-religion - what more could they ask?

To all the feminist/anti-feminist/sexist/male-bashing commenters - come on, kids, grow up! It wasn't an attack on men, though it could be understood as a rant against our patriarchal society (and for those who don't believe it IS a patriarchal society - Hell, it isn't EVEN worth the trouble). There is a difference, and in societies like this one, one of two types tend to end up in power: alpha-male, over-testosteroned types who prefer force to negotiation (they might have to give up something versus taking whatever they want and punishing the "enemy" for having it as well as for not handing it over immediately), and the cowards who HAVE to use force to show they're not cowards. Though how that last is interpreted as non-cowardly when they send OTHER people out to fight while they stay safe at home I have no idea.

From what I recall, matriarchies have generally been good at negotiation and good at defense, but don't generally start wars. Violence is usually looked on as an adult temper tantrum, which I really can't argue with, at least not regarding the initiators. And no, I can't remember where I read all this - it was over 40 years ago. I remember they were Native American cultures, a couple of African ones, and (I think) some old South American cultures. It also isn't an absolute; some women are warlike. Some men aren't.

There are differences between the genders, and pointing them out isn't an insult. Personally, I like a lot of them. And generalities only apply to the general case anyway. Having been raised a male in a patriarchy, I can attest that this patriarchy teaches, lauds, even requires its sons to be violent. Those who are not are thought poorly of, called names, often beaten throughout childhood (the reason for my getting into martial arts at age nine). I would like to see a woman president; she could hardly screw things up any worse than the asylum escapees in the white house now. And Hillary doesn't count. She's learned to follow the money and power, and has been "inside" enough to know that someone who really tries to buck the system often has a short life expectancy. Until and if we can disempower the corporations and the "Old Money" families, we can expect to have the same old same old no matter who gets elected.

Meanwhile, I'm glad Sally has finally grown enough to say what she thinks and not worry about who it pisses off. Good for her!

Ian

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At the very least congresswomen! I wish she lived in Nancy's district.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]