Yes, Todd Epp's latest stint is ridiculous and thanks to Rebecca and Cory, Angie, and Anna ( both below) for taking him to task. Through Todd's latest escapade, I was reminded of the ridiculously sexist Carls Jr. ad campaign, courtesy of Target Women of Infomania.
Also, where is he coming up with these so-called 'progressive babes?' Last time I checked, Shannon Stevens was pretty public after the 2008 election about the fact that she voted for the McCain/Palin ticket. Having taken a paycheck from the very organization of which she voted against, this seems counter-productive to the advance of the pro-choice agenda. I would question the 'progressiveness' of that 'babe.'
Anywho, Todd is free to continue to be the shotty "Esquire" of the blogosphere, but I hope he doesn't expect that anyone's going to take him as anything but that. I mean, what next? A deep analysis of "Manswers" and because his wife thinks it's funny, it's totally progressive? Give me a break...and meanwhile, get some substantive information...or at least do your homework. This is a gross disgrace of a progressive. And unfortunately, it isn't the first time.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I am shocked after reading your post. I feel that no matter where you stand on Todd's use of 'babe' it is totally ridiculous to start insulting someone who worked for years at protecting women's reproductive rights.
To start off with, it was my understanding that Planned Parenthood was a bipartisan organization. So does it really matter what someones political affiliation is? I think that it is comments like yours that give Planned Parenthood a bad name. Planned Parenthood is there to protect the reproductive rights of all women, even if they are a registered Republican.
I guess that my main thought is that publicly questioning the integrity of Planned Parenthood and Campaign for Healthy Families employee who worked countless hours to protect YOUR reproductive rights is more of a douche-bag move than calling someone a babe!
Also curious about how you heard that Steven's voted for the McCain/Palin ticket?? Publicly ... Really?
Andrea Marie Ph.D.
How exactly would my reproductive rights be protected if McCain had won and he was now appointing Souter's replacement?
I didn't even begin to insinuate that. P
Planned Parenthood currently does and so did Campaign for Healthy Families. Therefore their employees and volunteers do. Regardless of there political affiliation.
This is beginning to sound a little like Todd's 'I help women and gays most of the time, so it's alright if I'm sexist some of the time' stuff. Working or volunteering for an organization does not shield you from criticism if you do other things that work against your cause. And when the 5-4 majority supporting Roe hangs in the balance, I think that's worth talking about.
Thanks for the comment, anders. I'd be glad to address it.
You might have missed my more recent post wherein I said the following:
"And just to clarify: I used Shannon Stevens as a good, bad example to illustrate how confused and off base Todd often is and I stand by it. [...] We should all demand accountability when a progressive blogger, politician, or non-profit’s staff person doesn’t put their money where there mouth is at the expense of the entire progressive movement or worse, women’s access to healthcare through the reality of what is public policy formation in the US."
Additionally, I'd say that PP is not a bi-partisan organization, it's *non*-partisan -- distinctly different. And no, someone's political affiliation doesn't matter whatsoever -- that's not at all what I said. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'd vote for a pro-choice Republican long before I'd vote for an anti-choice Democrat. That's not where the issue is.
I'm sorry you villify me in this situation. For someone who appears to have a great deal of knowledge and passion for reproductive rights in the state of SD, I'm at a loss as to why you seem confused about how candidates, especially the POTUS, impact public policy in SD or anywhere else.
If you believe holding people accountable to potentially catastrophic, contradictive acts that undermine the very cause they work to promote is more douchey than the act itself, so be it.
I am not trying to vilify you in any way ... and apologize if you thought that.
I just find that it gives feminist and pro-choicers, like we all obviously are, a bad name when we start throwing each other under the bus. And I would rather have some guy call a woman a babe than have one of my own question my dedication to the cause. I think that it is important to have these discussions but think that when you are talking about a third party you need to be somewhat respectful. Stevens did not bring herself into this discussion and last time I check didn't publicly announce how she voted. Therefore you cannot accuse her of
of taking part in "potentially catastrophic, contradictive acts that undermine the very cause they work to promote"
So if you want to call Todd a douche for his use of babe ... go for it (i am not all found of the word myself). I just think that bringing Steven's into the discussion and questioning her integrity and dedication to the cause (especially without any evidence) is, well, super douchey!
Post a Comment