Congresswoman Wants Politics Dumbed Down So Women Can Understand

The Republican Party has had a seemingly never-ending series of blunders when speaking with women. Hoping to fix these mistakes, North Carolina Representative Renee Ellmers met with a panel of fellow conservative female politicians to discuss the problem. Alas, the advice she offered up doesn’t seem all that helpful.

“We need our male colleagues to understand that if you can bring it down to a woman’s level and what [sic] everything that she is balancing in her life, that’s the way to go,” Congresswoman Ellmers said.

I’m sorry, bring it down to a woman’s level? Perhaps she misspoke and she meant that there’s a different approach that Republican men could take when speaking with women. Ellmer, however, removed any chance at a benefit of the doubt by elaborating on her opinion:

“Men do tend to talk about things on a much higher level. Many of my male colleagues, when they go to the House floor, you know, they’ve got some pie chart or graph behind them and they’re talking about trillions of dollars and how, you know, the debt is awful.”

Ah, yes, graphs – how can women ever be expected to understand those things? Sure women can bake pies, but pie charts?! Dumb it down for them, boys!

By the way, what kind of issues do women care about? Finding more time, explained Ellmer. Specifically, finding “more time in the morning to get ready.” So women are too busy putting on makeup to worry about the national debt – got it.

It should seem obvious by now that condescending to women is not a winning strategy for politicians:

For the record, Ellmers released a press statement declaring that her comments were taken “completely out of context.” She dared to call the article “offensive and sexist,” too, as if calling out her specific inane comments is somehow sexist while her own words that diminished the intellectual capabilities of women in general were not the issue.

Ellmers also blamed the Sarah Palin tried-and-true “gotcha” journalism tactics of the liberal media, even though the story was initially reported by The Washington Examiner, a publication known for its conservative slant.

Besides, Ellmers has already established an embarrassing track record in regards to gender issues. Not long ago, she argued that the Affordable Care Act is part of the Obama administration’s “war on women” because – for some convoluted reason – offering women health care is an attack on them.

Also on the subject of health care, Ellmers stated that insurance providers should be permitted to charge women more for daring to go to their doctors with biological lady parts. She wondered why men should have to pay premiums that cover pregnancies when men don’t even have babies, labeling it “discrimination”; it’s unclear who Ellmers thinks helped to get these same ladies pregnant in the first place.

Just because Ellmers doesn’t appear to grasp the issues at hand doesn’t mean that the entirety of her gender needs to be treated like idiots. The real problem seems to be one particular female politician who is content to sell out her gender at the federal level.

 

195 comments

Jim Ven
Jim Ven6 months ago

thanks for the article.

Regus S.
Regus Slantei2 years ago

Paul B. -- In response to my post to you, you write: "Regus, really? Can you name one politician that wants to eliminate women's right to vote? I doubt anyone can."

What the f**k does the subject of 'eliminating the right to vote for women' have to do with what I said to you?! I did not touch on that subject AT ALL, and neither does the story!! Yet you contrive your response into a DEFLECTING challenge to me about whether I can name such a politician! What??!! Stop DEFLECTING. Stay on topic, you deluded little Teatard!!

And, by the way, thank **YOU** for so hypocritically and humorously providing us with "the most ridiculous statement......on this sight[sic]" in your attempt to complain about others' ridiculous posts. It takes a real dull-headed Teatard to double down on your own STUPIDITY so publicly, even as you senselessly shreek about the supposed stupidity in others.

You are a real 'prize' -- one appropriately claimed by the rightwing clowns that now run the [R] party.

Dale O.

Renee Ellmers really needs to ease up on taking all of those Republican supplements with her breakfast. It's numbing her brain cells.

Donna F.
Donna F.2 years ago

wow! ellmers is a moron!!

Michael T.
Michael T.2 years ago

Here let me repost Regus's comments to you


11:41AM PDT on Jul 24, 2014

Paul B. says "...it is the most ridiculous statement I have read on this sight".

Wow. You do know the definition of HYPOCRISY, right Paul? Or perhaps you feel, in true oligarch-wanna-be form, such definitions should not apply to YOU?

You need to review your own ridiculous words that you posted on this thread, and then get back to us about 'ridiculous'.

Anybody who so proudly feeds at the teets of the rightwing underbelly, has no business attempting to judge others' level of 'ridiculousness'.

Get a grip, "moron".

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/congresswoman-wants-politics-dumbed-down-so-women-can-understand.html#ixzz38QU1Txhl

Michael T.
Michael T.2 years ago

PlauB,

If you really want to read the MOST ridiculous statements

on Care2

Read your own comments. They should have you laughing until

well,

until the end of time

Paul B.
Paul B.2 years ago

Regus, really? Can you name one politician that wants to eliminate women's right to vote? I doubt anyone can.

Paul B.
Paul B.2 years ago

I should have stated... if you can find me one politician that believes we should take away women's right to vote, I will show you a politician with a VERY short career.

Karen H.
Karen H.2 years ago

Elaine B, write-ins are fine, but unless a candidate gets enough votes to upset the balance, we stand the risk of a LOSER getting into office.
What’s scary is that there are lots of women who’ve been brainwashed into thinking like Ellmers. Look at the Duggars – a woman’s place is staying home and supporting her husband and kids.
Maybe brainwashing from birth is part of the reason. I just read this: “Young children who are exposed to religion have a hard time differentiating between fact and fiction, according to a new study published in the July issue of Cognitive Science … children who went to church or were enrolled in a parochial school were significantly less able than secular children to identify supernatural elements, such as talking animals, as fictional … they made more appeals to reality and fewer appeals to impossibility than did secular children.”

Regus S.
Regus Slantei2 years ago

Paul B. says "...it is the most ridiculous statement I have read on this sight".

Wow. You do know the definition of HYPOCRISY, right Paul? Or perhaps you feel, in true oligarch-wanna-be form, such definitions should not apply to YOU?

You need to review your own ridiculous words that you posted on this thread, and then get back to us about 'ridiculous'.

Anybody who so proudly feeds at the teets of the rightwing underbelly, has no business attempting to judge others' level of 'ridiculousness'.

Get a grip, "moran".