It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NYT Op-Ed uses sexism and name calling to defend Cortez and socialism

page: 3
55
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2019 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Thank you G.W.B for no child left behind...




posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Ketsuko I am surprised to learn you are a female [unfamiliar w/Asian naming conventions, so if the name was a clue I missed it]
My new thing to learn for today. It amuses me how defensive the left gets over this woman. So she is off limits for all the mindless drivel she spurts out because she is a female latina? No, no that is not how it works. If she cannot defend her positions logically [no, telling people it's intelligent does not count] and deal with the criticism [public office ya know?] she should just shut her mouth. Her and the current freshperson crop of Democrats are too catering to the twitter audience. Twitter is not a useful tool for politics on her level, so unless she has all people from her district as followers all she is doing is pandering to people who will tell her what she wants to hear. Not like that many people follow they don't like on Twitter unless they are reporters or political hacks. Yea, yea girl your Twitter followers are really affected by your tweets, they have little stake in the game so to speak.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Personally I think AOC would have a lot more going for her if she'd just get back in the kitchen.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: pteridine
a reply to: abe froman


I had read about the "casting call" somewhere but it sounded a bit far fetched. So far, all the evidence points in that direction.
Maybe AOC, Omar, and Tlaib et al. are designed to be distractions that elicit responses and direct the public eye away from the real problems of the Democratic party. For all the talk of "diversity" and new ideas, the front runner is an old white male who is so heterosexual that he even sniffs little girls.

They are proud of their casting call. SMFH
Here are justice democrats talking about it.

The brains behind AOC




posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 06:31 AM
link   
you guys uhhh.... read the bit where it's an OPINION, right?
on twitter?
it's someone playing the twitter game and expressing a controversial opinion?



cute how you're all getting so unbelievably twisted about it tho
i mean seriously to go just by the way you all talk about her in threads like this anyone would think she'd be crawling in your window with a machete this evening

i mean, nooo, you're the rational, strong ones. of course.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Yeah, yeah we all get it. Everyone can be offended except the straight white male. Who of course, is the blame for everything Democrats allegedly suffer from. Democrats are ridiculous, unreasonable and illogical, which is why they lose all the time...that's what losers do...lose and cry about it.
edit on 30-4-2019 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

It's true tho. Usually the men who are against a woman the most are the same men who can't get laid. I worked with a lot of middle-aged men when I was young and you wouldn't believe how sexist these guys were, it was scary.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 06:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ligyron
a reply to: DBCowboy

It's true tho. Usually the men who are against a woman the most are the same men who can't get laid. I worked with a lot of middle-aged men when I was young and you wouldn't believe how sexist these guys were, it was scary.



Women who can't get laid are called feminists. They are equally as pathetic and irritating. So women are not exempt from everything you speak of. I work with THEM. Oh...and I have been married happily for over 20 years. I can speak because I have had a lot of sex in my lifetime.
edit on 30-4-2019 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 07:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: Breakthestreak

I still don't understand why a man would think she's hot.

To me she's maybe a 6 until she opens her mouth...

(Personal bias... I like a woman with eyes inside her skull and when AOC opens her mouth I get an Aliens movie flashback)

Her voice alone drops her to a 4 (can you imagine listening to that mickey-mouse helium voice for any length of time?).

Then if you listen to what she's actually saying she drops to about 2...

Maybe that's it.

Men listen to her and think "well, she's borderline retarded so at least she'll be an easy hookup"...

~shrug~








I am a man and I don't find her attractive at all. Those big ol teeth and too much gum along with those bulging eye.
I am sorry I wouldn't do that chick with my dogs unit, I just couldn't do that to him. Oh ya she is dumber than a box of hammers.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 07:21 AM
link   


Women who can't get laid are called feminists. They are equally as pathetic and irritating. So women are not exempt from everything you speak of. I work with THEM. Oh...and I have been married happily for over 20 years. I can speak because I have had a lot of sex in my lifetime.


What? You're saying that the only women who are feminists - a movement that looks to aid women and to mend the hundreds of years they have suffered under western patriarchy - and want to create an equal society between women and men are women who are overweight?

Emma Watson is overweight or ugly?

Sophie Turner, the actress and fashion model who portrays the role of Sansa Starkk in the HBO game of thrones series has a hard time getting laid?

She's to get married to one of the Jonas Brothers. Do you think a guy who can get laid with thousands of women would marry an unattractive woman? But she is unattractive, right? Since she's a feminist and the only women who are a part of Feminism are physically repelling?

I'll never understand that. I've lived in all of the Continents on this Earth, and something I've always ecountered; doesn't matter when I was hitting nightclubs in Sweden or when I was walking through the pavements of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan after a hard day of archeology was that...

Almost all men on this earth are sexist and are very threatened by attractive women/women who make a living without needing a man to support them




. I work with THEM. Oh...and I have been married happily for over 20 years. I can speak because I have had a lot of sex in my lifetime.


A lot of sex?! oh boy! Having sex with the same woman for the last 20 years has made you an expert on how the vast majority of women are like! Amazing. Funny how my dad, who has been married for the past 40 years to a former Miss doesn't talk anything like the dudes on this thread are talking like about women



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

Yep, this was pretty much confirmed by the semi-recent news about the people who recruited her. They basically went out looking for decent actors/actresses to run for office.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy


After a week of anti-Semitic cartoons, the NYT thought that defending socialism through sexist remarks would be the high road to travel.

Guys? We just don't get or understand socialism because Cortez is a babe.

That's it.

That's all there is.

She's just too "hawt" for us to understand the authoritarian nature of her ideology.

Jesus H Christ.

SMDH


Like it or not, some socialist programs will be needed, such as in the case of your now messed up healthcare, as fixes.

Are the men at Fox obsessed with her?




A study found that the New York City Democrat was mentioned 3,181 times on Fox News Channel and its sister Fox Business Network during the six-week period of Feb. 25 to April 7, or just under 76 times a day. Not a day went by when she wasn’t spoken about on Fox. The liberal watchdog Media Matters for America, which did the research, called it an obsession and said the first term representative has become the network’s latest bogeyman, “someone for hosts and guests to demonize, knock down and refer to whenever grievances need to be aired against the Democratic Party.”




The congresswoman tweeted a link to the Media Matters research, adding the comment, “that’s how hard they’re fighting against dignified health care, wages and justice for all; and turning their fire power on the youngest congressional woman in history to do it. “Too bad for them, because we don’t flinch,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote. Beyond politics, Fox Business Network’s Stuart Varney illustrated another reason that Fox would pay so much attention to Ocasio-Cortez. “We have an AOC segment every day, almost every single hour,” he said. “She’s good for our ratings.”


www.apnews.com...
edit on 14CDT08America/Chicago01380830 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ligyron


Women who can't get laid are called feminists. They are equally as pathetic and irritating. So women are not exempt from everything you speak of. I work with THEM. Oh...and I have been married happily for over 20 years. I can speak because I have had a lot of sex in my lifetime.


What? You're saying that the only women who are feminists - a movement that looks to aid women and to mend the hundreds of years they have suffered under western patriarchy - and want to create an equal society between women and men are women who are overweight?

Emma Watson is overweight or ugly?

Sophie Turner, the actress and fashion model who portrays the role of Sansa Starkk in the HBO game of thrones series has a hard time getting laid?

She's to get married to one of the Jonas Brothers. Do you think a guy who can get laid with thousands of women would marry an unattractive woman? But she is unattractive, right? Since she's a feminist and the only women who are a part of Feminism are physically repelling?

I'll never understand that. I've lived in all of the Continents on this Earth, and something I've always ecountered; doesn't matter when I was hitting nightclubs in Sweden or when I was walking through the pavements of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan after a hard day of archeology was that...

Almost all men on this earth are sexist and are very threatened by attractive women/women who make a living without needing a man to support them




. I work with THEM. Oh...and I have been married happily for over 20 years. I can speak because I have had a lot of sex in my lifetime.


A lot of sex?! oh boy! Having sex with the same woman for the last 20 years has made you an expert on how the vast majority of women are like! Amazing. Funny how my dad, who has been married for the past 40 years to a former Miss doesn't talk anything like the dudes on this thread are talking like about women


It's all about control and ego (and for some hate), as evidenced here from some replies.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician

originally posted by: Ligyron
a reply to: DBCowboy

It's true tho. Usually the men who are against a woman the most are the same men who can't get laid. I worked with a lot of middle-aged men when I was young and you wouldn't believe how sexist these guys were, it was scary.



Women who can't get laid are called feminists. They are equally as pathetic and irritating. So women are not exempt from everything you speak of. I work with THEM. Oh...and I have been married happily for over 20 years. I can speak because I have had a lot of sex in my lifetime.




I'm sure the women of the world are ecstatic that you speak for them...



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Another AOC hate thread!

Great stuff. Thanks guys! Just what we needed.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: FatherLukeDuke

Actually it's more of a criticism of the NYT and their use of an Op-Ed to use sexism to defend an ideological viewpoint.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: continuousThunder

Yeah, and their political cartoon was just someone's opinion too, but it found it's way through editorial and onto the published papers of the so-called paper of record.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: FatherLukeDuke

Actually it's more of a criticism of the NYT and their use of an Op-Ed to use sexism to defend an ideological viewpoint.


I am sure sexism factors into play in some way.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Ligyron

The rank and file are the ugly ones, from my experience. The leaders are varied but their motives are power, nothing more nothing less.

What is this "western patriarchy" you speak of? You mean the most equal society in the history of mankind? That's the inequality they're fighting? Not the inequality in asian nations? Or islamic nations? Or african nations? They chose the west to wage their war for "equality..."

See, feminism falls apart upon any critical look at it. The truth of this world is that women are weaker than men (In general, unless they're men, masquerading as women), physically and mentally. That's why every society puts women lower on the totem pole than men when it comes to running things. There have been a few cultures that attempted to switch this and they all suffered defeat at the hands of other cultures. Look no further than the current war on the left, which involves feminists and islam, supposedly on the same team. Who will win that fight? Islam. It's obvious.

Some call it sexism, but the truth is, it's reality. There's a reason women are drawn to men with power or stature, it's for protection from other men. Why do they need protection from other men if equality is the natural state and the western patriarchy is simply oppressing them? Well, the obvious answer is that equality of unequal things is not the natural state.

Let me try to break it down further. What are the things you need to survive on this planet? Food, shelter, and the strength to defend your food and shelter from those (people and animals) that try to take it from you. Who are the farmers? Who are the builders? Who are the defenders? Why?

But lets take it back to the "western patriarchy." How does it contrast with the non-western patriarchy? Is there a matriarchy throughout the rest of the world? LOL. Let's go through the most powerful nations and some of their history:
China - literally kills their girl babies for no reason other than their gender being worth less

Russia - influenced by the equality movements in the "western patriarchy" nations of europe, began reforming in the late 19th century

Saudi Arabia - LOL, I don't even need to list anything

Iran - Formerly a fairly liberal place (as far as feminism is concerned), today women can hardly leave their homes

Japan - After a humiliating defeat by the western patriarchy nations, they instituted equality measures. Mostly in name only. Their monarchy is still strictly male only.

But continue railing against that behemoth that keeps women oppressed, the western patriarchy. LMAO.



posted on Apr, 30 2019 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

The problem with socialism --

You hitch your wagon to everyone else. So why is that a problem?

Hey, wonderful, you know you're a hard worker, and you are fabulously productive. So long as everyone else in the collective is just like you -- a hard worker and fabulously productive -- , then it's all good. There will almost always be an abundance produced to share equitably across all members of the collective. Sure. Some members will have down years or fall on temporary hard times, but all in all, so long as everyone is always striving to work their hardest and be fabulously productive at all times. It should work well.

Now look around you. How many people do you see who are always hard workers, always fabulously productive? How many do you know who simply coast by on doing just enough, and while you're at it, be honest with yourself. How many days are you like that? Those are the people you're roped into your collective with, and it's them and their productivity that your hard earned gains are getting diluted by.

Suddenly plenty because a lot less.

Now look around again. How many people do you see who do next to nothing? And how many of them have a good excuse for that (truly unable through disability of some kind)? How many of them are simply lazy good-for-nothings? Now understand they're roped into your socialist collective pulling your gains down even more, taking shares of what you're produced while making nothing themselves.

This is why socialism doesn't and never will work as advertised.

There are always far more of the last two groups than the first one, and the people in the first one rapidly become cynical and descend into one of the last two groups, so the whole structure falls in on itself.




top topics



 
55
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join