The GOP War on Women has had many of us confused, irritated, and a little bit scared. Who knew that an entire party could run on a platform that includes not only a few nips and tucks to Roe v Wade but a blatant disregard for women’s health?

Well, it’s never sounded like a very good strategy, and the Republican Presidential candidates have lost women’s support as a result. A Gallup poll published on Sunday shows that a substantial percentage of women voters under 50 have swayed their support away from Romney to Obama in the past month. But is this switch, which is based on women running away from oppressive policies and not necessarily towards beneficial ones, obscuring the need for real change?

The Obama campaign has taken the GOP’s failure with women as an opportunity to stress the President’s support of women’s rights. Last week, the campaign released a Gloria Steinem ad encouraging women to stick by the president during these turbulent times for feminism, and Obama spoke out in support of Planned Parenthood in another video, saying that “women are not an interest group. They’re mothers and daughters and sisters and wives — they’re half of this country. And they’re perfectly capable of making their own choices about their health.”

This is what it’s come to: simply reminding the country that women have the ability to make their own health decisions is enough to steal voters away from another party and keep those of us who already intended to vote for Barack Obama appeased.

While this strategy should help bring Obama another term in office, which is great, where is the room for actual progress? Not to suggest that Barack Obama hasn’t done anything for women, but if his duty is now to make sure that our existing rights aren’t eroded, and in essence to merely preserve the status quo, are we being shortchanged?

What do you think?

Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • Pampam

    This is the most stupid post that I’ve ever seen on this blog. WTF!

  • E.M.S.

    I’m not seeing how we’d be short changed. It’s simple: the Republicans have demonstrated they don’t care about women, so even if female voters don’t really support Obama, they’ll pick the lesser of two evils to maintain their rights. And Obama is smart to play on that (though he also does genuinely care and is not just doing so for votes).

    As for progress, it’ll be how it is now if he serves a second term. He’ll try to make things happen, and the Republicans will shoot it down just because they can. We’re better off keeping him around another four years.

  • Greg


    Since this Obama doesn’t advocate for black men/men/boys but instead only for women (no longer a minority in this country as they outnumber men) I can’t support his party. They advocate for women, Gays, Illegal Immigrants but NEVER for men. Instead they put down men on Father’s Day.

    Thusly I must vote for his enemies as he has enthusiastically decided to embrace a War on Men. Combined with the fact that he ignored Alpha Phi Alpha when they along with other signatories signed a letter requesting an Office for Boys to Men to coincide with the Office for Women and Girls and he turned them down. Obama is an incredible Misandrists and he and Democrats will lose many minority men to the Republican Party.

    Wonder what hate for black men he has planned for this Father’s Day?!?

  • Belltow3r

    Are you guys serious?

    Just because Obama supports women doesn’t mean he hates men. Women are seriously repressed in this country; we’re a first-world nation with third-world gender equality. The Republicans believe that women don’t deserve to make their own decisions. The blogger’s point is not that women are superior to men, but that we need room to make change in our society for the better. The idea that all feminists hate men is absurd; yes, some of them let their anger get the best of them, but definitely not all and definitely not enough to call them haters.

  • HopeChest


    If anything, it should be the same as last year. I found nothing wrong with his speech, and it needed to be said by a man for those men in question.

    If anybody was butt-hurt about it, it must mean they’re the ones he’s talking about.