Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ZRT2209

(1,357 posts)
Fri May 31, 2013, 07:04 PM May 2013

Dear Erick Erickson

You seem confused and mildly amused at the people who are offended by your recent comments.

In order to help you understand where you went off the rails:

Women don’t want to be told that they have an “expected” role and that they are harming their children if they fail to meet your stupid idea of what that expected role is. Drop the "expected role" shit from your little mind.

We do not want politicians who will perpetuate and enhance institutionalized systems of patriarchy (the obvious intended result of your comments). Especially not based on wrong-headed, ignorant, and outdated views about women and "women's roles" and stupid crap like that.

For someone who whines and moans so much about Obama's "nanny state," you, Erick, certainly seem very free with your arrogant pronouncements about the optimal arrangements of How a Family Should Look and Operate.

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
2. he's just a jerk looking for reaction and he's getting it.
Fri May 31, 2013, 07:19 PM
May 2013

He used to work for CNN. Part of Redstate.com or some vile right ugliness.

MSNBC and other 'news' is giving him coverage when they shouldn't. I hate this soap opera crap 'reporting'. Good grief as if there isn't anything else to talk about. MSNBC gives more cover for this guy and things like Limbaugh and the most ridiculous of the ridiculous baggers. Why do they do this? It's so cheap and stupid tabloid stuff.

I don't care what Eric thinks or says or does. Why do they care so much?

rurallib

(62,406 posts)
3. he is supposedly the right's answer to Markos (dailykos)
Fri May 31, 2013, 08:13 PM
May 2013

essentially where Markos is very intelligent etc. - Erickson is a pig.
like Superman and Bizzaro.

Cerridwen

(13,252 posts)
6. Markos is much better.
Fri May 31, 2013, 10:11 PM
May 2013

So over the weekend, certain segments of the community have erupted in anger over the TBS ad for their reality show, the Real Gilligan's Island. Apparently, having two women throw pies at each other, wrestle each other in a sexy, lesbianic manner, then having water splashed on their ample, fake bosoms is degrading to women. Or something like that.

Whatever. Feel free to be offended. I find such humorless, knee-jerk reactions, to be tedious at best, sanctimonious and arrogant at worst. I don't care for such sanctimony from Joe Lieberman, I don't care for it from anyone else. Some people find such content offensive. Some people find it arousing. Some people find it funny. To each his or her own.

<snip>

And I certainly won't let the sanctimonious women's studies set play that role on this site. Feel free to be offended. Feel free to claim that I'm somehow abandoning "progressive principles" by running the ad. It's a free country. Feel free to storm off in a huff. Other deserving bloggers could use the patronage.

<snip to after he had his ass handed to him>

Update: Hmm, after considering the early feedback, it seems most people didn't have a problem with the ad, but had a huge problem with my sweeping generalization of the "women's studies set".

<snip to more at link: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/06/06/119494/-Pie-fight-ad>



"Our sexists aren't as bad as your sexists!" Boooooo Yahhhhh!

Well, they use the same words; "humorless, kneejerk", but hey, they're on "our" side.


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Dear Erick Erickson