A lesson in Feminism to Emily’s List and its followers.

I recently, today actually, got into a debate with followers on Emily’s list about a post. Here is the Post:

Thank you, Elizabeth Warren

Thank you, Amy Klobuchar

Thank you, Kamala Harris

Thank you, Kirsten Gillibrand

This race was better for having you in it.

Now I responded with what about Tulsi Gabbard and Marianne Williamson? I received numerous negative responses mainly aimed at Tulsi and I felt the need to write them here and with my response.

It started with impeachment and the “present vote.” Someone claiming she doesn’t have a right to be on Emily’s List I suppose because she voted “present” in impeachment. I don’t quite understand that logic since that has nothing to do with her being female, or a democrat, or running against Trump for the presidency since she thinks he should be replaced. But, Here is my first response:

ME:

Impeachment was a fraud to keep the country divided. It was never going to be successful and the only strategic person who really wanted to censure Trump is the person you smear. Had we followed Tulsi we would be have more control over Trump’s actions now. We are now again at risk to him winning and keeping as much power as he had before.

Female of Facebook response to me:

It was not a fraud. It was not successful, but when someone stands up and says “sure, I broke the law, but what are you going to do about it”, what do you suggest we do?

Me:

I suggest we punish him yes, but if we have the foresight as Tulsi did to know that impeachment won’t work because of the very strong Trump following Republican senate then we say what can we do that is effective? We can find a way to censure him and that relays to every president that follows, so they can not continue to break the law. Impeachment made him stronger and we gained nothing but a more divided country. And divided we fall. It’s discipline, plain and simple.

Someone else said that Trump caused the division not the Democrats so this was my response:

Trump did cause division, and impeaching him only made it worse. But it was a fraud to keep people divided. It’s a good tool for controlling masses: to keep them divided. The rhetoric on both sides is dividing us and you can say Trump started it and I’d agree but now all have joined it. Pointing fingers isn’t working and the Democrats knew it wouldn’t pass in Senate so why did they continue to push something they knew would be divisional? Why did they decide to impeach over something where you had to believe Trump or Biden? And why not make a clause that censured the president? Since Bush (or maybe before) presidents have pushed the limits in foreign involvements so why not rule something that lasts for all presidents going forward so we don’t continue this presidential lying and power? That’s what she was standing for. She never said he didn’t do it she just said impeachment won’t benefit the American people.

FEMALE RESPONSE:

I take your point — a censure MIGHT have passed, and may have been better strategy because clearly a substantial portion of the country really would let him get away with shooting someone on Park Avenue, or whatever he boasted. But I think that REFLECTS the divide, it did not create it.

I left it at that. Again, not sure how Tulsi’s vote on impeachment disqualified her from Emily’s list. But this next one could have disqualified were it true to still blame her now:

Someone said something about Tulsi Gabbard’s past that when she was young (21) she was against gay marriage and was pro-life. Here again is my response. Since most of these women were Warren supporters that is why I put in Warren.

Tulsi switched her views to pro-choice after she came back from serving her first time in the armed forces, and has voted pro-choice ever since. She has numerous times explained how she grew up in a conservative house and once she left and served in the military she saw things differently and has adamantly been pro LGBTQ and pro-choice since she entered congress. I am also someone who grew up in a conservative house and I admire her strength to change not only against her parents but also to do so publicly. I’ve had many fights with my parents and it’s not easy because I love them very much but they are pro-life. Even now it’s a subject we avoid to keep the peace. The quickness of the liberal women to assume all have a holy record of righteous from birth is something that creates a divide in this country. I am a strong pro-choice but I can even see the dividing affect of people who don’t forgive those publicly struggling to figure out their ethics at a young age. I never faulted Warren for switching from Republican to Democrat. She too was learning her ethics. I’ve always said if we can work together to make this country a better place for moms in general and safer against rape, then at least we can find some common ground.
It was my pro-life Mom in the first place who told me when I was younger she always votes for the women because she believes we need more female representation, so people aren’t so black and white as this fraudulent division makes it seem. One of the first lessons I learned in women’s studies was that feminist theory allowed for the grey area, the in-between.

This last paragraph I wrote was to Emily’s list but also to many feminist organizations. All who know me know how I have always called myself a feminist and I am a women’s studies scholar. But slowly I am removing myself from these organizations such as Emily’s List and Women’s March because of basically this:

ME: That is why it’s upsetting from one female here to see Emily’s list leave out Tulsi and Marianne. It feels like they are taking a more pro-establishment side and less of a feminist side. In the history of women, specifically indigenous and women of color, they have often been seen as outcasts by the establishment, which very often is led by white women.