Mona, my consolation watching MSNBC last night: This was an old guard feminist establishment leading the media shakedown. And the shrill PR is coming from a movement on its last legs — we just increasingly know too much, through documentation, through experience. The truth is out there.
"Shrill," really? That's a pretty loaded term when directed at women (even feminist ones).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseKLo, a "movement on its last legs"? If only. This is demonstrating the great power that PP has, not just politically, but out there in the culture. It's as important an institution as exists for the secular left.
Maybe this controversy does more to turn people in the middle off from movement feminism and the "women's health" lobby, but in the short term, this is a setback for the pro-life movement.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHow wrong you are, KJ. You may be right that the NOW is an outdated, outmoded organization (tho, I think referring to a woman with a strong of point of view as "shrill" is rightfully off the table)... But this outrage, this surge of anger at Komen did not come from any PR people, did not come from the media - no matter what you thought of the coverage - it very clearly came from individuals using social media to spread the word and put their dollars where their mouth was... The movement that led this charge is on anything but it's last legs—it looks to me like the modern re-incarnation of direct democracy (as seen just two weeks in the SOPA turn-around as well). And I like it. At the least the old guard Feminists and allies had the right slogan: Power to the People.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"shrill PR is coming from a movement on its last legs"
Wishful thinking or willful denial? Of course smack-talking an opponent who's just heartily beaten you in the game isn't new. And as for the "shrill PR" schtick, it certainly shows how tone deaf Komen and it's adversaries were in this whole melee. Komen's PR tactics were so shrill they could only be heard by hunting dogs.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse