Yesterday the all male GOP candidates for Governor of Colorado decided to have a debate geared toward addressing women’s issues. What could possibly go wrong? Here’s a hint: If you want women to think you see them as equals, you might want to avoid patronizing them by calling them “ornamental” and setting up your Q & A panel in the format of The Dating Game, complete with theme song. Clearly these men are in touch with what women want. In addition, you may want to actually talk about the issues where the GOP has alienated women. But as Rebecca Leber pointed out in her article on ThinkProgress.org,
…little of the gubernatorial debate’s substance had anything to do with issues where Republicans have alienated women. Republicans typically find themselves on thin ice when discussing things like birth control, abortion bans, sexual assault prevention, equal pay, and maternity leave. Instead, there were questions about which women they admire (excluding their wives and mothers), creating jobs, and even about oil drilling.
John Tomasic of the Colorado Independent said in his assessment of the debate that:
…the three candidates — former Congressman Bob Beauprez, former state Senate Minority Leader Mike Kopp and Secretary of State Scott Gessler — had no specific policy proposals regarding women’s issues and barely mentioned women…
In ColPols.com’s live blogging of the event:
This was billed as a debate centered around “Women and Colorado’s Future,” and it was about as insulting to women as you could get. It would have been difficult to make this look less genuine, though it would have helped — a lot — to not play the theme song of “The Dating Game” after every break. It’s hard to explain how uncomfortable it was in the room every time that song came up and the candidates tried to chuckle about it. What a disaster.
They also included some of the questions and answers:
Next question: How would you deal with Democrats accusing Republicans of waging a “war on women?”
Beauprez: Says 1/3rd of our kids can’t read at a third-grade level. Don’t know what that has to do with this question.
Gessler: “I think we have to take that head-on.” Says Barack Obama and Mark Udall clearly discriminate against women. Says the New York Times just fired a woman as editor in chief. Why those two items are connected is not clear.
Kopp: Brings up Ronald Reagan for the 10th time. If you wonder why Republicans have trouble attracting young voters, it doesn’t help that candidates like Kopp keep bringing up a President who left office in 1988 and has been dead for 10 years.
Or how about this doozie?
“Name a woman you admire, not including your wife or mother.” The fact that the questioner thought this qualifier was needed tells you everything you need to know about this “Women and Colorado’s Future” shtick.
Beauprez: A woman who worked in his bank.
Kopp: There is a woman in this audience (whose name he butchers). Kopp says she is an immigrant from Colombia. Says he calls her “The Colombian Hurricane.”
Gessler: “Helen Keller and Susan B. Anthony.” This could not get any more ridiculous. Asked to name a woman he admires, Gessler can’t even come up with someone who is actually alive today.
Enter this meme posted by a friend today on Facebook:
Do you see how maddening this is? If you are a woman and do not laugh these things off, or if you respond to it in a negative way at all, you will be labeled as an “overreacting female” and they will say, “See? This meme is truth.” Arrrrg. No, this meme is misogynistic hogwash. This time the meme in question was posted by a male friend of mine. However, I have seen very similar ones posted by WOMEN in my feed. DO NOT EVEN GET ME STARTED. These women are akin to the women who agreed to take part in a panel that treated them like they couldn’t relate to a panel discussion unless it was set up as A DATING SHOW. But wait, maybe I am just OVERREACTING to the clear efforts of these fine gentlemen to make politics more fun and understandable for us lady folks .
Perhaps all this overreacting explains the article I read yesterday. Clearly this is the reason women who earn 4.0 GPAs in high school earn roughly the same amount of money as men who earned 2.25 GPAs in high school.
Please tell me again how there is no pay gap or war on women and how exactly I am overreacting?
word of a woman 
Bravo. No, you are not over-reacting. The biggest mystery is why are so many women under-reacting?
Thanks Rob!
Great column. But it makes me wonder why so many male Republicans apparently think Sarah Palin is fine and dandy since she certainly seems to be the boss in her family. Maybe it’s because she does so much “huntin’ and fishin'” and killing.
There is far more to this equation than just GPA’s in high school… Looks like someone failed math in any school. If a man stays with a job for a long period of time he gets a raise. If you leave and come back you can’t start at the same pay rate as before. Women leave jobs all the time for personal reasons and for family reasons like their kids. If you study real world scenarios and what exactly is going on you will understand far more than looking at things myopically. Just like how you can’t tell what a picture is just by looking at one or a few pixels.
Hey, Scott, thanks for mansplaining that to us.
It isn’t “mansplaining” >_< Get off your high horse or soap box and treat everyone as an equal! I literally mean everyone!
It isn’t “mansplaining” >_< Get off your high horse or soap box and treat everyone as an equal! I literally mean everyone! Let me ask you this simple question, if someone starts any job at $8 an hour regardless of where they are or anything else, and are given a $1 raise every year. Is anyone regardless of gender that has been there 5 years going to make more than someone that just got a job?
When you enter into a discussion of equal pay with an insult and condescension , the way Scott did, it is EXACTLY mansplaining. When you then jump on someone for calling that out and pretend that the subject at hand is about how women can’t apparently stay in a job but still expect to be paid at the same rate as a man who has been at that same job for 5 years, you are still mansplaining. Let me explain something to you, since you seem to have issues with the actual topic of discussion: It does not matter whether or not women stay at that job for 5 years. They make less when they start than a man with the same qualifications does, and 5 years later, they’re STILL making less. That is the subject at hand – ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, women still make less than men with the same qualifications.
*sigh* If a woman said that would it still be “mansplaining?” If you want condescending then here it is, you should go to a psychologist and get on antipsychotic, an SSRI, and nasal spray of Oxytocin prescriptions do reduce dopamine, increase serotonin to treat OCD, and Oxytocin so you actually have empathy. $100 says you have no idea why I am saying that. To prove it, off the top of your head without looking it up tell me why I said that and what the definition is to describe your made up word of “mansplaining.”
That is about the statistics they cherry picked being wrong, and I already explained it! PREGNANCY! If you want to argue about more false data and cherry picking, look at global warming, it is actually getting colder! This year has had few tornadoes, when in 2009 my state had over 500 in one night! Why are the global temperatures “rising?” Because there are several temperature stations around the world that have been shut down, so they estimate their data from surrounding areas! In fact Antarctica has grown in size! There are 5 times as many Polar Bears now than several decades ago!
If you want to argue facts with me you had better stick your nose in a book and read for the next few decades, because no one has ever won an argument with me. Those that know more than me don’t win an argument with me, because we aren’t arguing! We are discussing ideas like all smart people do! >_< Go ahead and tell me what Helium 3 is. I am not going to argue anymore with someone with the conditions I know you have.
You really are an ass.
Thank you for the insult without any explanation or response to what I said. Also, how am I “mansplaining” if I am a woman?! If you really want to know about medical and psychological conditions, I have one that is not directly treatable because there is no Rx for it because the neuropeptide was first discovered in 1998! What caused it? A now banned chemotherapy prescription.
Are you serious? Do you honestly expect me to engage with you? You have demonstrated yourself to be woefully deficient in several qualities necessary to discourse, and any exchange with you is pointless. I will not address you again. Have a pleasant day.
Says the person that can’t argue, spell, or use proper grammar, and is easily offended and fights too much. Let me guess, you are single.
Being single has nothing to do with it. Let’s lay off the personal attacks and stick to the issues if you please.
You were the first to insult anyone personally, and every single time. Now you are using something I told you to do against me? Nice try, but no one has won an argument with me. Why? Because anyone that disagrees with me is smart. Smart people talk about ideas, normal people talk about events, and stupid people talk about other people.
Wait, I didn’t read who said that. Either way read what they said and stop thinking like a woman. This website should be named “wordofaHUMAN!” >_<
Oh for crying out loud. Stop “thinking like a woman”? Really? Who else am I supposed to think like? I am a woman. However I think, whatever I think, by definition must be “thinking like a woman”. If you would like to know why I titled my blog, “Word of a Woman” I explained it in a post that you can read here: https://wordofawoman.com/2011/12/29/hello-world/
I was the first to attack you personally? I went back and looked and I never did any such thing. If folks would like to remain in the thread let’s all just stick to the issues please. That is all I am asking.