xx chromosome

I'm a girl. Well, OK, I'm a woman. And I am conservative. As a conservative, I really don't care what someone's sex is when he or she is making an argument. I care about the power of persuasion, the logic, the rhetoric. In short, I care about the truth of the argument or the lack thereof. Blue Yeti posted earlier this week and said that our Ricochet Overlords want to encourage women's voices here at Ricochet. I am not alone in thinking that this is a bad idea (elegantly phrased, Douglas!).

I certainly don't believe we should discourage women's voices here at Ricochet, but we should worry more about the content of folks' posts than their sex. Doing otherwise seems, well, kind of liberal and lefty, no?

On March 23, I was asked to speak at a Stand Up Rally for Religious Freedom. I was proud and honored to do so, and I think I did a kick-butt job (thanks again for all the kind words and support!), but it kind of bummed me out when they told me they asked me specifically because they were hunting about for some females to put up on stage to combat the anti-woman narrative of the lefties and found me. I'm all for combating lefty narratives, but can't we do so just by showcasing our best speakers and best arguments and leave the quota thing to them?

I believe that my point of view is valid if it is valid, not valid because I have two X or XY chromosomes. 

(3 minutes to the end of Palm Sunday, and it's Lenten fast for me again until Easter! Have a blessed Holy Week, all!)

Comments:


tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

The strength of an argument has no direct relationship to whether it is created by an XX or an XY, though I believe a rational argument can be made that XXs tend to be more practical (which seems like another word for rational).  Some of our strongest conservative voices come from XXs (e.g., Ingraham, Malkin, Charen, Coulter, Lopez), and I'm all for them being heard (because they make strong conservative arguments).

I'm in favor of both genders of conservatives having their voices heard, and if we'll just stay out of the way, it will happen.  Planned economies are bad--so are planned gender balancing acts.

Edited on April 2, 2012 at 10:58pm
Tom Lindholtz
Joined
May '10
Tom Lindholtz

Nice job....for a girl.  ;-)

Seriously, you are absolutely right....if we are dealing with an audience of rational, thinking people.  The phrase "President Obama" is prima facia evidence that we are dealing with people who are largely irrational and non-thinking.  Thus, we are forced to meet them on their level; to set aside sweet reason and present attractive images with whom they identify and who can present ideas with which they, therefore, identify.

SMatthewStolte
Joined
Feb '11
SMatthewStolte

I think it’s nice to have women around, and I’d be glad if more were encouraged to join the conversation.

But part of the reason I think this would be nice is that Ricochet is not a manufactory for political arguments. It is a place for conversation. And conversations among men are different from conversations in mixed company and both of these are different from conversations among only women. 

Paul Snively
Joined
Oct '10
Paul Snively

I regretfully must add my support to the position that we do, in fact, need conservative women to be front-and-center on some topics, if for no other reason than that we can't afford to let the other side win by default. As an adoptee, a good example for me is the abortion issue: the lefty claim that only women can legitimately speak on the issue because it only affects them just makes me roll my eyes, to put it mildly. But precisely because some people with extremely poor critical thinking skills believe that, it's important for pro-life women to make their case.

It shouldn't be that way; I wish it weren't that way. But what should be and what I want to be are wholly irrelevant.

Edited on April 2, 2012 at 11:07pm
Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller
tabula rasa:  Some of our strongest conservative voices come from XXs (e.g., Ingraham, Malkin, Charen, Coulter, Lopez), and I'm all for them being heard (because they make strong conservative arguments).

Think about that. How many people who are even slightly liberal will stop to genuinely listen to Ingraham, Malkin, Palin or any other prominent conservative woman? How many pay any extra attention to Clarence Thomas, Allen West, or even Bill Cosby for being black?

I'm not against adapting the presentation of one's arguments to specific audiences. But style is more significant than appearance.

Trying to relate to one's audience helps when that audience already agrees with you to some extent. It's good for preaching (inspiring). A wary audience is made only more distrustful by claims of solidarity.

Jordan Wiegand
Joined
Feb '12
Jordan W

I must disagree to some extent.  Gender matters, but only in the realm in which it matters.

There is such a thing as credibility on an issue.  This credibility properly comes from direct experience or expertise.  As the gender of a person significantly impacts the experiences of a person, it may fittingly impact the credibility of a person to speak to a certain set of issues.

This is not to say that gender ought to have determining play on the credibility of a speaker, but it seems fitting to have someone with an appropriate set of experiences speaking on an issue, and these experiences are colored by gender.

This thinking does not apply to logical arguments, which are utterly removed from the criteria over which credibility may have influence.  So when making arguments which are not utterly rational, i.e. making claims which are colored by our experiences, it is appropriate to let gender exist as a category which lends weight to a position.

When a man wants a "woman's perspective" on a matter, he is asking based strictly on gender but this is appropriate because we all know how this gender thing works intuitively—we're different.

Duane Oyen
Joined
May '10
Duane Oyen

Michael Horn

Duane Oyen: The world is made up of two kinds of people: males, and females.  Gotta sell to both. · 1 minute ago

Woah, woah!

Easy now, Duane. What about our transgender members? Or our members who are trapped in a man's/woman's body? To say nothing of those who don't even recognize gender as a concept.

I think I speak for all of Ricochet, when I say that we should look past such antiquated social constructs, like gender.

;) · 1 hour ago

I'm stricken with remorse......


Joined
Mar '12
Madcap

Diane Ellis, Ed.

 

My thoughts exactly. 

I'm four years out of college and I still try to maintain friendships with women from my college sorority.  Most of them are stuck in an echo chamber of liberalism in their jobs and social circles, and I feel responsible for voicing an alternate perspective.  To the extent that they listen to me, they do so mostly because I'm a woman. · 7 hours ago

Have you told them you're a professional conservative yet? =P We're the same age, and I've mostly given up on college classmates. I only seem to engage with them when my husband eggs me into arguing with them on facebook. I don't think marrying young helped either; it drove a very big wedge.

I find that being a woman only helps so much. I'm insufficiently minority in question, or I'm insufficiently educated on this issue (I find this hard to believe; I read more about politics than anyone I know), or I lack empathy. Etc.

Roberto
Joined
Mar '11
Roberto

Aaron Miller

tabula rasa:  Some of our strongest conservative voices come from XXs (e.g., Ingraham, Malkin, Charen, Coulter, Lopez), and I'm all for them being heard (because they make strong conservative arguments).

Think about that. How many people who are even slightly liberal will stop to genuinely listen to Ingraham, Malkin, Palin or any other prominent conservative woman? How many pay any extra attention to Clarence Thomas, Allen West, or even Bill Cosby for being black? · 2 hours ago

This point cannot be emphasized enough. For everyone in the conversation discussing the merits or "tactics" of using particular spokespersons to appeal to certain demographics you leave me flabbergasted, did none of you witness the reaction to Sarah Palin? Were you watching a different 2008 election than I was?

EThompson
Joined
Dec '11
EThompson

Duane Oyen

... I am a capitalist pig free-markets person.

The world is made up of two kinds of people: males, and females.  Gotta sell to both.

Amen... Ditto... Right On !

Southern Pessimist
Joined
May '11
Southern Pessimist

There is nothing wrong with wanting to encourage women's voices here or anywhere else but my experience is that women's voices are quite strong enough already. I don't say that just to be snarky. I think the most persuasive voices here have been feminine.

tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

Aaron Miller

tabula rasa:  Some of our strongest conservative voices come from XXs (e.g., Ingraham, Malkin, Charen, Coulter, Lopez), and I'm all for them being heard (because they make strong conservative arguments).

Think about that. How many people who are even slightly liberal will stop to genuinely listen to Ingraham, Malkin, Palin or any other prominent conservative woman? How many pay any extra attention to Clarence Thomas, Allen West, or even Bill Cosby for being black?

I'm not against adapting the presentation of one's arguments to specific audiences. But style is more significant than appearance.

Trying to relate to one's audience helps when that audience already agrees with you to some extent. It's good for preaching (inspiring). A wary audience is made only more distrustful by claims of solidarity.

Aaron:  What's your point?  Someone who is slightly liberal won't listen to Will, Krauthammer, or Steyn either.  Or are you suggesting that liberals will be convinced more easily by a man?

My only point was that we need the voices of both men and women and, using some examples, suggested that we have strong women voices on the conservative side.

Color me perplexed.

show She's comment (#33)
She
Joined
Dec '10
She

OK, I finally figured out where I am on this.

First of all, I completely agree with you, Mama Toad.  And congratulations on talking about 'sex' (physical differences) rather than 'gender' (societal/psychological differences) in your post.

I've worked my way from "Here they go again, inventing a problem that no one knew existed and then inventing a cure for it," (sort of like "whoever knew there was a national crisis over the cost and availability of birth control pills and condoms?") to here:

How will you know, Blue Yeti, or Ricochet Overlords, or whoever you are, at what point you have the 'correct' amount of female commentary prominently displayed on your site when so many Ricochet members choose pseudonyms or avatars that disguise their sex?

Won't that make compliance rather difficult to monitor?

PS--Full disclosure: "She" is a girl.  Maybe not "A Lady," (pace Jane Austen), but definitely female.

Southern Pessimist
Joined
May '11
Southern Pessimist

I'll say it another way to be less snarky. If I had to bet on who would win an argument between a yeti, a toad and a rattlesnake, I would bet on the reptiles.

Actually that sounds more snarky but I hope you get my point.

James Of England
Joined
Apr '11
James Of England

We shouldn't have identity politics, but while we do we shouldn't concede the field. Much like the left feels about super-PACs. I've spoken to a lot of people who felt that as a woman, they couldn't vote Republican. Michael Steele used to talk movingly about the plague of identity politics (albeit often as an argument for using them ourselves).

Plus, you're pretty eloquent, at least in writing, and passionate without ceasing to be a team player. It's not like they were actually choosing a Steele equivalent. Reagan used to tell a lot of jokes. We shouldn't have people being persuaded by dumb one liners, either, but if that's what it takes, then we shouldn't value procedural ideological purity over religious liberty.

I like going through OMB documents, and sometimes find them very persuasive. In an ideal world, everyone would make their choices based on swatting up with Mankiw led tutorials on macro-economics, but while people make decisions for stupid reasons, when those decisions matter, we should work to rebut the stupid reason rather than simply dismissing it as beneath us.

10 cents
Joined
Dec '11
10 cents

My key word in life is balance. If things are out of balance something is wrong. I wish what Mama Toad wrote was true. The idea that mostly men can get things right appeals to my pride.  Unfortunately, I am a man thus limited in insight. What I cannot understand about feminism is the idea that masculine input is not needed. A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle is an idiot statement. Simple biology teaches us that a fish needs a father or there are no fish. Some of the wisest people I know have no Y chromosome. If some of those would contribute I would be better off since they could balance my input.

Karen
Joined
May '10
Karen

I disagree with the assumption  that the "Ricochet Overlords" are looking for only conservative women contributors. Ricochet is a right-of-center website, at least it was when I first joined. I've noticed the pull to the right, and it bothers me that now Ricochet member = conservative. Ricochet is a business, and they need a broader appeal than to just  hard-core conservatives, which are overwhelmingly male. And women contributors are under-represented.

From my observations, a lot of women don't get engaged in politics for a variety of reasons, mostly because they don't enjoy the leisure to do so. They vote Democrat because they're seen as the nicer party. Many women's perceptions about politics are filtered through the media. And if Obama wins it will be because of the  women's vote. These things are unfortunate, but true.

The purpose of Ricochet isn't just to articulate the conservative point of view, it's also about persuading more people and swelling our ranks. We need to persuade more women. Pontificating only goes so far. I want Ricochet to be successful, but I want to deprive Obama of a second term even more. 

Edited on April 3, 2012 at 6:13am
Charlotte
Joined
Apr '11
Charlotte

Southern Pessimist: I'll say it another way to be less snarky. If I had to bet on who would win an argument between a yeti, a toad and a rattlesnake, I would bet on the reptiles.

Actually that sounds more snarky but I hope you get my point.

Toads are amphibians.

How's that for snark?

Andrea Ryan
Joined
May '10
Andrea Ryan

I seem to remember Lucy Pevensie wandering around in here last year asking where all the women were.  My first thought was that Ricochet was overflowing with women at that point compared to when I first joined two years ago.  And, now I see even more women.  That's great.  Normally, I would agree with you on this, Mama Toad, but this time I'm just not there.  I'm not advocating a campaign as cold as securing a certain number of females, but I don't see anything wrong with encouraging more females to get involved in the Conservative conversation.  I guess I don't see the big deal.  I do, however, see a big deal when we take the high ground in a battle against the Left.  As Andrew Breitbart said, it's war.  And that means we need to put a different filter on everything.  Republicans and Conservatives do have a reputation for being a bunch of stodgy, old men.

Andrea Ryan
Joined
May '10
Andrea Ryan

Charlotte

Southern Pessimist: I'll say it another way to be less snarky. If I had to bet on who would win an argument between a yeti, a toad and a rattlesnake, I would bet on the reptiles.

Actually that sounds more snarky but I hope you get my point.

Toads are amphibians.

How's thatfor snark? · 12 minutes ago

Oh, good catch. :-)


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In