“I desire you would Remember the Ladies, and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the Husbands. Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the Ladies we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation”

Abigail Adams wrote that in 1776. Her words have never seemed more prescient than they do today.

Surely, this is a time where many ladies wish to foment a rebellion. So many of us, today, want to burn a system to the ground that could put a man like Brett Kavanaugh, a man accused of multiple accounts of sexual assault, on the Supreme Court. Especially when there is such a strong sense that justice has not been done. The FBI’s investigation was limited. Mark Judge, an alleged witness, was never subpoenaed and made to testify. Ford’s nuanced, precise testimony seemingly could not hold up to a man shouting about how much he enjoyed beer.

Some (male) people might be concerned that women will foment the rebellion. To them I can say with certainty that the rebellion is already underway.

Like Ford, women “are used to being collegial.” So the rebellion might look more polite and orderly than some people expected.

That does not mean we are not furious.

“Women are so angry,” Trump declared in a rather garbled press conference about Kavanaugh on Tuesday night: “Women are very angry.”

It may be the first time I’ve agreed with Trump. God, are we angry. If we had calendars, like Kavanaugh, for many of us, this week would just be represented by the word “fury” scrawled in all caps.

For years, women’s anger has been dismissed. We have been taught to subsume anything even resembling anger at all costs. Watch a woman speak in a tone that does not convey deference and watch her be called "strident". Watch a woman speaking firmly be accused of "yelling". If she is not smiling, she seems "angry". If woman are openly upset, they will be called "hysterical," a term which implies that the root of their anger is a form of madness.

Mercifully, for the first time in a long time-perhaps the first time ever-women’s rage is being seen as valuable and useful. Soraya Chemaly’s book Rage Becomes Her and Rebecca Traister’s Good and Mad are both recent books delving into the way women’s fury have created a more just world. In Chemaly’s book, she remarks that, “Anger has a bad rap, but it’s actually one of the most hopeful and forward thinking of our emotions. It begets transformation, manifesting our passion and keeping us invested in the world. It is a rational and emotional response trespass, violation and moral disorder.”

And women’s anger does create change, even here, even in this age. In an excerpt from Good and Mad published in New York Magazine, Traister cites not only my personal favorite angry American woman, Abigail Adams, but the many times American women’s anger has been the impetus for social movements. Those range from the women at textile mills in Lowell Massachusetts staging walk-outs in the 19th century, in one of the first iterations of a labor movement, to Emmett Till’s mother cracking open her son’s coffin in order to reveal the damage done to him to the world. Doing so, in Traister’s words, “lit a match under a burgeoning social struggle that would help to partially remake the United States and lessen (though hardly obliterate) the legal and political obstacles to racial parity.”

We’ve been angry before. We’ve channeled our anger to remake society, before. We’re good at this.

“Why aren’t women out in the streets then?” Some people are wondering.

Those people are remarkably unobservant. We are. Seventy percent of the membership and almost all of the leadership of local resistance groups are women. We are outside The Hart Senate Office Building chanting “We Care” and “Abolish I.C.E.” We are organizing walk-outs to protest Kavanaugh. We have been out there, in the streets, numbering in the millions since Trump was elected.

And yet, each year, when we march, Republican men wonder why women are even marching.


That is easy to answer this week. When we march, we are marching against your blithe dismissal of the fact that women’s lives have value. We are marching to inform you that we are people, not objects for male pleasure. We are marching to show that our lived experiences of pain will no longer be something you can dismiss with a laugh and a shrug.

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, when asked what she remembered most about her assault, replied, “Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the uproarious laughter between the two.”

It’s telling how little Republicans have evolved in 50 years that, during this trial, as a woman described her sexual assault, republicans like Kurt Schlichter were tweeting, “I’m laughing.”

Women are not.

Women aren’t going to keep politely laughing along with you. Even Republican women, who will tie themselves into knots trying to justify bad male behavior, have seemingly reached the end of their rope.

They are fleeing the Republican party in droves. In 2002, 36 percent of young women identified as Republican. In 2018, 23 percent do. Steve Bannon (has said “The Republican college-educated woman is done. They’re gone. They were going anyway at some point in time. Trump triggers them.” I would suggest that it’s the entire GOP’s dismissal and mockery of issues like the #MeToo movement that “triggers” them, but okay. This, all by itself should be a message to men on the Right to stop laughing, and start taking women seriously.

But they’re refusing to. If anything, they’re leaning in to misogyny.

In Kavanaugh’s confirmation they have revealed their true colors completely.

The GOP has made it clear that confirming a man accused by multiple people of sexual assault, who responded to accusations by bemoaning what a hard time he’d had as a result, was not only tolerable to them, it was desirable. Many onlookers saw Kavanaugh presenting as angry and entitled - he alternated between crying, yelling, lashing out at Senator Amy Klobuchar and expressing his fondness for beer.

Christina Cauterucci at Slatewrote an article called, “Brett Kavanaugh’s Testimony Made It Easier Than Ever to Picture Him as an Aggressive, Entitled Teen.” New York Times writer Mara Gay said on MSNBC “You hear a lot of entitlement coming from him.” Alexandra Petri of the Washington Post quipped on Twitter, “is this how people get to talk if they don't spend their entire lives being scrutinized for tone?”
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/kavanaugh-confirmed-time-burn-down-201700261.html

If Kavanaugh was such a "sexual abuser", he would have done something, I mean something in the last 37 years. If he had actually done something 37 years ago, you just don't wake up and 'declare' you're not going to be a 'sexual predator' anymore. He has interacted with women over the last 37 years without any accusation whatsoever. It says a lot about this wonderful country is that we don't convict and you are completely innocent until proven guilty with some kind of corroboration, proof, evidence, something. This whole thing with the Kavanaugh hearing was a disgrace. The DIMMS show just how low they could go. Let's face it. The Dimms weren't going to approve anybody no matter who the Pres. picked. They said that from the outset. It received the highest marks from the American Bar Assoc. What Sen. Graham said during the hearing was spot on.; The dims looked like complete idiots. Blumenthal declaring Kavanaugh "dangerous".

She was lying or heavily coached. Did she ever refer to Kavanaugh as anything but "Brett?" I'm surprised she didn't say that Brett put Brett's hand over her mouth. She had been coached to say "Brett" and never "he" of "his." She was coached to sound small and fragile. Her testimony was dissected by the prosecutor and her report should not be ignored. She couldn't even remember if she gave her shrink's notes to CNN or not just a few weeks previously. Her total lack of memory, probably the result of more coaching to avoid perjury, was astounding. She had nothing corroborated and her democrat allies continued to apparently hold back potential "witness" until one 11th hour after another.

The more I think on her words and how she said them, the more I am convinced she is flat out lying and had nothing of the sort actually happen to her outside of her imagination or dreams. The more I think about her words, the more I see her as a stalker, formerly jilted or at some point shunned by a young Kavanaugh who probably hardly even noticed her in any of their few encounters they might have had. She apparently loved him from a distance but could never break into his circle of friends but by attending partied where she hoped to find him and possibly corner him, hoping he might cast an eye her way.

At any rate, go ahead girls, bring the mob to full power, backed by the democrats. November is probably ours but a little insurance would be nice!!!!

“I desire you would Remember the Ladies, and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the Husbands. Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the Ladies we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation”

Abigail Adams wrote that in 1776. Her words have never seemed more prescient than they do today.

Surely, this is a time where many ladies wish to foment a rebellion. So many of us, today, want to burn a system to the ground that could put a man like Brett Kavanaugh, a man accused of multiple accounts of sexual assault, on the Supreme Court. Especially when there is such a strong sense that justice has not been done. The FBI’s investigation was limited. Mark Judge, an alleged witness, was never subpoenaed and made to testify. Ford’s nuanced, precise testimony seemingly could not hold up to a man shouting about how much he enjoyed beer.

Some (male) people might be concerned that women will foment the rebellion. To them I can say with certainty that the rebellion is already underway.

Like Ford, women “are used to being collegial.” So the rebellion might look more polite and orderly than some people expected.

That does not mean we are not furious.

“Women are so angry,” Trump declared in a rather garbled press conference about Kavanaugh on Tuesday night: “Women are very angry.”

It may be the first time I’ve agreed with Trump. God, are we angry. If we had calendars, like Kavanaugh, for many of us, this week would just be represented by the word “fury” scrawled in all caps.

For years, women’s anger has been dismissed. We have been taught to subsume anything even resembling anger at all costs. Watch a woman speak in a tone that does not convey deference and watch her be called "strident". Watch a woman speaking firmly be accused of "yelling". If she is not smiling, she seems "angry". If woman are openly upset, they will be called "hysterical," a term which implies that the root of their anger is a form of madness.

Mercifully, for the first time in a long time-perhaps the first time ever-women’s rage is being seen as valuable and useful. Soraya Chemaly’s book Rage Becomes Her and Rebecca Traister’s Good and Mad are both recent books delving into the way women’s fury have created a more just world. In Chemaly’s book, she remarks that, “Anger has a bad rap, but it’s actually one of the most hopeful and forward thinking of our emotions. It begets transformation, manifesting our passion and keeping us invested in the world. It is a rational and emotional response trespass, violation and moral disorder.”

And women’s anger does create change, even here, even in this age. In an excerpt from Good and Mad published in New York Magazine, Traister cites not only my personal favorite angry American woman, Abigail Adams, but the many times American women’s anger has been the impetus for social movements. Those range from the women at textile mills in Lowell Massachusetts staging walk-outs in the 19th century, in one of the first iterations of a labor movement, to Emmett Till’s mother cracking open her son’s coffin in order to reveal the damage done to him to the world. Doing so, in Traister’s words, “lit a match under a burgeoning social struggle that would help to partially remake the United States and lessen (though hardly obliterate) the legal and political obstacles to racial parity.”

We’ve been angry before. We’ve channeled our anger to remake society, before. We’re good at this.

“Why aren’t women out in the streets then?” Some people are wondering.

Those people are remarkably unobservant. We are. Seventy percent of the membership and almost all of the leadership of local resistance groups are women. We are outside The Hart Senate Office Building chanting “We Care” and “Abolish I.C.E.” We are organizing walk-outs to protest Kavanaugh. We have been out there, in the streets, numbering in the millions since Trump was elected.

And yet, each year, when we march, Republican men wonder why women are even marching.


That is easy to answer this week. When we march, we are marching against your blithe dismissal of the fact that women’s lives have value. We are marching to inform you that we are people, not objects for male pleasure. We are marching to show that our lived experiences of pain will no longer be something you can dismiss with a laugh and a shrug.

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, when asked what she remembered most about her assault, replied, “Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the uproarious laughter between the two.”

It’s telling how little Republicans have evolved in 50 years that, during this trial, as a woman described her sexual assault, republicans like Kurt Schlichter were tweeting, “I’m laughing.”

Women are not.

Women aren’t going to keep politely laughing along with you. Even Republican women, who will tie themselves into knots trying to justify bad male behavior, have seemingly reached the end of their rope.

They are fleeing the Republican party in droves. In 2002, 36 percent of young women identified as Republican. In 2018, 23 percent do. Steve Bannon (has said “The Republican college-educated woman is done. They’re gone. They were going anyway at some point in time. Trump triggers them.” I would suggest that it’s the entire GOP’s dismissal and mockery of issues like the #MeToo movement that “triggers” them, but okay. This, all by itself should be a message to men on the Right to stop laughing, and start taking women seriously.

But they’re refusing to. If anything, they’re leaning in to misogyny.

In Kavanaugh’s confirmation they have revealed their true colors completely.

The GOP has made it clear that confirming a man accused by multiple people of sexual assault, who responded to accusations by bemoaning what a hard time he’d had as a result, was not only tolerable to them, it was desirable. Many onlookers saw Kavanaugh presenting as angry and entitled - he alternated between crying, yelling, lashing out at Senator Amy Klobuchar and expressing his fondness for beer.

Christina Cauterucci at Slatewrote an article called, “Brett Kavanaugh’s Testimony Made It Easier Than Ever to Picture Him as an Aggressive, Entitled Teen.” New York Times writer Mara Gay said on MSNBC “You hear a lot of entitlement coming from him.” Alexandra Petri of the Washington Post quipped on Twitter, “is this how people get to talk if they don't spend their entire lives being scrutinized for tone?”
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/kavanaugh-confirmed-time-burn-down-201700261.html