Home | About | Donate

The Least the Patriarchy Can Do

The Least the Patriarchy Can Do

This weekend's hundreds of thousands of defiant, exultant women marchers have gone home, but not for long. Change is in the air: From the all-female SAG award presenters and Davos Economic Forum leaders to a dizzying 21-point swing toward Democrats by white women to a massive spike in women running for political offices long held by good ole boys who too often didn't deserve them - proving again that yes, the resistance is definitely female.

I don’t like to be a “party-pooper,” but the real test of this candidate movement will be the issues, not gender. Single payer in California is really being held up for millions of women by politicians like Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi (not to mention, Barbara Boxer) - all of whom were elected in similar hoardes of women heading to the polls to vote in - women - and mostly on the basis of those women being pro-choice. Certainly it wasn’t in the numbers we are now seeing, but it was just as historic and significant.

(Yes, I know about Anthony Rendon - but they’re all bought and owned and he is really a lower henchman with Pelosi and Feinstein higher up, in this case.)

SO - now these same women are actually holding us back - and the reason is the money in the elections, including “Emily’s List.” In my opinion, one of the reasons Elizabeth Warren didn’t back Bernie during the primaries is because Emily’s List is involved with insurance/pharma. (But anyone feel free to correct me - courteously, that is (which excludes a couple of people who post here - only a couple, however) - if that’s not true. So is Planned Parenthood, these days, by the way. They used to support single payer, but ever since Hillary ran for president, they sold out - and now, represent the neo-liberal status quo.

WE NEED MEDICARE FOR ALL. If these women are running- and taking the dirty money and not fully on board with an assertive, outspoken stance on behalf of single payer at the national and state levels - FORGET ABOUT MY VOTE.

The “resistance” was coined by a real resistance and then co-opted by the same Clinton campaign bungling health care and a whole lot more. It’s no real “resistance.” A real resistance loudly and aggressively supports QUALITY health care for ALL women and NOW, not “someday.”


Indeed, just because they might be women doesn’t mean we necessarily want them in office either. I have a woman representing my district, Virginia Foxx, and she is about as conservative as you can get. The issues they stand for is far more important then their gender.


Single Payer is being held up in CA because it is a bad bill.

The ranks of the global economic elite remain male dominated - women make up just 21% of about 3,000 Davos participants and a paltry 6.4 % of Fortune 500 chief executives - but the future looks increasingly egalitarian: In the one group at Davos to achieve parity, half of those leaders under age 40 were women.

Did you seriously just use the words “elite,” “Davos,” and “egalitarian” in the same sentence? Is your definition of egalitarian really just more women participating in the global elite and more women gaining access to power?! Because I’ve always thought of egalitarianism as BREAKING power, not equal opportunity access to power! See, here is the problem with people like this author. They think the solution is “oh, we just need more of insert group in the Davos class.” Never once do they consider that, maybe, just maybe, the problem is not the diversity of the Davos class but the Davos class itself! Nothing will get better until we break the back of the Davos class!


I had an argument over the phone with one of the Emily’s List callers. I was trying to make the point of single payer being necessary to help all, including women, but she kept interrupting and talking over me. Finally, she started asking me if I would support the politicians they were trying to back and I flat out said that there is only one politician I supported because he is the only one who doesn’t take money from elites. Then it went something like this:

Caller: “Sir, may I ask who that politician is?”
Me: “I think you know who I’m talking about.”
Caller: “I think I know who it is too, but can you say his name?”
Me: “Yes, Bernie Sanders.”
Caller: Rueful chuckle
Me: “I support him because he’s the only one who doesn’t take money from elites. Even Liz Warren, who I would have much preferred for President over Hillary Clinton, takes money from these guys.”

The call pretty much ended there when she just said “good day to you sir” and hung up. The message I took away from this phone call was “we at Emily’s List only support neoliberal Davos supporting candidates and anyone else is to be treated as a woman hating misogynist.” Even if the person were to be another woman.

PS: I’m not too keen on Medicare-for-all. I much prefer a National Healthcare system somewhat like Canada, the UK, or even one of the Scandinavian countries!


Curious. What about it makes it a bad bill?

Wondering if Trump and his cronies will call for investigating/purging voters rolls bearing female names.

My preference is for the outright nationalization of healthcare. HR 676 is a decent start but tonight we must see to it that Bernie’s bill, S 1804 becomes a true single payer system exactly as is HR 676.

The Sanders Medicare for All Town Hall can be watched Tuesday, Jan. 23 at 7:00 pm.

Here is Sanders’ Facebook Event Page: https://www.facebook.com/events/923471961163492/

Here is the page for the Twitter Storm that will also start at 7:00 pm: http://healthoverprofit.org/sanders-town-hall-twitter-storm/

Afterwards, we are going to host a Facebook Live discussion on the Health Over Profit for Everyone page. Here is the event page for that: https://www.facebook.com/events/212121552690479/

And here is the HR 676 vs S 1804 Handout: http://healthoverprofit.org/hr-676-versus-s-1804-hand-out/ (I also attached it to this email to make it easier to print)

Please participate as you are able during and after the Sanders Town Hall to spread the word about National Improved Medicare for All (NIMA) and to push Sanders to improve his bill.


It is dishonest for one thing. Dysfunctional for another. These are not very good answers I know, But, the more one looks into to this the worse it gets. I love all the experts here, try calling a CA elected official, they don’t even know.

On another note, it is a great day for women. Cheers.

Funny, I looked into this topic to see what exactly the patriarchy was doing. I find it only in the quick explosion of mansplaining complaints about “identity politics.” Electing women may not be the only answer, but it’s certainly a place to start.

Mostly, btw, I want to look for candidates who want to be elected to DO something rather than to just be something.

1 Like

This is definitely worth considering. It seems to me this is a particularly American blind spot.

Just as thinking everyone having access to “medically necessary care” is going to be in their best interest. What is medical necessity anyway? Would not having to wait in an ER over 10 hours qualify?

1 Like

Thanks for the info. I can’t make it, I’m afraid, but I passed it on to a few friends.

Oh, you don’t have to tell me about Cal legislators. I live in California and work for the state government. Cal legislators like to pretend you don’t exist and when you have the audacity to remind them of your existence, you get some variation on former CDP Chair John Burton’s “Sit down and shut the fuck up!” The plain and simple fact is that Cal Dems are just as eliticist as the DNC and their pols.

To be fair, the Dems i spoke with were confused not dishonest. I can understand that,having worked in State and Federally regulated programs. It would be better to just admit there is a lot to understand. I know somethings from simply doing accreditation which is having to put every regulation into practice and not passing until it is all evaluated.

Dems are still slightly better than republicans that hide from voters.

Without consistent pressure from the citizens no congress person or senator will work for the public. Look at history, how many “leaders” truly worked for the public ?
There will no be parity until governments stop using the GDP as the only measurement of value when considering life in their country. Sure economics is important but the cost to our lives and environment must be the top criterion.
All that said, it is time for women to have an equal part in decisions.
PLUS Great signs ladies !

It’s being held up because Anthony Rendon has taken hundreds of thousands of dollars from insurance/pharma - and that’s what he’s paid to do. It’s an excellent bill. What is “bad” is the current system.

Great story about Emily’s List!

I’m fine with either system, myself (what American wouldn’t, right?) - when I say “medicare for all,” I do mean improved Medicare For All on the national level. For example, John Conyer’s bill. And with full dental and vision, including periodontal.

As Giovanna-Lepore mentions, S1804 is not as good. Hopefully this can be reevaluated and changed before implemented because they do not entirely absorb the Medicaid system and abolish the poverty requirement for the elderly. Margaret Flowers wrote an excellent and worthwhile critique.

Everyone must vote only for candidates who they believe are ready to implement immediate passage of the bill. I believe that we cannot afford to keep sending these corporate democrats or b.s.'ers in. In some ways, they do more harm than the GOP in terms of moving forward. Look at Pelosi and Feinstein in California. They must vote them out and send in real progressives ready to kick butt.

1 Like

Which insurance company do you work for?