 |
| image - Knights of Columbus |
YouTube, "thoughts" from one who is donating his brain to trauma studies focused upon football players who during playing careers take repeated hits to the helmet.
In that video - Birk rambles. He says negative demeaning things about women and their capabilities to be allowed to run their lifetime decision making without impositions and constraints he feels proper to be imposed upon them by others, by outsiders distant from the lives and families they would burden.
View, listen and decide.
Vanity Fair, quotes:
Birk told the audience: “It’s not over. Our culture loudly but also stealthily, promotes abortion. Telling women they should look a certain way, have careers, all these things.” Would Birk prefer women be sent back to the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant? Sure sounds like it!
Naturally, he went on: “Rape is obviously a horrible thing,” Birk said. “But an abortion is not going to heal the wounds of that. Two wrongs, it’s not going to make it right…. One of the arguments that I saw probably 20 times online today was about rape. And you know, obviously, they always want to go to the rape card.” Ah yes, the old “rape card,” that thing people “go to” when, after experiencing a horrific act of violence, they decide they don’t want to be forced to carry their attacker’s child to term and then coparent with them.
But wait, there’s more: “Rape is obviously a horrible thing,” Birk repeated, before deploying perhaps one of the most bizarre non sequiturs in history. “Shortly after we won the Super bowl—did I mention I won the Super Bowl?… They said, well, abortion’s legal. And it was kind of an easy out for a lot of people…. A lot of things have been legal before that we’ve changed, right. We always hear about, I’m sure you’ve heard—I know I’m talking to a bunch of pro-life warriors here—you know slavery used to be legal, right. Which is an interesting comparison to make, because really the way that the other side treats an unborn child is basically that the unborn child is the property of the mother. Other laws, you know, women used to not be able to vote in our country. Now we let ’em drive. I mean, I have three teenager daughters that drive, I don’t know if that’s a good law or not. Just kidding. Sorry, kidding, kidding to all the women out there. And don’t tell my wife I used that joke, she hates that joke.”
If considering voting for one respecting women, the quality of their lives and the full spectrum of human capacities they embody, each unique in her own life; would you vote Birk?
Should Birk be put a heartbeat away from running Minnesota's executive branch? Is he right for that job? Or too ideologically programmed; inflexible and wooden minded?
Scott Jensen is as biased and unpromising as Birk. A like-minded ticket. Do either of the two have a spouse with any noteworthy educational or career achievements?
If so, they surely have not been touting their own history of having an ability to balance, adjust and accommodate a marriage allowing two rewarding careers, one for each spouse.
They plainly campaign on -- Women should conform to rigid outside expectations and treasure their child-bearing role - e.g., Birk's Family First part of his campaign "about" page:
 |
| click the image to enlarge and read |
Yesterday, weeks after the opening video, Birk was unrepentant over his insult of women with careers and his worse demeaning of impregnated rape victims seeking abortion - not wanting to bear that child:
Minnesota Republican lieutenant governor candidate Matt Birk appeared to double down Wednesday on contentious comments he made about abortion and women on the day the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
Speaking at the National Right to Life conference in Georgia last month, Birk said American culture "loudly but also stealthily promotes abortion" by "telling women they should look a certain way, they should have careers." Birk said abortion rights activists who oppose bans that do not allow exceptions for rape or incest victims "always want to go to the rape card."
An abortion, Birk said, is "not going to heal the wounds of that."
"Two wrongs is not gonna … make it right," said Birk, a former Minnesota Vikings center who is the running mate of Scott Jensen, the GOP-endorsed candidate for governor.
Democratic Gov. Tim Walz's campaign released videos of Birk's June speech this week. At a press conference Tuesday, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan condemned Birk's remarks as "disrespectful towards survivors."
In a video statement posted to his Twitter account Wednesday, Birk said, "I've done over 200 pro-life events over the last 10 years and I've given the same speech pretty much every time."
Referring to his earlier comments about women's careers, Birk elaborated that he thinks women are told they either can have a career or be a mother, not both.
"Why don't we uplift both those things? I don't think we promote motherhood enough," Birk said. He accused Flanagan of misinterpreting and politicizing his position, adding, "Aren't you a mother? Isn't that more important than being lieutenant governor?"
As to Birk's second video "doubling-down" upon the first, one can suggest, "Two wrongs do not make a right."
Beyond that, it is a gross insincerity to know women who favor choice and dominion over their own bodies and control of their reproductive planning (free from outsider impositions) do in almost all instances manage on their own to balance career and family. Doing it perfectly well.
Not every woman wants eight kids. Eight little Birks. Some do, and nobody should tell them from outside not to. Live and let live. As more than baby-making second class citizens each woman should be allowed to set her own course. It is the fair thing to do. If Birk's family differs from other families, fine.
But Birk should accept diversity of outlooks - accepting life decisionmaking by free women, free from biases and limits he'd cannonize into civil law and impose, if he could. Birk should be open to diversity, and accepting of civil, secular law that does not intrude upon the balanced lives of actual, sentient humans.
Tolerance is a word Birk likely knows but fails to understand. Even with a finite earth with finite resources for its population, the Birks can go and have eight kids and nobody suggests a law should exist against them doing that. Unwise perhaps, but not illegal.
BOTTOM LINE: Is Birk too rigid and patriarchally biased, despite disclaimers, to be a fair public official? This is the opening image from the Knights of Columbus event at which Birk served as keynote speaker - where he spoke to the young about his outlooks:
.jpg){kind=tracking} |
| link |
If that is not a patriarchal venue and Gestalt, what is it? Suits and ties in rows, and other outfits. The boys, and the procession of guiding men imprinting the impressionable young into lasting rigid narrowmindedness.
___________UPDATE__________
Who is the "we" Birk means when Birk in his second video says, "Why don't we uplift both those things? I don't think we promote motherhood enough"? Does he mean: The Knights of Columbus? His church? Him and Jensen?
Does this Harvard graduate really think it is the job of Minnesota's government to "promote motherhood enough"? Is that what he means? It is a nanny state that would be doing that, instead of taxing and spending, which is what governments fundamentally do in addition to passing laws. Does he campaign on Minnesota passing a law to promote motherhood? Spending taxpayer money on a program promoting motherhood? Many in the Republican Party denigrate the concept of a nanny state. One which would spend to promote motherhood.
Then, what about promoting apple pie? Don't motherhood and apple pie go together? Give me a break.
SO - What does Birk mean? His party and its platform needs more focus on motherhood? Instead or in addition to what?
Who does this clown want to promote motherhood, and how? Have a mother's day every month? Get everybody lapping beads saying "Hail Mary?" He seems to speak before knowing what he is about to say,not thinking how to phrase it, to seek clarity.
And then, he poses the question as an either/or remotely, rhetorically, to Flannagan, who has her own happy home as Birk does. He adopts a kind of a childish schoolyard taunt as his way to make a point.
He accused Flanagan of misinterpreting and politicizing his position, adding, "Aren't you a mother? Isn't that more important than being lieutenant governor?"
He says society, presumably that is his meaning, denigrates motherhood in favor of "career." Who does that? Do you? Do you see the two things simplistically, as either/or? Does either party? Of course not.
Birk is using the straw man propaganda device. Ineptly.
Birk is simply blowing rhetorical smoke. Ineptly.
But what he does that is a danger which he admits, indeed trumpets, is his promoting misogyny. Belittling women who strive for a successful career and family life, together, neither excluding the other. His choice of nuclear family lifestyle is not everyone's choice, and the debate is, after all, about freedom and choice. Gender, patriarchy, and freedom and choice.
__________FURTHER UPDATE_________
https://bringmethenews.com adds:
These comments were made before instances seen in the wake of Roe vs. Wade being overturned of people – including in one notable case a 10-year-old child – struggling to access abortion care in their states following rape.
Jensen has confirmed during his campaign that he would back the overturning of Minnesota's abortion protections should he beat Walz in November, with Republicans also likely to seek banning or restricting abortion should they win control of Minnesota's Legislature.
Jensen has previously stated that he would not approve an exception for rape or incest in any abortion ban, unless the life of the pregnant party was at risk. He has since tried to backtrack on this, suggesting that mental health impact on the individual could also be considered as putting their life at risk.
On Tuesday, Walz and Flanagan held a press conference along with a number of sexual assault survivors, during which Flanagan said she is likely to be "a broken record on this for the next several months."
"But it is what is required of me as a mother and as someone who is responsible for protecting the health and safety of Minnesotans,” she added.
"These disturbing remarks are disrespectful toward survivors and the policy is even worse. The Jensen-Birk abortion ban would force survivors to live the lives their rapists chose for them rather than ones they wanted for themselves,” she added.
In response, the Jensen and Birk campaign accused Walz and Flanagan of being a "single-issue campaign" while ignoring other major issues facing Minnesotans.
Lines have been drawn. And, clearly, Walz/Flanagan are not ignoring a spectrum of issues. But the "look over there" response from Jensen/Birk suggests a preference to drop the abortion issue and its complications, as a tactical decision to distract attention away from their extreme patriarchal inflexibility. From their denial of the wisdom underlying separation of church and state.
________FURTHER UPDATE________
Minnesota Reformer adds:
Newly released video shows Birk speaking to a national anti-abortion group in Georgia on the day in June when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade: “Our culture loudly but also stealthily promotes abortion. They’re telling women they should look a certain way. They should have careers, all these things.”
(It’s unclear from the video clip what the relationship is between “the culture” promoting abortion and promoting women in the workforce. What is clear: If women stopped working, Minnesota’s economy would collapse. Just before the pandemic, women made up 51.5% of the Minnesota labor force.)
In the same speech, Birk, a Harvard graduate who played professional football, made remarks about rape and abortion that are also likely to draw the ire of many voters. Nearly two-thirds of Minnesota Republicans support the right to abortion for victims of rape and incest, according to a recent MinnPost poll that showed broad support for abortion rights.
With a clear majority of his Party's voters supporting abortion for rape or incest victims, Birk is swimming against the current. Moreover, with women numerous in the workforce, job and career issues (including sexist bias) are important and not to be belittled.
Birk is a multimillionaire from his own career, in the NFL, and already retired at a young age. He should show more respect for single mothers forced to work to feed and house their families. They face career and motherhood as mutual necessities, while far from being multimillionaires able to comfortably live off the portfolio.
Able to afford a mansion sized to his unusually large family, with plenty of room to move around and children able to avoid having to share bedrooms, Birk should consider that struggle to pay rent is attendant to a normal single mother's job or career, where even modest housing can eat a major share of take-home pay.
Wealth can breed complacency. Wealthy Dr. Jensen, clinic owner, and football millionaire Birk should not disrespect regular people and their daily and monthly struggle to make ends meet. These are heroic efforts of regular people keeping a family together. These people are a large segment of voters, and are not complacent loungers,. Often they are non-white sufferers of racism on top of having modest incomes. That non-white workers are today finding current opportunity to have a comfortable career is a fact for joy, not scorn or dismissive ridicule if the worker postpones having children for economic or other personal choices
Birk probably treasures his
having been able to have a successful pro career, and should share a
sympathy with women who want to have an equal kind of joy in their
accomplishments. They are first class citizens too.
These added factors in aggregate emphasize the narrowness of the Birk mind, showing a person of questionable fitness to seek to become a next-to-chief-executive for the people of an entire state. A broader open mind, Flanagan's, is a better fit. Flanagan gets it. Birk is too tied into his prejudice to see the forest through the trees.
__________FURTHER UPDATE________
While not an endorsement by Crabgrass, a JUXTAPOSITION.
MN CD7 Rep. Michelle Fischbach, is, like Birk, a Roman Church member, and while sharing his abortion stance (with her spouse being an activist that way) she and spouse have two children, while she has had a career, a successful one and one which many would say eclipsed her spouse's career.
BOTTOM LINE: Not all Roman Church adherents are as extremely biased against women having rewarding careers as Birk sees and says things. Birk is what statisticians would call, an outlier. Fitting with Scott Jensen outlier status that way too, at the top of an extremist ticket. Again, this is not to praise Fischbach but to define a sane or at least semi-sane GOP contrast to the grossly extremist Birk.
Fischbach bio details: here, here and here. ON THE RECORD. From being a dual career family, the Fischbachs could have afforded to have raised a family size they could support, and they choose a family size cordial to their aims and outlook -
 |
| https://www.fischbachforcongress.com/about/ |
Caveat - It is uncertain when the above photo was taken, i.e., those could be present grand children since both of Scott and Michelle's children are now adult.
From https://www.lrl.mn.gov/legdb/fulldetail?id=10180
FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS
Spouse: Scott
Children: Two children: Bryce and Brianna
Most recently, from: https://fischbach.house.gov/about
A native Minnesotan, Michelle received a B.A. in Political Science from St. Cloud State University and a J.D. from William Mitchell College of Law. She and her husband, Scott, have two adult children and six grandchildren, and live in the Paynesville area.
FURTHER: An interesting thing, but irrelevant to the JUXTAPOSITION of Birk and Rep. Fischbach. Dual careers spouses, with both spouses in the anti-abortion world advocacy structure, can lead to criticism within Republican circles, in unique situations.
FURTHER: MN Sen. Karin and spouse Phil Housley represent another dual-career Republican anti-abortion family, where motherhood and career balance out. Birk, again, out of step with the Housley capabilities.
The Fischbachs and Housleys might be viewed as outliers, given how political office holding is not a numerous phenomenon relative to Minnesota's overall population level, but they stand within their Party for a principal Birk belittles, dual career Republican families where motherhood is a factor, career a factor, both in balance with the other.