Oh look, Hollywood gave birth to another beautiful, bouncing, fresh faced victim card.

Jennifer Lawrence, with the help of her friend Lena Dunham (aka, the woman who admitted to molesting her sister), tackled the horrific issue of sex slavery genital mutilation in the Middle East child brides honor killings income inequality in a profanity riddled essay. Because giving your thoughts with the vocabulary of a teenage girl when her mom’s not around makes it totally legit. Now, concerning leftist Hollywood, she’s right; Hollywood has been known to pay their men more, sometimes for good reason, other times because they can. Now maybe that’s because liberal men have significantly less respect for women, or maybe it’s because the whining ovaries of Rodeo Drive don’t have the proverbial cojones of women like Margaret Thatcher? I’m guessing it’s a mixture of both.

“Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren’t.”

Am-I-right, Lena?

Now, thankfully, this wage gap doesn’t trickle down from their ivory towers onto the rest of the country. The study purported by all of the Democrats and Hollywood elitists compared all salaries in the country, not individual job choice. Men and Women tend to migrate towards different areas of expertise, and have different ambitions. The data used for the propaganda that leads to ridiculous bills – like the Paycheck Fairness Act – does not take that huge detail into account. SO, while men may choose to become brain surgeons more often than women, and women may choose to specialize in pediatrics more often than men, they get lumped into the same category. Now, clearly a brain surgeon would be paid more due to the higher level of skill set necessary when dealing with the brain. So it isn’t about their genitals after all…

Woman are also more likely to take breaks during their career – by choice – to take care of their family. Men also fill the majority of overtime paying blue collar jobs, while women tend to lean towards salaried white color jobs. Men also choose more dangerous and higher paying jobs, and also account for nearly all fatal occupational cases. If you support a woman’s right to choose, then you should support the Republicans on this issue. The wage gap is due to the individual choices made by women. Most of the “paycheck fairness” proposals would open up doors for endless litigation if employers work with women on their flexibility and pay, so much so that employers would be forced to tighten the reins on negotiations with women. Progressive ideas on how to combat “inequality” wouldn’t help women, it would take away their choices. Not to mention, paying women more because of their gender – regardless of their level of work – is not equality, it’s special treatment.

So why do they keep feeding you blatant lies? Because that’s how they get voted in, by fiddling with heartstrings.

Example: Obama on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act:

He cares about you, ladies. He cares about you. You can’t see me, but I just dry heaved.

Apparently Obama wasn’t aware that discrimination was illegal long before he took office. The original feminist movement was founded by women who wanted to be seen as intellectually equal, so lets put their fight to good use and ask why Lilly needed her own act. See, Lilly was indeed paid less than men for the same job, which was illegal. The Lilly Ledbetter Act wanted to change the statute of limitations, that’s it. In the original anti-discrimination laws, the statute of limitations started counting down from the DAY of the discrimination. Well, Lilly didn’t report her story until later in her career, but the statute of limitations clock started ticking the day they began to pay her less. The Lilly Ledbetter Act statute of limitations starts counting down on the day of your most recent paycheck. And so, every check is considered a new act of discrimination.

Republicans opposed the LLFPA because they knew that if an employee had been discriminated against in 2004, under a manager that left in 2005, the new management that took over in 2005 shouldn’t have to pay for the discriminatory acts they knew nothing about. Logical right? Because that would be like being abused by your mother, and then making your step-mom serve the prison sentence. They don’t hate women, they hate undue punishment.

Maybe if more women would vote with their minds, and not their lady parts, we wouldn’t have politicians using skewed data and lies to garner our votes. Why don’t they talk to us about the LFP, U-3 and U-6 unemployment, or the upheaval in the Middle East? Because victimhood sells.

Example: The gem we Victory Girls stumbled upon today.

Alexandra Petre wrote a piece – posted on The Washington Post – titled, “Famous quotes, the way a woman would have to say them during a meeting.” First she gave an excerpt from the Jennifer Lawrence diatribe, then she proclaims the star had “nailed it.”

Woman in a Meeting” is a language of its own.

It should not be, but it is. You will think that you have stated the case simply and effectively, and everyone else will wonder why you were so Terrifyingly Angry. Instead, you have to translate. You start with your thought, then you figure out how to say it as though you were offering a groveling apology for an unspecified error. (In fact, as Sloane Crosley pointed out in an essay earlier this year, the time you are most likely to say “I’m sorry” is the time when you feel that you, personally, have just been grievously wronged. Not vice versa.)

She fell on her own sword there. “the time you are most likely to say “I’m sorry” is the time when you feel that you, personally, have just been grievously wronged.” I don’t know, maybe if you stopped treating women like special needs projects simply because they have a vagina, they’d stop thinking they’ve been “grievously wronged” all the time.

To illustrate this difficulty, I have taken the liberty of translating some famous sentences into the phrases a woman would have to use to say them during a meeting not to be perceived as angry, threatening or (gasp!) b—-y. [Word edited by yours truly]

Oh joy, this should be fun.

“Give me liberty, or give me death.”
Woman in a Meeting: “Dave, if I could, I could just — I just really feel like if we had liberty it would be terrific, and the alternative would just be awful, you know? That’s just how it strikes me. I don’t know.”

Heh.

“I came. I saw. I conquered.”
Woman in a Meeting: “I don’t want to toot my own horn here at all but I definitely have been to those places and was just honored to be a part of it as our team did such a wonderful job of conquering them.”

The article goes on to translate other famous sentences, such as:
“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”
“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”
“I have not yet begun to fight.” 

I have one to add:

“Do you know that one of the great problems of our age is that we are governed by people who care more about feelings than they do about thoughts and ideas.”

I wonder how a female would say that… Wait, I don’t have to, because a female did say that. So weird, it’s like Margaret Thatcher didn’t give a flying rats gluteus maximus what anyone thought, nor did the men who made the statements in the “pity me I have ovaries” article. If people questioned them, yelled at them, etc., they moved on like strong minded individuals do. Like these ladies:

“We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat; they do not exist.” – Queen Victoria

“A leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes people where they don’t necessarily want to go, but ought to be.” – Rosalynn Carter

“Professional intellectuals are the voice of a culture and are, therefore, its leaders, its integrators and its bodyguards.” – Ayn Rand

“Learning is not attained by chance, it must be sought for with ardor and attended to with diligence.” – Abigail Adams

“I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.”
– Margaret Thatcher

Maybe, just maybe, if you can’t speak with the strength and confidence of the strong men and women listed above, it simply means you’re nothing like them. Maybe it means you want to be given the same authority as these women without actually doing anything to deserve it. Maybe you’re just a big whiner. That’s not my problem, that’s not their problem, that’s your problem.

This message brought to you by a woman with a care account currently in the negative when it comes to whether feminists were hurt by her words or not.

Oh! Sorry, I forgot: Trigger warning!

UPDATE: Previous version said that “Famous quotes, the way a woman would have to say them during a meeting” was posted on the “The Washington Times” instead of “The Washington Post.”