The GOP to Women: Give Us Our Jobs Back or We'll Shoot

A GOP state senator says women in the workforce are what causes men to commit gun violence.

By SHARE
widemodern_airshow_071513.jpg
A shotgun and assault rifle on display at the F-AIR show in Rio Negro, Colombia. (Jason Koebler for USN&WR)

The latest message to female voters from a GOP candidate is this: Give us our jobs back, or we'll shoot.

What else could be the reason, after all, for the mass shootings that have happened in recent years, wonders former New Hampshire state senator Jim Rubens, who is expected to challenge sitting Democratic Sen.Jeanne Shaheen, N.H.. Rubens, Buzzfeed's Evan McMorris-Santoro reports, had this to say in a 2009 web posting:

The collaborative, flexible, amorphously-hierarchical American economy is shutting out ordinary men who were once the nation's breadwinners in living-wage labor and manufacturing jobs … Because status success is more vital to the male psychology, males are falling over the edge in increasing numbers. … The collapsing number of male jobs in the increasingly female-centric economy just adds to the already harsher impact of OverSuccess on males.

[ See a collection of political cartoons on the Republican Party.]

Well, Rubens must really have a problem with Shaheen, who has the nerve to be female and a U.S. senator at the same time. Never mind that Rubens' theory is so absurd on its face that the misogyny behind it is almost secondary. "Status success is more important to men than women? What are all those women who are competing in business, sports and politics – some sort of biological aberration? And what, exactly, is "OverSuccess – the terrible state of a woman actually beating a man at something?

Men are so angry, Rubens suggests, that they just go nuts with guns and kill people. Men have long committed the vast majority of violent crime in the country, even when women were in the workforce in small numbers. How does Rubens account for that? And if it really is an inherently male response to commit violence when challenged by a woman (an equally ridiculous and insulting theory), would the solution not be to have presumably nonviolent women run the economies and governments of the word instead of men?

If Rubens has trouble understanding women's natural state when it comes to competition and a quest for success, he'll find out if he ends up facing Shaheen. And in the interim, he can try explaining to female voters why they should lend their support to someone who believes they are by nature destined to be controlled and dominated by men. Perhaps he could seek out failed Senate candidate Todd "legitimate rape" Akin for advice.