February 6, 2014 6:26 AM

Does it get any more childish and small-minded than boycotting Girl Scout Cookies?

Toward the end of December, Girl Scout USA’s official Twitter account tweeted out a Huffington Post story about the inspiring individuals who should be considered to be 2013′s “women of the year.” The article included figures like Beyonce, Malala Yousafzai, and Wendy Davis — and the organization asked its followers who else should be added to the list of “incredible ladies.” That was enough for anti-choice activists to call for a national boycott of the organization’s popular cookies, claiming the Girl Scouts have endorsed “pro-abortion politician Wendy Davis.”…. “We’re asking you to boycott Girl Scout cookies in 2014,” reads a new site dedicated to the boycott, explaining that Davis should not be lifted up as a “worthy role model for our children.” The same accusation is being leveled against the group in regard to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who was included in a different news article about influential U.S. women that the Girl Scouts shared on its Facebook page.

There are those for whom everything’s political, and every act or utterance- no matter how small or seemingly insignificant- carries an political and/or ideological message. If they can’t find a political aspect to something, they’ll create one out of whole cloth. In so doing, they’ll reveal just how disturbingly hyper-partisan and joyless they truly are.

How thoroughly black and vacant must one’s soul be in order to boycott Girl Scout Cookies? When you’re a cabal of arch-Conservative, anti-choice zealots, the answer’s pretty obvious. If the Huffington Post story had featured women that Conservatives could embrace, they’d have been beside themselves with joy. That the story happened to spotlight women generally associated with more Liberal causes was enough to send the zealots into fits of apoplexy. That there was nothing about the story intended to be partisan seems to have escaped the notice of the ninnies caught in peals of faux righteous indignation.

This is about as offensive and intellectually insulting as it gets…not that anyone capable of rational thought should be taken by surprise.

The Girl Scouts’ supposed endorsement of the Democratic lawmaker is hardly the first time that the organization has landed in hot water with conservative groups. The national organization has been harshly criticized for its ties with Planned Parenthood over the past several years, and some anti-choice activists suggest that Girls Scouts USA actively promotes a “radical feminist agenda.” Last year, one right-wing preacher and radio host suggested that the organization is a “wicked” group that is an agent of lesbianism.

In reality, Girl Scouts USA takes no official position on either abortion or birth control. Organization officials repeatedly emphasize that these are topics best discussed between girls and their parents.

“CookieCott 2014″ is encouraging supporters to share a flier to spread the word about the “pro-life concerns” with the national organization.

I find it difficult to divine what, if any, positive motive lies behind this collective Conservative freakout. They’ve very clearly established by their protest what they’re against- strong, successful women, reproductive rights, women making decisions for themselves- but not so much what they’re FOR. They excel at tearing women down, but they’re decidedly lacking when it comes to putting forward positive images for women to emulate. Unless unfocused rage and an over-developed persecution complex are to be considered things worth holding up as “positive” values.

And how is Wendy Davis not a role model? Hers is the very definition of the American Dream. She overcame poverty, went to Harvard Law School, and now is running for Governor of Texas. Despite the well-organized whisper campaigns directed against her and the truly vile and very public Conservative assault on her (alleged lack of) maternal responsibility, Davis has stood tall. If that’s not a role model for women, I don’t know what would be.

No, this seems to be a deliberate Conservative tactic designed to smear women whose accomplishments speak for themselves. By painting them as some sort of Liberal criminal, they’ve made it clear that they have nothing to offer but negativity and cheap personal insults. When you’re incapable of building, your only other alternative is to destroy, a tactics Conservatives seem to excel at.

Because they’re just that morally and ethically vacant.

Holding up Kathleen Sebelius and Wendy Davis as female role models is a wholly appropriate (and nonpartisan) example of the sorts of things young women can aspire to. There are undoubtedly women who lean more Conservative worthy of the same mention and admirations. Sadly, there are those who still believe that women are and by rights should be the property of men, and that when they leave hearth and home it leads to the breakdown of the “natural order of things.” It may come as a shock to folks, but having the right to make decisions about your life isn’t limited to those of us in possession of a penis.

I feel sorry for those able to manufacture so much self-righteous fury at the drop of a hat. It can’t be easy carrying around that much anger and rage. It’s toxic and corrosive to be so prone to hair-trigger hatred and the willingness to smear someone not “enlightened” enough to share your flavor of fear and prejudice.

The truly important aspect of this sorry saga, and one that the ninnies seem willing to blow right past, is that the Girl Scouts make a concerted effort not to wade into political issues. They’ve made it clear that as an organization they take no public stand on abortion, stating that the issue is best addressed by a girl’s parents. Girl Scouts is about teaching young girls how to grow into strong young women capable of making their own decisions about they own lives for their own reasons. That’s not partisan ideology, that’s providing a place where girls can learn and grow free of outside political pressure. Evidently, some folks have a real problem with the idea of teaching girls to think for themselves.

One of the ways to teach children about success is to hold up successful people as role models. That the Girl Scouts happened to spotlight Sebelius and Davis is, ideologically speaking, apropos of nothing. It’s about providing role models who can inspire girls to aim high, whatever their dreams might be. If they ultimately choose to be a housewife and focus on raising children, good on them. If they choose to pursue a different path because that’s where their dreams lead them, that’s also an appropriate and laudable choice.

That’s what it’s about- teaching girls that THEY control the direction their life takes, and that they can be and do anything they set their mind to. What’s so wrong, evil, or anti-American about that?

Here we are in the 21st century, and there are still those who firmly believe that the rightful and only places for a woman are the kitchen and the bedroom. The arrogance, ignorance, and intolerance, it is strong.

WE DESERVE BETTER.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on February 6, 2014 6:26 AM.

Because appreciating diversity is for losers and Liberals was the previous entry in this blog.

What it means to be 'Murrican...speak English, dammit!! is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 5.2.6