The Boy Scouts have always been problematic as an organization, but the Girl Scouts have always been pretty woke. The Girl Scouts have LGBTQ+ acceptance built into their charter, and they’ve always promoted girl-power, feminism, multiracial inclusion and Thin Mints. It would not surprise me, however, if there were people working within the Girl Scouts, trying to make the organization more conservative and less tolerant. There are a lot of Karens in this world, and many of them are mothers. So, yesterday, the Girl Scouts’ social media posted this:
On one side, it’s just a fact now. Yes, Amy Coney Barrett is a Supreme Court justice. Yes, she will be included in all of the lists of female SCOTUS justices. But… she’s also a divisive partisan hack who has already worked, and will continue to work to dismantle the rights and privileges of girls and women. The Girl Scouts followed up their congrats with this, as they were getting ratio’d:
Yeah. I feel a little bit sorry for them, because I get what they were trying to do, which is simply acknowledge that another woman is on the Supreme Court (they’d also highlighted the other female justices in social media posts over the years). But to do so in this environment, with Barrett just shoved onto the court in a horrendous partisan scheme, of course it reads as “Girl Scouts Are MAGA Now.” So they ended deleting those posts, and then posted this:
Earlier today, we shared a post highlighting the five women who have been appointed to the Supreme Court. It was quickly viewed as a political and partisan statement which was not our intent and we have removed the post.
— Girl Scouts (@girlscouts) October 28, 2020
So now EVERYONE is mad. MAGA Moms are mad that the Girl Scouts would back down in the face of “liberal pressure,” which is kind of showing that Amy Coney Barrett is exactly the partisan MAGA hack we know she is. Liberal moms are mad that the progressive Girl Scouts would enter into the political fray with such a “Anti-woman, anti-LGBTQ women can have girl power too” message. It’s a bloody mess and it all could have been avoided if the Girl Scouts, as an organization, had just sat there and ate their cookies and avoided making ANY comments about Barrett before the election.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid, social media.
My favorite tweet in response to this was something like, “imagine the poor social media manager trying to convince the powers that be that this tweet was NOT a good idea” lol.
And it was a bad idea. Even putting aside Barrett’s politics, the process was a sham and as Americans, we should all be ashamed of how partisan and broken our system is. And WITH her politics, it just really feels like a slap in the face. I am all for other women on the bench. I’m even “okay” in general with another conservative woman. But Barrett is something else that just “conservative.” At this point I just view her as a partisan hack.
It seriously was a breathtakingly bad idea. If their powers that be couldn’t recognize that, it makes me a little nervous about the org in general.
100%, Becks
Savannah Guthrie stepped in it too with the shameful NBC Trump townhall ratings grab. No clue if she volunteered or was ordered to host but the left HATED her for doing it and then she got attacked by the right for being an actual reporter and demanding answers and honesty. None of these were a good idea.
That is an excellent point. You know there were at least a few people in the room who weren’t insane, but the powers that be ignored them and said just do it. I hope those morons know how badly they screwed up today, but that never seems to happen. Blowback always falls on those lower down the rungs of the ladder. (Do I speak from some personal experience? Of course not! /s)
Also, given the fact that the ideals of Amy Coney Barrett are a direct contrast to those of the woman that she is replacing, her appointment to the Supreme Court is essentially erasing all of the hard work that RBG had done.
Barrett isn’t just another woman SCOTUS. Her appointment is intended to destroy and dismantle the legacy of RBG, one of the greatest justices of our time.
This was a bad idea. I understand wanting to highlight “girl power” but that goes beyond having a woman in a male dominated space IMO. If you’re actively against certain female rights, is it really “girl power”?
She’s a willing puppet controlled by men and places in that seat by men to remove female rights.
Hate is a strong word and I’m feeling it’s very applicable these days.
Exactly @Sophia
Now I want Girl Scout cookies. Where do I find emergency Tagalongs?
Girl Scout cookies were or are made in the same factories as Keebler. You can find all the cookies on the shelves all year long. It’s a huge scam as the GS doesn’t actually get much from the sales. All the execs get paid 1st. Then overhead. Then pennies will trickle down to the troops.
Fk Barrett
GS just praised a woman that wants to remove female rights. So those Girl Scouts can’t use their full potential. Deleting a tweet doesn’t muring a bell.
Even Aldi’s had some really good versions.
Oreo thin mint flavored are awesome…
Wow…read the room, Girl Scouts.
I’ve never understood the popularity of the cookies; they are largely flavorless and artificial tasting. I’ll pass on all of it.
This was a bad tweet but please don’t insult Thin Mints.
For real. Say what you will about that stupid post. But don’t attack the Thin Mints. I have several boxes in my freezer😂
They don’t taste like they used to; I didn’t even bother to buy any this year because they were so bad. That’s nothing to do with this godawful tweet praising the handmaiden, the cookies have literally become bad.
ugh GS cookies suuuuck!!! they seem to take people over by nostalgia NOT taste…when the office ordering came around I was always side eyed because I thought they were disgusting trash cookies…
It’s the same as World’s Finest Chocolates. It does not taste like it used to. The chocolates have a chemical taste to them but it’s still $1!
There was no need to commemorate the fifth woman.
“First woman approved by theocrats”
I was on the GS Twitter feed last night. I do understand what the original innocent intent was but, under the circumstances, it was not the thing to do and I support the removal of the original tweets. The respondents who were hurling the most hateful vitriol at the GS and me were, no surprise, men screaming about abortions. The MAGA moms would then show up to applaud the men screaming about abortions
I do not understand women who have been through the pregnancy and childbirth wringer and still come out thinking that forced birth politics are at all acceptable. The whole process was uncomfortable and painful enough, and I *wanted* to do it.
I can think of better words, but I really hate thinking about the cruelty so many women would show other women.
Betsy, yes, exactly. I don’t see that side mentioned much, but it is so valid. As a mom, who WANTS to be a mom, i cannot imagine forcing this on someone. On a related note, how does anyone think it is a good idea to make a person birth a child they do not WANT? How is THAT good for either the mother OR child?
The health and life of the mother are never an issue for them either. It’s all about saving these perfect “babies.” How do these women not know someone who has faced horrible, sad decisions based on a medical emergency? A co-worker just went through a horrific situation in which she carried twins to third trimester and then everything went wrong and her very life was at risk.
Couldn’t agree more. I’ve actually read some articles written by women who either were pro-life before pregnancy or more neutral and then got pregnant and changed their tune because of the experience.
I’m guessing the ones who are mothers and don’t end up thinking that are probably also those who think being a mother is the end-all, be-all of life and if you aren’t one, you’re not doing your job as a woman, blah, blah, blah. Malarkey!
The truth is many of these prolifers had abortions and still live with their guilt. They’ll never admit that. They feel shame so they push others into not having abortions to try and remove their guilt or “help” others to not having to experience the same guilt.
It’s not about the babies as much as they crow it is, it’s about putting women who don’t live by their rules in their place: at the bottom, where they belong. They’d rather see a child hungry, abused or neglected than a woman living life on her own terms.
She was a handmaid ffs, let’s not act like this is empowering girls or women anywhere or will empower girls or women anywhere. She’s perfectly happy and poised to take away rights from these young ladies and if you don’t want to be in the political sphere, don’t congratulate the sham process or the absolutely unqualified patsy.
As an aside, every time I see your name, I’m taken to a place, back in the early 80s when mom would use her chicken tetrazzini recipe, and we’d have an argument later because I’d be diving in for thirds or fourths. 😁
Well dang now I want Chicken Tetrazini.
Tetrazini was a favorite when I was a kid too! And now I think of “Flavor of Love where I think New York says another contestant is “stealing her man with her chicken tetrazini!” It’s just such a fun thing to say
I’m wanting some now too lol. I’ll have to locate that recipe. I have a chicken that’s seasoned with tomato and basil, I wonder if that might work and add a new dimension? And wasn’t there cream of chicken or something? I have a cream of poblano! My brain is waking up lol.
Exactly! @Chicken
Welp, that’s why you can’t equate representation with structural change: just because a person is Black, Latinx, a woman, etc doesn’t mean that they, as an individual, are anti-racist, feminist, etc. Clarence Thomas is a Black judge and signs onto every single conservative anti-Black SCOTUS ruling, including gutting the Voting Rights Act — there’s a Black judge who is not good for Black people, Same thing with ACB — just because you’re a woman doesn’t immediately make you a feminist (look at all those MAGA karens). There’s absolutely nothing to celebrate about having another woman SCOTUS judge if all they’re going to do is oppress people. A woman oppressing other women – rather than a man oppressing women – doesn’t make it any better, Girl scouts! It’s still misogynist oppression!
I feel bad for the girl scouts, I believe it was a decision not thought out completely, or possibly made by a conservative within the organization. Even though some of these organization are diverse on the ground (the scouts) doesn’t mean the leadership is equally diverse in their thinking. Hopefully it will blow over and in the meantime I hope it opens a dialogue among the youth.
All of this, + what Chicken Tetrazini said above. It’s not that they need to be boycotted or anyone should slap a box of thin mints out of someone’s hands (gotta get that in before the edgelord libertarian complaints about ‘Cancel Culture’ or ‘liberalism gone 2 pharr’ start). This was just a dumb decision. There’s always a push to put a woke spin on these inherently violent and unequal rightwing agendas by getting female, poc, and other marginalized voices behind them. Then everyone from these groups who criticizes that gets accused of not being able to tolerate other members disagreeing in any way. This isn’t an accomplishment that should be celebrated.
Exactly. Feminists and women’s/girls groups should only endorse women (and men) who support equality for women. The conservatives are always whining about that, e.g. why women’s groups didn’t support Palin. It’s because Palin doesn’t support women.
Thank you @Naomi !
My daughter has been a scout since her Daisy days and is now a Cadette. I was her troop leader for a lot of those years. My former next door neighbor was the troop co-leader and she quickly took over as the head leader and it was a nightmare. Wasn’t interested in taking the girls camping, etc. I mentioned something to her about not shopping at Hobby Lobby with troop money and she replied “I don’t think we need to make this about politics.” One time I accidentally used my troop debit card on a personal purchase (the card looked exactly like my personal one), immediately fixed the mistake and told her about it because she would see the bank statement anyway, and she insisted I be removed from the account. Any power I had to protect or advocate for my child or any of those girls in the troop was completely stripped from me by her and she was so good at it that I didn’t even realize it was happening. Her daughter was cruel to all the girls and we lost members every year. Meanwhile she’s out here doing the most being a delegate for Sanders and wearing “nevertheless she persisted” graphic tees. There were years of her sneaking around alienating every friend I introduced her to, taking credit for all the ideas I brought to the troop (and other things in other parts of our lives), and being p-ssed off when it was suddenly “hip” to care about politics that my child was interested in civic duty and hers wanted to sell Premier Jewelry for a living. She’s a Karen of the highest order: bland and dry as unflavored oatmeal and almost as intelligent; jealous, petty, insecure and dishonest. And when she’s called out she cries wolf and attempts, poorly, to misdirect. I’m sure she sees nothing wrong with what the Girl Scouts posted.
My daughter is in a larger troop now and I can’t really get a read on most of the families, but we aren’t going to be getting close with any of them, especially considering the pandemic. I’m so tired of all of it. I’m just glad I don’t have to do the heavy lifting any longer, but it’s sucks because I thought I would be her troop leader her whole life. At this point she’s just in it for cookies and summer camp, which is so sad to me because she and I both wanted it to be more.
All this to say, Girl Scouts has relied on its refusal to comment on politics while supporting LGQTQIA+ in their charter for a long time, without having to make much of a statement – only little hints here and there that yes, of course they’re for equality and diversity, just look at the stories they post wink wink! This was a big misstep on their part. I’m left feeling grossed out.
Yikes. My sister was a troop leader for a few years and just stepped down because of her co-leader. A couple months ago she (my sister) wanted to start planning in-person meetings again and asked her co-leader if they could come up with a COVID safety plan. The co-leader, who until then seemed normal, said “I don’t think it’s necessary, you know the girls won’t follow it anyway.” My sister was speechless. After trying to convince her that a safety plan was necessary, all to no avail, my sister stepped down. It makes me sad because she had put so much work into the troop.
Ahh man, this stinks. I mean, yeah, I get what they were trying to do. But because she is such a toxic option in the worst climate, we can’t even acknowledge that she is only the FIFTH woman on the court in 231 years. Representation matters. Too bad she represents the worst of the worst.
Whoever posted that was an idiot. Like, f*cking context matters when it comes to socioeconomic improvement of women. A woman who engages in a highly unethical court nomination, both from the position of hypocrisy from within her own party and the sheer speed at which she was forced through with obvious intent, is not ~girl power.~ Miss me, girl scouts. That was stupid.
I just edited some interesting (academic) work that made an argument regarding sexist and misogynist legislation in Muslim countries that could be relevant here.
Basically, the argument goes that you can’t support your own subjugation. For instance, you can’t sign an agreement that turns you into a slave or allows someone else to cannibalize you. An act such as this rests on the premise that your willful consent is prerequisite to whatever actions follow–you need to consent (in this case, consent takes the form of an agreement). The premise itself derives from a larger ideology on the value of individual agency and freedom, and relations between individuals/the state. Yet the actions that follow (slavery, cannibalism) contravene the larger ideology. By becoming a slave or a meal, you undermine the ideology that values agency, freedom, and so on.
In short, you can’t consent to an action that undermines the ideology valorizing your consent (in effect, you are nullifying your own right to consent). And no state organized according to said ideology can tolerate individual behavior that would undermine it.
Of course, slavery and cannibalism are extreme examples and more mundane examples would require some hair splitting. But it seems the Girl Scouts are finding themselves in this position: they want to applaud the SCOTUS appointment of a woman, but that particular woman wants to preserve sexism/misogyny. She’s Phyllis Schlafly, a working woman arguing against a woman’s right to equal opportunity for employment. The contradiction is untenable.
I love this.
This is VERY interesting! Will this work be published and if so, where and when? Can you say?
It was just a paragraph in a lit review of postsecular theory and its critique. I imagine it’ll be published eventually, but the literature should be floating around.
An example here in the US would be PREA under which an prison inmate can never consent to sex. Because of the situation of being in prison, one can never know if the sex is actual consensual or situational, based on a sense of safety or quid pro quo in the prison environment, so any sex involving an inmate is, by law, rape. Doesn’t matter who is involved, other inmates or prison staff, it is rape because the inmate lacks the capacity to consent.
Right, that’s almost easier to follow because in consenting, you’d be exercising an agency you simply don’t have (given the context). So you can’t consent.
IIRC, this argument was in response to a claim that women involved in an Egyptian mosque movement were actually feminists (they were assuming a gendered role but in doing so, they were subverting something else…). It’s similar to the claim that wearing the veil is an act of feminism. And the response was that you can’t exercise agency/choose to accept a gendered role that is part of a systematic undermining of the agency of your gender.
Anyway, I don’t want to come across as Islamophobic as I think this applies to so many situations (^^case in point!).
This is the big problem, I keep coming back to. This nomination was a sham and position in the highest court of the land was hijacked that from this point on no matter what it will be a divisive and politicised issue. The fact that she was ok with that and did not withdraw her nomination says all we need to know about her. She lacks character and judgement, doesn’t care about justice, about the Constitution and rights. She just wanted her seat at the table at any price and the price is the authority of the Supreme court. I mean any Justice that is in any sense interested and cares what their legacy will be, would walk away as the Republicans put on this circus instead of a confirmation.
So either:
a) this was a conscious political choice
or
b) someone is living far enough under a rock to not realise that this is a highly political and divisive issue and this women does not represent the best interests of women and girls
Either way it is a BAD look for them.
I’m so horrified by this hack of a judge that I’m just here to be petty AF. Her hair is FRIED and thirstier than a kardashian selfie.
I hate everything she stands for with every fibre of my being, but the least she could have done about her appearance on the biggest appointment of her life was ‘do her friggin’ hair’ – the fried, full of split ends, Witchypoo look is so glaringly unpolished.
Her entire appearance is created to emphasize her politics. Teeth – unfixed. Hair – for her level of professional, unkempt. Clothing – could be any wealthy conservative Catholic mom going to church. Jewelry – conservative and modest.
Her hair drives me nuts. The rest of her appearance, I have no issues. I have even liked some of her dresses. She is appropriately attired for our profession. Dressing in a flashy manner detracts from the case. But her hair drives me batty. COMB IT OR BRUSH IT! DO SOMETHING! She sat through one of the hearings with a giant tangle right in front of one of her ears. I understand that maybe there are textural hair issues but find what works and go with it. If your hair is wavy or curly, then let it be wavy or curly. Condition it! Don’t show up with giant knots all over your head.
From now on I will refer to this mess as she, who’s hair thirstier than a kardashian selfie so it takes an edge off of my spite when thinking about this despicable person.
I am not surprised. Girl Scouts was originally founded as a Christian organization and the pledge includes the phrase ‘to serve God’ in it, although it is allowed to be replaced. Participants do not have to be Christian but it still holds implicit values that were shaped by a Christian faith.
They have done a great job of creating a secular space for themselves though, and promote diversity and acceptance.
I feel like maybe expecting organizations, any organization, to conform to particular political standards, whether conservative or progressive, is just not a good use of anyone’s time, but that’s just me.
Aldi does have a really good version of both the Peanut Butter Patties/Tagalongs and the Caramel deLites/Samoas! I buy a package of each pretty much every time I shop there. And I like to support girl organizations and the Girl Scouts when I can, but the Aldi versions are only $.98 per package and I think that they are better and they are available all the time.
Now the secret is out and we will not be able to find them on the shelves at any Aldi! 🙂
mindboggling I didn’t even know that she wasn’t even a judge before 2017. uuugghhhh
Yeesh. Proof, once again, that organizations can _not_ stay “normal”/neutral during wartime.
We are calling her Amy Coathanger at our house. Please join us. I wish the Girl Scouts hadn’t posted. I’m still going to enjoy my GS candy.
Grasshoppers are the exact same as thin mints, you can get those in the store year round.
They also stepped in it when some troops marched in 45’s inauguration parade. There was a lot of pushback and they went hard for the non-partisan, we have some troops who want to do this so we support them angle. But then they created a badge for those troops who wanted to participate in the Women’s March and allowed them to wear their uniforms (my daughter did that twice). They do have an RBG badge that my daughter’s troop is going to earn (she’s a Senior).