You can't even call them hypocrites; they are totally open about it. For the official feminist movement, keeping abortion legal is more important than defending women who are exploited by men.
This became clear when Bill Clinton's reckless womanizing with a 21 year old intern was accepted as just fine by the feminist movement. We see the same pattern with Anthony Weiner. This is now an established pattern, the normal way feminism reacts to the exploitation, humiliation and manipulation of women.
Jill Stanek lets them have it:
What’s more important, abortion or equal rights for women? Though they would have you believe otherwise, liberal feminists do not consider the 2 synonymous. And to answer the question, in case you didn’t know, it’s abortion.Read the whole thing here. It can't be stressed enough: you can be a feminist or you can be respectful of women but you can't be both.
This 1st became clear when Monica Lewinski’s blue dress caught Bill Clinton red-handed.
But because Clinton supported abortion, feminists excused the fact that he clearly used his authority to sexually exploit a young woman. It helped that he was at the time the most powerful man in the world, although this fact only spotlighted the national security threat feminists also ignored of his being placed in a vulnerable position to be blackmailed.
So I’ve been watching with interest to see how feminists would respond to Weinergate, another example of a powerful man exploiting young women in this case he wasn’t even positive were legal adults, and displaying almost inconceivable stupidity in the process. And they did not surprise. Feminists for Choice was particularly frank, if not pathetic:
Keeping abortion legal, that’s what it’s all about for liberal feminists.
In situations like these, I think feminists are in a bit of a hard place. As women, we’re sort of grossed out and annoyed by the fact that he would send anyone a (hopefully solicited) picture of his junk, but ultimately, I think we realize that it’s just another part of the role that patriarchy has created for men….
There is the bigger issue at hand, here…. Anthony Weiner is a progressive beacon in a House of Representatives full of a bunch of Tea Party wackos – we need him there.
Weiner has a 100% pro-choice rating from NARAL, a history of voting for women’s issues, LGBT issues, and just progressive politics in general. Again, progressives and women need Rep. Weiner in the House.
Feminism retains and supports the worst features of patriarchy while attacking and despising the aspects of patriarchy that served to honor, protect and respect women. By creating this false "patriarchy versus feminism" construct, feminism strives to identify its views with the interests of women and the views of patriarchy with those of men. But this is a ridiculously overly-simplistic construct. It is really an ideology that masks the exaltation of the will to power for amoral and self-centered women and men and the denigration of the Christian ideals of mutual respect, loving inter-dependence and sexual complementarianism.
The "patriarchy" that contemporary feminism spends all its time attacking had, by the 1950s, created a society that treated women better than any other society in the history of the world - bar none. You cannot go to any other culture in any other period of history and find women with a more exalted place than in the early 20th century West. Since the 60s, with the triumph of the ideology of feminism throughout the Western world, the status of women and children has declined. Feminism is responsible for the breakdown of the stable family structure, a huge increase in poverty for women and children and for encouraging and enabling the lowest and basest instincts of men. The ideology that says that feminism is about elevating women hides an ugly truth. Feminists think men are superior to women and that is why they want to imitate men in every possible respect; they are anti-women.
Feminism or the respect for woman: that is the choice.