Review of binders on Amazon becomes politicized

October 20, 2012 • 1:20 pm

LOL!  Remember when Romney made his dumb gaffe about being brought “binders full of women” when he was vetting candidates for his cabinet in Massachusetts?  Well, it’s spilled over into reviews of binders being sold on Amazon.

Have a look at these reviews of  the Avery Durable View Binder on Amazon.

A sample:

There are 106 pages of this, almost all anti-Mittens. Yay, America!

h/t: Ivan

45 thoughts on “Review of binders on Amazon becomes politicized

  1. Aside from the utter stupidity of people making Romney’s comments about “binders with women” in them, the fact that people would pretend to be offended about it offends me! You are a complete idiot, if you want to tell me that no employer has ever had a “binder” of candidates. That is precisely what Romney was saying. It’s just because the left has no critical thinking skills whatsoever, and no real arguments, that they have to turn a comment about hiring women, into a perverted whatever it is now.
    By even participating for this so called argument, women only lower themselves and in turn make themselves look stupid. If I was hiring a women, and she had a problem with the fact that her resume is in a binder, well I’d tell her she can go pound sand, and I wouldn’t hire her. This whole thing has turned into a stupidity argument.

      1. There is a difference between humour and just plain stupidity. It’d be funny if this was merely a joke, the only problem is it’s not a joke any more. It’s an “issue” amongst liberal [women]. Their literally making an issue out of absolutely nothing. But yea, if it was just a joke, I’d be laughing.

          1. Trolling and commenting are two different things. 😛
            And I wouldn’t call commenting on two posts to be commenting “all over this site”. Considering the posts on this site, I’d say I did a remarkable job restraining myself.

            p.s. being a new poster has nothing to do with anything lol

            1. Agreed. The wording is not important and to make a big deal out of it is silly.

              What is an issue is that the whole thing is a lie. The binder was brought to him, and he put women in positions he didn’t care for, for a while.

              Maybe he did better than many others, but he is not some kind of champion for women in the work place.

            2. You’ve done a remarkable job restraining yourself against what? What’s wrong with the posts on this blog? I noticed you did not answer Dr. Coyne’s questions about evidence supporting creationism. Show us the “far more substantial evidence to support it”, or move on.

    1. The reason it’s been set upon by those who are genuinely for gender equality is that:

      a) Romney’s story was a lie. He altered the details to make it look like he had actually done something or even cared about gender equality, and

      b) Even if the story had been true, what a ridiculous thing to tout as your “achievement” in closing the gender gap. Not any rubber-met-the-road action, just a binder full of “potential” action, gathering dust on a shelf somewhere.

    2. “the left has no critical thinking skills whatsoever”

      As compared to the superstition-embracing, anti-science right?

    3. The comment has taken off, as it gives women a chance to vent, and in a rather creative way, at that. Please don’t take things so literally.

  2. While it’s a fun concept to play around with, I don’t see how the binders specifically is a gaffe. Romney’s misrepresentation of the whole scenario, sure. But saying you have ‘binders full of women’ is not that hard to understand as meaning “binders full of women’s resumés”
    The phrasing here isn’t what deserves scorn, at least thats how it seems to me.

    1. It’s a gaffe because women shouldn’t be put into special women’s binders, to be opened as a last resort when the “normal” pool doesn’t yield a few good women. After soliciting resumes from minorities and women, tnose resumes should be put into binders that say things like “lawyer,” “educator,” “economist,” etc.

      1. That’s understood, but in the flow of the narrative, women were already specifically under consideration.
        If Romney claims that he was looking for competent women to add to his cabinet, it’s not beyond the pale to say that what he received was ‘binders of women’.
        The fact that he was only looking for women as an afterthought and that he’s implying that after many years in business he didn’t know of any competent women to add to his cabinet are understandably thing to whack him on. Making the binders comment the point of derision seems as if its missing the point.

        1. Yes, the “binder” kerfuffle has obscured the real concern here, which you have summarized beautifully: “After many years in business he didn’t know of any competent women” who might have been worthy of consideration.

    2. I think it comes down to context. Is one side of the contest more likely to treat women as objects, as chattel, lacking in agency or as 3/4 the value of a man?

      I also see an association with men’s magazines, where the resumés would be viewed first for how attractive they were in their photos and second for the contents (articles).

      His intent was pretty much innocent and his meaning easily understood. What makes it so comment worthy is how tone deaf he was to the context.

      I also like the way it draws attention to his mendacity in taking all the credit from the womens’ groups while not actually improving the percentages over the duration of his term, let alone in the high profile positions.

      1. Even if you take it as perfectly innocent and exactly as Romney described it (which wasn’t at all the case — the binders were prepared by an advocacy group before the election to be presented to whomever won), it’s still pretty bad.

        I mean, really. Romney just won the governorship of Massachusetts, of all states, and he didn’t have a single woman applicant for a single cabinet position?

        Seriously?

        If that was truly the case, the answer isn’t, “bring me binders of bitches,” it’s to fire and blackball the entire search committee and tell the new committee that they will present him with a diverse slate of qualified candidates or they, too, will wind up in the shithouse.

        In those same two minutes, Romney told us that he’s so hip to what women want that he let his token woman go home early so she could cook dinner for her hubby and tuck her kids in at night.

        Again, seriously? Having a 40-hour work week for top professionals is a woman’s issue, and the only reason anybody would need or want to keep to a standard 40-hour work week is so you can take your shoes off and slave away in the kitchen for your man?

        In response to the question of what he’d do about gun violence, Romney blamed gun violence on single mothers and said that what we really need is to get them bitches some men to make sure the bitches raise the kids right. Not quite so crudely, of course, but that is what he said.

        Obama is a seriously flawed president, the most radically conservative (yes, conservative) in American history, and one of if not the most dangerous. From his use of flying death robots to summarily execute American citizens to his radical expansion of the already-insane TSA to his repeated pledges to “Drill, baby, drill!” even during the debate, he is clearly a dire threat to the Union and to the global civilization.

        But Romney shares all of Obama’s flaws and he’s a privileged patriarchal sonofabitch who’ll lie through his teeth to tell you whatever he thinks will get you to vote him into office so he can rape the Treasury the same way that he raped private corporations while he ran Bain Capital.

        So please don’t vote for four more years of Obama…but, for fuck’s sake, whatever you do, DO NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY!

        Cheers,

        b&

          1. Pick almost any topic, and Obama’s position is at least the same as, if not even more radical than, Bush’s.

            Bush started the war in Afghanistan, and Obama has pursued it with excessive zeal, even to the point of ordering civilians and American citizens be murdered with flying death robots — and still with no end in sight.

            The Guantanamo Gulag is still going strong.

            Warrentless wiretaps are more popular than ever, with even less oversight. If Nixon had that power, he’d never have bothered with that robbery in a certain Washington hotel.

            The TSA’s presence and powers are unprecedented in American history.

            If you watched the last debate, you may have noticed that Obama’s energy plan is the exact same, “Drill, baby, drill!” that we mocked Palin for. Incidentally, that’s also his environmental policy.

            The crooks who collapsed the economy and Wall street got paid bonuses by the Obama administration.

            And even Obama’s signature piece of legislation, the Affordable Care Act, is a radical right-wing gift to the private insurance rackets that’ve wrecked health care in America in the first place. And it wrote into law that they can gouge their customers with up to 20% of premiums going to overhead. One in five of your healthcare dollars is going to advertising, executive salaries, and shareholder profits — and that’s by Obama’s signature!

            I could go on, but I should probably stop before I give myself hypertension and thus funnel even more profits into an insurance racket.

            b&

  3. Binders of women is apparently an LDS locution – binders of young girls are presented to LDS men for selection as wives. This was a plot line in Big Love, an HBO show about LDS/polygamy. Like “study it out”, Mormon locutions, which often come from Mormon texts that are memorized by LDS students, slip out of devout Mormons and are labeled by the media as “awkward.”

    Note: my info is from a former Mormon who posted on a progressive blog.

  4. I almost want to thank Mitt Romney for running. He is comedy gold for creative humorists, both professional and amateur.

    1. Not looking forward to a possible four years of easy pickings for comedians.

      Please vote to keep the clown away from the launch button.

      Between going to war in Iran and Syria who knows where else and cutting taxes for the rich, he will put the country into receivership.

      If I were a Chinese politician, I know who I’d be hoping for in the election. A couple of Pyrrhic ‘victories’ for Romney’s America and China would once again rule as the Middle Kingdom.

      1. Except that the USA has borrowed all their money so if you lot go down, they take a massive hit too. It really is in the interests of very few for America to tank.

        1. The interdependence of so many of the world’s economies is one of the most hopeful things going for us as far as avoiding military conflicts.

          I’m watching China vs Japan with their contested islands in exactly that light. Hopefully they will compromise before the killing starts.

  5. Hard to believe, but actually the oldest ten of those 106 pages really are full of ordinary, painstaking, completely serious reviews of the details of these Avery binders. I find that somewhat disturbing.

    1. Why should that disturb you? I didn’t review those, but I have done completely serious reviews of really nice plastic folders and other such small stuff. If you are looking for something specific, such reviews help.

  6. “Zen master, teach me liberation.”
    “Who binds you?”
    “No one.”
    “Then why seek liberation?”

    Not much to apply here, but hey, that’s Zen.

  7. Et tu, WEIT?

    What! Does “binders” have a sexist double meaning? How about “curriculum vitae“?

    This posting is “not optimal”.

    1. See my reply to Simeon above.

      The word is not the issue. It’s that his example of doing something about gender equality was to be given a collection of CVs. And it stops there. Well, Mittens, what happened next?! What did you actually do to improve the status of women?

      1. Also, as I’ve pointed out, it’s a funny gaffe that illustrates Romney’s problem — that he’s utterly clueless when it comes to women, and quite the misogynist when it comes right down to it. Not necessarily because he’s got some sort of hatred or fear of women, but rather because he thinks of them as the same sort of second-class subhumans that Joseph Smith did. I mean, really: what’s the difference between putting a woman on a pedestal or in a binder?

        It was the same thing with Big Bird. It showed that Romney really is a heartless bastard who’ll steal candy from babies to make a profit.

        b&

        1. It also highlights that despite his months of attempting to convince people that he understands them, he is still a completely out-of-touch upper class twit who has absolutely zero connection to ordinary Americans and their problems.

  8. I’m surprised nobody’s pointed out that Romney’s statement was in response to a question about equal pay (perhaps he wanted to hire women to save money).

    1. Silence! You aren’t supposed to notice that Romney never actually answers the questions he’s asked.

      Look, something shiny!

Leave a Reply