While I understand that the title of this article is misleading, since it’s not just conservative women who are treated as hysterical when they debate facts instead of emotional fluff, I’m going to speak to my experiences as being treated as such and relate them to the overall dialogue.

I’m not a timid person, or some kind of shrinking violet.  I definitely do not back down from a fight….just ask my coworkers.  If I think I’m right, I will fight you until I’m blue in the face.  Unfortunately, I’m very animated, so making my point is often coupled with a wide variety of facial expressions and hand gestures (the vast majority of which are NOT obscene) so you could say I very passionately explain my positions.  That being said, whether we are debating the color of my shirt or whether or not abortion is murder; you are guaranteed to get two things from me, the aforementioned passionate delivery, and facts.

It gets more difficult in some arguments to not allow emotions in, however I try my best not to.  Though I will argue abortion, at length if necessary, I tend to stick to my political beliefs with regard to it.  Not because I’m afraid of offending anyone, though contrary to what some believe, I would not intentionally hurt someone who didn’t deserve it.  If we’ve ever met, you know this, but I have a very visceral and emotional reaction to abortion.  I have two children.  Neither one was conceived at a convenient time, or with upstanding men, and I have both of them.  My situation is just that.  Mine.  I’m not going to throw red paint or show pictures of aborted babies outside a Planned Parenthood.  While I think that they are an abortion mill that throws in the occasional breast exam on the side, that kind of disagreement is too emotional for my liking.  I would prefer to argue, as I have in the past, about the fungibility of federal funds given to the organization and how segregation to prevent tax dollars from being used to perform abortions is nearly impossible.

What really grinds my gears, is making an argument like that by myself, or God forbid, by a man, immediately brings forth throngs of liberals (sobbing hysterical women, or SHWs for the future) who rail that Conservatives are unreasonable and want to deny women access to “healthcare” or the freedom to exercise “their reproductive rights.”  Clever wordsmithing designed to evoke an emotional response in an argument that is factual.  Because the leftists don’t want the unwashed masses doing silly things like taking the facts and dissecting them and forming rational arguments.  They instead want those same masses to imagine that those who don’t want their paycheck spent on paying for Sandra Fluke’s $3,000 a year diamond encrusted birth control are the unreasonable ones.

Taxes are another favorite argument of mine.  The SHW cry about how the rich don’t pay their fair share.  Fair is a subjective term.  If you have siblings, or ever interact with other human beings, the childish concept of fairness is something you learn about very early in life.  The difference between the right and left, is that the right eventually grows up and understands that sometimes, life isn’t fair, and you work through it.  My seven year old doesn’t think it’s fair that she has to go to bed early if she mouths off to me.  But in sticking to the punishment, it teaches her that there are consequences to her actions, and as she grows into an adult, my dearest hope is that her going to bed at 6:30 a few times will lead to her think before she speaks or acts.

When I suggested to a friend I had known for many years, that he look into the historical data compiled by the Treasury before making assertions about taxes cuts costing the Government money, I was blocked from his Facebook.  And I’m the one who is treated as though I’m hysterical.  I didn’t even argue with him.  I suggested he check the facts, so that he could form his own opinion. . .and he immediately cut off any discussion.  Another favorite argument that the SHW use is that I worship the rich, or that my party (the party I’m affiliated with solely to have the ability to vote in primaries) is full of old, rich, white men.  Oh, and stupid religious fanatics.  And rednecks, lots and lots of rednecks.  I don’t know where any of you were during the RNC, but I can assure you my ass was glued to C-SPAN and while I saw some of the “stereotypical” Republicans, I also saw people like Mia Love (Black Female), Nikki Haley (Indian Female), Artur Davis (Black Male – Former Democrat), and Marco Rubio (Cuban Male).  Bobby Jindal (Indian Male) was going to speak, but instead he chose to forgo the convention and do his job as Governor of Lousiana and govern to ensure the safety of his constituents during the Hurricane.  Allan West (Black Male) is a notable conservative.

Here’s the difference between my side and the SHW’s side (aside from the illegal alien that spoke at their convention), I don’t care what color they are.  Conservatism is color-blind.  Liberalism is divisive.  But the MSM can whitewash (no pun intended) the coverage of our convention to fit their lying dialogue, but the facts are still on our side.  The problem is, that throwing terms like racism and fairness out, evokes that damned emotional response again.  Emotionally charged people are not known for their rationalism.

My absolute favorite argument is anything to do with race.  Because I’m not afraid, like so many of the more right-minded, that disagreement with someone of a different skin color automatically paints me as a racist.   Me: “I disagree with President Obama’s handling (bungling) of the recent spate of protests in the Middle East which resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including an Ambassador.”  SHW:  ”You dare disagree with our first Black President’s policy choices???  You’re a RACIST!!!!!”  Me: “It is unconscionable that the liberals used an illegal alien speaking at their convention to illicit a dialogue on illegal immigration.”  SHW:  ”You don’t think that we should allow our borders to be completely open to everyone, at any time, for any reason????  RACIST!!!!”  Me: “Eric Holder is all but guilty of pulling the trigger to the gun that killed Brian Terry due to his handling of Fast and Furious.”  SHW: “RACIST!!!!  Wait, wait, no, Bush started it!!!”

If you want to debate with me, present me with facts, not emotional premises, not non-factual talking points bearing little relation to the argument at hand.  If I wanted to argue with a sobbing hysterical woman, I’d date one.  If I wanted to be treated like I was suffering from the uterine hysteria, I’d get married again.