The NH House recently passed HB 135, a bill aimed at repealing parts of the so-called Stand Your Ground law that was passed by the last legislature.
A great deal of hysteria has ensued. One would think that the many urgent problems that beset our state (JOBS,infrastructure, tuition costs, housing) could all be solved with guns.
That hysteria has spilled over into the NH House internal email system. This system exists so that all 400 of them can send and receive notices and share information. Sometimes the sharing can get a little ugly. Rep. Rick Watrous wrote about a rule change instituted at the end of last year by former Speaker William O'Brien:
"Electronic media cannot be used for knowingly transmitting, retrieving, or storing any communication that is: 1. Discriminatory or harassing; 2. Derogatory to any individual or group; 3. Obscene, sexually explicit or pornographic; 4. Defamatory or threatening. In addition, also prohibited are jokes . . . or any other non-legislative work activity that is not allowed on government computers."
O’Brien warns that “there will be zero tolerance for any violation” of the language section of the policy. Upon any House member violating that section “his or her legislative email privilege will be immediately terminated.”
Has this strict policy been adhered to?
Not so much.
Rep. Steve Vallaincourt gave a lengthy and dramatic speech from the House floor before the vote on HB 135. He posted that speech on the house internal email, resulting in this critique from a fellow legislator:
From: Hansen, Peter
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 8:32 PM
To: ~All Representatives
Subject: RE: HB 135 SpeechThe Representative from Manchester blogged today his full speech from the well at last weeks vote on HB 135.
There were two critical ingredients missing in the illustrious stories purporting to demonstrate the practical side of retreat. Not that retreat may not be possible mind you. What could possibly be missing from those factual tales of successful retreat in VT, Germany, and the bowels of Amsterdam? Why children and vagina's of course. While the tales relate the actions of a solitary male the outcome cannot relate to similar situations where children and women and mothers are the potential victims. The presence of one or both ingredients demands that a potential totally different outcome might have prevailed and that is the factor which I believe was dismissed in the HB 135 debate and vote.
Rep. Peter T. Hansen
Hills. District 22 Amherst
ED&A Committee
I'm pretty sure that when the Titanic was sinking, the captain's instructions were "women and children first, not "vagina's and children first." That the representative chose to describe women as "vagina's" is certainly an affront to half the population. That he failed to properly pluralize the word adds insult to idiocy.
That email resulted in the following exchange:
On Apr 2, 2013, at 3:30 PM, "Hansen, Peter" <Peter.Hansen@leg.state.nh.us> wrote:From: Watrous, Rick
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 9:12 PM
To: Hansen, Peter; ~All Representatives
Subject: RE: HB 135 Speech
Rep Watrous,
Having a fairly well educated mind I do not need self appointed wardens to A: try to put words in my mouth for political gain and B: Turn a well founded strategy in communication into an insulting accusation, and finally if you find the noun vagina insulting or in some way offensive then perhaps a better exercise might be for you to re-examine your psyche.
Rep. Peter T. Hansen
Hills. District 22 Amherst
ED&A Committee
Here we learn that referring to women as "vagina's" is a "well founded strategy in communication" coming to us from a "fairly well educated mind."
The female voters in his district (Amherst) may disagree.
h/t to anonymous source
Maybe the term for all those who are not vaginas, should be "dicks." Then one would be correct is calling Rep. Hansen a "dick."
ReplyDeletethe best of analogies
DeleteThen it would appear you don't have a problem with the Representatives choice of words.
DeleteNo, not because they agree with his choice of words. Not because he has a dick. Because he IS a dick. See, unlike the word vagina, the word dick has another meaning...Sorry, but I felt the need to spell that out for you as if you were a toddler, since you seemed confused about what samiinh was saying.
Deleteyou can educate a fool all you want...but it will still be a fool......somewhat like dressing up a pig.....
ReplyDeletewhat is that famous saying"you can stay quiet and be thought a fool..or speak and erase all doubt".....?
ReplyDeleteLMAO, samiinh! Perfectly logical reasoning!
ReplyDeleteMy late sister worked for the Speaker as Press Secretary for the House for a couple of years. I'm considering driving back to NH and kicking this idiot dickhead where it would hurt him the most in her honor.
ReplyDeletesamiinh, your comment is perfect! Thanks for making it clear. :-)
ReplyDeleteThe proper corollary would be 'penis', not 'dick' saminh. ;-) While I wouldn't want to be categorized as a vagina, the word itself is a perfectly acceptable term for a part of my anatomy. This circumstance could be hilariously funny as an SNL sketch. Unfortunately, this fellow is not a comedian.
ReplyDeleteThat's absolutely appalling and shameful!
ReplyDeleteYou are correct, Anonymous, strictly speaking, however, "dick" seems much more appropriate, colloquially.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJacob - it's always wise to read the story before you comment.
ReplyDeleteOf course, Susan. Had the author of THIS article put "vagina's" in quotes, there wouldn't have been a problem. That or "sic". I shall delete my comment above.
DeleteThat's excellent, Jacob. You've made your failure to read the story before commenting my fault! Nice work.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, you made the mistake of assuming your meaning was clear, when it wasn't. Compounding it with passive-aggressive behavior (twice) doesn't make you look any smarter either.
DeleteOf course, there is always the chance I'm assuming you're being passive-aggressive, when in fact you are merely helpful and supportive even in the face of adversity.
I've read through the comments and agree with them, but to raise a question, does anyone thing that perhaps he stupidly wrote "vagina's" in a facetious manner? Not towards women but towards whatever he is referencing that the speaker left out in an attempt to make that person look foolish?
ReplyDeleteWow, Hansen is a real moron.
ReplyDeleteJacob, stop digging, LOL!
Both seem good @ blaming others for their deficiencies...
does anyone thing that perhaps he stupidly wrote "vagina's" in a facetious manner?
ReplyDeleteNo.
He wrote vaginas because like most conservative men, that's all he thinks women are.
I can't take offense to something when I don't know the whole story. When I see the original Email in whole that was sent, then and only then, will I be offended or once again, think you all are idiots. That's what is wrong with you sheep! You are waiting like lapdogs for the next media outlet to tell you how to feel, vote, eat, sleep, etc. Republican or Democrat you are all fools!
ReplyDeleteDear Most Recent Anonymous - it's always a treat to hear from a true intellectual.
ReplyDeleteGreetings Mr Hansen,
ReplyDeleteIt has come to my attention that you have used the New Hampshire House email system to transmit a communication that is derogatory to women.
I found this response to you from Rick Watrous, who most chivalrously cautioned you about your offensive language.
From: Watrous, Rick
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 9:12 PM
To: Hansen, Peter
Rep. Hansen,
"Children and vagina's"??!! Are you really using "vaginas" as a crude catch-all for women? Really?
Please think before you send out such offensive language on the legislative listserve.
Rep Rick Watrous
Yowza, here is your scorching response to Rep Watrous:
On Apr 2, 2013, at 3:30 PM, "Hansen, Peter" wrote:
Rep Watrous,
Having a fairly well educated mind I do not need self appointed wardens to A: try to put words in my mouth for political gain and B: Turn a well founded strategy in communication into an insulting accusation, and finally if you find the noun vagina insulting or in some way offensive then perhaps a better exercise might be for you to re-examine your psyche.
Rep Peter Hansen
YOU sound like YOU are insulted and offended when he writes to you, "Dude, don't call the ladies THAT." LOL: and you wrote him that you don't need him putting words in your mouth! Are you kidding? You referred to all women as Vaginas, then you set about to OWN IT, and you tell HIM to not put words in YOUR mouth! Sweet jujubes! MTV couldn't write a reality show sillier than what you just said! Back to your email in which you are OWNING IT... "IF you find the noun "vagina" insulting or in some way offensive then perhaps a better exercise might be for you to re-examine your psyche" Clearly you are defending your use of the noun vagina in the context of the original email which refers to females as vaginas. (No apostrophe needed to pluralize the noun "vagina.") And yes, you do sound like a very smart man who has been educated.
Your reference to women as vaginas in the context of your original emails means that you do not value women except for the role their vaginas play. Vaginas are used during coitus to receive the penis for purposes of reproduction. Vaginas are used during birth to allow the baby to exit the body. After that, I cannot think of any other common uses for a vagina. You do realize, I hope, a vagina is internalized in the human body and is not visible to the outside, right? I also want to be sure that you know that women don't receive sexual pleasure directly from their vaginas, right?
So for you to say that "children and vaginas" are missing from the supporting anecdotes to persuade a decision to retreat, it is like you are saying that children and human beings that are only valued as sexual receptacles for males are missing from the supporting anecdotes.
You know, I wouldn't have to be all up in yo' business if you hadn't made it personal. You have said to me "I don't see you as a citizen, nor as person with dignity and rights; I only see you as a receptacle to receive a penis for reproductive purposes."
No matter how scientifically or socially acceptable you think the word "vagina" is, the context in which you said "vaginas" is utterly repugnant. You have used it in the same context that the word "cunt" is usually used in. Even though you chose the noun "vagina," everyone knows you meant it in the same coarse, vulgar, guttural, demeaning, way as "cunt." You have labeled yourself a woman-hater.
Yes, I am insulted and offended. Not that you used the word "vagina," but the context in which you used it.
There is NO apology you can make that doesn't make you look like a misogynistic fool.
Just resign your office, you are a disgusting disgrace.
Amen.
DeleteWow! Susan the Bruce ,your sarcasm and veiled insult is remarkable. Anon above I agree with you. Clearly the whole story is not presented in this posting. The two things I find most unfortunate are: 1) that the uproar is over Rep Hanson's use of a word which some find as vulgar (Possessing my own vagina I really am not offended) or that he as a white male and a republican (gasp) should say such a thing,is overshadowing what the debate is supposed to be about: HB 135: and 2) that "all you all" (having lived south of the Mason Dixon line for the first 29 years of my life I use to mean everyone that has posted or replied here) resort to name calling when you disagree with someone. So now feel free to attack all my grammatical errors and my personal character because that is what the thought police and Big Brother are expecting. :)
ReplyDeleteIt's not the word. It's the context he used it in.
ReplyDeleteits amazing that this story died a natural death, but i'll send his competitor some cash when she emerges LMAO
ReplyDelete1:21 Anonymous are you for real? this isnt about name calling at all. dont let a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch, girl lol
ReplyDeleteI get 1:20 Anonymous = you are a personal friend of the Hansen
ReplyDelete