Alright, so she didn't exactly say 'misogynistic' in her shitty NYT opinion piece, but she did imply it. All she is attempting to do is rile up brainwashed dumbcunt feminists to cry out "Patriarchy!" and "They won't listen to tha womynz! For shame, someone please hear my queefs!":

"Elizabeth Warren Was Told to Be Quiet. Women Can Relate. By SUSAN CHIRA. FEB. 8, 2017. New York Times"

http://archive.is/03Fyp

"Susan Chira (@susanchira) is a senior correspondent and editor on gender issues for The New York Times."

But, apparently, the Senate committee chair, when Elizabeth Warren was shut down for breaking a rule, was somehow biased in enforcing the Senate's rules... yeah.. that's right, Elizabeth Warren was warned about impugning the reputation of a sitting Senator (rule 19 says that's a no no).

And... "Women can relate" according to this article's author.

How fucking stupid. Anyone can relate to being told not to break rules.

Bitch, shut the fuck up. Just because you have a gender studies degree does not mean everything that happens on Earth, that you don't like, and happens to affect women, is a gender-biased action.

Yet talking over women, or shutting them down, is a bipartisan exercise. During the Obama administration, women in the White House banded together to work on “amplification,” taking care in meetings to repeat other women’s points and give women credit for ideas they had first raised.

Bitch please.

And this idea of "Amplification" is so fucking stupid and irrational-- "Yeah, anytime a woman speaks, we're all going to back what she says and repeat it! No matter how ignorant, baseless, or stupid it is! She has a vagina, so her opinion matters! What? You have data? Fuck you, she has a vagina and an opinion!"

Jesus. This is an article about absolutely nothing. Yet here we see again that a woman (the author) wants to assert herself for no reason whatsoever. She just wants attention. She wants validation. She wants to do something meaningful... so she's making a mountain out of a molehill of rule-enforcement and calling it patriarchy mountain.

It's like a little kid who is trying to help but is just getting in the way. It's like-- Yo. Just sit down and watch. Watch and learn.

But definitely, don't write stupid fucking gender-biased articles about the patriarchy because the fucking Senate enforced its own goddamn rules.

Here's a youtube video of what happened. Sen. Warren was merely warned that she broke a rule, and then allowed to continue reading what she was reading.

Sen Warren Cut Off For Reading MLK Widow's Letter About Jeff Sessions - Youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAXr5Cq-0-0

Loren DeJonge Schulman, who worked 10 years at the Department of Defense and the National Security Council in the Obama administration, has vivid memories of watching men bridle as senior women challenged them. “The constant allegation from the Department of Defense was that the National Security Council was micromanaging them,” said Ms. Schulman, now a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “Is it really micromanagement, or are you complaining about women nagging?”

Yet this dumb fucking NYT gender studies correspondent relates it to NAGGING from NSA to the DoD, and sexism in management. What the fuck bitch? Is there a boogieman in your closet too?

How about instead of making shit up, go and find a real fucking story to report on in your attempts to conflate maintaining standards of equal enforcement of rules and law to both genders, as some sort of fucking gender bias.

What a dumb cunt.

Here is her twitter feed. https://twitter.com/susanchira/status/829453397510217728

Tweet at her and NYT: @susanchira @nytimes

Tell her Vaginas do not grant Senate rule-breaking privileges