To American women, a cautionary note: If Democrats believe they can gain politically at your expense, they won’t hesitate to sacrifice your well-being. They might even do it more than once for good measure.

Consider, for example, the situation faced by the victims of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who are reportedly urging Democrats to refrain from using their painful experiences as political ammunition.

In anticipation of a document release on Friday, House Democrats on Thursday unveiled 60 new images from Epstein’s property with little context. One image depicts what seems to be a young woman’s foot, inscribed with lines from “Lolita,” the controversial novel from the 1950s about an older man’s fixation on a young girl.

Why are Democrats disseminating these disjointed and disturbing images so recklessly across the internet?

The apparent strategy is to keep the Epstein saga in the public eye, hoping it reflects poorly on Donald Trump, despite a lack of evidence linking him to Epstein’s heinous acts.

According to CNN, Epstein’s victims have been holding private discussions with members of the House Democratic Women’s Caucus, imploring them to cease the selective release of their photographs. Publicly, these Democratic women appear to be in agreement with the victims’ pleas.

‘I do think it is important that we always remember that this whole process is a constant re-traumatization for survivors,’ head of the Democratic Women’s Caucus, Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández, said Thursday.

Well, Teresa. You’d better tell the dude in charge of releasing these photos to stop then, because Congressman Robert Garcia – the fella weaponizing Epstein’s reeking trash piles – is mailing out these images like they’re Christmas cards.

The victims of convicted freak show, pedophile Jeffrey Epsteinare reportedly pleading with Democrats to stop exploiting their trauma to score political points

On Thursday, House Democrats blasted out 60 images from Epstein’s estate, released without any apparent context. One picture shows what appears to be a young woman’s foot (pictured)

Look, I am for full transparency in the Epstein saga. I think everything should be exposed to the light of day. But that doesn’t mean it also should be more readily available than Kim Kardashian’s selfies. At least Kim includes captions.

Behind the blurred faces and blacked out names are real women, who deserve to be treated with respect and decency. Have Democrats –  who constantly claim to be standing up for the most vulnerable among us – forgotten that?

This, of course, is not that only example this week of lefties dragging women in the name of politics.

Did you happen to read the two-part hatchet job Vanity Fair profile of White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles?

The woman credited with imposing once-unimaginable discipline on the often feral 47th US president turned into an unlikely quote machine in a head-scratching interview, granting unprecedented access to White House chronicler Chris Whipple.

Now, I’m not letting Wiles off the hook for walking straight into this open manhole. 

Sure enough, White House peripherals and Hill Republicans are expressing off-the-record shock that Wiles granted access to a writer with an agenda and an outlet that has it in for this administration. That’s fair. But I also can’t excuse Vanity Fair’s straight-up sexist portrayal of some of the most powerful women in America.

Exhibit B: There was a near immediate uproar over the intimate portraits of several Trump cabinet members that were cropped so close that you could see their pores and, in the case of White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, her possible lip-filler injection marks.

Wiles ended up looking like a raccoon caught by the floodlights while raiding the garbage cans in the middle of the night.

Yes, the men got a similar treatment. JD Vance’s shot was so tight it seemed to me that photographer Christopher Anderson was recreating the fat baby meme. Why not photoshop a binky in his mouth?

The harsh lighting, akimbo eyeballs and unnatural skin tone in Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s portrait made that one like an autopsy photo.

Wiles ended up looking like a raccoon caught by the floodlights while raiding the garbage cans in the middle of the night (pictured)

But let’s not kid ourselves. It’s not a secret women generally care more about their outward appearance than men. So, the Leavitt and Wiles pictures were particularly egregious. And the left-wing-glossy-magazine-complex almost always gives Democrat gals the Annie Leibovitz treatment.

Whether it’s Michelle Obama’s multiple Vanity Fair covers or Dr. Jill Biden shown from a respectful, filtered distance for Vogue, lefty lasses are always cast in their finest light.

When Vanity Fair published an essay from outgoing and irrepressibly incompetent White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, the accompanying action shot was empowering and flattering, portraying Bumbling Biden’s babbling mouthpiece like a soft-lit girlboss.

Karoline Leavitt wouldn’t get the same soft touch if she were non-binary and disabled.

Anderson tried to defend himself saying of his luscious-lipped subject: ‘That’s the makeup that she puts on, those are the injections she gave herself. If they show up in a photo, what do you want me to say?’

Fine. It’s not your fault Anderson. This is what you do. It’s on Vanity Fair for commissioning a hit shoot.

These lefty gatekeepers want you to believe they champion all women. Don’t buy that slop for a second. If you make fodder for their bias machine – man or woman – they’ll grind you down and extrude you like a sausage.