I hesitate to release this particular blog because I know this small essay is going to be taken the wrong way by so many different people. In short, this blog is not going to appear to be very politically correct and, for that matter, will probably piss off people of all political persuasions. That’s one of the dangers to be associated with independent thought. One thing I do recognize about Americans is that we are not big on nuance. Take for instance the McCain supporter who claimed a black Obama supporter carved on the letter “B” on her face the other day. McCain’s Karl Rove operatives were all over the story leaking it to the press only to find out the dumb ass actually carved the letter herself backwards in a mirror. Oh, did she mention it was a dyslexic black Obama supporter? Again, we are not big on nuance and, hence, my somewhat offensive blog article title.
I’m not even staking a position on this issue and this is neither an anti-feminist diatribe nor is it necessarily a knock against Sarah Palin, heaven knows I have done enough of that in my past blogs. Frankly, I don’t know or care if Sarah is nursing her youngest son but do Americans realize that for the first time in American history there is a remote chance that we could have an American President that is actually breastfeeding? Besides the prurient aspects of this possibility, this is obviously another nail in the coffin of the stuffy old, white guys who have been running and running down our country for the past two hundred plus years. Much has been made of Obama possibly being the first black president, second if you count Bill Clinton, but we never had a mother running this country and being the “Commander in Chief” before.
Other nations have already had female leaders typically Prime Ministers. These women tended to be older, mature types that had withstood the political winds of their respective countries. Some were maternal, perhaps loving partners to their respective mates but the essence that made them most feminine was long in the past by the time they took office. Face it, Palin is a younger, untried personality much like Obama. Plus, we know scientifically that women are genetically and hormonally different than their males counterparts. Accordingly, women have been treated very differently by Western culture and to some degree negatively. That has changed with the advent of total war and while we have had a prohibition against woman serving in combat units that does not mean they have been in harm’s way, particularly in Iraq, so the political sands have been slowly shifting in favor of women expanding their role in society.
Biden recently made a comment about Obama being tested during his first six months in office. A lot of people have been thinking that about an Obama presidency but Biden said this as a stupid off-the cuff remark that engendered all sort of comebacks from the McCain-Palin camp. But what if McCain wins and one morning several months into his presidency McCain never gets up. Come on, you know he is old enough to peacefully go in the middle of the night, right? Consequently, we would have the untried Palin as President and Commander in Chief of this country. Once she gets in office, terrorists decide to test her because hell that is what they do to any American President. They hold hostage a number of Americans and among the hostages are a number of children. Being a mother does this color her judgment and subsequently alter her tactical response to the situation?
Most people will say what the hell does her gender have to do with any of this? These are the same people who say race has nothing to do with this campaign. Nice brave, politically correct words but we all know differently. For the average African-American you don’t think Obama’s color makes a difference? Did Kennedy make a difference to voting Catholics in 1960? Kennedy’s Catholicism did not make a difference to some Protestants at that time? For the young, first-time voter you don’t think age makes a difference? You’re telling me they don’t think McCain is a fossil who can’t even boot a computer never mind download an MP3? You don’t think Hispanics don’t care that Obama is black? Or for that matter some white Americans don’t think he is a black Arab? Yes, brave politically correct words but not really grounded in the reality of the American electorate and the behavior of people in general. Nuance Alert: I didn’t say all Americans are rednecks but I did say they are human.
This type of fossil, conservative thinking about the ramifications of Palin being President is, of course, negated by the black man’s presence. After all, she is not running as President and Obama is and, for many Palin is clearly the lesser of two possible evils. If she ever got into the Oval office images of her kids playing would abound as she commanders the office of Chief Executive. Think of Kennedy and John John and you’ll scare the hell out of lot of people. Plus she could be breast feeding one of her brood at that time! Really, this is not an issue for the American people? How about America’s enemies? Think about Kennedy playing poker with Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile? Would a mother behave or negotiate differently with a powerful enemy knowing that her child could ultimately be killed by her decisions? What about your enemies who may not be so politically correct? If you’re Putin, do you reconsider annexing Georgia if a nursing mother is running the United States?
On second thought, maybe we need more of that type of maternal thinking in this world? Think about all the wars and stupid bloodshed we have seen started and waged by tired, old white men who were more concerned about their egos and place in history than they were concerned about the fates of their children. And, face it, nobody does total war like tired, old white men. Maybe a mother would be a refreshing change of pace and perhaps their perspective is one that is long overdue in our government? But isn’t Palin’s son serving in Iraq and isn’t she in favor of the war, claiming Iraq is a mission from God? Being a woman hasn’t stopped female suicide bombers, right?
Let’s face it, bringing this breastfeeding issue up is another variation on the old double standard, right and I am being little more than a sexist pig, correct? Nobody mainstream touches this topic but if you Google “Palin breastfeeding” there are over a million hits so Americans are talking about this topic. As to the double standard, hey guys can’t breastfeed and secondly, as I said before, men are very genetically and hormonally different from women despite what political correctness may say about the topic. Nuance Alert: I didn’t say men are better, I just said different. (As a matter of fact, woman are genetically superior to men because of their double-X chromosomes which can make them less susceptible to a variety of sex linked genetic diseases.)
And hello, Americans are still big on double standards. Hillary is allowed to squirt a few crocodile tears when she is being picked on and she didn’t get dinged too bad for her blatant display of womanly emotion. However, if a man was to do that during a campaign, well can you say sayonara to him in the polls? Moreover, we can make all sorts of aspersions about the young black guy being tested early on if he gets elected but we can’t question the nursing mother being tested? I don’t know, I just can’t figure this one out and I guess we’ll just let history take place in the weeks ahead.
***By the way I recently heard that almost two to three million Chinese factory workers have been laid off thanks to the latest economic downturn. With the Olympics over expect the Chinese authorities to clamp down on dissension within the general populace and note the recent headlines regarding the death sentence for the mayor found taking bribes for Olympic contracts. If this is a relatively short recession the Chinese will recover but a long, drawn out recession will test the mettle of both the Chinese people and their government. This is going to get interesting and scary at the same time.***
Link:
Honestly, the only thing I like about Sarah Palin is that she is breastfeeding. But that isn’t a reason to vote for her. It also isn’t a reason not to vote for her, IMO. Her “maternal thinking” is VASTLY different from my “maternal thinking” and she doesn’t come close to supporting mothers.
about me:”You claim that it’s up to one’s interpretation what the Bible means, but why?”That isn’t at all like ahytning I’ve said here or in conversation with you elsewhere. By wording the statement as you have there, it sounds as if you think I mean there is no way to know ahytning about the original intent of the author and that EVERY possible interpretation is a productive interpretation. I don’t mean ahytning like that at all.Instead what I mean when I talk to you about biblical interpretation is that every interpretation brings with it some personal baggage. We read scripture through our particular lens. Good exegesis attempts to (though never perfectly) read the texts through the lens of the original author. This is never a perfect science because we don’t have access to the original authors. In most cases we don’t even have a definitive identity of the author. So we undertake the process of textual criticism to examine the cultural norms, political climate, and geographical influences of the approximate environment of the author and their community. By doing that, our goal is to learn what the author meant rather than reading our own desires into the texts. My goal in all reading of scripture is to understand the author’s intention. I’m never intentionally trying to read my views into it. However, that goal is unreachable. We must remain humble enough to realize our flawed attempts. Our humility must cause us to consistently question our interpretation as it is OUR interpretation. Where you suppose I am questioning the texts themselves, what you should realize is that I’m questioning our (and my) previous interpretations. When you over simplify the process by suggesting the texts have ONLY the surface plain meanings, you are belittling the authors by suggesting they were not smart enough to add depth and complexity in the form of metaphor, symbolism, and allegory. You are selling the authors short. I suggest you are valuing a particular (I’d add simplistic) interpretation rather than honoring the full depth of texts. For example, I am 100% positive that I saw you place a fag in your mouth behind the office building last week. Do you want to take that statement at face value within the culture of those reading the statement or do some exegesis and look for possible alternate meanings for the word fag? Do you want to consider the most obvious use of “fag” in our culture to mean “homosexual” or do you want to consider that in some cultures, the word fag is slang for cigarette? To truly understand both my statement and the object of my statement (you), a person would need to do more research about both of us to avoid a misunderstanding about your daily habits behind the office.
There are many who truly believe that they are doing the work of God, but if you step back for a second and think, “how many of these guys are out there just scamming people”, you realize, there? could be thousands around the world ripping mentally disturbed people, who are seeking help, out of loads of cash. Terrifying, huh?