There’s this candidate out there that I think might be just what men need to ensure their specific needs are met—a candidate who has the ability to configure a world that more adequately fits the needs of the man of today. I’m talking about any candidate with a penis. Oh, sure, it’s usually not a good plan to vote on a single issue, but in this case, I think this single item is of utmost importance…..one that rises to greater magnitude than specific issues, or even the actions of the candidate.
This is basically the Gloria Steinem/Madeleine Albright argument for Hillary Clinton, but just substitute one genitalia for another. I’m sure you’ve heard about Steinem chastising millennial female voters who trend heavily toward Sanders. She said something like…… these girls just want in the tree-house with the boys, and will do anything to get up that rope, even bring snacks. She said later that she “misspoke” but usually a mispeak is a word that is made up, like mispeak, and a small error, not a complete opposite meaning. She meant what she said, and it’s just tragic. The millennials are saddled with debt, a culture that seems to hate their autonomy….and the grand old dame of the feminists has to throw in some insults, as well.
The young women are looking at their situation (huge student debt, erosion of good jobs, lack of universal health care) and they are utilizing their equal and talented brains to come to the conclusion that a neoliberal lackey is not the best fit for them, regardless of sex.
Gloria Steinem is something of a Charlie’s Angels feminist. She takes assignments like dressing up as a Playboy bunny to show things like “ouch, these guys are staring at my cup size!”. No shit, Gloria. It’s like an assignment from Charlie (can you tell I was a kid in the 70’s!?)…..”Jill, you’re going to have to take down this drug smuggling ring that operates out of a bank on 5th Street. Here is your disguise.”
“But why do I have to dress up like a bikini model to take down the smugglers?”
“It’s not for you to ask, Jill. A man talking from a box says so.”
So basically, that’s Gloria Steinem. She could have gone for something a little less cheesy, like a hard-hitting, insightful look into poverty, especially from the female angle like Barbara Ehrenreich did in Nickeled and Dimed, but that isn’t as fun as dressing up as in a shady bunny suit. You might actually have to wash some dishes and do decidedly non-dress-up, grindingly hard work. Screw you, Gloria Steinem, and screw your damn bunny suit (which I just know you probably dress up on Wednesday nights in and prance around your house). You are a sicko, at least close your curtains. And quit insulting these young women.
And Madeleine (We Think the Price Is Worth It™ ) Albright said something about women who don’t support Hillary Clinton going to hell or something very crazy like that. I’m not a hell believer, but if I were of such an inclination, I’m thinking the monster who said the death of 500,000 Iraqi children was “worth it” might have the most “special” place. I would think she’d have a corner booth, even.
The comments have been termed “tone deaf” but I consider them a bit more than that. Their sexism is every bit as virulent and the most misogynist MRA noodlebrain in that it hurts more coming from these women who should be looking out for their “sisters”. They are only looking out for the protection of the authoritarian patriarchy. They wouldn’t care if it was an authoritarian matriarchy, or even one led by zebroids—it’s all about the power. (I just learned that word, zebroid, sorry—had to use it, I’m not really saying an authoritarian zebroidocracy is in the works….but if you know of this possibility, let me know. I want to hear about it!) They have no interest in unraveling a system composed of strands of inequality for all sorts of situations and individuals. If they have power, they are good with it.
The most common item that leads to a woefully low station in these United States is a lack of money. It all feeds into that, and the deranged circle is certainly fed with racism and sexism. It’s all connected. Comments like the ones from Steinem and Albright expose that it’s about so much more than simply supporting someone with a damn vagina. It’s such an insult to the men who have worked hard to champion rights for women as well. Why would you want to be so nasty to those on your side? To indicate a stellar candidate in terms of women’s equality still falls short if he has no vagina?
The young women are looking at their situation (huge student debt, erosion of good jobs, lack of universal health care) and they are utilizing their equal and talented brains to come to the conclusion that a neoliberal lackey is not the best fit for them, regardless of sex……that’s what feminism should be about. A judgment of others (men and women) for their actions, not the presence of a vagina.