There is a story about a little girl, Susan, whose parents were Democrats and a little boy, Jimmy, whose parents were Republican. Unmindful of political adversity, the children happily played together. One day the little girl came home with wet hair and damp clothing. Her mother asked her what happened.
She answered, “Oh, Jimmy and I went swimming.”
“But”, her mother responded, “You didn’t have your bathing suit.”
“No matter”, Susan replied, “we just took off our cloths… and you know what, mommy, I never knew there was such a difference between Democrats and Republicans.”
One cannot help but think that even if the Senate Alito Hearing Committee took off their cloths, with one exception, we would see little Party difference. Of course we know that Party differences are not based on genitalia.
But reproductive rights are. The huge majority of this Senate Panel and the Senate itself is male. Seldom if ever have males felt any need to insist on their reproductive rights – indeed, the opposite may be true in most cases.
Males do not have a uterus, fallopian tubes, vagina or significant amounts of estrogen and progesterone, yet they have a huge majority in the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of our federal government.
Males seldom have any need for birth control except as a health safety measure. They have never experienced a monthly menses or been conditioned from birth to play with dolls; to consider their bodies as traps for mates and baby ovens.
In point of fact, males are encouraged to think outwardly, to develop bonding with other men and to dress in uniform ie suit and tie, a dress code that excludes females. They are encouraged also to denigrate females, to train their body in sports and prepare to join the governing body of humanity – the adult male.
Males are trained to use their energy competing in sports with other men, but to establish solidarity with other males off the playing fields. Females are trained to put their energy into their own bodies and to compete with their bodies against other women for male attention. It is the sine qua non of fashion that any two women should NEVER dress the same – difference is emphasized to prevent female bonding.
Without even a modicum of body organs or sensations of what it is to be female, males are allowed to determine the legality of the most intimate of female bodily functions.
And women must take much of the blame for this. They allow their daughters to be called with silly-baby-stuffed animal names like Kitty or Candy or Daisy [can you imagine voting for a presidential candidate named Candy?]. They teach ignorant femininity over feminist strength and responsibility.
Despite the revolution of the late, great Woman’s Movement that liberated women from being “sexual objects”, allowed them to attend college and compete for non-traditional jobs, most women now are actually delighted to be objectified. To paraphrase Edward R. Murrow, Women who emulate “a nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
The few brave women that are working for women’s reproductive and other rights are to be commended. They little deserve the nasty criticism of women who have chosen to nurture their own lazy, uncaring minds; women who jeer from the sidelines at female candidates and then complain when their “rights” are trampled.
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change address or comment:
or in GenderGappers Blog - NEW!
Visit the GenderGappers link page: http://www.gendergappers.org/links.htm
GenderGappers articles may be forwarded if you wish, and translated into other languages, but please keep them intact. All issues are archived at the following site:
http://www.gendergappers.org 2006 - 003