And women helped to defeat the ERA, too...
This article appeared this week in my campus paper, the University Daily Kansan. For your enjoyment/irritation, I give you:
by Sara Garlick
Published: Tuesday, September 27, 2005
There will be no female president in my lifetime and there shouldn’t be. All
right, so I’ve already touched a nerve with some of you. Many liberals
and female activists would bring up the issue of Hilary Clinton running
for the presidency in 2008.
Although there are some women who have the public presence and essentially more balls than their male
counterparts vital for holding such an office with a huge amount of
power and prestige, this country would still not accept a female
president, or we would have already done so.
For a country that prides itself on women’s suffrage and the feminist movement, then why
haven’t we had women in power since the start of colonies? The answer
to that question is that back then, men and women thought that women
were incompetent for such power.
This thinking still goes on today. If the United States wanted to be known as a country that
allowed equality of the sexes, then the United States would have
idolized women as leaders and warriors from the beginning as other
countries had done in the past. In England, for example, women have
been recognized as leaders and warriors throughout the centuries
starting with Queen Boudica in the first century C.E. during the Roman
occupation up to Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria and Margaret
Thatcher. Here in the United States, we do not have this “female
warrior” persona that allows the women who want to lead to do so.
Religion also plays an important factor in the sexual inequality here in the
United States. Within the Judeo-Christian beliefs on which the United
States and its principles are founded upon, this sexual inequality is
obvious in the emphasis on male leaders and paternal lineage allowing
for the success of the society to be based on the male genitalia. This
is another reason that we will not have a female president. When it
comes down to it, politics still follows the emphasis on males and men
controlling power.
The majority of the senate, the house and governorships has and always will be men. Even though having women in
politics and acknowledgements by their male counterparts as excellent
leaders is good PR, the reality is that the general male politician, a
WASP (white Anglo Saxon Protestant), will not give up his established
power just for a woman to take it. Come on, that’s common sense.
There is one biological factor that would prevent a woman from fulfilling the
office of the presidency - estrogen. It is physically proven that
because of the higher levels of estrogen in females than those levels
in males, they are physically weaker than men. Not only are there
differences in the muscular and skeletal structures of the body, but
there are also mental differences due to the elevated levels in
estrogen. Think about this: Although some women are rational during
their menstrual cycle, not all of us are.
The chemical imbalances during this time have several side effects from cramps to
becoming total bitches who crave chocolate. Along with the mental side
effects of the increased estrogen comes the maternal instinct that all
women have.
The maternal instincts also would prevent a woman from raising her family and giving the oval office her undying
attention. Even male politicians can’t take care of their families
while in office. That’s why they have their wives and/or they ship
their kids off to boarding schools to let someone else raise their
children. That way their minds are worry-free and they can get their
job done.
Because of several factors, women should not and will not become president at least in my lifetime. As I said before, if the
United States was going to choose a female president, there would have
already been one. Instead, sexual inequality will always be present.
For the most part, though, power is outside of the media frame and behind
the scenes. The old saying goes “Behind every great man is an even
greater woman.” This saying is indeed true! Most recently, even Sex
& the City has commented on this behind-the-scenes power.
Kim Catrell’s character, Samantha Jones, states, “The only place you can
control a man is in bed. If we perpetually gave men blow jobs we could
run the world!” If it wasn’t for the wives of politicians, I highly
doubt their husbands would have public’s support for them to be in
office. The harder job is behind-the-scenes, getting that support and
those votes as well as campaign money (just don’t let your brother put
campaign money in real estate, Adam Taft), not being the pretty face
that people see kissing babies.
by Sara Garlick
Published: Tuesday, September 27, 2005
There will be no female president in my lifetime and there shouldn’t be. All
right, so I’ve already touched a nerve with some of you. Many liberals
and female activists would bring up the issue of Hilary Clinton running
for the presidency in 2008.
Although there are some women who have the public presence and essentially more balls than their male
counterparts vital for holding such an office with a huge amount of
power and prestige, this country would still not accept a female
president, or we would have already done so.
For a country that prides itself on women’s suffrage and the feminist movement, then why
haven’t we had women in power since the start of colonies? The answer
to that question is that back then, men and women thought that women
were incompetent for such power.
This thinking still goes on today. If the United States wanted to be known as a country that
allowed equality of the sexes, then the United States would have
idolized women as leaders and warriors from the beginning as other
countries had done in the past. In England, for example, women have
been recognized as leaders and warriors throughout the centuries
starting with Queen Boudica in the first century C.E. during the Roman
occupation up to Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria and Margaret
Thatcher. Here in the United States, we do not have this “female
warrior” persona that allows the women who want to lead to do so.
Religion also plays an important factor in the sexual inequality here in the
United States. Within the Judeo-Christian beliefs on which the United
States and its principles are founded upon, this sexual inequality is
obvious in the emphasis on male leaders and paternal lineage allowing
for the success of the society to be based on the male genitalia. This
is another reason that we will not have a female president. When it
comes down to it, politics still follows the emphasis on males and men
controlling power.
The majority of the senate, the house and governorships has and always will be men. Even though having women in
politics and acknowledgements by their male counterparts as excellent
leaders is good PR, the reality is that the general male politician, a
WASP (white Anglo Saxon Protestant), will not give up his established
power just for a woman to take it. Come on, that’s common sense.
There is one biological factor that would prevent a woman from fulfilling the
office of the presidency - estrogen. It is physically proven that
because of the higher levels of estrogen in females than those levels
in males, they are physically weaker than men. Not only are there
differences in the muscular and skeletal structures of the body, but
there are also mental differences due to the elevated levels in
estrogen. Think about this: Although some women are rational during
their menstrual cycle, not all of us are.
The chemical imbalances during this time have several side effects from cramps to
becoming total bitches who crave chocolate. Along with the mental side
effects of the increased estrogen comes the maternal instinct that all
women have.
The maternal instincts also would prevent a woman from raising her family and giving the oval office her undying
attention. Even male politicians can’t take care of their families
while in office. That’s why they have their wives and/or they ship
their kids off to boarding schools to let someone else raise their
children. That way their minds are worry-free and they can get their
job done.
Because of several factors, women should not and will not become president at least in my lifetime. As I said before, if the
United States was going to choose a female president, there would have
already been one. Instead, sexual inequality will always be present.
For the most part, though, power is outside of the media frame and behind
the scenes. The old saying goes “Behind every great man is an even
greater woman.” This saying is indeed true! Most recently, even Sex
& the City has commented on this behind-the-scenes power.
Kim Catrell’s character, Samantha Jones, states, “The only place you can
control a man is in bed. If we perpetually gave men blow jobs we could
run the world!” If it wasn’t for the wives of politicians, I highly
doubt their husbands would have public’s support for them to be in
office. The harder job is behind-the-scenes, getting that support and
those votes as well as campaign money (just don’t let your brother put
campaign money in real estate, Adam Taft), not being the pretty face
that people see kissing babies.