Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Just so you know that is a photoshop of McCain and Bush combined, I don’t exactly know how it became my avatar, I originally signed in on one of my work computers and it just popped up, I have no idea how to change it to be frank. I usually use a pic of my Great Dane Bob as my avitar, but since it was a shared computer this photo popped up?? I am a bit of a luddite in this area, so if you have any suggestions on how to get Bobs pic up there in stead of McBush I am more than willing to hear them.

As for Ms Obama, I suspect part of the reason she is keeping her distance from the political process is that she wasn’t too keen on him running for POTUS, I met her in Iowa almost 3 years ago, months before he decided to run, at a mutual friends house for a brunch before the Harkin Steak Fry event and she, at the time, was not on board with him running for POTUS. As much as it pains me to say this, I think that the spouse/family of the first ‘non white male’ president (be they female, black, hispanic, etc) would be a bit worried of some sexist, racist, wackadoodle with bad intentions and a gun. She is a very smart woman, who had a very strong understanding of what kind of danger him being POTUS puts her family in, and she seems to shy away from the spotlight, not because she isn’t worthy, but because she worries that some lunatic will go after her children, mother, or husband. It is perfectly understandable, but very sad as well. I can not imagine being is that position. Being watched at every moment, from both friends and foes. Those poor Bush girls couldn’t let loose and have a few beers and a bit of fun when they were in college without it ending up in People mag. Now that is a drag.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

You also seemed to have missed that the very thing about Ms. Obama that I respect is that she is not trying to be a controlling First Lady like Nancy Reagan or Hillary Clinton but instead acknowledges to everybody that she’s just “married to the President” and playing a “mom-in-chief” supporting role as he takes on one of the most demanding and difficult jobs in the world.

I think this is a type of progress where we no longer have these wives trying to control or even have a say in things when they are not the ones we elected. In other words if you want access to Presidential power (whether to be of service to the world or for other reasons), now you have to run for the office, not marry it. I also think it is a healthier acknowledgment that women have egos and are independent people from their husbands, rather than women having to rely on their husbands to act for them in the world.

BUT that does not change the fact that many men are still objecting to female empowerment and many women are kind-of naive about this, I think, as well as contributing to the problem by reinforcing the submissive, service-oriented wife model because they don’t take life by the horns like you have and do the work of getting a DVM or otherwise finding a way to be a player in the outside world and supporting themselves.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Since you will not take a hint, here is the drill… I am just barely over 35 (my birthday was in May), I am a professional doctor (granted I am a DVM not an MD), I am proud to be a very strong and solid feminist, and above all I am a WOMAN… Taylor is my middle name, it is easier because the name Alice is usually taken, and I find that people are sadly more respectful to a person if they don’t know their gender,so I use my gender neutral middle name, which is a sad reflection of our culture… I am proud to be a woman of accomplishment in my small corner of the world, and I think that every woman should be and that people should not try and pidgeon hole them by their husbands accomplishments, like people tend to do with first ladies. Eleanor Roosevelt was no shrinking violet, and should never be treated as one. Brilliant people gravitate to each other, one of them (regardless of gender) may become famous (POTUS for example) more so than the spouse, but that doesn’t diminsh the other persons worth. Just because I point out that these former and current first ladies were accomplished in their own right, does not mean that I do not want a woman in the Whitehouse, or that it is my thinking they are subservient to men in any way. I strongly suspect that if that is what you got from my comments you either seriously misread what I wrote, I worded it very badly or you are quite young probably just in college with a burr under your saddle (hell, I had one of those for my fresh and soph years as well, I think we all do from time to time) and I honestly do not mean that as an insult, I am just attempting to understand how in hell you could possibly think that I am some sexist grandpa type.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

I just have found in practice that this psychology of entitlement to support and service by women (as opposed to more of a negotiated, reciprocal exchange model of dealing with women as well as trying to be friends with them) was programmed into men over about the age of 40 or 45 and a lot of them appear to be expressing anger and resentment about losing it. Also, I suspect the evolutionary biology does play a role (men consciously or subconsciously fear losing their “status” and some actually like using it to get relationships with younger women, and multiple women).

I am not saying you are doing this or are driven in this way, just that I think it does go on in our culture and is a big part of the wars over female Supreme Court Justices, abortion rights & so-called “socialism.”

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Wow, you have REALLY missed my point, and I take credit for failing to make it clearly. I was simply trying to say that these women deserve credit for their own accomplishments and should not be put down as being nothing more than married to a sucessful man. I would love to see a woman in the Whitehouse, I thought Sec Clinton really had a chance, but unlike others I thought she wasn’t ‘riding the coattails’ of her husband but instead unfortunately held back by his baggage (Lewinski nonsense, etc). Personally I can not stand when people suggest that a woman is only where she is because of her spouse, it is offensive and disrespectful. That was my point, while these women may not be POTUS (and frankly there have only been 44 of them in the history of the US so far, so via the stats most people won’t regardless of gender/race etc) they shouldn’t be recduced to someone who married well or is nothing but some sort of stand by your man nitwit. That was my point. Ms Obama is a strong, educated woman, and she should be damn proud of that fact; she didn’t get through law school by batting her eyelashes.

And by the by, you may want to watch your speculations a tad, you seem to be under the impression I am an older, uneducated fella, who doesn’t understand feminism and womens issues… Well, while I choose not to share about myself personally on the ‘intertubes’ I will say you are way more than a bit off on that assumption, and if you actually met me you would know exactly what I mean. Remember assumptions are the mother of all f*ck ups.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

I agree with you that it is troublesome if Rihanna is blamed for the abuse and that the behavior of Britney, Lindsay et all is troublesome.

You’re still not acknowledging the distinction between being First Lady and holding the more substantive role of President, though. Even Hillary Clinton got where she is in large part on her husband’s coattails (and I suspect, on women, especially older women, identifying with her suffering from her husband’s infidelity). (I know many male politicians, such as the Kennedys etc benefit from these same family ties.)

You appear to be focused on these women who have supported their husbands’ achievement and are not supportive of the women holding the power and accomplishing things themselves.

We are not going to get out of the gender wars until there is clear recognition that women in the substantive roles are recognized as valuable and not threatening to male egos. The whole male backlash to feminism is exactly this: resentment and rejection of women in power. This is exactly why women behave like Britney and Lindsay. They think the only way to get any standing in the world is to cater to male interest in their bodies. Michelle Obama and Laura Bush are a step up (or more) from this, but they are still playing supportive roles to male achievement (at least for Michelle Obama right now anyway). I am not aware that Laura Bush has done much in public life beyond her charitable work.

I think the only answer is individuation and understanding that women need support from their husbands just as men need it from their wives. Lots of young men and women recognize this and the entitlement psychology of men appears to be dissipating in younger generations.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

And I give you a hearty Amen to that, but I think your angst in this matter is better directed at nitwits like Brittany Spears or Paris Hilton than Ms Obama. For heavens sake did you see that poll out of Boston, that nearly 50% of teenagers thought that Rhianna was at fault for the abuse or to be more correct the beating? I damn near vomited when I saw that. Ms Obama is not the one influencing the young women of tomorrow, she is in Time and Newsweek not ‘teen beat’ magazine, but foolish, self obsessed ‘girls’ like Paris, Brittany (sp?) etc and their antics are, and that scares me to my core. I wish more young women would look up to a woman like Ms Obama (a sucessful lawyer), Ms Bush (with a masters degree in library science), or Sec Clinton, or Marie Curie, but they are sadly not likely to in our current culture.

Report this comment as spam or abuse