America’s Next Bill Clinton!


“Because a woman’s worth is based on her breasts and thighs …”

I was deciding between Clinton and Obama, and this did it for it. Look at it, here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/02/whillary102.xml

 A staffer on Obama’s campaign has the now popularized Hillary Meal picture on his desk top. For those who cannot get the link, it says “Hillary Meal Deal: Two large thighs, two small breasts and a bunch of left wings. $666.”

Right, because the worth of a woman’s leadership is in how big her breasts or small her thighs are, right? Nevermind the fact that she is a senator or has experience with working in both national and international politics …she’s a woman, and thus is reduced down to what she her body offers.

So apparently a woman can be as power as ever, and still, the judgment of her worth is her body …but funny, when was the last time we saw an ad for a man as having a small cock? I don’t see ads for Dennis Kuncinich’s Meal Deal, with a small cock and a bunch of nuts anywhere …

Why? Because he is a man. Rather than focusing on real campaign issues, this staffer is playing tongue-in-cheek politics based at devaluing a woman based on her body. Great.

 The fact that this is in a published report means that Obama is aware of it. The fact that he does nothing to take it back means he’s not the right candidate for me. It’s official. I am casting my vote for Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Advertisements


Man kills pregnant daughter.

Courtesy of CNN: “The India native told police he disliked his son-in-law because he belonged to a lower caste and had married his daughter without his consent.”

Someone confirm this for me, this is America, in 2008, right? If that’s the case, then why are stories like these still happening?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/01/01/family.dead.ap/index.html

I logged on to CNN this morning to get some stories on the Iowa Cacus, and what do I run across? A story about a father who burned down his daughter’s house because her husband did not ask his permission to marry her.

What the fuck? Firstly, let’s address the crime in itself: since when did it become okay to burn a person because that person upset you? Have we taken domestic violence a step up? Going from beating women to burning them? We’ve talked a lot as of late about how masculinity harms us all – and I disagree. Society’s perception of what masculinity is, is harming women more than they do men. Until a father is burning his son because his daughter did not ask to marry him, then it’s a different story.

Secondly – this guy got upset because, well, his son-in-law did not ask permission to marry his daughter? Are we living in the fucking 1800s? This is a fine example of how the patriarchy and the objectification of women can lead to violence to women. After all, if you see a woman not as a complete person with her own autonomy, but something of an object, to be bought, sold and bartered for, then you can treat them however you want.

The question I have is: if his daughter is so special to him, that he needed to be asked permission to marry her off, then why did he kill her? Isn’t this a case of “if I can’t have you, no one can?”

Thirdly, I’ll tread this lightly: the man who has been charged with this crime is Indian. I’ve said this many times before: it’s not the skin color, but let’s face it, some cultures are more sexist than others. Being of the culture does not automatically make a person sexist, but for certain, the culture does certain promote the practice …

Time and time again – we’ve heard about transnational feminism, and that we have to tread lightly when it comes to people’s cultures. But how the hell do we stand idle and pretend that this shit is okay?