An Indictment on Feminism

For the past month, there have been a litany of articles by women professing their support for both Democratic front-runners’ candidacies. What I seem to find intriguing and puzzling is the raison d’être given by Clinton female supporters. It all reads as a crock-pot full o’ s*** (excuse my French)!

So, Gloria Steinem kicked things off, first. There may have been others before her, but I honed in on her op-ed piece in the New York Times Women are never Front-runners . An op-ed written and published in that newspaper is a big deal, since it is a national newspaper with undeniable national exposure. The brouhaha began with Steinem’s declaration of why she was voting for Hillary. Her assertion that Hillary’s fight for the White House is to break the highest glass ceiling and that Barack Obama’s candidacy embodies the “good ol’ boys network” of preclusion – is bull****. Now, I’m not sure if Gloria truly believes what she meant or the implications of her assertion, but if you have the clout and you utilized your leverage to run an op-ed piece in the New York Times you want to be heard. And Bellini heard you loud and clear.

Did Steinem forget the glass ceiling was created by white men? Unbeknownst to Steinem she alienated legions of women of color – me included – who find her assertion inaccurate thus insulting. If you want to make the reckless decision and dismiss Barack Obama’s candidacy as a cakewalk, I am hear to inform it is not. I’m sure you read his autobiographies. This man had dealt with paternal abandonment, interracial upbringing, substance abuse – all while being Black in the United States of America – don’t get me started. But that’s okay Gloria, I’ll characterize your opinion as pure naiveté. All your life you’ve seen black men active members and participants of the “good ol’ boy club”, you’ve seen them create businesses just to tell women NO, you’ve seen black men flourish with their wealth and deny you entrance – right. . . right?

Let’s move south of Intestate 95

Over the weekend, Erica Jong featured an op-ed piece in the Washington Post, Hillary vs. the Patriarchy (read this crap). (Folks when you travel to the Nation’s Capital you will get caught up inside the beltway – and the Capital beltway by virtue of its design creates an echo chamber. At times, there are views and opinions espoused by our Members of Congress, punditocracy, etc. . . that only resonate inside the echo chamber. So for most of your benefit, you are given the pleasure of not hearing what bounces of the walls of the beltway. . . I digress.)
Although, Jong does a better job of pinpointing the target by exposing Bill Kristol, her title’s inclusion of patriarchy does little to buffer the damage. Jong asserts her support for Hillary, yet implores the reader to identify with Hillary’s obstacles including persevering in a precarious marriage with a philandering husband – ummm. . . that’s not my problem. She would also add that Hillary’s commitment to raising their child is pure admiration – ummmm. . . that’s her job irregardless of the circumstances. Jong wants sympathizers for Hlllary, she is running for commander-in-chief – there is no sympathy. You must get the job done irregardless of sex, creed, or gender.

You feminists are hurting your plight, yes your because I choose to dismiss myself from this farce.

P.S. Folks Tsunami Tuesday shook things up and the Dems have a long way to go -- there is no clear victor. To my Republicans -- do yourself a favor and tell Romney to go sit down (he is a stubborn somebody) Just like the Super Bowl Sunday's upset -- continue to expect the unexpected in '08!


cheers,

Bellini