A woman running for state attorney general in Michigan says people should vote for her because she doesn’t have a penis (http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Vote-for-me-I-have-no-penis-says-Mich-candidate-12395907.php).
Uh, can’t we nail her for transphobia? Aren’t all The Smartest People in the World always telling us that not all men have penises, and not all women have vaginas?
To presume, as this candidate does, that every human being, man or women, equipped with a penis will use it to harass women–well, fry my hide, what do you suppose Brad “Chelsea” Manning would say to that? Well, okay, he had his willy cut off so he could call himself a woman and run for U.S. Senator from Maryland. But certainly by the standard being used here, he would be a viable candidate. Crikey, what if these two were running against each other? “Yeah, well, I don’t have one, either!” What an edifying debate that would be.
If lack of a penis is all it takes to be Michigan’s attorney general, that makes deciding who to vote for pretty easy. But what if a woman runs against a woman?
This discussion is fast turning into a kind more commonly encountered in a busy tavern.
“This discussion is fast turning into a kind more commonly encountered in a busy tavern.”
. . . or an insane asylum. 🙂
More like a grade school playground.
It has been my impression that the most important body part for a politician is a really big mouth, which could also be extrapolated into talking heads – mostly empty ones.
Right on, Linda. First off,, I would never consider voting for, or even looking at a person who made a statement like that. It is vulgar, perverse
and totally inappropriate to be spoken in public. It seems we have almost reached the bottom of that barrel full of garbage.
Please return, Lord Jesus. We need You desperately.
Amen, Erlene!
It really is amazing how base many people have become. It’s like dealing with dirty-minded little children. The whole of society has suffered as a result. When I was a child, such a thing would never have been publicly stated, never. Had a candidate said such a thing it would have been shocking and probably the end of their candidacy.
I remember when things like merit and character mattered the most, now we are reduced to anatomy. I know the implication. She’s implying that women are more virtuous and more deserving to be in positions of power… for no other reason than their gender. Of course, that’s not true. There have been plenty of examples of women abusing their positions of authority. The many cases of female teachers having inappropriate relationships with their students, for example. Women can be just as prone to bad behavior and corruption as men (*ahem* Hillary Clinton).
Modern feminists insist that every single problem in the world is caused by white heterosexual males: get rid of those three categories, and the world will be problem-free.
They can’t help it if they’re idiots.
Yup, one group of people blaming another group for all their problems… it’s a theme often repeated in history, and it never ends well.
24 on Rush Limbaugh’s list of undeniable truths is: Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women access to the mainstream of society.” No matter what Dana Nessel’s physical looks, her soul is ugly.