Hillary Cannot Be President
by Marc H. RudovThe Unfairer Sex
Hillary Clinton isn’t qualified to become our next president. Why? Because she exclusively represents a gender that doesn’t want or believe in equality. She promotes herself as a champion for women, and, therefore, doesn’t represent men. This biased leader of the “unfairer” sex — a gender always in search of special rights and privileges — doesn’t have what it takes to lead our nation.
Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, also can’t be president. He launched his Women for Richardson effort with pledges to support pay equity, provide limited Social Security credit for family leave, and appoint judges who would uphold abortion rights. Said Richardson: “This is not a constituency issue. This is not an issue of women being a special interest. Women are the majority in this country. What I’m doing here is addressing the interests of the majority.”
Mature, emancipated, fair-minded adults take umbrage at condescension and handouts. But, women are not taking umbrage. Why not? They don’t really want equality. Women don’t grasp that they diminish themselves by seeking and accepting special treatment, from politicians or employers or boyfriends or husbands. It suits women to feign weakness and fragility — because wimpy men fall for it. Alas, a woman who plays the victim card will indeed experience the occasional victory, but it will be Phyrric: she will lose the respect of others and of herself.
Women enjoy double standards and aren’t satisfied having the upper hand in the laws governing reproduction, safe haven, abortion, maternity fraud, paternity fraud, divorce, custody, alimony, child support, assault, battery, restraining orders, domestic violence, rape, and presumption of innocence. They want more, and they get more. Gains in rights for women mean losses in rights for men. It’s a zero-sum game. Equality be damned. The Constitution be damned.
Name one presidential candidate who’s promised to prosecute the next woman who falsely accuses a man of rape. You can’t. Remember Crystal Gail Mangum, who feloniously accused three Duke University lacrosse athletes of rape? They were totally innocent, and yet she’s a free woman. Outrageous. Which presidential candidate promised to prosecute women like Kim Basinger who alienate children from their fathers? None. Which candidate promised to prosecute Katie Couric for slapping a male subordinate in the workplace? None. Not one presidential candidate gives a damn about or represents men. America is a gynocracy.
Princess Academy
What is the genesis of our gynocracy? Women aren’t born believing they’re entitled; they learn entitlement at Princess Academy, through a lifetime of courses. These courses are available within and without the family — in school, on TV, on the radio, in the movies, in singles bars, in magazines, and in “female-ly” courts. They are offered to grown women, as part of continuing education, and to little girls, as the introduction to vaginal manipulation.
In July, NBC teamed up with Money magazine to teach women how to land billionaires. And, within the past week or so, MSN Money offered a female-taught tutorial to men on how to get a second date by paying for the first one. Are men stupid enough to justify and validate these courses? You bet. Otherwise, the “madrasahs of misandry” wouldn’t exist. And, they will pay handsomely for their stupidity. After all, it’s no coincidence that “court” is at the root of courting and courtesan.
Despite graduating college at a 33% higher rate than men; despite earning more money than men in New York City, Chicago, and Dallas; despite owning the preponderance of rights and privileges in all of America; women perceive themselves as the downtrodden. This is a vestigial emotion from the days when daddy never said no.
Women protested when ladies’ nights were outlawed in California, Hawaii, Iowa, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and are outraged that the same fate might befall New York. Princess Academy graduates like Maureen Dowd — who penned Are Men Necessary? — reject equality, proving that feminism is a hypocritical joke.
Princess Academy has a panoply of courses for little girls, too. SalesGenie, an online purveyor of sales leads, is the latest advertiser to teach that fathers (men) have all the financial responsibility. In a new TV commercial that CBS showed frequently this past weekend during the 89th PGA Championship in Tulsa, Oklahoma, a little girl laments that her father, a salesman, didn’t make very much money last year. But, mommy saved him by buying a subscription to SalesGenie. Now, the little girl tells us, her daddy can get more sales leads, close more business — and make more money.
Is it inappropriate for a little girl to be involved in her father’s finances? Yes. Is it perverse to use a little girl to manipulate men into buying a financial product? Yes. Is it strange that women, who also are sales executives, aren’t targeted customers in this SalesGenie spot? Yes. What do children think when they watch this sexist SalesGenie commerical? That men have one purpose in life: being the default providers for women.
Damsel in Distress
If women are fragile, dainty, delicate, entitled princesses, they’re unfit to be president. If women need special rights and privileges, they’re inferior and unfit to be president. If they don’t mind watching their sons, fathers, brothers, husbands, boyfriends, cousins, uncles, and friends lose civil rights, they’re unfit to be president. Alas, many men, in the name of political correctness and notwithstanding the above, will vote for Hillary, and they should be ashamed of themselves.
Until women act equal, they aren’t equal, and we cannot elect them to the top job of our country. How will we know when women are equal? When ladies’ night is outlawed in every state and no woman complains. When women stop demanding and expecting to be wined & dined on dates. When articles about how to marry billionaires cease to exist. When alimony is abolished. When mothers stop getting automatic child custody. When unwed mothers are no longer entitled to child support. When women who falsely accuse men of rape are imprisoned for 25 years. When politicians no longer have special campaign platforms and promises for women.
Newsflash: Hell will freeze over before women act like equals. Why? Because the typical woman is insecure and, regardless of her education or occupation or age or wealth, likes to be a damsel in distress; the typical man is insecure and, regardless of his education or occupation or age or wealth, feels compelled to rescue her. Ultimately, however, he will pay a huge price for his insecurity: loss of cash, kids, house, and civil rights.
The NoNonsense Bottom Line
It’s shameful enough that male candidates are pandering and condescending to women, totally ignoring men in the process. But, Hillary’s candidacy is doubly bad because she’s a woman running as the “champion for women.” Adult women in a gynocracy don’t need a champion. A genuine, fair, balanced president must be the champion for all citizens. Hillary cannot offer this, and Hillary cannot be our president.
When women demonstrate that they are fully equal to men — take the same lumps, pay the same prices, and suffer the same consequences in life as men — then they will be qualified to occupy the Oval Office. Until then, they can keep seeking special treatment and keep getting disrespect.
About the Author
Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 60+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (ISBN 9780974501727), and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth (ISBN 0974501719).
Rudov’s books, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.
Copyright © 2007 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, August 12th, 2007 at 1:56 pm and is filed under TNNM, Vox Populi.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
| 
Print This Post
August 12th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Marc,
As usual, I can’t disagree with a single word. You rock, man.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:04 am
Marc, you are dead right. How can a great nation – or even a small one – ever be led effectively by someone who is entrenched in the belief that she is a victim?
But this is just too much political incorrectness and accuracy. In-your-face reality overload. Is the world ready for it all? In one article you have summed up exactly what is wrong with the modern female population of the western world, and why it is causing so much misery as it drags us all down. You have thrown off the rose-tinted spectacles, ground them into a million fragments and kicked them into oblivion. How will you ever again be able to see the female of the species in the way you are supposed to do?
But I will give you another reason why Hillary should never become President of your fair country (not mine – I live in the UK). This is because, quite simply, she will kill untold numbers of American men if she gets the chance. How do I know this? By a combination of two factors.
Firstly the historic track record of women who have proven themselves coldly ambitious for political power. They are uniformly bloodthirsty and have no qualms about using the bodies and lives of men to cement themselves in an impregnable position through wars, sieges, repression or whatever else it takes. From Boudicca and Cleopatra, through Elizabeth I and Bloody Mary, to Indira Gandhi and Margaret Thatcher, we see a recurrent pattern of total indifference to the suffering inflicted on men, who are sacrificed in whatever numbers are required. This is a particular type of female that either tries to copy the most ruthless aspects of male nature in the mistaken belief that beating relentlessly with a big stick is the proper and only way to wield power; or is simply lacking the basic humanity that we have rightly or wrongly assumed always to be present in the female sex. I don’t know which; God only knows exactly what makes these women the way they are. But whatever it is should never be allowed anywhere near the levers of power.
Secondly the pronouncements of Hillary herself who has demonstrated the same chilling absence of any conscience or concern for what happens to mere men. I don’t need to give you examples beyond that breathtaking assertion that it is women who suffer worst in wars. Anyone who can come out with such a pronouncement can only have a deep and callous indifference to men and their loss of life. This is a dangerous, dangerous woman. I give you a prediction that if you get President Hillary, you will also, at some point in her Presidency, get a male bloodbath. Of course you have had plenty of those under male Presidents, including the current one, so I am not saying Hillary would be any worse. But she will not be a whit better and will be far worse in one aspect: that she will never be persuaded to stop simply because of the numbers of dead men.
I think you will have a female President in my lifetime, simply because there are plenty enough people in your country stupid enough to buy into the mythology of the strong woman and try a new experiment. But there will only be the one, because you will learn the hard way why every country that has elected one female leader has never been in any hurry to repeat the experience.
October 5th, 2007 at 1:03 am
Very interesting, and articulate.
Bishop Desmond Tutu said in an interview two or three years ago that the way of the future is a world run by women. He delineated that the world would be more warm and fuzzy, but I am convinced that Hillary is neither warm nor fuzzy and that there is no single definition of “woman” in behavior or ethics. US women are a minority in the world and it is important for me to realize that the choices and (what you may see as feminine bullying) allowed here are not universal in the least.
I read a rather sobering article about the way young girls are being raised in the US:
http://alternet.org/sex/59840?page=entire
October 5th, 2007 at 1:17 am
The fact women are childbearers and men are not has an intrinsic bearing upon the way we seem to make demands of men. [Consider: ageism against women of a "certain age," "newer models," glass ceilings, deadbeat dads, madonna-whore paradigm, stretch marks, porn-industry standards of beauty, sexualization of adolescent girls, etc etc ad nauseam]
Some take advantage of this biological blessing even though they may never bear children in the numbers of old patriarchies. On the other hand, till you’ve borne children, the sacrifices, from the cellular level to the last of your pennies, are unfathomable for both women who’ve never and men who cannot. Not too long ago a woman was expected to lose a tooth for each child, and that was with two-parent homes, pre-women’s lib.
Not every woman is HC. I will not be voting for her. To vote for a woman only because she is a woman is to be blind to the humanity we’re looking for in a president who must, as I agree with you, take every citizen’s/class’s/gender’s concerns into account. Kucinich sounds agreeable but I’m not sure it’s possible for him to win.