When I was young, feminism was about singing “I am strong, I am invincible, I am woman!” We women weren’t weaker than men, physically or emotionally. We were at least as strong, if not stronger. We were women and we were roaring!
Maggie Thatcher was one of those women, even though she never made common cause with post-60s feminism. You know, if any man ever had the temerity to grope Maggie Thatcher, she would have ripped his testicles off . . . and that was before she was five years old. It would have gotten scarier later.
The current generation of feminists, though, are defined by their weakness, not the strength. In the wake of the “groping Trump” media fiesta (a private boast followed by scads of accusations from women who can be proven to be lying or to be Hillary operatives), women have been swarming social media with tales of their being groped too. One of my Leftist Facebook friends stated that she didn’t know any woman who had not been groped.
I said, “I haven’t.”
I was then told by her, and her friends, that I’m in the minority. That the vast number of women have been groped.
I said that there’d be less groping if women responded to a grope by groping the guy back, in the same region, much more painfully (a la Maggie Thatcher).
I was told that I was diminishing women’s pain. That women suffer. That women cannot recover from the experience. That I’d made the women in the conversation who had been groped feel bad about themselves. No one said it, but the word “microaggression” was clearly in the air. Heck, maybe even “macroaggression.” Mind you now, we were not talking about criminal rape or molestation; we were taking about the disgusting (usually drunk) opportunist taking a quick grab.
I came away from that exchange convinced that we’ve gone from women who are roaring to women who are whining. These gals, frankly, sickened me with their assertion that women cannot handle what the world sends their way.
So, what’s this have to do with Hillary? Well, after the first debate, Hillary was a victim because Trump interrupted her. I interpreted this to mean that Hillary was too weak to hold her own. Certainly Trump fought back vigorously when Lester Holt kept cutting him off. Paul Ryan showed his weakness when Biden bullied him. Mike Pence, on the other hand, showed Kaine up for a bully and handle it well. No victim there.
Thanks to today’s feminists, the message is that women are total victims: They have no emotional resilience, they’re easily cowed into silence, and a man’s mere presence can intimidate them. Hillary has cheerfully agreed with her followers’ assessment of the situation when it comes to Hillary and men.
My conclusion from all this is that Hillary’s most impassioned followers have made a strong case that Hillary should not be president and, indeed, that no woman should be president. We women are too emotionally and physically fragile to function outside of “safe spaces.” Sure, Hillary’s good in a high school gym with a few dozen screaming fans, but put her on the world stage against Putin (a very dominant man), the Mullahs (men who hate women), or any other male world leader and she won’t be able to handle it. Handling Trump is trauma enough.
Face it: the days of Maggie Thatcher and Golda Meir were a golden age for strong women. We’ve now fallen back to an era of fragile Victorian women who can’t be far from their fainting couches. I don’t want one of those neurotic whiners leading my country.
(And by the way, if you ever meet me, don’t try to grope me. I’m not kidding about groping you back, the hard and painful way.)