Remember Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Puritan society in his novel, The Scarlet Letter? Poor Hester Prynne violated the laws of the church, which meant that she broke society’s laws, too. At the beginning of the novel, the reader joins Hester as she leaves the safety of the town prison and makes her way back into the society that jailed her. Reading the book for the first time in the 11th grade, I had a hard time understanding how, in a free society, the religion of one group could also form its judicial system. That makes the laws of God the same thing as the laws of man. Separation of church and state was also an 11th grade U.S. history lesson, so we students figured no more Hesters could be jailed for breaking the laws of her religion . Or so we thought. We fought a war 250 years ago to separate the colonies from a king who was not only ruler of the government but leader of the church. A quick walk through British history shows what a mess that ideal leads to: remember Henry VIII
Josh Hawley is telling American men that their masculinity is defined by the left as “inherently problematic.”
Now, ain’t that a hoot !
As a woman, I can speak to the idea of one’s sex being “inherently problematic.” Like being paid less than a man or being judged by a potential employer in terms of my child-bearing years. Then, there’s the whole concept of women as breeders and women whose bodies don’t belong to them but to the politicians in their district.
And we could go throughout the history of women from Eve (if you’re a believer) all the way to the passage of the ERA - oh wait, it hasn’t passed yet. And there’s the idea of women being subservient to their fathers and husbands, not being able to own property, being passed over for top positions (just ask Queen Elizabeth I), and that’s before we ever get to the ridicule, harassment, and number of times we women have been told “good girls don’t do that.”
No, Josh Hawley, masculinity isn’t “inherently problematic,” but femininity is. And thousands of years of history and facts back that up.
What facts back up your claim ?
But another laughable part of the senator’s whine is his whacky idea that men are suffering just because they are male.
“This is an effort that the left has been at for years now and they have had alarming success. American men are working less, they are getting married in fewer numbers, they’re fathering fewer children, they’re suffering more anxiety and depression, they’re engaging in more substance abuse,” said the senator recently at the National Conservatism Conference.
Maybe, just maybe, Josh, they are getting married and having fewer children due to your archaic right-wing abortion laws limiting a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body. Maybe they are suffering from anxiety and depression because we all are after the past six years of divisive politics foist upon the public by your choice of president. And maybe they’re working less because they choose to, or they’re being paid more because they are male.
Cry me a river.
But the most ludicrous part of this male suffering nonsense is its hypocrisy, which eludes all Republicans. Like the reality that black and Hispanic men and women suffer at the hands of the Right because of their “inherently problematic” color. Or that LGBTQ people suffer because of their “inherently problematic” sexual orientation. Or that authors suffer because of their “inherently problematic” addiction to reality.
Men, particularly white men, have been in charge of this country since its inception. If things aren’t going your way, Josh, your have no one to blame but your WASP lineage.
But maybe that’s the problem. Now that white men are on track for minority status in just a few years, you’re afraid that those you’ve treated so badly - women, minorities, LGBTQ - might treat you the same way you treated them. So you’re pointing your finger at this new scapegoat, just in case things don’t work out so well for you men.
Trouble is, all those blame fingers point back to you, Josh.
Comments
Post a Comment