The National Review's Kevin D. Williamson has managed to bring criticism of the President up a notch at least by NOT being overtly racist.
Williamson's theory is that since Mitt has fathered all boys and the President all girls, it is obvious that Mitt is the more virile of the two. The writer even offered to cough up some fallopian tubes for our Commander in Chief. Not literally I would imagine, but I'll have to consult Representative Todd Akin (R-MO) for more biological facts.
This notion of course flies in the face of the assumed sexual prowess of men of color. Though size is not the issue here, just the lousy genetics of having "gulp" GIRLS for children, we can take some comfort for the racial reprieve so often evident in characterizations of our President.
Somehow I am reminded of China: Not sure if it's the whole distaste for female children thing or the prodigious outsourcing which Mitt also fathered over the years at Bain. And I'm pretty sure I'm offended as a woman who, though the nurses got the crib label wrong for my first few days on the planet, was finally verified to be a girl. My dad wanted a girl and didn't seem to feel he was any the less manly for that desire. He proudly passed around my baby pictures daring any man at his business luncheons to produce evidence of a more beautiful child. He says they could not. True or no, I know I made him proud.
I'll admit I've wondered a time or two if the sex of children signified any strength of a certain partner in a relationship, but I've never used that curiosity as a judgment of the parents. This assumes, of course, these were children born to heterosexual parents without the assistance of another party. The plethora of other parental situations wouldn't apply in this conversation--a surrogate is not in the relationship and same-sex couples don't have to worry about such nonsense in the first place! Perhaps it's human nature to ask oneself such things in some vain attempt to guess the sex of a soon-to-be-released new album as it were, but in the end what does it really matter? If I were to assert that you can tell who's the boss in the relationship based on the gender of the offspring, I'd sound just as stupid as Williamson. (But I am relieved that for my own relationship we have one of each. You know, just in case "the crazy" is right. Knock wood, don't walk under ladders, carry a rabbit's foot, throw the baby out with the bathwater over your LEFT shoulder.)
As is my way, I would like to mention a caller to Stephanie Miller's show this morning. (If you aren't watching on Current or listening on XM, you're not living by the way.) She asked Steph a very interesting question: Since three of the Romney boys have had kids by invitro fertilization and since extra zygotes must be produced for that process to arrive at success, what happened to Mitt's other grandchildren? Zygotes are people, my friend. Careful when you stand atop that Republican platform next week, Mittens. You might just fall through a crack called "hypocrisy".
I believe the children are our future, so perhaps Mr. Williamson should concern himself more with the horns of granddad's dilemma rather than the horniness of dad's secretions. Or maybe he should check the dateline of his publication for a reminder of which century we're living in at present.
Either way, isn't putting more pressure on our kids exactly what we as parents should be doing? It is in line with the Republican's knack for blaming their situation on others however. You'll recall (according to Fox Nudes) that President Obama inherited a SURPLUS then squandered it on welfare Cadillacs and solar companies. And I'll just bet it was his girls that talked him into doing that too!
Kids...and women these days!
No comments:
Post a Comment