IN AN interview with a women’s magazine, Valerie Jarrett, senior apparatchik to Obama, says:

A lot of good people are turned off by the nastiness of politics. And we need more people, particularly women. Just imagine what we would get done in Congress if it was comprised of a majority of women.”

Ah, more words of wisdom from the Marxist Polytechnic Institute that is the White House today.

Here’s a few words in response:

There is certainly no need for more people in politics. There are plenty of bodies. But more importantly imagine if any male senior cabinet member were to say, “See how much we get done because Congress is comprised of a majority of men.” He would be thrown out of office or publicly thrashed. More women have said arrogant, nasty things about male rule than prominent American men ever said publicly about women in politics in the days when Congress was all male. Men went around opening doors for women and doffing their hats. Men didn’t go around publicly saying, “See how great we are because we are men.” They didn’t go around abandoning their wives with impunity and still hold major office. They didn’t go around saying, “I married without really appreciating how hard divorce would be” — as Jarrett is quoted as formerly saying.

But even if men had gone around saying such things when Congress was all-male, they would have been more entitled to say such things than an affirmative action hire like Jarrett, whose position and arrogance are more evidence of the forbearance of men. They would have been right in defending male rule because male rule is natural and female rule of the kind Jarrett proclaims is artificial. Male rule is natural given that men, not women, give their lives defending their country; given that men disproportionately provide tax revenues and support women and children; given that men are far more interested in competitive politics; given that women have other equally important things to do; given that men are the authors of almost all significant political theory and given that nature itself is hierarchical, with men entitled to authority over women not because they are superior to women (indeed often they are inferior) but because this hierarchy of the sexes is the product of design. It was ordained by God, and we can no more alter it than we can change the path of the planets or the heat of the sun.

I wish Congress would become majority female or even all-female. Then people could see where large numbers of women in public office lead. They would see many more effeminate, submissive and divorced husbands; more neglected children; more wildly socialist and fantastically expensive reforms that actually exploit women; and more women who exhibit the sort of nastiness, aggression and self-promotion that is frankly unappealing in mothers and wives. Speaking of children, Jarrett also said in the interview:

Before I had my daughter, I spent every waking hour at work. There is nothing like having a child to remind you what is really important in life. I can remember, when she was young, just walking through the front door and seeing her standing there, and anything bad that had happened through the course of the day just evaporated.

Oh boy, nothing like having a pet to greet you at the end of a long day. Jarrett is divorced and her daughter has no siblings. Well, there’s yet another reason why women in power are unnatural. The female politician leaves very little behind.

— Comments —

Mark S. writes:

“with men entitled to authority over women not because they are superior to women (indeed often they are inferior)…”

Inferior, how?

You mean we’re inferior like we’re stupid drooling idiots; we’re clods; we walk on all fours and drag our knuckles? You mean we’re inferior like we can’t spit babies from our stomachs? What do you mean inferior, inferior how? How are we inferior?

Laura writes:

Men on average are superior to women in certain ways, especially in physical strength, logic, and abstract intelligence. And women on average are superior to men, mostly in ways of the heart — in the interpersonal sphere — but also in their famous  “multi-tasking” abilities and certain language skills. Don’t you think women on average are superior in daily child-rearing? Do you think that is so offensive to say?

In marriage, a man does not lose his right to authority in the home because he may have defects his wife does not have. Similarly, in society, men do not lose their right to positions of public authority — and men do have the right to govern society — because women have strengths they do not have.

Please follow and like us: