Scott Adams in his blog posted October 13 (immediately following Trump and his whole "pussy-grabbing" debacle), he anointed Clinton as the next President and proclaimed the next 4 years in American politics "are likely to be some of the worst in our country's history".
"Everything that goes wrong with the country from this point forward is women's fault...Men had a good run. We invented almost everything, and thats cool. But we have also started all the wars and committed most of the crimes. It is a mixed record to be sure...Hillary Clinton is all your ladies. She and her alleged rapist husband are your brand now. Wear them well".
Besides hating on Clinton, which to his credit Adams has done at every available opportunity,
Adams reinforces the inferior role of women in the American political arena. While we know that Hillary Clinton is not immune to scandal, it does not serve the author well to end his argument by reference to her "alleged" rapist husband. What does it mean? Are we attacking Bill Clinton's character? Is HE running for office? Is this 1998? Hillary Clinton for the record is her own person. With or without Bill.
And this presents another problem in contemporary politics: the idea of a sort of male protectorate.
These are just great. By promoting these images, Americans are saying a couple things about women. That despite Hillary Clinton's personal and professional achievements, as a political leader she can only exist as a "co-president" or can only get elected if she stands on Bill's shoulders. As a man (not even self-identifying as a feminist) I don't find these images amusing or comical. If anything I'm annoyed. The ideas of women that need protection or maidens in distress was appropriate perhaps for the Cold War Era but in 2016 I won't even entertain the argument. That this gender stratification continues to exist at this level baffles me... and Scott Adams is not helping America have a fruitful dialogue about American politics or gender roles.
Mr. Adams, I seriously suggest that you put yourself and your silly Dilbert cartoons in a time machine and go back about 60-70 years. People in the 1940s may actually find your views enlightening.
Your blogger.com link is broken, so I cannot read what you are crediting Adams with.
ReplyDeleteYour bafflement over gender stratification is a reflection that you do not understand the worldview of the substantial portion of the US who do not share your values.
Thank you Carl Hommel for bringing the link to my attention. I've corrected it and the article should be accessible.
ReplyDelete"She and her alleged rapist husband are your brand now"- well Adams what about Trump and his alleged rapes? I agree with you on this post 100%. Adams is trying to tell us that Women cant run the country unless they are co- running? I don't think so. This makes me think of the quote "woman can do anything men can do, but they can do it in heels". SO yes Palatable Pig, you are correct he does need to hop in a time machine to a time where people might actually agree with him, but in this day in age you have so many woman and men who believe that a woman can run the country and be good at it. Yes this election season has come down to two candidates who are not the best candidates we have ever had but Adams only rags on Clinton, what about trump!
ReplyDeleteYou forgot the "and backwards" in your quote. It's a reference to how Ginger Rogers was Fred Astaire's dance partner.
ReplyDelete