Some Internet sources are saying the masculinity ad for Kamala Harris was produced by an organization called “vote save America “and it is a lefty organization,
Some Internet sources are saying the masculinity ad for Kamala Harris was produced by an organization called “vote save America “and it is a lefty organization,
I think being considered masculine, or feminine, depends upon the observer. Much like pornography, I think most of us would have a difficult time describing it, but we know it when we see it.
Voting for someone based upon their gender has nothing to do with either, it's just stupid.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Considering how much Kamala has rejected Hillary’s embrace of being the first female presidential candidate it’s a struggle for me to believe that Kamala had anything to do with this ad. Kamala has made it very clear that she wants to be elected president regardless of her gender or race. She wants to be elected because people think she can do the job. Period. And that she doesn’t intend to use the military to attack the ‘enemies within like democrats and immigrants as opposed to the other guy with the failing mental facilities and sad victimhood complex.
In my mind, masculinity covers a whole range of things. It is over the top macho behavior that I find offensive as it often includes a mean-spirited attitude towards anyone of a different kind.
Is masculinity necessarily gender specific or a behavioral term that can apply across the board. I can think of several female politicians that exhibit masculinity.
"what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" Mary Oliver
I don't think masculinity is positive or negative--it's neutral. Just like femininity. There are traits that might land anyone, male or female, on the continuum of what people would perceive as masculine or feminine traits. I consider that continuum to be very dynamic. I tend to go for guys who almost straddle the middle of that continuum. Hence, my unrequited love for two closeted gay guys in the 60s. I still love them, but at least I know why I was "rejected". Even DH and I defy the textbook 50s masculine/feminine relationship. I'm the breadwinner; he's the cook. I'm cool as cucumber; he cries every day. I throw on my jeans and flannels. He puts a lot of time and money into his outfits. Yet, he served in the Marines and is great at fixing cars; I always take the subservient role and spend my free time in the garden, or painting or writing.
My instinct tells me that parentage influences those traits but is not solely responsible for them.
"Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
www.silententry.wordpress.com
Of course it isn’t gender specific. Hence my use of “spectrum. “And Catherine ‘s use
of “ Continuum “
and maybe you mean “sex specific “here, although maybe not.
we are a mix of all kind of influences and exhibits, stereotypical gender markers being one of them.
I’ve always been kind of irritated when men talk about “getting in touch with their female selves” because it seems bogus to me.
I think you’re right. Which is why I think identity politics is so inane. Assigning attitudes, interests or beliefs based on superficial traits like race, gender, generation, class, region or zip code is just stupid. It leads to inanities like posing for pictures with a Beretta A400 shotgun to demonstrate maleness. Or the CBS “Race and Culture Unit” springing into action if a journalist asks the wrong questions of the wrong person. Or a candidate for the Supreme Court fearing to offer a definition of “woman”. Or pretty much any utterance of DJT. Or Marxism and all it’s preposterous offshoots. Or entire academic disciplines.
Personally, I’m much more comfortable with a “content of their character” approach than taxonomical guides to victimhood and villainy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)