IMPORTANT MESSAGE: CONSTRUCTION AT LA SENTINEL OFFICE: Due to unforeseen construction work, our office is temporarily closed. We are operating business off site and still accepting ads and classified ads. View Company Directory.
Anyone who can’t answer the above question in the affirmative couldn’t have been raised in the Black community. Because as ashamed as I am to have to admit it, it is clear to anyone with eyeballs that the Black culture is matriarchal by it’s very nature. Now at this point, I’m supposed to start explaining all of the conditions beyond the Black man’s control that led to this state of affairs, but the fact is, I’m not predisposed to lying, so I refer you to BET and you be the judge. Ok, had enough? Now that you’ve viewed the misogynistic subculture that has all but seized the soul of the young Black male, it has to be clear that any woman who can manage to raise well rounded, productive, and stable children-by herself-in such an environment can do anything. So, of course a woman can be a good, even great, president. But I don’t count Hillary Clinton among those women.
Hillary, and many other so-called “feminists” of her generation, suffer from seriously misguided views on what it truly means to be a strong and independent woman. They actually diminish the meaning of womanhood, by embracing the position that the only way a woman can truly be strong and independent, is by being more like a man.
She, and many other modern women have dedicated their entire lives to the proposition that the traditional role that women have played in society is something less than what a modern woman should aspire to. I firmly disagree with that position. While I think that a woman should be free to compete with a man in any and every area in this society, I also think the role of the traditional “housewife” has been severely undervalued in this society. What society looks upon as a “mere housewife” is actually a mother, a psychologist, a nurse, a chef, an economist, an interior designer, in addition being a sex therapist for her philandering husband—and society has been going downhill every since they were convinced to give it up to become doctors, lawyers, and other sundry professionals. Remember Donna Reed? Women of Hillary’s ilk look down their nose at women like that, but consider this—there was no such thing as a drive-by on Donna’s watch.
But of course, now I’m going to accused of wanting women to remain barefoot and pregnant, but that’s not at all the case. Women should be free to go into whatever profession they choose, but if they choose homemaker as their chosen profession, they shouldn’t be denigrated as “barefoot and pregnant”, because as our current situation clearly demonstrates, they are actually the backbone of this society.
This country is falling apart because we allowed the “feminists” of the sixties to sell us a bill of goods. When these women chose to pursue professions and then ran into sexism in the workplace, instead of addressing the problem within the workplace itself, they decided to hitch their wagon to the civil rights movement in order to sop up some of the gravy that the eloquence of Martin Luther King had stirred. But in order for these White, middle and upper class women to make an effective case—many of whom, living comfortably, and supported by husbands—they had to convince all of the housewives across America that they, as a class, were just as victimized as Black civil rights activists—who were not allowed to vote, couldn’t find jobs, and were being attacked by police dogs.
So while these women did have a just cause, they addressed that cause in a fraudulent manner—and in the process, convinced women across this land that raising a family and laying the foundation that everything else in our society is built upon is something less than a desirable pursuit. They also convinced many women that the only things that are of value in this world are those things that men do—in fact, focusing on being a lady, in itself, was a frivolous pursuit. The message was, the only way to compete with men was on a man’s terms. That message places women confines women to a gross disadvantage.
I have a good friend who happens to be an Asian. She’s so beautiful she doesn’t look real—she looks like someone drew her. In addition, she’s brilliant, and one of the sexiest women I’ve ever laid eyes on—and she knows it. Her only shortcoming is she’s bought into the nonsense that it’s against the rules to use her femininity to help her get ahead. She told me one day that her boss wouldn’t allow her to move up any farther in management. When I asked why, she said, her boss always tries to flirt with her and she doesn’t want to play that game. So I asked her, doesn’t your boss use his voice and intimidating personality to get what he wants? And she told me he did. I then asked, so why shouldn’t you use your beauty and feminine wiles to get what you want.? You don’t have to give in to your boss—just make him think you might—right after the next promotion, then the next, and the next. You don’t have to give up a thing—just, keep hope alive. There’s nothing immoral about that—you’re simply manipulating him with your feminine beauty, like he manipulates you with his masculine ability to intimidate.
So, absolutely a woman can be president—and maybe the greatest one we’ve ever had. But I don’t want one who’s thinks she has to act like a man to be successful. I want to vote for a female who’s intelligent, charismatic, and educated, yet, not afraid to stick her hands in dishwater. Yes, I want her to be professional and dignified, yet, also know the value of a short skirt and silk shiny stockings. I want her to know how to be firm when she needs to, but she should also know how to work it like it’s hot.
Eric L. Wattree Wattree.blogspot.com
Eric L. Wattree, Sr. n can be reached at