Sexism in 2008

The rampant sexism in the current presidential campaign has served as a reminder of just how prevalent sexism still is in the United States, even in 2008. It's not just that Hillary Clinton has been treated like dirt by the media, Howard Dean, the DNC, and a plethora of traitors who chose to jump on the bandwagon of a grossly unqualified, highly suspect male competitor. It's not just that Clinton is being treated like so many other smart, driven women have been throughout history, i.e., looked at as a "bitch"--whereas a similarly driven man would be seen as motivated--and expected to play second fiddle to a male. No, all of that just acts as a reminder that sexism is so prevalent in our society that even today--when women are doctors, lawyers, judges, police officers, astronauts, Supreme Court justices, and so much more--we're still basically second-class citizens.

Don't believe me? Turn on your TV. Watch commercials for products like Pledge, Oust, Flintstones vitamins, Clorox, Lysol, and many others. What's the common theme? It's always mom who does the housework. It's always mom who talks about cleaning products and who's shown taking care of her home and family. It's always mom who knows just how many paper towels a spill needs, or who cleans up after the other people in the family. It's always "Moms know how important..." or "...the one moms choose..." or "we asked these real moms..." or "mom-tested recipes..." Um, where's dad?

Does being born with testicles make men less able to wash dishes or do laundry--correctly? Or is it that being born with ovaries somehow gives women magical powers--within the four walls of their houses only?

I am so sick of seeing ads that make it seem like it's the 1950s instead of 2008. Apparently, the powers that be at certain companies still haven't heard that women have been unchained from the kitchen now for several decades, and that women actually can and do have productive careers other than cooking and cleaning inside their homes. They're apparently unaware that men care about their kids, too, and that men shop, cook, do laundry, wash dishes and vacuum--all without their wives showing them the "right" way to do it [since men are inept morons when it comes to housework]. Yes!, men actually do these things just as competently as women. Yet, for some reason, advertisers still don't get it.

When I contact a company, as I did Lysol most recently, to complain, I typically get a reply that says something along the lines of, "We truly regret that you were dissatisfied with this commercial. Please feel assured that your comments have been passed on to our Brand Manager for consideration in future advertising." But nothing changes. And I really don't get it. Why the insistence on advertising as if we're back in Leave It To Beaver or Father Knows Best days is beyond me. Why alienate women--AND men--who don't recognize themselves in these commercials with outdated gender stereotypes? Shouldn't advertisers pay attention to the realities of modern day life, instead of trying--HARD--to make it look as if women are nothing more than "housewives" with magical powers that only extend to cooking, cleaning, and doing laundry?

On a related note, how about the still-prevalent use of "Miss" and "Mrs" as salutations for women? Sorry, but "Miss" and "Mrs" are archaic, sexist, and outdated; "Ms" is nonsexist and should be used instead.

Think of it like this: The archaic system of referring to women as "Miss" if they're unmarried or "Mrs" if they're married, trivializes their existence as individuals. It gives them identity based on their marital status. Is there an equivalent of that for men? Um, no, of course not. THEY'RE the "owners" in this scenario and we're the PROPERTY.

For "traditionalists" who think these archaic terms are perfectly fine, let me ask you why? WHY should women be referred to in a manner that identifies their marital status? And if women should be identified that way...why not men, too?

Would you vote for a woman as unqualified as Barack Obama?

Here's the question we're asking on our latest anti-Obama merchandise line: "Would you vote for a woman as unqualified as Barack Obama?" Stop and think about that for a moment, okay?

It's clear that Obama has no qualifications [to speak of] that should convince people to support him for the presidency. Yet--as I've written about numerous times!--the Obama cult mentality that has swept the nation doesn't seem to care that he has no qualifications they can point to. So, as I've said before, if a woman dared have the audacity to run with the same [lack of] qualifications Obama has, she'd be laughed out of the race. No one would be jumping on her bandwagon, no one would be talking about the abstract 'change' she would supposedly bring about, the media would not be having an endless love affair with all things related to her...none of that would be happening. People would criticize and chastise her for having such an overblown opinion of herself that she actually thought she could run for president.

Looking for anti-Obama merchandise?

So what's wrong with this picture? Obama, being male, is getting away with one of the most insane things I've ever seen, running on Hillary Clinton's platform, with just the slightest change of wording here and there to make it "his" platform...and people are buying it! If they like what they're hearing from Obama, they ought to be supporting Clinton, since she's the one who thought of all that stuff. Instead, they're deluding themselves into believing that this one term senator will somehow magically bring about 'change' that'll make everything all better...

I may be voting Republican this year!

Yeah, well, I've done it before and fully expected to do it again at some point: I may vote Republican this November. The more I hear and see of Obama and the ridiculous, unjustified worship he's receiving, the more I can't stand him. I've long admired John McCain because--unlike the cowardly deserter CURRENTLY in the White House--he's a real veteran...not just a veteran, but a true war hero. I know that he's a decent man, and he has plenty of experience in politics. If it comes down to choosing between ODrama and McCain, I do believe I'll be casting my vote for McCain.

Looking for anti-Obama merchandise?

Of course, I'm less than thrilled with McCain's recent "100 years" remark about Iraq, and I will have to weigh that and some of his other beliefs before really deciding whether to vote for him. But right now, I simply can't stomach the idea of voting for Obama...

Calling all feminists! Hillary Clinton needs your support

Did you grow up during the feminist movement of the '60s and '70s? I did, and although I was too young for most of it to actually get involved, I remember the point of it very well, and I believe I've benefited from it throughout my career. When I started in computing in the mid-'80s, it was definitely a male-dominated field (still is today!, but not as much). I never let that concern me, as I knew that I was just as capable as any man of being a great programmer and system administrator, and I plunged in and made my mark. My first job was at a furniture store chain, and it was up to me to transition them off their IBM System/3 mainframe and onto a multi-location, multiuser UNIX system. Talk about a challenge! But I loved every second of it. To this day I don't think I would have been given the opportunity had it not been for my older "sisters" who worked hard to break down glass ceilings and make the idea of women holding powerful jobs, especially in areas that were historically male-dominated, seem mainstream.

Today, I'm reminded of the passion of the feminist movement by the presence of a woman--a strong, intelligent, capable woman--as a viable candidate for president of the United States. I always hoped I'd see a female president in my lifetime and now, with Hillary Clinton running for the office, I'm excited beyond description.

Before going any further let me make something very clear: I would absolutely NOT support a woman for president just because she's a woman. The reason I'm so passionate about Hillary Clinton becoming president is because she's a woman AND she's the best qualified candidate. A mediocre female candidate would never win my support over a better qualified male. Period. So when I say I support Hillary's bid for president it needs to be understood that, first and foremost, she's QUALIFIED for the position; the fact that she's a woman is just icing on the cake.

I'd like to put out a call to all feminists--male and female--to support Clinton's run for president. Those of you who are too young to even grasp what it was like when women were relegated to lower-paying, lower-prestige jobs just because they were women, really need to have a little history lesson! You should read up on what it was like when women were nurses--not doctors, secretaries--not executives, legal secretaries--not attorneys, data entry clerks--not programmers or system analysts, etc. If you're currently in school studying to be, or you already are, a physician or a lawyer, an engineer or a chemist, a rocket scientist or an astronaut, please stop and think about HOW you got there. Trust me, things weren't always like they are now! In fact, women weren't even expected to work. No, really. College educated women were expected to give up working once they were married, and stay home cooking, cleaning, changing diapers, etc., while her husband earned the money--and made all the financial decisions, and had all the power. You're LUCKY to be living now, when you're free to make your own choices--if you [or your husband] WANT to stay home and cook/clean/change diapers, you [or he] can!, but if you want to continue pursuing your career, you can do that, too.

Please join SmartAssProducts.com in supporting Hillary Clinton for president. This really is a chance to make history! We didn't start out being anti-Obama, but have basically become so as he's gotten endless hype, adulation, endorsements, and media coverage--undeservedly so, in our opinion. Forget about the supposed history-making that electing a black (actually, HALF black) man would create. He's still male! If you're truly interested in making HERstory...er,history, support Hillary Clinton. She's more qualified, better prepared, and has vastly more experience than Barack Obama, and that's why we think you should support her. But it cannot be denied that putting a woman into the White House will be a profound step for American women which may, finally, put us on equal footing with men in the workplace.

One last thing: Please contribute to Hillary's campaign! And encourage others to do the same.

Barack Obama: All hype, no substance

Continuing on with yesterday's theme, we think Barack Obama is all hype but no substance. We really cannot remember any other candidate getting so much positive attention for having done so little politically. We're just stumped on this one. We also don't get why voters are jumping on the Obama bandwagon without really understanding what he has/hasn't accomplished, and why that does/doesn't qualify him to step into the White House next January as president. But they're just blindly leaping onto the bandwagon as if under some kind of spell. Wake up, people! If Obama gets elected he will be in over his head right from the start. Is that really what you want?

Looking for anti-Obama merchandise?

Why all the hype about Obama?

Is it just me, or are you also sick of all the hype surrounding Barack Obama? WHAT on earth has he ever done to warrant so much attention?! I'm at a complete loss as to why he's garnering endorsement after endorsement--including from my hometown paper, the LA Times--and being talked about incessantly. He's totally lacking in experience, or at least the kind of experience that will be needed to clean up the mess left after Bush leaves office, yet people are talking about him like he's God's gift to humanity.

Looking for anti-Obama merchandise?

Oh, another thing: How come no one ever mentions that he's only HALF black? It's always "he'll be the first AFRICAN AMERICAN president!" Um, no, he won't. Assuming he manages to get elected, he'll still only be HALF BLACK. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, will still be 100% female...and 100% capable...intelligent...ready...when she takes office!

It's painful for me to find myself siding with Repugnants who are bashing Obama, but in this case I can't help it. I'm surprising myself by coming up with an anti-Democrat design for merchandise on my web site, but just felt it was necessary. As far as I'm concerned, [no] Obama!

Let's make "herstory": Hillary '08

Last night's debate [between Clinton and Obama] really drove home just how ready Clinton is to be president of the US. She was poised, very well informed, had facts to back things up, and, as always, came off looking professional and sounding intelligent and articulate. That's not to say that Obama performed poorly because, for the most part, he didn't. It's just that Clinton is so much readier to be president now than Obama is.

Here's a scenario that would work well for all involved: A Clinton/Obama ticket. That way, we'd get the immediate readiness on Clinton's part to step into the oval office and get down to work, and we'd have an 8 year stretch (yes, I do believe Hillary will win a second term) with Obama as vice president, giving him time to ease into getting ready to be president.

For right now, let's concentrate on making "herstory" by electing Clinton in November. (For the record, we don't think Clinton should be elected BECAUSE she's a woman. The only thing that counts is who's the best candidate for the job and, in our opinion, that's Clinton, hands down.)

One issue that REALLY bothers me is Obama's repeated attempts at making it sound like his opposition to the Iraq war, from the beginning, somehow makes him the better choice. Wrong! Clinton based her decision to support the war on faulty information and lies from the Bush administration. Under those circumstances, who can fault her? She did what she thought was best based on the facts as she knew them. She didn't have a crystal ball and couldn't have known how faulty the Bush intelligence (wow, is that an oxymoron or what?!) was; Bush was the president and Clinton had to assume that what he was saying was indeed correct. If there really had been weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, wouldn't it be a good thing to go in and take control? Of course it would. And that's what Clinton thought she was supporting. I have no problem whatsoever with Clinton's changing opinions over time regarding the war. It's GOOD to learn from one's mistakes! It's GOOD to admit that--knowing what one knows now--one wouldn't make the same bad decision they did when they had incomplete data. Obama and his supporters really need to get over the fact that he--in his opinion--was 'right' about the war from the get-go. Really...get over it.

Do we REALLY want an inexperienced person in the White House?

With all the hype being generated around Barack Obama, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that he does not have the experience it's going to take to clean up after eight disastrous Bush years. So who does have that experience? Hillary Clinton, of course!

We're surprised to see everyone from Oprah Winfrey to John Kerry jumping on the Obama bandwagon, because they're clearly overlooking his lack of experience. If they're so interested in "making history" [by electing the first "black" president--and keep in mind
that he's only half black, but for some reason everybody seems to be forgetting that], what they ought to do is support Hillary. After all, it really would be history-making for the United States to elect a female president! Instead, though, they're putting their support behind a half-black, inexperienced man, and we really don't get it.

Experience matters: Clinton 2008

We know a lot of people are taken in by Barack Obama, and while we LIKE him just fine, we don't think he's ready to be President of the United States. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, IS ready, and will bring with her 30+ years of experience that will help turn this country around again. Besides, doesn't it take a Clinton to clean up the mess made by a Bush?