This is just an observation, okay? And maybe I’m reading too much into it. But Sarah Palin went on FoxNews to say that anti-immigrant Arizona Governor Jan Brewer “has the cajones that [Pres. Barack Obama] does not have…” by pushing her profiling “papers please” approaches to legislation.
Beyond the warped irony of using a Spanish euphemism to defend an attack on Mexican immigrants, why do we have a woman using anti-feminist concepts to undermine perceptions of a President (granted, it’s not the first time)? “Cajones,” of course, reinforces the implications that masculine is the ideal and that testosterone equals courage (from my perspective, it takes more courage to stand up for justice and ethics even if it’s unpopular at the polls).
Normally, I don’t get too far into US politics, because, hey, I’m not an American, I’m not a voter, it’s not my business. But the latest bit of anti-woman rhetoric being used to undermine a political leader because his war and anti-minority policies are not manly enough is my business, when I live in a North American society in which this attitude perpetuates like stink. This spreads colonial and patriarchal mentalities in which feminine traits are vilified as weakness in a “father knows best” society. Some of my thoughts on this will be explored in more depth shortly.
I recognize that there is good reason that people are getting impatient with this particular political leader. It sure does look like people have been thrown under the bus. But none of it should have to do with “cajones,” and we have to stop acting like diplomacy is always weakness. It only appears to be weakness when the other side of the discussion throws fits and tantrums and roadblocks at every conceivable and inconceivable length, “Just Because.”
We have this persistent perception that might is right, that security means militarism and toughness and “protecting” the poor helpless huddled masses. The Republican party knew how to manipulate this when they developed a colour-coded alarm system to keep the public in perpetual terror and willing to give up their civil rights in the name of protection from the forces of evil and immorality. Separation of church and state, separation of powers, free assembly, due process, accountability, fair judiciary and the freedom to exist and pursue happiness all stand to be lost when someone is reigning from the dictatorial and “cajones” -based beliefs that might makes right and the powerful were meant to govern. Ironically, the very things the Tea Party are complaining about — government heavy-handedness, loss of liberties — are things that developed from a previous administration’s reign of terror, and it’s a bizarrely twisted thing when those same people are complaining about this administration not ruling with the mechanisms of fear and control.
If it were me, I’d see the solution not in upping the cajones quotient, but in addressing the obstructionism for what it is.