Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Cathedral Avoids Discussing Female Sovereigns of the Past

History forever marches forward with more progress and change. The cathedral can only hope Hildawg doesn't die off or get too old and fat to run in 2016 to get ladies all ginned up to vote for the first female president of the United State of America. Oh what a great achievement by our enlightened minds it would be! Ladies would throw away the yoke of patriarchal oppression and have a president with a real vagina, not just act like he has one like Obama. The media campaign will be in high gear, and after the smoke job they pulled in 2012, where the evil Romney and Ryan were waiting to stitch up vaginas nationwide, I have no doubt the cathedral will have the propaganda in full force to let low information voters think this is a crowning achievement for all mankind. It will also be a sham not just for modern times, but compared to when individual women fully held sovereign power several hundred years ago.

I could sit here and just type names of modern female executives like Angela Merkel, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher, Indira Ghandi, Bhutto, etc." Those are prime ministers chosen as leaders of their party", a feminist might argue, and Ghandi and Bhutto were daughters of politicians (while completing forgetting they only know Hildawg because of her husband). "There was no campaign purely on her merits", they might argue. Using names like Queen Elizabeth I, the Italian or Hapsburg Countesses, Queen Isabella or the old Byzantine Empresses might be too removed and deflected by a Jezebel reader. Let us review two names from very patriarchal nations and times that few, if any, modern women know about for their true power or rule who would put voting for a betrayed woman to be the figurehead of our corrupt system to shame: Christina of Sweden and Catherine the Great.

Christina of Sweden was a pretty intelligent woman who was ahead of her time with cultivating the arts, philosophy and an enlightened court around her. This was in the 1600s in Sweden, which was just a couple hundred years removed from the Viking era. She took the crown at a young age, but reigned for a limited time. While she did rule, she cultivated the arts and was a bit of a Renaissance woman if there was such a thing. She may have been the only one. She abdicated the throne upon converting to Catholicism in a Protestant country when wars were fought over that sort of thing, and lived life, never marrying, as a bit of a wild child. If you want to know what she was like, picture what ever lesbian imagines their life being like as a rebel against the system. That was Christina. I say lesbian because there were enough lesbian vibes from her to film an MTV reality show. If Hollywood was not full of idiots, we'd see a period piece biopic about her life in this new era of gay glorification. She actually did things and held power, not just write on a Tumblr about some guy making a pass at her. She wasn't as awesome as the Queen from an even more manly nation, Catherine the Great.

Catherine the Great had her husband knocked off when her conspiracy was uncovered by him, and didn't trust her son enough so she had him locked up for years. There were multiple threats to the throne from somewhat legit heirs and pretenders, which she had crushed. Russia is called an alpha male's paradise today, imagine 250 years ago. Her reign was the high mark of the Russian Empire as she actually enacted many of the reforms and moves that Peter the Great had wanted to accomplish. She held real power and expanded her nation's Empire. Considering the history of Russia from the late 1800s to today, one could say Russia needs to be ruled by a stern Tsar, whether royal, red or KGB. Catherine ruled for decades.

These examples matter for nothing. The evil straight white man is always there to oppress women. If the election of Obama was the 'it's time' moment for electing a black, then we are sure that the cathedral will let us know that 'it's time' to elect a woman with Mrs. Clinton. It does not matter the number of historical examples of women holding power in European history. History does not matter. The patriarchy has forever held women down, and the struggle will only be rewarded by seeing a female totem at the top. After all, the Iphone addicts who used their votes twice for Obama and are just hoping for the chance to vote for Clinton think Christina of Sweden is a technopop singer and may know Catherine the Great as the Russian lady who banged horses.

1 comment:

odinslounge said...

Let's not forget all the women who fought each other in order to marry the King. I've read numerous times about the deception and competition amongst women for that honor, sometimes even between sisters!
Yeah, women are great leaders cause their more level headed. HA!