Will Men Vote for a Woman President?

After the Presidential Debate, Fox News has been dropping the notion, "Men will probably not vote for Kamala Harris." This is planting the SEED; men don't want to be BOSSED by a woman. Even though there is a difference between bossing and leading.

Donald Trump and JD Vance have been giving interviews for podcasts in the Manosphere. The Manosphere is made up of men from communities such as the Red Pill Community, Incels, and MGTOW, who have a bone to pick with women for ruining America and the world at large. This is the beginning of the "Men should be the head," defense. Even women are saying a woman should not be "over" men as a president..

According to Gallup and Resume Lab, only 28% of men would prefer to work for a female manager, and only 53% feel positive about having women leaders in their organization. The men tend to not like female bosses. 28% of them would prefer to work for a female manager. Only 53% feel rather or very positive about having women leaders in their organization. And a mere 17% would trust a woman more than a man to lead a company. It's not a Kamala Harris problem, it's being a WOMAN problem.

Americans revere presidents as role models, fixating on their status – real or perceived – as founding fathers, real fathers, war heroes, and Master of Diplomacy and making money and cheating on their wives without getting caught (or, at least, without getting divorced). Because presidents epitomize American notions of manhood, elections reveal what kind of man, what type and degree of masculinity, is most respected and deserving of power. ‘Be a man and vote for a woman’: Kamala Harris’s unlikely edge in America’s masculinity election | US elections 2024 | The Guardian. Can a MAN see a WOMAN as a HERO? Is MASCULINITY on the ballot for male voters?

Republicans are associated with more masculine issues and traits, Democrats with feminine ones. National defense and the economy are seen as topics that men care about, because men are expected to prize being providers for and protectors of their families. Healthcare – including abortion rights – and education are seen as women’s issues, because women are supposed to be compassionate caregivers. Even religion is brought into the equation of whether to vote for a woman as president. Can men accept a WOMAN in CHARGE of an entire NATION? Trump is gaining traction with young men because they feel voiceless in this country. They fear with a woman in charge they feel their concerns will be IGNORED. I have addressed the cry of this generation's (males) grievances in another post. 

How many reasons have you heard Kamala Harris should not be president? Has one of the reasons given been due to the Christian religious belief that a woman should not rule over men? If you haven't heard this reason yet, just wait, it's bound to RISE up in your circle of political commentary. Let's put this erroneous belief to rest shall we. 

When it comes to men struggling with antiquated masculinity issues when it comes to voting for a woman as president because of gender, I hope they have at least one woman they know who they view as a woman capable of great things. Maybe a sister or daughter who they would cheer for to reach their full potential. But those male voters do not think beyond THEMSELVES. For those MEN and WOMEN using Christian Scripture as the foundation for NOT voting for a woman to lead a nation, I have a WORD for you.

Christianity has taught for centuries that WOMEN are to be in a submissive position to men and not have a 'role' within the church. The church teaches church leaders should be men. But what happens when the established roles of women within the church, whether correct or not, are applied outside of Christianity and outside of the church? The answer is you get CONFUSION.

The first instance of a woman being considered in a 'lower' role than a man is in Genesis, the first book of the Christian Bible, when we are introduced to Adam. Adam was alone in the Garden of Eden and God saw he was lonely when he was not around. God had created the animals and birds, male and female but Adam did not have a companion so God created him a companion, a wife, and said she would be a helper suitable to him, Genesis 2:20-25.

The KEY point about the wife being a helper here is there was NOTHING to help with. The Garden of Eden was self-sufficient. There was no WORK or toil to do. Work would come into being well after Adam and Eve were created. The REASON a wife was created was for companionship/relationship. This is the 'help' offered by the first wife. Later in Genesis 3:16, as punishment for her disobedience of God, Eve's DESIRES would be for her husband, and he would RULE OVER HER. Her punishment was that her husband, not all men, would rule over her. This is a husband-and-wife thing which cannot be broadly applied to the world of interactions between unmarried men and women as many Christians believe.

Again, we read about the husband-and-wife relationship in the New Testament, Ephesians 5:22-33 says, "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything". Now, me as a woman, do not have to submit to any other woman's husband. It is HER job, according to Scripture, to submit to HER husband. A man does not go to his place of employment as a husband. He is just an employee. Men are just citizens in the United States. WHERE they are husbands is where they have authority. The passages cannot be any clearer.

We do not have to wonder how God felt about women as leaders because we have a clear example in the Bible in the book of Judges. In the Old Testament, judges were military leaders of the tribes of Israel before the monarchy. They were raised by God to govern the tribes and lead them into battle against enemies. Two famous judges were Samson and Gideon. Of the twelve judges chosen by God, there was ONE woman, Deborah. Deborah was a married woman who led Israel. She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites CAME to her to have their disputes decided, Judges 4:4-5. She defeated Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite Army. She was the commander over 10,000 men. It was a woman, Jael, who actually KILLED Sisera, the Canaanite commander.

What about women having a leadership role within the church leading men. Here we have the example of Phoebe in the book of Romans. Romans 16:1-2, "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way WORTHY of the saints and to GIVE her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me." Because her name is listed first by Paul, even before other men, scholars agree she held a position of importance. Paul goes on to tell the church to greet twenty-six other people, but he only instructs them to give Phoebe whatever she asks.

When the words of the above passage are reviewed in its original language, the word 'servant' is defined as ministry sixteen times so scholars accept the word as meaning teacher. Next, we have a woman, Priscilla whose name is listed BEFORE her husband's which scholars also believe is significant, since women were understood to be submissive to their husbands within their Christian teaching. Paul said the husband and wife had risked their lives for him and the Gentile churches. Here we see the author of many books of the New Testament exalting women and the work they have done for the church.

Throughout the Bible, women are hand selected in the same manner as men to carry out the will of God. Different people have been used in different capacities as God sees fit. We are all his creation. We all have different talents. Many Bible teachers and preachers prefer to say women are easily deceived and are the weaker sex, according to Scripture. Well, I have an entire post dedicated to that vein of teaching that I will not address here.

My point is, there is nothing biblical that indicates a woman cannot be president of the United States. Even without scriptural backing, many believe it will be against God's will for Kamala Harris to be president. I ask Christian's to think about the NATURE of God as evidenced by his Word in the Bible. How many times is it written and said, "I have chosen." God chooses to do what he does, and it does not always line up with what we believe should be. His ways are not our ways. 1 Corinthians 1:27, "But God has selected [for His purpose] the foolish things of the world to shame the wise [revealing their ignorance], and God has selected [for His purpose] the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong [revealing their frailty]."

One last point I would like to make. No matter who is the leader of our country, as Christians we are to carry ourselves as such. The person leading us may have been allowed to be in that position to show OUR CHRACTER. Christians are not yanked around by worldly concerns. We are to remain steadfast in our Christian walk and service to God. And we learn through Scripture, as far as God is concerned, to never say NEVER.

Is Donald Trump Ugly?

Former president, Donald Trump, said at his rally in Pennsylvania, "I look better than Kamala Harris." Many people have commented about the way Trump looks, usually making fun of his choice of "tanning" color. They also mention the shape of his physique. Neither of which I need to give an example. You would have had to live under a rock not to know most of the comments about him. We don't need to address whether Trump is attractive. NOPE! That said, does attractiveness play a role in who people choose for president?

Studies going at least as far back to the 1970s tended to show a positive correlation between handsomeness and how subjects assessed a candidate. Scholars sometimes reasoned that the attractiveness effect took place because voters without a lot of information about a candidate used good looks to infer other good qualities—a kind of “halo effect.” Voters appear primarily drawn to faces that suggested competence.

Since all of the presidents have been men, we are in new territory, discovering does attractiveness matter when choosing a female president. The backlash from Trump's comments about Kamala Harris appearance, would make you believe looks do not matter. Looks have always matter.

Did looks make a difference for John Kennedy? Google him and you will find descriptions such as, witty, charismatic, and handsome, John Kennedy's youthful vigor attracted a new generation of Americans to public service and political engagement. At 43 years of age, Kennedy became the nation's youngest-elected president. His debate with Former President Nixon, solidified that a candidate's appearance mattered. Nixon looked a mess during the debate while Kennedy looked cool, calm, and collected.

Obama is considered to be handsome by I dare say, millions of women of all races. Obama's sex appeal hasn't hurt him in such images of him exited an ocean in his swim trunks. His physical fitness captured in photos for the world to see. What other president would get high marks in a swimsuit competition? He has touched a nerve among Black women in particular, who consider him an IBM (Ideal Black Man) — educated, eloquent, tall, attractive, family oriented, ambitious and down to earth.

President Joe Biden chooses outfits that make him look younger. Donald Trump opts for old-fashioned dark suits and long ties to convey a message of traditional masculinity. Choices like these are attempts by candidates to morph into the ideal "handsome man" by the public's standards.

Studies show, people vote for candidates who put a lot of effort in looking natural and effortless, but not perfect. Some suggest this is why Mitt Romney was not elected; he looked or presented himself as flawless. People also questioned if he was too handsome. Former President Bill Clinton had the ability to talk naturally and with ease with many ethnicities, such as the Black community. This sense of naturalness made voters feel he was trustworthy. Unlike Mitt Romney, Clinton was known not to be perfect. He was flawed, especially when it came to women. President Clinton was a president many women may have voted for due to his charisma and charm, if not for his physical features.

In 2005, Princeton psychologist Alexander Todorov and colleagues published an astounding study. Todorov and colleagues developed computer models of how faces can suggest character traits like trustworthiness and likability. The competent face shape is masculine but approachable, with a square jaw, high cheekbones, and large eyes. The shape of the eyebrows can suggest anger, for instance, while a long distance between the eyes and the mouth can suggest sadness. An incompetent face, beady, close-together eyes paired with high eyebrows suggest fearfulness. Mitt Romney vs. Newt Gingrich: How much do looks matter in presidential politics? (slate.com)

So, is Trump attractive? Evolutionary psychologist, Todd Shackelford of Oakland University. said Trump is not, from a scientific point-of-view, good-looking. “Indications of non-natural skin texture or color, non-natural hair”—such as Trump’s conspicuous fake tan and orange-tinted ’do—“these are cues that people read as, ‘Something is wrong,’ and that decrease ratings of attractiveness, according to Shackelford. But it seems Trump knows, when it comes to assessing the rich and famous, women are far more forgiving of physical attributes. This may be why Trump has so much White female support - the lure of money and power, not good looks

A 1976 profile of the young mogul in the New York Times gushes: He is tall, lean and blond, with dazzling white teeth, and he looks ever so much like Robert Redford. He rides around town in a chauffeured silver Cadillac with his initials, DJT, on the plates. He dates slinky fashion models, belongs to the most elegant clubs and, at only 30 years of age, estimates that he is worth “more than $200 million.”

Trump, who did look a little bit like Robert Redford in those days, described “flair” as one of his favorite words. “If a man has flair … and is smart and somewhat conservative and has a taste for what people want, he’s bound to be successful in New York,” he said. Trump informs people how to SEE him. The shtick appears to have worked on Andy Warhol, who wrote in his diaries in 1981 that Trump was “good-looking” and “a butch guy.” 

Trump’s perceived virility declined in the 1980s and ’90s in tandem with his prestige and financial troubles. When he no longer could rely on youthful good looks and a large bank account, Trump turned to BEHAVING ugly to draw people to him. Ugly IS his attractiveness. 

“The Ugly American” – a phrase made famous by the 1958 political novel about U.S. policy in Southeast Asia by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer – can no longer refer just to the prototypical loud, ignorant American. Today the title has taken on a real human face, and that is the face of Donald Trump. Like in 2016, Trump must make a campaign of darkness and disarray. He tries to take away the electorate's desires for a hopeful future. He strips the voters of the excitement of a new beginning, and demoralizes, demeans, and dejects. Donald Trump embodies ugly. This time, ugly is his only way forward. Ugly is how he surprisingly achieved accidental success in 2016. Ugly is how he will succeed again.

Because he is ugly in behavior, he tries to make his opponents ugly or whoever displeases him. He has no problem trying to ugly up women. When facing presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Trump said, "If Hillary Clinton can't satisfy her husband, what makes her think she can satisfy America?" [April 16, 2015]. Facing another female candidate, Carly Fiorina, he stated, "Look at that face. Would anybody vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president? I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not supposed to say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?" [Sept. 9, 2015]. On Arianna Huffington he stated, "Unattractive both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man — he made a good decision." [Aug. 28, 2012]. On Stormy Daniels, he also commented, "Horseface" [Oct. 16, 2018] "I never liked horseface. That wouldn't be the one. There is no one. We have a great First Lady."  [March 25, 2023]. You get the picture?

You can be beautiful on the outside but ugly on the inside and eventually your actions will show people how ugly you really are. Kamala Harris does not have to give energy responding to comments regarding how her physical features. Beauty fades, but the heart remains the same. Kahlil Gibran said, "Beauty is not in the face; beauty is a light in the heart."  

If Donald Trump wants to focus on things that fade and don't matter and Kamala focuses of bringing joy and hope for a better and brighter future, I'll take what she is offering. Beauty has always been in the eye of the beholder. Thank goodness looks are not on the ballot. But if it was, scientific evidence shows Trump would lose by a landslide. 

I will end with a famous quote I learned as a child; "Beauty is as beauty does," which means that beauty is worthless unless it comes with a kind, generous soul. Whether someone is actually “beautiful” should be judged by their actions, not their appearance.

Black Enough Kamala Harris

 BEING BLACK IS COMPLICATED!

Kamala Harris is coming face to face with this fact. For over a century, being Black was simpler. There was an in 1662, which identified who and who was not Black. What was the one drop rule in 1662? The act stated that "every person who shall have one-eight or more of negro blood shall be deemed and held to be a person of color." This was the equivalent of one great-grandparent. This definition of being Black was solely based on biology. But, as time passed, being Black became about a person's actions and personality, and who the Black community said was Black enough.

According to a 2022 study, autosomal African ancestry in Jamaicans ranges from 76% to 92%, while Y chromosome data ranges from 61% to 79%. However, estimates of admixture can vary depending on the sample size, the number of markers used, and the communities sampled. For example, a 2010 autosomal genealogical DNA test found that Jamaica's gene pool is about 80.3% Sub-Saharan African, while a survey of Jamaican Maroons found that 97.5% of their genome was of West African origin.  

I heard someone say, if you notice, there are so many 'light skinned people ' fighting for Black people's rights. They made this statement, being offended, people with light skin and green eyes were fighting for the rights of BLACK people as though they were not Black. This is a form of colorism. Colorism is prejudice or discrimination especially within a racial or ethnic group favoring people with lighter skin over those with darker skin or not favoring a person because of the lightness or darkness of their skin. In many instances, Black people with light skin are not seen as Black enough and they cannot relate to the real Black experience. Spike Lee's School Daze, released February 12, 1988, explored several issues within the Black-American community such as colorism, elitism, classism, political activism, hazing, groupthink, female self-esteem, social mobility, and hair texture bias—all against the backdrop of a historically black college.

The way a person speaks and how they choose to spend their free time has been used to determine if a person is Black. It is not uncommon to hear a person is trying to act WHITE. It is asserted if a Black person speaks in a certain way, it makes them not Black. The Black community, over time have developed their own style of language and if you don't speak it, you may not be seen as Black. African American Vernacular English (AAVE), also known as Black English Vernacular (AAE), or African American Language (AAL), is a style of English spoken by many working- and middle-class African Americans and some Black Canadians, especially in urban communities. It's often spoken in Black American households and is a way for people with a shared culture to communicate. Linguists believe AAVE may have originated from West African or Creole languages.

Examples of this defined way many Black people speak are,

“Finnin to.” This expression is used to state a desire to do something, as in “I’m finnin to slap him,”

“Big ol'’.” It’s the shortening of “big old,” but it often sounds like “big-o.”

“My bad.” This phrase is used to offer apologies for a wrongdoing

“We straight.” In Black American English, “straight” can mean “all right.” So “we straight”

In this same vein, many White people believe it is a compliment when they say a Black person speaks well and is articulate. This implies that particular Black person is somehow special and different from the norm and speaks well for being a Black person. Acting White is an anti-intellectual culture the Black community has leaned into. To be educated is associated with being White. Two theories, one, blaming acting white on a racist society, and second placing blame on self-imposed cultural sabotage, have emerged as the predominant explanations for acting white among American Blacks. For school aged children, the cost of being educated or intelligent has been studied. 

The social costs of a high GPA are most pronounced for adolescent males. Popularity begins to decrease at lower GPAs for young black men than young black women (3.25 GPA compared with a 3.5), and the rate at which males lose friends after this point is far greater. As a result, black male high achievers have notably fewer friends than do female ones. There is a similar pattern among Hispanics, with males beginning to lose friends at lower GPAs and at a faster clip, though the male/female differences are not statistically significant. A smart teen of color is less popular. Black students, particularly adolescents, face the "burden of 'acting White'" if they are academically successful.  My children faced this as high school students. They were not Black enough. The "acting White" hypothesis asserts that Blacks have not historically valued education, viewing academic success as the domain of Whites and thus fundamentally in opposition to Black culture and identity.

Even though Kamal Harris passes the 1% Negro blood act, many people, including Donald Trump, have decided she is not Black enough. She is not considered 'light' skinned and unable to relate to the Black experience. She uses Black vernacular and references cultural points Black people recognize within their community and family circles. So, why is she not Black enough? Is it solely because she is educated or is there another underlying reason?

When a white congressional candidate, in 2008, referred to a black news reporter as "uppity," he coincidentally joined company with another white politician who, later that day, applied the same description to then Sen. Barack and Michelle Obama. Both of the Georgians claimed ignorance of the racial history of the word "uppity," a derogatory term applied throughout the Jim Crow South to Blacks who dared to climb the socioeconomic ladder. The word “uppity” was used to describe someone inferior that was not staying in their proper place. This term has historically been used in America to describe Black people who were considered to be acting above "their place". Kamala is in a place no other Black female has been before.

Donald Trump's ignorant comment about Kamala Harris one day choosing to be of Indian descent due to her mother being born in India or choosing to be of African descent because her father is Jamaican, sows seeds in the Black community to question whether she is Black enough. There are low rumblings online among Black people saying she is not Black. As I stated earlier, being Black is complicated. Complicated for those clinging to the trauma of slavery and the Jim Crow era.

According to the 2020 United States census, 10.2% of the population, or 33.8 million people, identified as multiracial. This is a significant increase from 2010, when 2.9% of the population reported multiple races. The multiracial population is the fastest-growing demographic in the country. Do biracial people identify with only one ethnicity? No, most biracial Americans do not identify with only one ethnicity, and how they identify can vary depending on the situation. For example, a 2015 Pew Research Center survey found that 70% of white and Asian biracial adults and 61% of white and Black biracial adults identify as multiracial. However, some mixed-race Americans may not identify as multiracial if they "look like one race". According to the survey, 54% of those who don't identify as multiracial say this is because they were raised as only one race, while 45% say they closely identify with only one race. Others may not identify as multiracial because they never knew an ancestor of a different race. 

Kamala Harris is Indian, African, and married to a White man. She is diverse. Her diversity should appeal to many people. Instead, people are trying to put her into a box, make her CHOOSE. Being a woman, men may believe she cannot represent them as a president. Deep rooted beliefs of men holding onto the idea of only a man can lead and identify with a man are also a problem for Harris. Kamala will be a president who can represent the multi-faceted makeup of the United States because of her life's story and obstacles she has faced and overcome.

Not being Black enough, according to research, was faced in her adolescence and it seems she weathered it well. Living into her Black identity was tackled during college when she joined a historically Black sorority, AKA. Having no biological children of her own, she understands the importance of a woman making her own decision about becoming a mother (not saying she chose not to have children). As a biracial child, she understands how important it is to not be judged by skin color alone. For the fearful White man believing his kind is becoming less important in society, she loves a White man.

Kamala Harris shines on so many levels until she MUST be attacked on a primal level. Attacks that stoke FEAR in people. Sexism, racism. and misogyny are the tools of the weak. Fear of intelligence, womanhood, and skin color are old tools to try to keep a person in a perceived place others have decided a person belongs. But due to her diversity, life's experience, and work experience, these are obstacles she has already overcome. 

Not being Black enough is not the problem of the person the comment is said about. The concept the person has that blackness is defined as not wanting everything life has to offer is the problem. The person who lays claim to knowing how a Black person is to behave or what they are allowed to achieve is the one with the problem. Because the first comment is 'you are not Black' and the next comment is 'you're uppity'. All of this is the slave mentality of Blacks and remnants of White supremacy from Whites. 

All of the presidents before Obama were not Black enough because they were White. Many felt President Obama was not Black enough. Now Kamala is not Black enough. What is the vision of a Black president then? Because Obama nor Kamala can escape, they are Black people. Sorry Donald and the rest of America, Kamala IS Black

Kamala Harris, Lady Liberty

WHAT A GREAT DAY TO BE ALIVE! This is especially true for Kamala Harris who has a great chance of becoming the first female president of color. But is it really a great day for her?

Throughout time women have been at the forefront of great change. And while on that forefront, they have been ATTACKED viciously. There is also an expectation, Kamala Harris will face sexism, racism, and misogyny as she runs for president. So far, the biggest attack of her opposition has been about the way she LAUGHS. Imagine, being mocked for the way you laugh when you have an impressive resumé when it comes to fighting for the rights of others and prosecuting law breakers. It's like when a little boy says you have cooties because his vocabulary is so limited, and he cannot express what he truly feels.

If we look through history, we will find a large number of women who overcame the personal attacks to forge new paths for the better of community, state and country. In my book, When Will Eve be Forgiven?, I look at several women who were demeaned for their greatness and dedication for change. It has never been an easy path for women, and it won't be for Kamala Harris. 

I want to talk about one woman from my book, Mati-Hari. I choose her because the most vicious attack on Kamala Harris is that she SLEPT her way to the top. The attack on successful women only excelling if they have sex has been used since the creation of man. Christians have been taught how wicked women are using their sexuality to usurp men. This doctrine of women being deceptive and not trustworthy was introduced with the matriarch of women, Eve, in the Christian Bible. Sexy, curvaceous, deceitful, and wanton; these are the words used to depict Eve in the Garden of Eden

Courtesan, artist, free-spirited bohemian, Mati-Hari transformed her mysterious past into a future of world-renowned fame and admiration. Her stage name was Margaretha Geertruida “Grietje” Zelle MacLeod. She was born August 7, 1876, in Leeuwarden. Mati Hari became known as a promiscuous, flirtatious dancer who openly flaunted her body. She would progressively shed her clothes until she wore only a jeweled braw and some ornaments upon her arms and head.

She would live a life of intrigue seducing men of power and position. Accused of spying and even being a double agent between Germany and France she would be tried by a court February 13, 1917, found guilty and executed by a firing squad October 15, 1917.

From the time of her birth till the time of her death, Mati-Hari defined who she was and who she wanted people to know her as. Time nor circumstance limit who she wanted to be, and history recorded her as the person she declared she was. After her death, her head was embalmed and kept in the Museum of Anatomy in Paris. Her head was discovered missing in 2000 and could have disappeared as early as 1954.

Here, a woman clearly used her sexuality in an effort to help her country. Kamal Harris has not used her sexuality in the way Mati-Hari did. Mati-Hari did not hide who she was and how she operated. Neither does Kamala Harris.

In 2004, Vice President Harris was elected District Attorney of San Francisco where she was a national leader in the movement for LGBTQ+ rights, officiating the first same-sex wedding after Proposition 8 was overturned. She also established the office’s environmental justice unit and created a ground-breaking program to provide first-time drug offenders with the opportunity to earn a high school degree and find employment, which the U.S. Department of Justice designated as a national model of innovation for law enforcement. And years earlier, in 1990, she joined the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office where she specialized in prosecuting child sexual assault cases.

In 2010, Vice President Harris was elected Attorney General of California where she oversaw the largest state justice department in the country. She took on those who were preying on the American people, winning a $20 billion settlement for Californians whose homes had been foreclosed on and a $1.1 billion settlement for students and veterans who were taken advantage of by a for-profit education company. She also defended the Affordable Care Act in court and enforced environmental laws.

In 2017, she was sworn into the United States Senate where she championed legislation to fight hunger, provide rent relief, improve maternal health care, expand access to capital for small businesses, revitalize America’s infrastructure, and combat the climate crisis. She questioned two Supreme Court nominees while serving on the Judiciary Committee. She also worked to keep the American people safe from foreign threats and crafted bipartisan legislation to assist in securing American elections while serving on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Her life's journey has not come close to a woman who uses her sex to help her community, state, and country. 

The adjectives used to describe women have not changed much since biblical times due largely to the fact human nature has not changed much either. The Book of Proverbs in the Christian Bible has more vivid adjectives describing womanhood than any other book in the Bible. 

The list of adjectives include: adulterous, aged, angry; bad, beautiful, brawling; careless, chaste, clamorous, comely, compassionate, complacent, contentious; deceitful, devout, diligent, discreet, dishonest, domestic, drunken; elect, evil; fainthearted, fair, faithful, foolish, foreign, fretful; glorious, godly, good, gracious, grave, great,; haughty, high-principled, holy, honest, honorable,; impudent, indiscreet; jealous,; kind, loose, loving; obedient, odious, outlandish; peevish, peaceable, pitiful, prudent; quarrelsome, reverent, righteous; sensible, serious, shamefaced, shameless, silent, silly, simple, sober, steady, strange, submissive, subtle; temperate, trustworthy; unloved; virtuous; wayward, weak, wealthy, whorish, wicked, wily, worthy; and young.

In the coming days and months, there will be many words used to describe Kamala Harris, but Kamala has clearly defined herself through her past accomplishments and future vision for an America where the rights of every person, regardless of their sex or color, is upheld. ADJECTIVES are just that, adjectives. BUT here RECEIPTS are her receipts. She has proven herself time and time again.

So, let them talk. Women have withstood slander and defamation throughout history, and it never stopped them. It's an old trick. As my book, When Will Eve be Forgiven?, highlights, we, women, are free or should be free from MISOGYNY and live into who we are. If I am correct, the nastiness coming towards Kamala, will only fuel her in her purpose. She's a fighter and not a wilting violet. It is a great time to be alive and witness the strength and fortitude she will display as she vies to be the 47th president of the United States. We are witnessing HISTORY. It's not CLOTHES off but GLOVES off for Kamala Harris.