Women must be very proud. The first serious woman candidate for the democratic nomination since Shirley Chisolm in 1972 seems tickled that two recent endorsements also happen to accentuate her “testicular fortitude” and the fact that she is not a “pansy.” quite a tribute.
The physiological component to the first comment is something only Bill really knows anything about and he’s not talking. The fact that she is not a pansy is, well, homophobic, isn’t it. And she stood proudly by and accepted these endorsements, making her, i presume, a homophobic transgendered, or hermaphrodite candidate for president?
Or perhaps presidential candidates need not embody the characteristics ascribed them by their supporters. Perhaps endorsements should be seen for what they are, metaphors, rather than literal ascriptions of personal characteristics. (and, perhaps the candidate need not have to be responsible for everything an endorser says). If a metaphor, then she sure is one tough lady. Perhaps such a personna was necessary for Margaret Thatcher in the 1970s and 80’s, but is this ‘tough guy’ image thing really necessary now in a 2008 pomo universe?
I have seen my wife give birth, twice. I’d say, ovarian fortitude trumps testicular fortitude any day of the week. and it sure would get my vote.