Michelle versus Males

The former First Lady has serious issues with the guys of America

Hear me, your enraged misogynist scum! The Bratgirl needs your vote!

---

Like various other “strong black women”—the Left seems oversupplied with them—Michelle Obama doesn’t quite live up to her billing.

When her husband was running for president, there were not wanting unkind critics who suggested that if he were elected, she’d turn out to be his èminence grise: an ideologue in the mold of Hillary Clinton. But no, as First Lady, Michelle Obama exhibited scant interest in policy and dropped many hints that she found politics distasteful. Indeed, she came off as a bit of a diva, no doubt because of the adulation that came her way.

But there was always a touch of petulance in Michelle Obama’s makeup; she was known to throw the occasional sharp elbow. Indeed, she struck me as a woman with a rather large chip on her shoulder: Recall this magic moment, when she let slip that until her husband got elected president, she’d never really been proud of her country. Perhaps that helps to explain the intemperate tirade that she just launched against American men.

The former First Lady expressed her extreme annoyance with us guys, who for some reason inexplicable to her lopsidedly prefer Donald Trump to Kamala Harris. Though The New York Times characterized her broadside as “a searing appeal,” it was really nothing more than a standard-issue feminist screed, not likely to soften the hearts of guys whose reaction was something like: Ugh, she reminds me of my first wife/ex-girlfriend.

Michelle’s argument went like this: Trump can be a liar, a sexist pig, a racist, a fascist, and that’s okay. But Harris? She’s required to be perfect in every way—and that’s so unfair! In short, Michelle Obama is furious with men because we refuse to grade the Bratgirl on a curve. But that’s not all. Our unwillingness to toe the line for Kamala/Walz is due to “rage”—which, you see, does not “exist in a vacuum” and is actively harmful to the women in our lives. Yes, gentlemen, we are bad, bad people.

Harmful in what way? Well, supposedly Donald Trump intends to implement a national abortion ban if he becomes president. Kalama Harris has said so! This of course is a bare-faced lie. Trump has repeatedly denied that he would do any such thing and of course, no conceivable Congress would pass any such bill. But never mind: According to the comrades, MAGA fascists are scheming to deny American women the healthcare they need.

This manner of framing the argument is a tell. For in the vast majority of cases, abortion is not healthcare. If a female college student hooks up with a guy at a frat party and becomes pregnant, her decision to terminate the pregnancy is a lifestyle choice. If a married woman whose unborn child is found to be afflicted with Down’s Syndrome, her decision to terminate the pregnancy is a lifestyle choice, or perhaps an economic decision. Only in the minority of cases where a pregnancy endangers a woman’s physical well-being or even her life can an abortion be described as healthcare—and no one would deny a woman such healthcare.

So Michelle Obama’s charge that American men who support Donald Trump are complicit in the denial of healthcare to the women in their lives is an outrageous lie. And she knows it.

But Michelle and Kamala’s position on women’s welfare becomes even more complicated when one looks beyond abortion, toward what is misleadingly called transgender rights.

Enough has been written and reported about the intrusion of “trans women,” i.e. biological males posing as women, into women’s spaces to make unnecessary an extended discussion of it here. Suffice to say that Kamala Harris has a documented record of support for such abuses as allowing trans women to compete in women’s and girls’ sports, use women’s locker rooms and rest rooms, etc. These abuses are justified on the grounds of gender ideology, whose inversions of reality put Ingsoc to shame. Might this “enrage” some men, leading them to vote against Harris? As the father of two daughters, I have no doubt that it would. And it should.

But it gets worse. Kamala Harris also has a documented record of supporting gender transition treatment for minor children—puberty blockers, cross-hormone drugs, even surgery. Governor Tim Walz signed into law a bill making his state, Minnesota, a “sanctuary for trans youth,” the wishes of their parents notwithstanding. That is, Minnesota is now a place where minor children can be psychologically and physically mutilated without parental consent.

Be it noted that girls who go through these “gender-affirming” procedures suffer irreversible damage. They will never have a normal sex life; they will never bear children. If later they conclude that they’ve made a terrible mistake, they can never reverse it. Nor will Tim Walz, Kamala Harris be there to help them. How’s that for being “actively harmful to women”?

It seems fair to conclude that since Harris chose Walz as her running mate, she and Michelle Obama have no problem with this barbarism. So as far as I’m concerned, Michelle Obama can take her denunciation of American male rage and…run it through the shredder.

Note, incidentally, how the definition of “male rage” has been extended. Not so very long ago it was “white male rage.” But now that a significant percentage of black males are looking askance at the Bratgirl, guys of color have been included in the indictment. Welcome to the party, brothers! Yes, Barack and Michelle are very disappointed in you. Believe me, those of us who have languished under the interdict since 2008 feel your pain.

But contrary to the claims of Woke progressives, words, even when they come from a luminary like Michelle Obama, words aren’t really weapons. You’ll find as we have that her scolding—excuse me, searing appeal—lands no punch.