There have been ‘misogynists’ before Donald Trump

To the editor:

I will try once again to add some insights, not as an attack on liberals, but as a means to quell some of the distress espoused about our next president.

First, I would like to bring to light that Donald Trump is not the first (so called) “misogynist” president or politician who has held office in America. In fact, several have been viewed by those of the liberal left as icons. A definition of a misogynist: Sexual Objectification.
”Sexual objectification is the act of treating a person as an instrument of sexual pleasure. Objectification more broadly means treating a person as a commodity or an object without regard to their personality or dignity. Objectification is most commonly examined at the level of a society, but can also refer to the behavior of individuals.

The concept of sexual objectification and, in particular, the objectification of women, is an important idea in feminist theory and psychological theories derived from feminism. Many feminists regard sexual objectification as deplorable and as playing an important role in gender inequality. However, some social commentators argue that some modern women objectify themselves as an expression of their empowerment.”

A few examples of misogynists in the liberal political world:

• John Kennedy. It is a well known fact that John F. Kennedy was a “womanizer.” One of his most famous sexual encounters was with Marilyn Monroe. Though Marilyn was said to be intelligent, I somehow doubt that JFK was thinking about her intellectual attributes. And when he was done with her, he passed her off to his brother, Robert, who then cast her aside once he grew tired of her charms.

• Ted Kennedy. Who can forget the “Chappaquiddick Affair”? Ted, after running his car off a bridge, escaped and left his date in the car to die. He then went on to flee the scene to try and protect his good name and political career. All with total disregard for that poor woman.

• And then there was Bill Clinton. With regard to time constraints, I will not even try to list all his misogynistic travails.

The point to my comments are, no one got sick or hysterical about the activities of these liberal icons. There were no street demonstrations, nor even the thought that these men were a threat to women’s rights or a threat to all women. They were thought of as handsome, dashing or just a good old boy with flaws. I wonder what kind of conversations were had about women when each of them would set out on the topic of women?

Now for the topic of discrimination. John Kennedy was not known as a bigot. But, in deference to his political status, he was very hesitant to go out on a limb to promote equality to the African American portion of our society. It was Lyndon Johnson (another misogynist, who would slip a note to a female acqaintance, ordering her to his room for “Presidential Therapy” at 8 p.m., in case you did not know), who finally had the courage to put forth the several pieces of legislation of equality that was long overdue.

And what about Hillary? A woman aspiring to become our nation’s first female president. It is documented that, as a public defender, she was successful in getting a child rapist off with little consequence for his actions. To compound that, she later gave an interview making light of how she went about it. An example of a conflicting view of her non-bigotry was a comment in support of her husband’s crime legislation. Quote “Young black men of America are predators without conscience.”

This commentary is not to defend Donald Trump, simply because the deficiencies of others do not excuse his own. In fact, much to my dismay, the last election campaign was a picture of how personally flawed both candidates were. The real point of my comments is to point out that even with flawed leaders, our society has progressed.

And that the extreme distress, to the point of physical illness, mental anguish and unseemly protest (on the part of more than a few), is somewhat disingenuous if not simply biased. In fact, if we view this election with some restraint of hysteria and with a bit more of an open mind, we may even find that some changes to our governmental policies will be good for our nation and its citizens.

The electorate has chosen its path. Let us travel a bit down that path, without the pathos of the venomous political rhetoric we have been subjected to and see where it leads before offering total condemnation.

Robert Moras, Alpena, MI