Jesse Lee Petersen is a preacher and a "biblical" politician/pundit, appearing on Fox News, CNN, among other networks, as well as radio programs, to speak about his view of black America and other issues. Recently, he gave a sermon at his church and spoke about the impending downfall of America. I was alerted to this video from Libby Anne of Love, Joy, Feminism.
Before I jump into my critique of this work, I must say that I don't like the America portrayed by Mr. Petersen. When I see division (women vs. men, black vs. white, rich vs. poor, politicians vs. the common folk), I feel as if nothing was accomplished during the Civil War and more recently, during the Civil Rights movement, not to mention the women's suffrage movement, as well. My vision of America is one where we can disagree on issues and not section ourselves off into artificial camps based on race, gender, creed, etc. Thus, I do not appreciate anyone who attempts to drag us back to where we came from.
Now, to the Jesse Lee Petersen and his rant.
Jesse opens this talk by saying the following:
"Goodby America. It's over. My America is gone. Short of God intervening, I don't see any turnaround." (0:22)
He says all this by the 0:22 mark of the 12:03 video. By this time, I have my Bible open, sitting on the edge of my seat, ready to refute everything this gentleman will say, proving that what he says God said is irrelevant to today or, more in line with much of what is spouted from pulpits today, patently false. But what he said next made me fall out of my chair. (Don't worry, I'm okay. They were able to save the left side of my brain.)
"I realize that one of the primary reasons that it is over for America is because women are taking over." (0:39)
Yep. He said that. America is falling apart because women are in charge. Surely he has irrefutable data to back that up, right? Wrong. Let's lean in and listen. Keep all firearms away from arm's reach. I'm sure your computer screen is expensive.
What proof does he have?
"They are in so called powerful positions, running companies, making decisions." (0:45)
Jesse has to stop there because he gets some blow back from the look of a woman in the crowd. He catches himself and says "Not all, not all, not all..." (0:50)
Oh good! I was thinking he meant it was a principle that was undeniably inarguable where women were inherently unable to lead. As we'll see later, his qualification of "not all" is completely meaningless. He does mean all women. He just says "not all" to placate the women in the crowd that might disagree with him. I say "women in the crowd" while hoping beyond hope that most men disagree with his ideas.
Petersen gets more specific about those women that can lead.
"There are a few out there - logical women - that can make sound decisions. Most cannot." (1:03)
So, the only women that can be in charge are those that make logical decisions. Women are not logical. If you're at all familiar with this line of thinking, the antonym of "logic" is "emotion." Nothing makes me angrier to hear this line of thinking. Oh wait...I'm not supposed to be getting angry. That clouds my logic and makes me effeminate - ineffective in making sound decisions.
You see how stupid that idea is? If anyone removes emotion from their decision-making paradigm, first, they are lying to themselves that they are even capable of doing such a thing, and second, I want no part of the ramifications of their decisions. Have you ever spoken to an emotionless being? They are boring! And an oxymoron at the same time. I've never met one and you never will, either.
Men will make good decisions and men will make bad ones. So will women. Positions of power are open to those that are the most qualified. If that happens to be a woman, then a woman it is. Looking at the pockmarked history of the world, a preacher would be better off standing in front of a crowd, railing against MEN being in charge. After all, in the "good ole' days", as Petersen loves to say, all positions of power were held by men. And we have many black spots in the storied history of male dominated humanity.
Continued on Page 2
Before I jump into my critique of this work, I must say that I don't like the America portrayed by Mr. Petersen. When I see division (women vs. men, black vs. white, rich vs. poor, politicians vs. the common folk), I feel as if nothing was accomplished during the Civil War and more recently, during the Civil Rights movement, not to mention the women's suffrage movement, as well. My vision of America is one where we can disagree on issues and not section ourselves off into artificial camps based on race, gender, creed, etc. Thus, I do not appreciate anyone who attempts to drag us back to where we came from.
Now, to the Jesse Lee Petersen and his rant.
Jesse opens this talk by saying the following:
"Goodby America. It's over. My America is gone. Short of God intervening, I don't see any turnaround." (0:22)
He says all this by the 0:22 mark of the 12:03 video. By this time, I have my Bible open, sitting on the edge of my seat, ready to refute everything this gentleman will say, proving that what he says God said is irrelevant to today or, more in line with much of what is spouted from pulpits today, patently false. But what he said next made me fall out of my chair. (Don't worry, I'm okay. They were able to save the left side of my brain.)
"I realize that one of the primary reasons that it is over for America is because women are taking over." (0:39)
Yep. He said that. America is falling apart because women are in charge. Surely he has irrefutable data to back that up, right? Wrong. Let's lean in and listen. Keep all firearms away from arm's reach. I'm sure your computer screen is expensive.
What proof does he have?
"They are in so called powerful positions, running companies, making decisions." (0:45)
Jesse has to stop there because he gets some blow back from the look of a woman in the crowd. He catches himself and says "Not all, not all, not all..." (0:50)
Oh good! I was thinking he meant it was a principle that was undeniably inarguable where women were inherently unable to lead. As we'll see later, his qualification of "not all" is completely meaningless. He does mean all women. He just says "not all" to placate the women in the crowd that might disagree with him. I say "women in the crowd" while hoping beyond hope that most men disagree with his ideas.
Petersen gets more specific about those women that can lead.
"There are a few out there - logical women - that can make sound decisions. Most cannot." (1:03)
So, the only women that can be in charge are those that make logical decisions. Women are not logical. If you're at all familiar with this line of thinking, the antonym of "logic" is "emotion." Nothing makes me angrier to hear this line of thinking. Oh wait...I'm not supposed to be getting angry. That clouds my logic and makes me effeminate - ineffective in making sound decisions.
You see how stupid that idea is? If anyone removes emotion from their decision-making paradigm, first, they are lying to themselves that they are even capable of doing such a thing, and second, I want no part of the ramifications of their decisions. Have you ever spoken to an emotionless being? They are boring! And an oxymoron at the same time. I've never met one and you never will, either.
Men will make good decisions and men will make bad ones. So will women. Positions of power are open to those that are the most qualified. If that happens to be a woman, then a woman it is. Looking at the pockmarked history of the world, a preacher would be better off standing in front of a crowd, railing against MEN being in charge. After all, in the "good ole' days", as Petersen loves to say, all positions of power were held by men. And we have many black spots in the storied history of male dominated humanity.
Continued on Page 2
Most women can't make logical decisions?
ReplyDeleteWhat the hell , Petersen?
I know I sure can't! Using my ladylogic I would conclude that this Petersen d00d really hates women. Especially women who are smarter, more successful and more competent than he is (as in, pretty much all of them). And he HATES sex, most likely because hating women as much as he does he is a really awful lover. And he also seems to hate the thought of human beings having any pleasure of any kind whatsoever (which is actually pretty evil as well as astonishingly controlling, sadistic and stupid).
DeleteAnd since I clearly cannot be right about any of this, you really cannot argue with him there. I obviously cannot make logical decisions! Well, none that are based on anyone's actual words, anyway.
From this day forward I will use the word ladylogic as often as is possible. I love it!
DeleteOh please. All I have are manly emotions like rage, lust and that feelng when you kill something helpless. Other than that I am like a vulcan. I am a perfect man.
ReplyDelete"Men will make good decisions and men will make bad ones. So will women."
ReplyDeleteRight, but when men make bad decisions, those are just understandable mistakes. You know, fallible, human, etc. When women make bad decisions, on they other hand, it's because they are women. Or because they are evil. Or something.
Or wait! I know! When men make bad decisions, those decisions are not actually bad, because after all it is men who are making them, so they cannot be really bad. God has men's backs, people. But when women make bad decisions? Those decisions unleash Satan himself and apocalyptic ruin promptly ensues.
Excellent series! Can I cross post this on NLQ?
ReplyDelete