Should Having a Penis be a Requirement for Holding the US Presidency?
by francislholland, Tue Feb 06, 2007 at 05:22:52 AM EST
A leader can govern and govern well, even without a penis.
Cross-posted at http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/02/should-having-penis-be-requirement-for.html
Much has been written about the ways in which a penis contributes to the functions of the Presidency. That barely perceptible bulge in the woolen trousers, some believed, made a man look more "presidential". It offered hours of entertainment for those interminable cross-country and international flights that have come to characterize the US Presidency.
Before the modern gender-diversity era, holding a penis created a sense of mutual comfort among heads of state in the washrooms of the United Nations.
But, because of recent advances in technology and culture, the penis has become less and less necessary as a tool of national governance and international diplomacy.
Today, brains and breasts are thought to give women the same gravitas that penises gave men in the past. With the ubiquitousness of the Blackberry personal organizer and laptop computers as symbols of power and social status, these electronic instruments have supplanted the penis, both in ordering the thinking of our individual leaders and creating that international connectedness that in the past a penis alone was thought to provide.
Now, when the cell-phones ring in the bathrooms of the United Nations, they serve to bring leaders together wherever they are, regardless of their gender.
Because old habits die hard, the question is still asked, "Can a leader govern without a penis?" With the prominence of women Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senator Debbie Stabenow in this country, as well as women heads of state in Chile, Ireland, Latvia, Finland, Liberia, the Philippines, Israel and Germany, the answer is coming back loudly and clearly that, yes, a leader can govern and govern well, even without a penis.