I Salute Our Dominant Female Overlords, Just Not In The Bedroom, Please!

By
May 30, 2013

Quick! Spot the dominant figure in this image!

Male_Pundits_Fear_the_Natural-74911ef6c8ea4cd77659c46aaadc02aaWhy does all the fun stuff happen when I take a break? It  just pulls you back in. Hahaha

 

Look, if some folks enjoy what one might call a more traditional marriage i.e. male dominated – hey, that’s their business, not mine. But to suggest it all has something to do with science, or whatever? Well, maybe, … if you got your science diploma in sixth grade.

Erick is conflating a cultural argument with a biological one. That’s a mistake and a sure fire way to lose both arguments. Megyn Kelly doesn’t look pleased but she sure does look gorgeous. Clue – clearly, motherhood agrees with her, as much as does her high-powered career. I doubt you’ll find her barefoot and pregnant any time soon – except for an exotic vacation of some type, perhaps.

I’d like to think the world and gender roles are just a wee bit more complex than Erick’s comments would suggest.

However, what can I say? We like what we like. I’m just not into the whole dominatrix thang. I’ll take a good female bottom over a top any day of the week. Just sayin’! LOL

But … if we’re compatible and she earns?? Hey, that’s bonus time, baby!!! Hahahaha

Appearing on a Fox Business panel Wednesday evening, Fox contributor Erick Erickson suggested it is “anti-science” to reject the biological claim that men should be in the “dominant” role in the nuclear family.

Posted all in good fun, of course. ; ) More via Fox’s Erick Erickson: It’s ‘Anti-Science’ To Not Believe Men Should ‘Dominate’ Women | Mediaite. Also via Memeorandum.

Please consider supporting RiehlWorldView with a small donation
, by shopping at Amazon via our Associate link in the sidebar or by re-distributing our content across the Web with the options below. Thank you.


Comments:
  1. Ragspierre says:

    Megyn Kelly…

    (noise Homer Simpson makes when thinking about bacon-wrapped sticks of butter…)

    (drool…)

  2. Ragspierre says:

    Speaking of hawt ladies…

    American officials “instructed Benghazi hospital to list [US Ambassador] Stevens as ‘John Doe,’” Sharyl Attkisson reports at CBS:

    U.S. officials gave instructions for Benghazi Medical Center to use a “John Doe” pseudonym on the death certificate of Ambassador Christopher Stevens after he died of asphyxiation in the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya. That’s according to a U.S. official speaking on condition of anonymity because the official isn’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter. The reason for the pseudonym, says the official, was to avoid drawing undue attention to the importance of the victim as Americans rushed to figure out how to recover Stevens’ body and return it to the U.S.

    “Undue attention” from whom? As one person tweeted today in response to Attkisson’s story, ” if that does not say cover-up don’t know what does”.
    —Ed Driscoll