Politics Alert!
Feb. 29th, 2008 11:42 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
semiotic_pirateI just had myself a mini-rant over at ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
ginmar's journal. She links to a post over on Shakesville and talks about some guy who (as a lawyer) is shaking his finger at women and accusing them of privilege for thinking of voting for Hillary and accusing them also of (if they do vote for Hill) giving the presidency to McCain. GAH! See my rant at the first link if you want to get an eyeful of my opinion about that commenter.
In strangely related news...villagecharm mentions (in a post appearing just after gin's on my f-list) that:
"Our friends at Snopes explain one of the most persistent customs associated with the reappearance of February 29:
Leap years, according to folk tradition, were the only times when women could could propose marriage to men, with this belief often termed "The Ladies' Privilege."
This reflects the familiar folk belief that extraordinary events require a suspension of normal customs - since an extra day in February is outside the "normal" course of that month, human affairs on that day should be similarly "abnormal."
So. Therefore. By combining event A with event B, I say that we should definitely all elect Hill as our first female president. I don't quite have the logic of the decision worked out just yet... but, intuitively, it fits.
PS: VC, if you want me to not mention where I got the idea/info on the snopes stuff let me know, as you have that post f-locked or filtered.
Oh. And then there's the math of a leap year, which I cannot help but repeat because it is a neat math related rhyme...
Leap year's here! There'll be one more / In each year that cleanly divides by four / Except for full centuries / To be leap years they must / Be cleanly divisible by 400 / Otherwise they are common years / With the standard 365 days / That's why, for example / 1900 was not a leap year / but 2000 was.
ginmar's journal. She links to a post over on Shakesville and talks about some guy who (as a lawyer) is shaking his finger at women and accusing them of privilege for thinking of voting for Hillary and accusing them also of (if they do vote for Hill) giving the presidency to McCain. GAH! See my rant at the first link if you want to get an eyeful of my opinion about that commenter.In strangely related news...
villagecharm mentions (in a post appearing just after gin's on my f-list) that:"Our friends at Snopes explain one of the most persistent customs associated with the reappearance of February 29:
Leap years, according to folk tradition, were the only times when women could could propose marriage to men, with this belief often termed "The Ladies' Privilege."
This reflects the familiar folk belief that extraordinary events require a suspension of normal customs - since an extra day in February is outside the "normal" course of that month, human affairs on that day should be similarly "abnormal."
So. Therefore. By combining event A with event B, I say that we should definitely all elect Hill as our first female president. I don't quite have the logic of the decision worked out just yet... but, intuitively, it fits.
PS: VC, if you want me to not mention where I got the idea/info on the snopes stuff let me know, as you have that post f-locked or filtered.
Oh. And then there's the math of a leap year, which I cannot help but repeat because it is a neat math related rhyme...
Leap year's here! There'll be one more / In each year that cleanly divides by four / Except for full centuries / To be leap years they must / Be cleanly divisible by 400 / Otherwise they are common years / With the standard 365 days / That's why, for example / 1900 was not a leap year / but 2000 was.
