May 27, 2010

The Word of Women According to Libertarian Representatives

The figures had slowly come afloat and after a smashing, unanimous rejection, the President told the people that if the New Salary Raise Proposal passed the second debate and landed on her desk, she would veto it. It would have passed since the officialist party, PLN had joined forces with the libertarian party, ML, earning so half of the votes. It was all set and decided. Their salary would go from 2,1M/month to 4,3M/month. It seems that the President had originally agreed with the proposal. It seems, though no one has said that the President has indeed said so, nor the President has denied that.

There were people marching, protesting for it, and so the President decided to speak against it and veto it if it got to her. One of her reasons to do so was that it would benefit her once she leaves the presidency, as all former presidents get a retirement pension equal to the salary of the representatives.

Needless to say that the people celebrated, praised her name and chanted her campaing slogan happily, but not everybody was happy, and though her party's representatives bowed and took the decision with pretended humbleness, those from the ML ranted. One of them, whose name escapes me, in evident anger for losing the bet, put the whole thing in a different light, saying that they (PLN and ML) had formed a coalition, that they were said they had the support of the President, and if that was the way things were going to work, PLN says one thing one day and then other another day, then the coalition wouldn't work. Okay, so far so good. The heavy stuff came when said man (yeah, it was some old, balding dude. I checked them on the Asamblea Legislativa site, and it looks a lot like this Adonay Enríquez guy, but I can't really identify him all that well from the picture. It was in the news, in channel 11, though.) started saying that it said a lot about women. Yes, you heard read me well. This representative, whom I guess gives the credit of all his votes to men only, and who would probably love to take the sufrage right away from women, continued saying that men have word, of course they have, that's a thing of men; and that by having now a woman President, he expected to see women starting to have word, and yet this shows that not such thing is possible.Yes, because if this happened with a small thing such as this, then what could they expect with more important bills? If the President will make all her decisions based on what the masses want.

Oh dude yeah! The horror! The catastrophe! Just imagine that! A Government lead by the People. That would be like letting The People run the country. No, no, that can't be good, right? I mean, like the dude said, that's no way to build Governability. And of course, this type of calamities happen when you put a woman on the power because women have no word. You know, you can't trust them.

He can rant all he wants about the party and how irresponsible they are and all that. I guess it's their fault after all, since they decided to party with the winners. All a bunch of slime bags. What offended me deeply was the way he talked about women. What's that crap about us not having word? Is it that word to him means to convey to get rich and pull profit from others and then lie to the people but keep the promises made to the co-conspirators? That's not "word", dude, that's a maffia!

This far up in history, already in the 21st century, one would expect people to stop thinking that there are substantial differences between men and women other than the biological ones. Morally, intellectually, emotionally and in other many levels the only difference between men and women is the difference between one person and the next. We are all people, we are all humans, and all of us, no distinction of race, age, gender, religion or whatever makes us more or less trustworthy. We can all have word and we can all keep it. Also, we can all change our mind, if that's the case, or stay put on what we believe. The word is something we build and earn for ourselves, it's something we make and keep by our own, by our actions, not because we are men or women. 

But words of hate like those show one thing and one thing only: lo there, in the lines of the Costa Rican Representatives there is a man who judge you for your exterior, a man who will attack your for being different, who won't listen to reasons but diminish you for what God has made you. Lo there, an Imbecile in the lines of Representatives.

1 comment:

Storm Bunny said...

No es cuestión de dejarse influenciar o no. Es cuestión de que Laura y todo el Gabinete de Gobierno son servidores públicos, y no están en ese puesto para hacer su voluntad, sino la voluntad del pueblo.

Esta me parece una decisión acertada. Que había que pararla en seco desde el inicio, sí, pero que al menos se reaccionó a tiempo, haciendo la voluntado del pueblo está bien, en especial porque la democracia trata del poder del pueblo, de respetar la voluntad del pueblo.

No es influenciarse, es saber que en materia de Estado a quién se debe escuchar y quién tiene los intereses del país en la mira.