POTUS

Presidant

Clickford, Steven M.1 Comment

I intentionally misspell the office of the President of the United States. It’s intentionally to describe the person or the person in the most highest executive that has a more managerial or dictatorship type of operational style. Given the tense nature of our country in recent years, it’s more satire than being very literal.

Recently the office tends to manage cabinets, or make the office more complex. This type of style can also show a lack of empathy of other’s sufferings of their misdeeds of judgement, particularly on civil unrest and violence, or worse pandemics. Presidants I’ve noticed tend to avoid the issues and try to run away by showing less empathy from those very same misdeeds of judgement.

I have used this language statically for a number of years since our country’s governable style has changed drastically and multiple of men behind that office in D.C.

I phonetically say it as pres-i-d-ant.

I prefer to not refer to the office as such unless we have someone more presidential in the future.

On Men, Divorce, strong “families”

Clickford, Steven M.

This post is for you, the “Karens” of the world…

One of the things I am concerned about in the future is how women perceive men and how men will be further disposable; while people like Presidant Trump disposes women like toys.

Before COVID, divorces was nearly at a 50% rate, and thanks to loopholes like no fault divorces (meaning there was no need to provide proof of abuse or infidelity.) Sure some relationships were not meant to be; but some may had left them into breakup as the last resort perhaps due to deficiencies of men (lacking empathy, compassion, etc.)

Men and Women are “different” but Men shouldn’t take advantage of it

Biologically women and men are different, there is no disputing it; however using data as a way to justify men being statically apathetic to the point it appears to be socipathic; is not an excuse nor a reason to stay together. If the guy has been heckling and downplaying the Coronavirus as “it’s no different than the common cold” and one of his family members had a really rough case of it; it shows how he doesn’t understand other peoples emotions, by not reflecting the importance of protecting himself, his spouse and or children.

I am not advocating either way if a man should show his emotions of panic and fear, but unfortunately a lot of men are lacking empathy and sympathy. It starts at the top, Presidant Trump.

POTUS is a classic example of an old school man, who appears (or projects fearlessness) but is not adapting his behaviors temporarily due to well documented evidence that COVID19 is impacting his “base” of voters; children are taught to change behaviors if someone in their family is experiencing grief. What did POTUS do instead? Lighten the situation and made jokes such as “Kung-Flu” at a rally in late spring. Remember Hurricane Maria in 2017 in P.R.? Remember Trump throwing a Bounty paper towel roll to someone 10 people back or something like that? I understand if it was some political rally, or something that was more light hearted, but people lost their homes, and lost lives, and he was doing something that was insensitive to sane people.

What does he mean to women and relationships? POTUS acts like a badass playboy to these women, the same men they disposed; and yet love. How many “Women for Trump” signs they hold are ones who don’t have rings or are in a relationship themselves? The magic of technology, the privacy of the film on flat panels “protects” them from being exposed to the real badass vibes. They’ll get a thrill because he’s in a box, whereas a real man whose just as a badass to Trump sharing the bed, they’ll be creeped out and threatened.

“Solar Family Values”?

These “Karens” like badass in name only, but if you put a real life POTUS figure (which there are a lot men out there that act like him); they wouldn’t want him.

I find that the lack of a male figure in children, in adults, etc, are making women more unstable; and the inability to be in a relationship will hurt them in the long run. I can speak with some experience. Wayback when “nuclear families” were pushed, it meant that America thrived on a strong hetrosexual relationships; married till they died; families being close together, and keeping them on a tight leash. Ironically many of these said groups of families did fail, and they did blow up. How many people you knew came from an alleged “nuclear family” that it blown apart?

What makes a solar family you ask? Solar is dependent on the sun, so I thought well if the sun makes you happy… then..

  • Any relationship is better than none. Valuing Long Term Relationships if you can’t feel the urge to get married
  • One values each other; rather than subscribing to the valuing the institution. The Deep South and many of the Trump fanboys and fangirls would subscribe to the latter; not the former. In a nuclear family, you don’t see to much self valorizing
  • That a guy or a girl has risen above the “badass figure”
  • You value families as individuals not a collective unit as a group; because in reality, units of individuals makes the strength in numbers; not just throwing a bunch of 20 people and acting as 1.
  • A Solar-family would defend and protect individual’s happiness for themselves not for the overall good-optics for the country. In the days of the nuclear family; it was done as a civil defense against Communism; because apparently that was a threat to the States in the 1950s and many ol people think the 1950s was so great… but what did it do to the long run?

*