Now that you made me look again, I think BigFurHat's argument against you might be broken too.

That really applies in, say, the case of Michelle Obama, right? The remarks are just respectable appreciation. Same with Meghan McCain, and all the remarks about her being fat, right?

If you want to be taken seriously as a politician, a writer, or whatever…don't make your looks part of your identity. Palin is classier than that. All the neanderthals drooling over her looks are ultimately pushing aside what she is really saying and trying to convey. There are plenty of misogynistic liberals out there, make no mistake. However, if tomorrow Palin were to make an ad talking about her physical attractiveness, she would be a joke. Same with Nikki Haley. Same for men. If Paul Ryan made that kind of ad, he would deserve the ridicule he would get.

This kind of "conservatives and liberals are totally different kinds of people" crap is the most embarrassing kind of rhetoric. Slimy people on both sides, classy people on both sides. Your pondering about whether she is proud to be sexually desirable at her age has NOTHING to do with her importance in the political scene, and hence only serves to minimize her to the image of a runway model in the eyes of those who might otherwise vote for her or vote for who she endorses.

Going to respond more thoughtfully when I get a chance…I think I definitely need to clarify some things.

One is a political context based on etiquette of modern society, the other is a flaw that all people have because we were recently derived from a bunch of bug-eating monkeys…

Same root cause perhaps (being monkeys), different societal meanings entirely… since one has no societal meaning at all, and the other does…

I guess what I'm saying is …there is, and should not be *any* standard bearers… That term itself is taken from imperial armies… The standard bearer (aka "The first one to get shot"), was the one who marched into a fight with a bright red coat on and *no weapon*… He was the guy who said to the Zulus "Hey …Look…me ..over here… here I am…kill me first! all my buddies are right behind me too!"

Standards are a great *ideal* but trying to live up to them assumes that the opposing force will recognize the rules of imperial war and that you are in an imperial army in the first-place… We aren't … no two women are the same how do you standardize that which has no standard?

Liberty is the acceptance that were are flawed and are going to be flawed (whether you think God gave them to us, or evolution did)… Society is an attempt to control those flaws… So when one has a societal meaning (politics), it has a societal solution (keep it out of politics), but when another has a monkey-brained meaning, you can only control it by applying more societal solutions (laws)…which is exactly what led us to political correctness…

Wow …sorry… That went on way too long =)

Basically I agree. It's pitifully inconsistent to rejoice over Palin's physical appeal, and then whine when the bad guys mock the same on the grounds that they shouldn't have noticed.

I am not angry at the left for noticing Palin's physical excellence. On the contrary. Let them anguish over the physical inferiority of their female politicos. We have Palin, they have Pelosi. HA!

Their use of secual insult however, damns them and shows them up for the pack of miserable liars they are. "Palin wears falsies!!! Nya Nya". Give me a freakin' break here!

THEY were the people who said we shouldn't think about such things, not us. But that is because they are humanity hating idiots.

I see Palin and I am damn well pleased by how well she looks. If she weren't so good looking it wouldn't detract from here accomplishments or value to us, but hey, if you CAN have it all, why not?

And I will add, just for flavor, that I am damn well pleased by Coulter and Malkin and the rest of our troop of brilliant right-wing knockout babes.

Let the commies eat their damned hearts out.

So much for that.

=================

Regarding your heavier question:

I am not a poetic or social genius, and I am not sure that my imagination is equal to the question at hand.

I am not sure even that our vocabularies as they presently exist are entirely adequate, although of course, they will have to be pressed into service as they are. Consider that the very word VIRTUE derives from VIR meaning man.

My instinct directs me to the notion of honor. What sort of address and treatment is apt to be received by a female commander as an appropriate form of honor? Being a guy I hesitate to guess. But I would bet that the answer lies somewhere in there.

We are considering instituting something historically meaningful and substantial, and there is absolutely NO reason to assume that the correct answer will be immediately obvious, unless we are badly deluded as to our own brilliance.

On a grit and grunt day to day basis it is easy enough to figure out how to deal respectfully with a female boss. But that is not the issue at hand. We are talking about something much larger — and, for which, I might add, there is probably not a fully appropriate historical precedent.

Consider that the daughters and wives of emperors could be considered as inheriting the mantle of imperial authority from their fathers and husbands. and were thus imbued with the aegis and awe, so to speak, and were, appropriately, addressed as holding such.

THIS IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MATTER FROM A COMMONER, A COMMON WOMAN EARNING THE MAJESTY OF LEADERSHIP OF A NATION BY HER OWN HAND.

Where the matter of physical and sexual excellence fits in this picture complicates and extends the question.

I do not regard this as a trivial issue. But I also do not pretend to have all the answers.