American is 1. Suburban is 2. Housewife is 3.

3 doesn’t need 2, but it needs 1. 1 doesn’t need 2 but it needs 3. 2 doesn’t need 1 but it needs 3.

3 is freedom and dependence. 2 is freedom and dependence. 1 is freedom and dependence. The freedom of 3 is the freedom of 1. The dependency of 3 is the dependency of 1. The freedom of 2 is unique, and the dependency of 2 is the dependency of 1.

An American is a common power and a common flaw. A suburban is a unique power and a common flaw, and a housewife is a common power and a common flaw. A common power and a common flaw are also a flaw and a power – a flaw and a power that’s shared. Alongside the shared flaw and power, there is a flaw and a power which isn’t shared.

If a shared flaw and power is a unique symmetry, a non-shared flaw and power is a shared symmetry. By this data, the American suburban housewife is a force of nature which comprises of a symmetry that’s meaningful and a symmetry that’s not meaningful; the reverse of a symmetry that’s meaningful and a symmetry that’s not meaningful is a contrast which is meaningful and a contrast which is meaningful.

A contrast that is meaningful and a contrast that is meaningful is the equivalent of a symmetry that isn’t meaningful that is unique. A symmetry that is useless that is unique is a shared contrast that is useful – finally, a shared contrast that is useful is just a symmetry that is useless (so symmetry wins out after all, despite being useless).

The American suburban housewife is a useless symmetry, which by default requires that reality be a useful symmetry; thus, the truth is an identical application, and the fiction is but an identical non-application. This time, the reverse of an identical application is a non-applicable contrast, which then this time requires that the American suburban housewife gets turned into an applicable contrast (so at least contrast still isn’t useless).

Reality is something that can’t do anything – the American suburban housewife is something that can do anything (and since it wasn’t the British, Spanish, Chinese or Russian suburban housewife that invoked the issue in the first place, it seems fair to preclude the idea that the symmetry between the American suburban housewife and the alternate suburban housewives is just cause to exempt the American suburban housewife from their glory).

Cristina Raines, a former actress who appeared in numerous movies and television shows, owes her inclusion in this article to her central role in the 1977 horror, The Sentinel.

The fact that The Sentinel and that Raines’ part in The Sentinel were only known states after the origin of the American suburban housewife is as much a lack of consequence as it is a consequence to the argument that Raines and The Sentinel are prerequisites for the American suburban housewife. While there’s no telling, in literal terms, if Raines and The Sentinel are connected to the American suburban housewife, at the same time I’m in no position whatsoever to deny the subjective need to concoct the connection.

Even if the American suburban housewife has no basis, to oppose the style of Cristina Raines in The Sentinel, somehow, the effect of the style of Cristina Raines in The Sentinel elicits the need to act as if the American suburban housewife ought to be a type of reaction to Cristina Raines in The Sentinel.