Hillary Hate: Making Sexism Acceptable

Two great op-eds in the Washington Post yesterday, on the presumptive Hillary Clinton post-mortem: Misogyny I Won't Miss by Marie Cocco and Belittled Woman by Libby Copeland. Both women make the point that dislike and opposition of Hillary Clinton has been expressed in a multitude of sexist ways, sometimes shockingly so. Is it Hillary? Is it sexism? And why are people so stubbornly resistant to allowing that sexism might have been part of this campaign? (By "people" I mean those who insist that there are plenty of reasons to hate Hillary Clinton that have nothing to do with being a woman, and that there are plenty of reasons she (presumptively) lost the nomination that have nothing to do with that, either. (See a collection of them here.) My response is usually that while there are definitely legitimate reasons to dislike/disagree with Clinton, the expression of that dislike is what has so often taken sexist form). For those of you who still doubt, see what Copeland and Cocco have to say about it.

First Copeland:

There is something about that woman -- that woman! -- that refuses to bend, and something about a large portion of this country that despises her for it. The person who once conjured a vast right-wing conspiracy now refuses to exit a race she's almost surely lost, and it Drives. People. Crazy.

"Poor Hillary" is their response, an attempt at death by condescension. "Poor Hillary" means Clinton finally is being brought low (she is forever being brought low, isn't she?), the know-everything who tries so hard but never gets enough votes to be class president.

..."Poor Hillary" speaks volumes about an old truth: Clinton's wounds have always defined her. The haters are always on the lookout for her comeuppance, and the lovers love her more for what she has endured. The women who turn out to see Clinton holler for her to stick it out, tell her they like her grit

Copeland concludes by wondering: "Is it about her womanhood? Or is it about this woman? Is that a false distinction?" Cocco, for her part, thinks it's something that's being wondered far too late in this campaign, and by far too few people.

Cocco reels off a list of things she won't miss once Hillary is gone: Hillary nutcrackers (with stainless steel thighs!), "Bros Before Hos" shirts, comparisons to crazy bunny boiling stalkers, anti-Hillary groups with vulgar acronyms, comparisons to first wives and scolding mothers, whores and bitches. Says Cocco:

I won't miss reading another treatise by a man or woman, of the left or right, who says that sexism has had not even a teeny-weeny bit of influence on the course of the Democratic campaign. To hint that sexism might possibly have had a minimal role is to play that risible "gender card."

Most of all, I will not miss the silence.

I will not miss the deafening, depressing silence of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean or other leading Democrats, who to my knowledge (with the exception of Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland) haven't publicly uttered a word of outrage at the unrelenting, sex-based hate that has been hurled at a former first lady and two-term senator from New York. Among those holding their tongues are hundreds of Democrats for whom Clinton has campaigned and raised millions of dollars. Don Imus endured more public ire from the political class when he insulted the Rutgers University women's basketball team.

Story continues below

Would the silence prevail if Obama's likeness were put on a tap-dancing doll that was sold at airports? Would the media figures who dole out precious face time to these politicians be such pals if they'd compared Obama with a character in a blaxploitation film? And how would crude references to Obama's sex organs play?

There are many reasons Clinton is losing the nomination contest, some having to do with her strategic mistakes, others with the groundswell for "change." But for all Clinton's political blemishes, the darker stain that has been exposed is the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture.

Two smart op-eds from two perceptive women. I hope someone forwards them to Maureen Dowd.

Marie Coco: Misogyny I Won't Miss [WaPo]
Libby Copeland: Belittled Woman [WaPo]

Related:
Rebecca Traister: "No one is making nutcracker icons of McCain or Obama" [Salon]

Comments

[nazardesign]

If sexism = game ender — one of many — how do other women in the political arena fare? Hillary, married to a difficult former president, who has endured the public crap you mention is an unreliable sexism litmus test of Presidential race. Ahead before the voting began, she's run a solid second since Dec. I'd like to see Gov. Kathleen Sebelius or Gov. Janet Napolitano in a Presidential race — women respected at home, but not known nationwide. I'd like to see them campaign like Obama had to, to introduce themselves. Then we could see the extent to which sexism rather than anti-Hillaryism is at play. One thing that we saw with Kerry in 2004 is that even a white guy isn't exempt from overt and unfair prejudice.
Sexism is hard to parse when not on the business end of it. I think it is one thing, but I learn every day that a comment or action once benign is now sexist. On Hillary's own blog, posters rail against how Obama pulled out Clinton's chair during debates. Once thought polite, something Obama did because when he treated her as he would a man (not pulling out the chair) he was lambasted is now sexist. We are at an historic point, but we also are at a boiling point where accusations come from considerate and reactionary sources. We should heal the divisions of sexism AND racism when we have a President recognizes the division without further dividing.

[filmex]

A better analysis might be, "Hillary Feminism, Making Cultism acceptable". What I have seen in the allegiance of old friends who worship at the altar of Hillary is the same disease that ran amok amongst Busheviks.

An undying ability to rationalize any transgression; to overlook any flaw. Oppose the Iraq war but readily accept her Iraq war vote and her bellicose talk about obliterating Iran. Oppose union busting but accept her choice of the anti-union buster Mark Penn as the head of her campaign.

Ridicule McBush's campaign chief, Charlie Black, for his support of brutal dictatorships but remain silent regarding Black's Democratic partner, who supports Hillary. Advocate civil rights, but ignore her campaign's use of race, and her vile use of "white people", those being the "hard working Americans".

Hillary feminists will be there when the Kool-Aid is handed out at Clinton Camp in Jonestown. They are the equivalent of the Ellen Jamesian cult that protested the mutilation of a young girl by all removing their own tongues out of solidarity. There is no war-mongering, defense contract seducing, corporate-loving aspect of her beliefs that they can not forgive, forget and support.

They scare me as much as the Bushevik cult.

[raker]

Hillary wasn't defeated because she's a girl. She was defeated for a multitude of reasons related to her politics, like her Republican pro-business/anti-consumer votes and her votes for the invasion if Iraq, and her stark dishonesty. Conservatives I know despise her without knowing why, just because Fox and the radio tell them to, but we Liberals have solid reasons to dislike her. And frankly, it's kind of princessy to complain that the girl lost just because she's a girl. She lost because, thinking she had the nomination in the bag, she skipped campaigning for the Democratic primary voters and went straight for the conservative-mushy-middle. Blame her strategists, if you like. It was hers to lose, and she lost it.

[bigbingtheory]

bang on post. It's ironic but because of Hillary's campaign, the left now loathes her as much as the right. Moderate Republicans also can't stand her and would be motivated to vote against her. She has a base left of some moderate Democrats. I'm willing to bet many of those early voters for her have buyer's remorse.
She's tried to court voters who have been programmed to hate her and will continue to do so. This has alienated her staunch supporters during her husband's 2 terms.
And lastly, Bill referred to her as a girl not long ago. I don't remember Sklar or any of the other Clintonista feminists berating him for referring to his wife in such a way.

[longislandlol]

Let's stop with the women as victims sympathy vs. non-sympathy-- the downturn of her unpopularity all began in 2002 when her initial vote to support an unsupportable war took place-- had she taken Obamas' stand she still might have been the nominee--ITWS--- It's the War Stupid--

[mabelle55]

Right-o.

He wasn't even in the hotseat at the time and had nothing to lose. He's since voted for continued funding, troop surge, stop-loss proposals. Some courage that took...

He voted for Cheney's energy bill in 2005 and voted in favor of the Class Action Fairness Act - another pro-business bill that makes it all but impossible for plaintiffs to file class action lawsuits against corporations (Enron, Bear Stearns, Citywide...and the list keeps growing).

Lobbyists bundle funds and work for his campaign; he's supported by some of the biggest CEOs/Wall Street money interests, financial publications of ANY Democratic presidential candidate. Maytag CEO Crown is one; he sold out jobs in Chicago's South Side. Obama also turned his back on seniors in a Rezko housing project: they went without heat and windows in some cases, had rat- and roach-infested apartments. Obama knew full well the entire time that Rezko was doing nothing about the problem.

His campaign is the result of Republican strategists who knew as far back as early 2007 that Hillary Clinton would be the most formidable candidate. Karl Rove was even consulted in 2007 shortly before Obama announced his POTUS intentions about what Republicans would think of an Obama candidacy.

This guy is media-driven, packaged and marketed. He's gloss with no substance and is a media-driven personality, candidate.

He loses a GE in major battleground states, even if he manages to pick up CO and NM.

[WorkingClass]

Yes. There is sexism in America. Doesn't everybody know that? But your never gonna know how big a factor it was in Hillary's defeat because there are so many other reasons not to vote for her. Hillary was de-famed by professionals for eight years before she was Senator from New York. A lot of the people who don't like Hillary were taught not to like her. That makes her unique, don't you think? I would say that Hillary has proved that America *IS* ready for a woman president in spite of existing sexism. Just like Obama has proved that America is ready for a black president in spite of existing racism.

[tbone99]

yes i quite understand peoples dislike of H.C but that is not really the subject of this article.However people cn't seem to quite grasp anything more than how to express my Hilary hatred yet again ZZZZZZZZ..The real subject - has this election made sexism acceptable to the Dem. party has fallen by the wayside like a ball lost in the fray of the game . The crux of it , this paragraph :

" Hillary nutcrackers (with stainless steel thighs!), "Bros Before Hos" shirts, comparisons to crazy bunny boiling stalkers, anti-Hillary groups with vulgar acronyms, comparisons to first wives and scolding mothers, whores and bitches. "

were addressed in about two coments in this thread saying something like "those nutcrackers were unfortunate , but....( i hate hilary)
ARE YOU FOLKS OUT OF YOUR MINDS-ARE YOU REALLY OK WITH THESE THINGS? and if not why hasn't there been condemnation?

[csepwede]

maybe it's meanspirited on my part, but as an African-American woman, I'm not feeling too kindly toward Hllary right now based on her race-baiting.

I could rally to her defense, but did she ever rally to Obama's in the Rev. Wright controversy? Did she ever say, well, we've had Rev. Wright in the White House and we have known him and his church for many years?

Did she ever rally to Michelle's defense and say, "maybe African Americans have a different perspective... maybe they've had a history of being an oppressed minority."

When she was asked whether Obama was a Muslim, her comment was no "as far as I know."

Now, her supporters want us to rally against sexism in the name of Hillary.

I'm just not feeling it. Sorry.

[NicoleAnonymous]

So let me ask you this - if you were working at a rape crisis center and a woman came in for counseling and you knew her and didn't like her because she sometimes said offensive racist things would you feel sympathy for her anyway?

Couldn't you feel sympathy for her as a woman but still not like her personally? Nobody is asking you support Clinton or change your opinion about her. That is not the issue here. The issue is the nature of the insults and how misogynistic they are.

[Computer Geek]

Exactly! Not being able to be bigger than the issues made her rather common (less than). Like one of the voters she was trying to attract which by extension made her like the stupid bigots that some of those voting for her are. All in the name of politics! Which then made it even worse because then she was just like our current president. He's (Bush) not a good role model for anyone with a mind or a heart. And because of her desire for the nomination at any cost, she was revealed as someone without a conscience just like Bush! I wouldn't care if she were a man, there is no way I will ever vote for someone like that (I never voted for Bush either for the same reasons). For me the choice to vote for hope over the cynicism she represents was crystal clear. Obama is not black. Obama is not white. Obama is not a man. Obama is not a woman. He represents all of us. He is all of us. Obama '08

[csepwede]

As the dreaded Chris Matthews said, she had opportunities where she could have gone "big." She could have spoken about the media smearing of Obama, but instead she went "small" and tried to squeeze out all those "hard working white people" votes.

[Justtellthetruth]

I love women. Strong women, Pretty women, smart women, powerful women, all, of the above and more, you name it, I love em. We need the best leader possible. If that leader is a woman, I am on board.

I Hate war. Everyone should. Hillary, however, has shown a real affection for it whenever it is suggested in middle eastern countries. So far, in fact, she has not met a war or prospect for war in the middle east that she has not liked and backed both vociferously and with action.

She supported Iraq. She supported Lebanon. She is supporting and helping to create a completely avoidable war with Iran. She has come out in support of Jerusalem being the undivided capitol of Israel, a position that would preclude any peace in the middle east and that would ensure decades more of terror against both Israel and the US, over something that even most Israelis and Jewish Americans don't support.

This alone (although there are many other serious policy level criticisms I could level against her) precludes her from ever being a competent leader. She sold out to the Neocons long ago and is not fit to lead any more than they are fit to go on leading.

[purplestategal]

Rachel, for fairness' sake, would you be willing to write a companion piece entitled: Hillary: Making Racism Acceptable?

[filmex]

Funny how these feminist rants have no trouble with Billary surrogates like James Carville offering Obama one of Hillary's extra testicles, "so they'll both have two".

This campaign had nothing to do with sex. It had everything to do with a candidate with the best name recognition since Bobby Kennedy in '68, with the most powerful political machine ever, a 30-point lead in every state six months ago, and a 20-point lead amongst African-Americans, who still figured out a way to blow it (that's not a sexual innuendo, Clintonistas).

Her high negatives from the get-go insured that Dems were praying for ABH. That they found a gifted orator, with a visionary message, and the ability to activate 1.5 million online donors was simply icing on the cake.

Her willingness to allow her husband to disgrace the office of the Presidency (yet again) by turning himself from the ostensible de facto head of the Democratic Party into a partisan, low-rent political hack, with a racist edge to boot, simply finished her off.

As one national magazine noted in examining the Bush-like incompetence that she displayed over the past six months, her campaign should be sued for malpractice. Now all that is left is knowing that when that phone rings at 3AM, it is bound to be one of the creditors to whom she owes some $20 million.

It had nothing to do with sex, and everything to do with "Clinton" as a brand name.

[NicoleAnonymous]

So that justifies saying she should kill herself or be burned at the stake with other witches? Just because someone said something offensive about Obama's masculinity once during the campaign? The hatred towards Clinton has been consistent throughout the campaign from lots of people - all you can do is provide us with this example that almost nobody has heard about.

You really do not get it. I didn't realize how many people hate women until this campaign - even other women. And I don't support Clinton and I never have - but I don't say she deserves to die or call her a c__t or say she should be burned at the stake when I criticize her.

[mabelle55]

I see another Big O follower has bought this media crap hook, line and sinker. Follow the news all the way back to New Hampshire. You'll see where racism started - and it wasn't the Clintons. Indeed, it was Jesse Jackson, Jr. and Roland Martin, and was reaffirmed by Plouffe and Axelrod and other surrogates. It was then viral online with Obama's supporters/followers. Bill made it worse when he made the comment about SC and Jesse Jackson, which was perfect for use by the Obama campaign - and something that couldn't have come at a better time for him, since he has lost NH.

After this loss - every.single.time that Obama was in a losing situation in primary/caucus - he, his surrogates and his supporters pulled the race card. Clinton responded in kind.

After that, it got about as ugly as it could. And it was reinforced in great part online by other Democrats calling any of Clinton's supporters racists and accusing them of being like KKK because we didn't support Obama.

So, if you want to have a dialogue or discussion, fine. But get your facts straight before yelling "racist."

[kindofblue]

It's very satisfying to see the reams of reasoned comments that totally eviscerate Ms. Sklar's argument. I had real reservations with HRC after her votes on AUMF and Kyle-Lieberman, but that had to do with the stupidity of triangulation and not her sex. Fine, she can make her case for my vote-maybe she's changed. But why no apology? Was she really trying to show how tough she is? What kind of conflicted sexism is that?

But of course, she ran a totally awful campaign. Try as hard as you like Ms. Sklar, but any Democrat that runs a racially motivated campaign has lost any right to our votes. "Hard-working voters, white voters" be damned. Shame on you, Hillary Clinton!

[mabelle55]

I see another Big O follower has bought this media crap hook, line and sinker. Follow the news all the way back to New Hampshire. You'll see where racism started - and it wasn't the Clintons. Indeed, it was Jesse Jackson, Jr. and Roland Martin, and was reaffirmed by Plouffe and Axelrod and other surrogates. It was then viral online with Obama's supporters/followers. Bill made it worse when he made the comment about SC and Jesse Jackson, which was perfect for use by the Obama campaign - and something that couldn't have come at a better time for him, since he has lost NH.

After this loss - every.single.time that Obama was in a losing situation in primary/caucus - he, his surrogates and his supporters pulled the race card. Clinton responded in kind.

After that, it got about as ugly as it could. And it was reinforced in great part online by other Democrats calling any of Clinton's supporters racists and accusing them of being like KKK because we didn't support Obama.

So, if you want to have a dialogue or discussion, fine. But get your facts straight before yelling "racist."

[Nonamnesiac]

Hillary voted to send members of my family into harm's way against the intetests of the United States, lied about it, and ignored the overwhelming intelligence that Saddam had no WMDs (Blix and the NIE she didn't read that convinced FL Sehator Bob Graham to vote against invading Iraq), was an enemy of bin Laden and that militarily removing Saddam would strengthen Iran and be a costly calamity for the US (books and speeches by Daddy Bush, Cheney, Powell, etc.).

Then, when she had run her campaign so incompetently that she pulled a Kerry and took an inevitable nomination with the Clinton machine behind her against a relatively unknown candidate (Obama) and a bunch of old, unexciting Whtie guys and started to lose, she overtly ran a campaign directed at the most racist instincts of the American people. She also stated outright that McKlan was more qualified than Obama, based on his being a warmongerer like she is.

Opposing her has nothing to do with sexism.

[tbone99]

"Opposing her has nothing to do with sexism."

You are so right , so why are ugly things being tolerated?

[Nonamnesiac]

Her nastiness, dishonesty, narrow-minded, warmongering world view and racism do not engender a desire to defend her, especially given the fact that she claims her support from White working class men, who are, according to Conventional Wisdom, the most sexist voters in the nation. How can she plausibly argue she's a victim of overt sexism when the most sexist portion of the population she claims as her base?

This woman personally wants to kill or maim members of my family against the interests of the United States so that she can enhance her career. She's just a load, especially given her anti-Vietnam war background and the unwillingness of her daughter to volunteer for front line duty in Iraq.

Finally, she has no respect for the rules when the rules go against her. And her outright perversion of the truth by claiming she won the popular vote when she counts MI voters for herself but gives Obama zero votes in MI is the equivalent of her Bosnia moment in terms of honesty and credibility.

[LAJonathan]

HRC did not read what America wanted and screwed the whole thing up by being a Republican in sheeps clothing. Has nothing to do with vaginas, never did.

[ThunderclapNewman]

Hillary lost the nomination because she was a seriously flawed candidate, and because she mismanaged her campaign from the very beginning.

She hired people for loyalty rather than competence.
She spent money like a drunken sailor.
She played the gender card--repeatedly.
She listened to very bad advice---over and over again.
She had no plan for the period after Feb. 5th---none at all.
She and Bill both engaged in blatant race-baiting---and lied about it.
She lied about Bosnia---and repeated the lie at least four times.

Hillary started as the "inevitable" candidate---she had the money, the aura, the press loved her, she had the vaunted Clinton machine, and lots more.

And she blew it by running the worst campaign in modern history---worse than Dukakis.

And now, she doesn't have the grace and good manners to withdraw now that it is impossible for her to succeed in winning the nomination.

It has nothing at all to do with her gender.
It has everything to do with her utter lack of skill at running her campaign and managing her finances.
It's not a good example of the management skills necessary to run the Executive branch.

[NoahVail]

Was going to post, but Eve of Destruction here has it completely correct.

Short answer: Its Hillary.

[lvdragonlady]

No one has figured it out yet, but the biggest problem with clinton's campaign was clinton herself. It was not sexism. She was NOT the one to be the first female president. To be the first female president, one would have to have made it to the top(of what ever ladder) BY themselves, NOT by riding the coattails of the person they married.

[S1m0n]

"No one has figured it out yet, but the biggest problem with clinton's campaign was clinton herself. It was not sexism. "

Exactly. The Empress had no clothes. And no, that's not a sexist comment; that's substantive, albeit metaphoric.

[hopeless277]

Any attack on Hillary is sexist because she's a woman. That is what I hear from this article and dozens more from the likes of Taylor Marsh and Big Tent Democrat. I went in thinking that Hillary would be the nominee. I was OK with this. Then she started her campaign. What happened next actually startled me. She began using Republican talking points. She hyped her experience(read lied). She sent out Bill to attack. Her gender suddenly did not matter. She was running a Republican type smear campaign. She endorsed John McCain. Bill endorsed John McCain. I was floored! My first choice was Richardson until he pronounced Al Gonzo 'a decent and honest man'. Bye, bye Richardson. Next up was Dodd. Dodd was GREAT! He dropped out. Then came Edwards, he dropped out also. Obama was the only one left standing against psudeo-Republican Hillary. That's when the kitchen sink came out. No thanks. Not for me. Not the type of person I want in the WH. I do not hate women. Just this particular woman that thinks she and only she can be president. Well, sorry dahling, you lost. It's not that Obama won, YOU LOST. All by yourself.

[SkimaskBob]

Obama's speech on race saved his candidacy. It is unfortunate, both to Sen Clinton's campaign and America as a nation, that she never gave a similar speech on gender. Her candid thoughts based on her lifetime of experience would have been invaluable for Democratic voters as well as Americans in general. I hope that even at this late point in the race, she addresses the issue in an honest and forthright manner.