Obama got my attention with ant traps -- not the 2004 convention speech many view as a model of eloquence. True, "We worship an awesome God in the blue states" did a masterful job of returning the word "awesome" from its tawdry place in contemporary culture to its original meaning. But it was The Audacity of Hope that first really struck me -- as much for its stories as for its policy discussions. With remarkably unpolitical openness, Obama wrote about the strain that becoming a senator had put on his marriage. He had married a woman as tough and as smart as he is, and both were committed to equal balance -- hard enough, as we know, with normal jobs, but when one partner is commuting to the U.S. Senate, and the other is keeping the home fires burning while keeping up a fast-paced career of her own, things can get rough. The Senator described the night he proudly called home to tell his wife about a bill he'd cosponsored to restrict black-market arms sales, eager to share his success with the woman he loves. Michelle's response was simple: "We have ants in the kitchen. And the bathroom upstairs." He'd better remember to pick up ant traps on the way home from Washington, because she would be busy taking the children to a doctor's appointment after school. Obama concludes the story bemused, but exhausted: "I hung up the receiver, wondering if Ted Kennedy or John McCain bought ant traps on the way home from work."
This is a man with his feet on the ground, in love with a woman who's determined to keep them there. It is a very new place to be. Some women played professional roles in earlier eras, but if they had families, they had servants to handle the details. We are the first to struggle (and try not to fight!) over who picks up the children and organizes the carpools, to fret over whether the groceries will be unpacked in time for someone to cook them, and on top of all that we are now learning how to recycle. We are the first to hope we are not missing our children's recitals on some days and underperforming in our jobs on others, to scout out time, just occasionally, to remember why we fell in love with the person who is juggling the balls alongside us. We are the first generation to think about ant traps.
I believe we have too many identities to vote for just one of them. I'd no more support a candidate because she was a woman than because she was Jewish or went to Harvard or was born in Georgia or had twins, any of a number of biographical features that might link me to a random stranger. But if I were only voting as a woman, Obama would be a terrific choice, and feminists who see him as just another guy need to look closer. The Obama family is what the best of modern middle America is trying to be - and they're all the more appealing because they acknowledge that they're still trying to figure it all out too.
This is not the time to wonder how Hillary would have handled the ant traps. I suspect she would have pressed her lips together and done it all herself while finishing her day at the office, taking the kids to the doctor and whipping up dinner on the side -- as so many women who supported her have been doing all along. I wasn't married to a man who picked up the ant-traps, but I expect my daughters will be, and my son seems to view that kind of thing as normal. Millions of Americans are working hard and trying to live by the new rules about love and fairness, and raise children who will do it better than we. Imagine them growing up with the Obamas as First Family: a father who worked his way up to Harvard and still kept his street creds and never seems happier than when hugging his children; a mother whose gorgeous looks never undercut but only underscore her powerful will and intelligence; two lovely girls trying to figure out whether to wave shyly to a crowd or to hide in their parents' arms, and whose initial interest in their father's campaign was the promise they would get a puppy at the end of it. (How many working mothers have had hearts and sleeves tugged by a child's plea for a pet, while wondering how we could possibly manage to care for one more living being?) When Malia and Sasha are in the White House, accompanied by their choice of puppy, every American family involved in the balancing act will have reason to feel proud - and supported as we've never been before.
Susan Neiman is the author of Moral Clarity: A Guide for Grown-up Idealists.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
This article was far superior to most. Also, the comments have been impressively intelligent, and thoughtful. How refreshing.
Actually more intelligent than you'll ever know since they didn't post so many. I've never figured out how they choose what they censor. I guess if you make a good point that is not pro-Obama, they either censor it or post it and cut it in the same minute. I
I like to think that I am an evolved male (my wife might disagree at times), but I will say this from that perspective: We have four children, three sons and a daughter. My daughter is the youngest. Of everything that Obama says, when he talks about how Hilary Clinton has made it more likely that my daughter can grow up to be anything she wants to be, that resonates with me, and I mentally thank Hilary Clinton for her efforts to become the POTUS. Obama strikes me as as "current". His entire candidacy says so. Hilary seemed a bit rooted to the recent past, and Grampa McCain seems, well, a man of another generation all together. I want a current president. A president who brings out the best in all of us, male and female, black, white, yellow and brown. We have to solve a lot of problems and we need leadership to do so. Clearly the current crop of leaders is unequipped to do so. Our whole family supports Obama fully, and we encourage you to too.
The problem for the "feminists" you address (called "60s feminists" by some of the commentators) is not their agenda, it is their tactical acumen.
America is a society that moves with astonishing fluidity when exposed to the repetition of positive memes, images, and behavior worthy of emulation. Perhaps the high-profile appointment of women in the Bush presidency has done more to reshape common attitudes toward gender equality than Ms. Clinton's run for the White House, in which she served as both positive and negative role model, both highlighted the prevalence of pernicious gender bias and played its willing victim for political ends. (http://memestreamblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/07/being-rid-of-hillary/ and especially the comments.)
Old-school feminists need to realize that they (a) are not the only people advancing the traditional objectives of feminism, (b) are not the only feminists, (c) are far more appreciated and far less resented than they (inexplicably) would admit, and (d) may see their goals furthered more by a good candidate who happens to be a good man than by a polarizing, problematic candidate who happens to be a bad woman.
The Obama v. Clinton choice never seemed to be a tough one for feminists -- only for feminists stuck in the simplistic mode of identity politics. And nothing looks as unreasoned and uninspiring in today's world as the girls-vote-for-girls, only-boys-vote-for-boys identity politics to which the Clinton camp seemed wedded.
Susan Neiman: Feminists who see Obama as just another guy need to look closer.
===
While I appreciate your endorsement of Obama, your whole premise is really wrong.
"Feminists who see Obama as just another guy" are just whack. That's how I would describe a man who saw a female candidate for office as "just another gal", or a white person who saw a black candidate as "just another black".
Gender based political thinking - like race based political thinking - is a plague on our modern society. We should call it out, and grow past it, because it is nothing but vestigal sexism, regardless of whose mouth it comes out of.
If some feminist doesn't agree with Barack's policies and vision, then don't vote for him. If she thinks he is generically biased against women and their legitimate concerns, then don't vote for him.
Beyond that, gender shouldn't be part of the discussion - and we certainly shouldn't pander to unenlightened "feminists" in order to disabuse them of their emotional baggage.
There was a time when picking up ant traps wasn't normal?
Were the dinosaurs around then too?
Rather than use ant traps, which are poisonous, use Orange Guard, the best insect repellant ever and completely natural and safe.
I'm a 70-plus white man. Having ridiculous ego strength, I'm convinced I'm perfect.
But compared to Barack I fall way short. When I honestly compare the ways I missed the boat in my family I just have to say that Mr. Obama puts me to shame.
I am an unabashed Obamaniac!
My mother and daughter and sister are and were all smart strong people. I never resented women bosses or co-workers because I knew of the true equality of the genders.
Sexism is as stupid as racism but I confess to being a fan of Michelle, not because she's beautiful but because she's so damned smart!!
Obama '08!!
I'm a 51 year old woman - older yet young enough to have been positively effected by women's movement (e.g. law school class 51% women). Being older though I call many younger loved ones and younger friend - male and female alike - "sweetie." I am so used to doing this that I have called people I do not know very well or at all sweetie. I am embarassed, feel silly and blush. But it is hardly the shame I feel when I (unfortunately) say something terribly, terribly wrong, mean, damaging, hurtful. There are far, far, far worse things to be called than sweetie. Anyone who has even been called the "c-" word could never put these two names on the same planet. Thirty-some years ago when I was a "beach week" some drunken jerk called me "c-". To this day I remember the staggering pain and fear I felt. Being called sweetie is, well, sweet. Being called "c-" is like being verbally raped. Being called sweetie is at worst annoying and at best endearing. Hardly the same thing.
P.S. Let us stipulate now that this really is a trivial issue compared to the really serious issues we face.
I laughed throughout your post because I am a 50 year old female who has a bad habit of saying "Sweetie" as well. I say it w/o regard to how it is being taken for to me it is endearing. Not meant to be sexist or harmful in anyway. When I first heard Obama say it I knew he suffered from the same generation of "Sweetie" and I both respected him for the term and worried that it would be taken out of context. True to life it was. It was on that day that my life changed for now I have to catch myself, and although I am not always successful I do offer up an apology when it slides out.
What I find so magnificent about this electoral year is that we all share so much more in common than we could ever imagine having as differences. For that, I am most grateful.
I really really feel for the women in that 60's wave of feminism. My mom is one, and I've heard some shocking stories from her. For a long time I couldn't figure out why these women were so enraged by Obama, but it's easy for me to judge them. As a 30 year old I expect I will live to see a woman president, but if I thought I wouldn't it would break my heart. I have a theory about all this: I see a parallel between this Freidan generation and the black civil rights generation of Jackson, Farrakhan, Sharpton etc. These people got things done because they had a real fire in the belly to change things. They have an energy that can easily be interpreted as anger. More subtle, less fiery people like Obama simply wouldn't have risen to prominence without the groundwork they laid. This generation (both black and woman) are battle-scarred fighters, and because of the things they've seen will never see things from the less angry and more idealistic view of younger generations. They have the souls of soldiers, not statesmen. It doesn't make them right, but I do understand their perspective.
SS - great post.
I feel the same way you do...you and i are both of the same generation - I'm 37...I believe we understand what our mothers/grandmothers/etc. went through, but growing up in the age we have we don't have that same fighter mentality...we accept what we have because we really haven't had to fight like they did.
However, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't move on - we have to...we have to leave the past behind and move on to bigger and better.
Ignore Texanna - she is living in the past and obviously still bitter.
LOL! Such in depth analysis of me and my temprament and we don't even know each other!
It would have been really great if your point of view were espoused when Sen. Clinton and her supporters were being vilified during the campaign. Unfortunately, after the fact appreciation, is pretty much the same treatment women have been getting FOREVER! And, you contributed to it -- thanks, Honey.
Thank you. Your post is the first one that made me truly stop and think about the actions of some during this campaign.
A different positive point a view. Always a good thing.
If "Strangelet" had taken time to read and understand what Susan Neiman was writing, he would have reached a different interpretation than his current.
Susan was drawing contrast how "feminism" has dynamic interpretation bearing on generational bias. For instance, she observed that women of Hilary"s generation are inclined to think that the best person to address women"s issues should be a woman and hence their overwhelming support for Hilary during the primaries. Susan concludes that Obama"s family is what the best of modern middle America is trying to be and hence her appreciation of Obama"s candidacy.
It amazes me that many people are still wondering what Obama means by "change". Election of Obama as president is a profound change for many reasons that are beyond the scope of this commentary. Suffice it to say that his election represents the practical milepost of social-political construct of multiculturalism in American.
And what should one do, AGAIN, when they support neither candidate?
You might try considering the welfare of your country and decide which candidate would be best.
And therein lies the problem. Many of us feel neither of these two are better for the country.
Thank you. I had a sense of something different about the feel of the Obama's vs. the Clinton's, but I couldn't quite verbalize it; it felt like a generational difference, but not quite. Working at NASA for 21 years, an institution whose roots are as "good old boy" as it gets, has been like being in a microcosm showing an evolution of the role of women in the workforce. I've seen how women first had to be more "male" than men in order to be taken seriously; to women like Senator Clinton, who found their own feminine strength (which I will subjectively define as an ability to collaborate, integrate, multitask, to think non-linearly and non-hierarchically, and to endure in the face of emotional stress) but in so doing had to be superwomen who took care of their new roles AND their "expected" roles; to the strong women of today, like Michelle Obama who are comfortable in their own strength with nothing more to prove than any other individual (male or female), used to being (or at least expecting to be) treated as equals in the workplace and at home. Being a man, I am analyzing as an outsider looking in, but I was raised by a strong independent woman (albeit in a conservative, "traditional" household), and have always been comfortable having strong women as bosses and peers. And now I see from your article that that is another level of empathy I have with Senator Obama.
Feminists need to be less sexist.
Feminists aren't sexist by definition.
Adam - as a woman, I definitely AGREE!!!
As a 42 year old female, I have become very frustrated that woman of my mother's generation feel only a woman can represent women's issues.
This is a very well written article and I hope more women will take note that family values should play an important part in this election as well. We are starting to lose these values and the Obama family is a very good example of what can be done when they are important enough to you.
This man made time for his family during a run for the most important job in the nation. You've got to give him kudos for that.
what women of your mother's generation see is that another underqualified male has been hand-picked by the establishment ahead of the more qualified, harder-working, smarter female. and it rubs us the wrong way.
Really? A campaign book, filled with sweet nothings of stories, is what convinced you to vote for someone? What'd you think of Living History?
Really? You haven't bother to read the book in question yet you're dumb enough to make a stupid remark about it?
Oh really? Since when is your generation the first to do anything? Ant traps you say? My generation (probably your mother's generation) worried just as much about recitals, setting examples, medical care, finding good schools for the kids, trying to find time for the spouse, the house and love and romance among the ruins. I doubt the younger generation knows what really awaits them; we thought we knew, but we barely had a clue and most of us worked for a living. We are also known as the "sandwich generation"; finding ourselves caught between increasingly aging parents who need a lot of care and trying to raise out own kids. You just wait.
Keep up the good work, Rockerbabe. And keep taking it to people who don't realize what is going on. When Hillary Clinton talks about representing 'invisble' Americans, she is talking about you, and hoping Ms. Neiman is paying attention.
Saturday Night Live's sketch about the vice presidential debate starred Queen...
Appearing on a friendlier news outlet, Gov. Sarah Palin said she was "annoyed" with the way Katie...
At a rally on Saturday in California,...
Senator John McCain is a gambler. If I'd known that right away I would have...
In the latest Washington Post poll, Barack Obama continues to lead John...
Loading comments…
Posted June 27, 2008 | 05:34 PM (EST)