Ms. Wilson, as a white 70-year-old male, I scoured your blog for data about "our deeply embedded cultural fears of politically powerful women"? I didn't see any.
What would I count?
1. First female Speaker of the House only in 2007, proportion of male-to-female office-holders at all levels is (probably--I don't know) unevenly distributed toward males, first female candidate on a national ticket only in 1984, etc.
2. Numbers of articles that originate in the media, rather than in the people they are covering, e.g., Senator Dodd's urging each candidate to withdraw. Also length, urgency of the recommendation that she withdraw, etc.
3. Comparisons between this primary"s 50-state model and previous primaries. Are we comparing oranges and oranges?
4. Regional differences in electing females to state houses and Congress.
5. Statistical and anecdotal evidence that our culture values politically powerful women.
I personally think that Mrs. Clinton has made the case--and I'm discovering that a part of me has thought it "needed to be made"--that women can hold the highest offices in the land. What really made the case for me was Maureen Dowd's column years ago in which she said that men are not hormonally endowed for the highest offices.
I can't imagine any man saying, as Speaker Pelosi did, to the President, "Take a deep breath, Mr. President." It's a far better reply than arguing with him about issues.
An Army of Women
In this week's Gallup Poll, national Democratic voters continue to be evenly split, with Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton each receiving 47% support for the party's nomination. Yet despite this neck-and-neck race to the partisan finish line, as Eric Boehlert recently surmised, the press has been pushing relentlessly to get Clinton to throw in the towel and rescind her claim to the nomination. As the race for top democratic billing remains cloaked in ambiguity, I've been thinking more and more that a decisive win for the nomination is only a piece of the victory pie. And this may be the very reason why large swaths of the press are so diametrically opposed to one more day of Hillary.
Boehlert notes that numerous precedents exist for nominees to continue to duke it out until party conventions: Reagan and Ford; Kennedy and Carter; Hart and Mondale. Yet the media has never pressed a nominee to exit the race with such passionate insistence as they have with Clinton. And whereas Reagan was touted as a "resilient fighter" for his persistence, Clinton is painted as an "arrogant" and "selfish egomaniac." Why such a vehement disparity of descriptors? Is it the case that so much ambition in a woman is simply too much for American sensibilities to bear?
I think that the media's continual attacks on Clinton are symptomatic of deep cultural fear: that she is an extraordinarily visible woman who refuses to "know her place" - and that her refusal to give up her claim to power might be a rallying cry for a new wave of feminist fury. If we forget the delegates, the caucuses v. primaries, and the battle over Michigan and Florida, we see that a major win has already been had by and for the women of our nation through Clinton's candidacy. And many Americans might be afraid of how far this momentum will take us.
Never again will it be questioned, or a poll commissioned, on whether women are qualified to be president.
Never again will there be a presidential primary, I predict, without a woman - or hopefully several women - candidates.
And never again will there be any room for discussion about whether a woman can be tough enough to serve as our Commander-in-Chief.
The candidacy of Hillary Clinton has changed the political landscape forever, and has reinvigorated the political aspirations of women from all walks of life. To many, this "army of women" is a scary thing indeed. And who knows how far it will go if Hillary wins the nomination - or the presidency.
Whether Clinton has been the "perfect" candidate is not the issue at hand, and as the president of a nonpartisan organization, I am less concerned with Clinton-the-candidate than I am with what her candidacy represents. Her campaign tactics, voting record, and political maneuverings are up for debate. She may or may not win the nomination. But what she has already, and decisively, won has been a victory for all Americans, male and female, of all races, young and old: Clinton has broken a barrier for women in political leadership. For that, we are the collective inheritors of a great victory. And yet, this win is offset by what it continues to reveal: our deeply embedded cultural fears of politically powerful women.
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
Best rebuttal to this point of view I've read recently. Everyone should read both articles for balance.
Race to the Bottom By Betsy Reed
This article appeared in the May 19, 2008 edition of The Nation.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080519/betsyreed
James Carville: "If she gave him one of her cojones, they'd both have two."
I hope this ends all whining about sexism from the Clinton camp. All gutter comments about Hillary's vagina are fair game, after this. Unfortunately. Not a good day for feminists.
Indiana and North Carolina voters, end this now. Please.
Stop the Drama, Vote Obama.
What does her candidacy represent? Obviously it represents that WOMEN aren't GOOD ENOUGH to hold office. They're only 'good enough' if they're 'manly'. Case in point? Said of she of 'testicular fortitude' who makes other men look like 'pansies':
""The Republicans will eat him alive" is what the Clinton campaign is telling the superdelegates. Hillary is the tougher of the two, the candidate you want on your side in a knife fight, a gender reversal that prompts Carville to indulge in some ribald humor: "If she gave him one of her cojones, they'd both have two."
This is a 20th Century analyses of a 21st Century political race.
....missing on so many points, I don't know where to start.........
lets be honest here....
no other candidate has used the tatics of the republicans before
no other candidate has ever lied blatantly and have no problem with it.
Marie, you nailed it with your post, but obviously you've stirred up a hornet's nest of the most easily threatened Obamaphiles who cluster at this pro-Obama web site and simply can't tolerate anyone expressing an opinion different from theirs.
LOL! Such an in depth and compelling response. And anyone that doesn't agree with you and Marie must be an Obamaphile? Hello pot, meet kettle...
I don't remember any of the media questioning Rice's role as NSC adviser or secretary of state because of her gender or color, or of Madeline Albright because of her gender. I don't see anyone expecting a woman to stay "in her place", but I do see a woman who uses the gender excuse/card every time her campaign makes bad choices or she is in trouble, as in complaining that boys are picking on her when edwards and Obama both attacked her for stating that lobbyists are "people too" when discussing taking corporate money, or crying about how hard it is for a woman to do this job before the NH primary, or commenting on calls to drop out that she is "used to the boys telling me that I can't play." Imagine a black man responding after losing 12 straight primaries that he won't drop out because he is used to "the white man telling me that I can't be a member of the club.", how would that work for you?. I'll point this out again, that the western world has had many top female leaders (Israel, England, Britain, Germany, Canada, etc...) Have any of those women governed in any way different from the men they replaced, changed politics or the way their nations ran, at least in any positive way? Please, someone give me an example, please.
"the press has been pushing relentlessly to get Clinton to throw in the towel and rescind her claim to the nomination." ???
I disagree. The press has been supporting Hillary from the beginning BECAUSE the press is controlled by Republicans who want a Republican victory, and they see their best chance is to run against Hillary (because of her baggage that we all know about and don't want be reminded of).
Meanwhile it is high ranking Democrats, NOT THE PRESS, who have been asking Hillary to give up, for the sake of party unity.
Personally, I think she has a right to stay in the race until all states have voted.
Well Marie, it appears from the overwhelming majority of posts here that Hillary is not a victory for America.
Any woman that advances herself by riding on her husband's coattails, lying and pandering does not help women who want to be valued for their own merits and accomplishments and, in fact, harms them.
Marie, this isn't about Hillary! Marie put up any other woman' even Paris Hilton and I would vote for that woman and woman except Clinton.
I'm afraid this is indicative of an old school of thought whose time is past. There are millions of women voting for Obama, and we are most definitely not "anti-Hillary" because she's "uppity." Wake up. It's the 21st century, and it is leaving you behind.
I have a deeply embedded real fear of any politician who uses rovian tactics and is as dishonest as Clinton. You're thrilled. I'm a woman too, and I'm embarrassed. Whoopdeedoo, we can be as bad as Rove. Yes, she's achieved a new mark alright, but it's only on the b.s. dipstick. I hate finding out how many people vote against AND 'for' candidates because of their race, gender or age. I mean, come on, sure, when things are going fine and every day is another slow news day, sure, go for the record. But here? Right NOW? 2008? When so many crucial elements of our government are screwing up our lives in so many ways?
Feminists, Racists, Age-ists... all those who vote 'for OR against' any candidate based on prejudice rather than the content of their character, the congruency between their words and actions, not to mention a little thing like what's best for our country.... needs to stay home when it's time to vote. Never forget, ignorance and eating up the kind of b.s. she and the republicans are shoveling, got us the last eight years.
I wanted to vote for Hillary. I wanted a woman to be win. But she made it impossible because she's channeling Karl Rove. And you democrats that still want to vote for her.... who act like it's all okay because she's on our side.... I'll never hear the theme song from the Twilight Zone again without thinking of you.
"the media's continual attacks" on Clinton??? HELLOOOOO Have you even been watching the news? They're doing a hatchet job on Obama, while the "obliterate" & "screw' em" comments haven't generated a blip on the MSM radar. Thank God for the internet, cuz if I had to base my decision on what the MSM is reporting (which IS NOT THE ISSUES), I might have ended up voting for her. The thought makes me cringe.
To portray her as some victim who refuses to "know her place" is ludicrous. She's turned into a political joke who "refuses to know her facts." If she would tell anyone the truth about anything, she might have more credibility with American people.
I'd love to see a woman running this country someday, but her platform there would have to be based on issues, intlligence and integrity. Carrying around a pair of ovaries does not give one license to distort the facts.
PS. I'm a woman and I'm voting for Obama.
Are you kidding me?
"But what she has already, and decisively, won has been a victory for all Americans, male and female, of all races, young and old:...."
The campaign of Hillary Clinton has created and capitalized on racial divisions, class divisions and certainly contributed to a considerable divide in the women's movement itself.
That is the legacy of THIS woman, not what might have been with a different woman.
I am one of those women who will not support Hillary Clinton just because she is a woman.
I am also one of those women who does not attribute the motives of others, who refuse to support Clinton as being sexist.
I am a 60 yr. old white woman and I am convinced that many women of my age, have failed to keep pace with the times and expectations of those women younger than ourselves in the womens movement. I also think we have always had a huge divide in the movement between women of visible minorities and the general leadership of the movement.
Hillary Clinton's candidacy albeit not intended, has had a positive affect in shedding light on these very divides and yes, even the failings within our movement. his is a much bigger question about problems within our own movement, including our own failures than a simple
It is appalling that this worthless candidate represents a victory for all women to you. She represents the worst in politics and in human nature to most of us.
How are you defining "most of us"? Approximately half of all Dems are supporting HRC. Who are you???
Obama is ahead in every national poll except FOX (snicker, snicker).
As the great Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton once said' "A victory is a victory"
Sorry, dear, HealthisNation is correct. She's awful.
Please, Ms. Wilson, this is just not the case. For instance I am a single, white woman of 69 born and living in Alabama. I have always been a feminist and very outspoken. If someone of the ilk of Maggie Thatcher, Indira Ghandi or Golda Meier were running for the presidency, I might seriously consider the options BUT Hillary Clinton is a fore flusher, totally shrewish in her tactics and just simply NOT A NICE PERSON.
As for saying Hillary has been picked on by the media - HELLO? Obama has had the mud slung at him by the MSM who still won't shut up about Jeremiah Wright. ALSO, he is the first viable African American to run for this office. I am for Barack Obama and have not wavered. I hope this country has the good sense to vote him in.
Army of African-Americans.
Barack as an "elitist". That can be construed as a black man not knowing his place. Uppity Negro.
Plus if the test for leadership is measured in high elected office, let's look at the numbers
Why only 5 African American Senators in US history with 3 since 1967: Edward Brooke, Carol Moseley Braun and Barack Obama when there are 16 women sitting currently as US Senators out of a total of 35 in US history?
Why only 4 African American Governors in US history with 3 since 1990: Douglas Wilder and Deval Patrick and David Paterson out of 4 in US History, when there are 8 sitting female governors out of a total of 29 in US History?
I believe in the historic nature of Hillary's run, but history tells us that the opportunity to lead in the highest elected offices have been opened to women more than African-Americans. Plus it does matter that it is Hillary. Don't you think she gets more of a push than say Carol Moseley Braun or Shirley Chisholm because she was married to President Clinton? These two women had more experience in public service than Hillary has now when in their run for the presidency.
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The author of this article believes that Hillary Clinton has broken through the glass ceiling and opened that path for those women who will follow. I disagree. I think she was pushed through the glass ceiling by a womanizer.
I have evidently been a feminist all my life, because I knew early on that I would not tolerate being pushed around or dominated by another human being without a fight. Evidently there must be many types of "feminists". I am not of the Hillary Clinton school of feminism.
A woman will emerge to run for the presidency who will earn the respect of most Americans, of men and women of all cultures and races, based on clear thinking and commanding presence. I am waiting.
"that she is an extraordinarily visible woman who refuses to "know her place" - and that her refusal to give up her claim to power might be a rallying cry for a new wave of feminist fury"
Ma'am, I totally disagree with that statement. Hillary definitely knows her place. She stayed with a man who was known to be a womanizer. He had numerous affairs and to top it off he publicly humiliated her before the world. See that's what women have always done throughout the centuries. Stay with a man inspite of his cheating ways. We're expected to look away and pretend that it's okay. We somehow buy into the notion that we're not good enough, we're not pleasing. As I once heard an elderly woman say.......a man will be a man, that's just the way they are. Well guess what? It's not okay. I'm not saying that marriages can't survive infidelity, but being publicly humiliated is different. I question women who stay with men who CHEAT, not just once but repeatedly. No matter how much you may love him I believe staying with him is an indication of something deeper that requires the assistance of a psychiatrist.
The media is all over the Wright issue, but have they mentioned the Paul vs Clinton trial that began last week and calls into question the honesty of the Clinton's?
The Clinton's are unethical and have sold out to big money.
It is not her sex but her policies, lack of integrity and ethics that define Clinton and make her a terrible candidate.
The only worse possible President than Hillary Clinton is John McCain.
As a woman I don't need a role model like Hillary. I'm still waiting for my candidate-- a real feminist who appreciates the interconnectedness of the struggle of women with the struggle of others. My candidate would not vote for war in Iraq or threaten to obliterate Iran. She would not lie about sniper fire to try to prove she's tough. My candidate would not "pretend" to be working class, if she comes from a privledged background she would own up to it and she would have come to terms with what that means. She wouldn't have worked on the board for anti-union Walmart!! She would have been in the streets demanding that Walmart allow its employees to collectively organize.
Last but not least she would not spend all her energy tearing down her democratic opponent -- instead she would articulate a positive vision for America. I'm still waiting.
I'm sorry, but there are other much more worthy women than Hillary Clinton to have the honor of breaking the glass ceiling (Corazan Aquino, Bhenizir Bhutto, Golda Meir, etc. to name a few). I speak for myself and i'm sure i speak for countless other women who agree that Hillary is NOT what feminism is about. Someone who feels like she has to be a ball buster, someone who is afraid to be herself (and finally found her voice after her NH win!) is not a role model that I would want the future generation of young women to look up to.
I don't think it's that America isn't ready for a woman president as so much they are afraid to have THIS woman as president.
I know Hillary faced some serious problems from the media at the outset of her campaign, but I watch the major networks (that would be excluding Fox News) everyday.
Can anyone show me the current media bias against her because she's a female?
Or is this just another "thin-air" argument to rile up support for her?
I wish I could share in the author's optimism about the future of women's positions at the upper levels of our government, but I just do not. When Hillary is beaten back and beaten up sufficiently the lesson will be well-learned by women of all ages -- stay in your place girl or else...! Do you have close girl friends? Better be prepared for the "L" word. Have you got detailed ideas about policies and positions? Be prepared for being characterized as a wonk and a really boring one at that. Certainly not a rock star, which is a much better characteristic for being President. Have you ever actually reached across the aisle and gotten actual legislation passed? Better be prepared to be characterized as a party traitor. Have you ever gotten mad? Better be prepared for that "B" word, and worse, yet, if you're pre-menopausal, they'll go straight for PMS. Wow, you REALLLY don't want her finger on the big, red button, do you? Since you will only get a chance to ascend to the highest levels after many, many years of hard work you will probably have developed many, many relationships. Be prepared to be characterized as a user of people, since, of course, you could only have ascended to those heights because of your associations which you will be characterized as a complete abuser of. I am not a supporter of either candidate, but I would definitely say I am a sympathizer of Sen. Clinton.
Loading comments…
Before the largest crowd of his campaign, Democratic presidential contender Barack...
**UPDATE 7/25** ThinkProgress now reports that the bar...
John McCain's famously cozy relationship with the press is getting a bit testy. Taking questions in...
There is one more John McCain gaffe that...
As we have observed throughout the last several years,...
In a flagrant political act, the State Department has...
Major news organizations are drawing...
BARCELONA, Spain — Christian Bale swept into Barcelona on Wednesday night to attend a...
Will the mainstream media cover the John Edwards love child scandal put out there by the...
I have a wait problem. I hate to wait. When...
WASHINGTON — Congress approved mortgage relief for 400,000...
Ashcroft Claims Waterboarding...
Posted May 2, 2008 | 01:52 PM (EST)