Enough, already. It is time to deconstruct the disaffected.
As the Obama campaign continues to court Hillary Holdouts, not to mention Her and Him, and as her supporters continue to express resignation, anger, pique, sadness, whatever, one element seems oddly lacking in the public discussion about why the Hillary women are disinclined to embrace the Obama man.
It is not (or not only) that some Hillary Holdouts are so used to the double Clinton embrace and attendant power vortex, they were and are unprepared to be, well, losers.
It is not (or, not only) racism.
It is not (or, not only) the often quoted instances of sexism in media commentary about Hillary.
It is not (or, not only) incalculable personal preference.
It is something that all older women -- let's say, women over 50, maybe younger -- carry in their memory banks. That is the legacy of sexism. (A disclaimer: I have written before in these virtual pages that my candidate of choice was, and is, Barack Obama. But as we say, this is not about me.)
Every one of us women over 50 (WO5?) has endured decades of sexism, ranging from annoying to terrifying -- unless we were, say, camping alone the whole time. We perhaps have forgotten certain instances, but not the residual feeling from them and not the sense of the daily -- yes, daily -- challenges. Do I fight this battle, or this one, or this one? What do I put up with? What do I not put up with? What am I even aware of putting up with? Sometimes the sexism was so all enveloping the dailyness of it disappeared. I have at least two (bright, talented, creative) women friends whose families thought college was for their one son, not their one daughter, and so the daughters became excellent -- and underemployed -- secretaries. (Did any office job interview not include the three little words, "Can you type?") I imagine many secretaries (no Personal Assistants they) sensed that they, not their male boss, should be running the office, the division, the company, the warehouse, the factory, the school, the organization, or yes, the country.
We come to the present campaign.
I am convinced that many women in their 60's and up remember their workplaces with a measure of rue, and other strands of their lives with mixed feelings. Granted, I have not suffered the worst of sexism -- OK, been goosed, groped (by a cab driver as I exited his cab), twice sexually attacked (and twice escaped), mocked, put down, stymied at work, denied entrance, and entrance, and entrance. These only relate to occasions I remember specifically, quite apart from prevailing assumptions that kept me from venturing farther than I did.
Two teensy incidents. I still recall buying (in high school) a book about the foreign service, which I yearned to join, until reading the best job for a woman would be arranging a successful embassy cocktail party for her husband, "to calm international nerves," if I remember the quote correctly. I still recall walking, trembling, into a New York City police station, ca. 1978, to report another attack (my scream from I don't know where scared the guy off me), and stammering that I didn't know if he had been trying, well, to rob or ... when the policeman at the desk sneered, "Maybe he was in love with you."
Two teensy incidents, out of zillions across the country.
Whether or not other women, blue collar or white, bothered or risked fuming then, they are fuming now.
"I couldn't even wear pants to work!" "I couldn't get a credit card!" said (in similar words) Hillary supporters recently. And on and on and on. It does not help to say I couldn't wear pants either, at ABC News in Washington, DC. It does not help to say my foreign service career never got started, a cop was rude to me, or if one more man called me "hon" or "dear" I was going to scream.
It certainly does not help to say, "Excuse me, are you perhaps being petty in deciding how to choose a presidential candidate?" (Did Sen. Obama deny you your credit card?)
It does not help because, IMHO, Hillary Clinton's older women supporters do not see in her a person of great privilege (and mistakes and flaws), but a psychological stand-in for themselves: a woman who is not young, who is not svelte, who is not stupid, just as they were not stupid. They see a woman who suffered because of a man. (Surely Hillary Clinton is the most publicly cuckolded woman since Debbie Reynolds lost Eddie Fisher to Elizabeth Taylor, and that is going back a ways.) Most of all, they see a woman who worked real hard and did not get promoted. Because of men. Especially one man.
So the soul-robbing sexism of the past (surely much of it no longer exists?) has come back to roost in the present. The Hillary Holdouts who could not wear pants to work then, yell their support for their pantsuit-wearing avenger now. She is not calling them off, either, is she? For one (seemingly benign) example, addressing a crowd of supporters in San Francisco in late July, she said it is "time for us to unite and stand together," but noted she was "proud to get more votes than anyone has gotten" in a U.S. presidential primary campaign.
Run that one by the Obama campaign.
It, meanwhile, might well pay less attention to Hillary and more to understanding, and publicly excoriating, the wrongs -- however petty they may seem to those who were not thus wronged -- that have so many of her supporters (to coin a phrase) fired up and ready to go ... elsewhere.
Btw, white MEN share this sense of outrage, especially those who were passed over for reasons of affirmative action.
Surprising that the MSM has not picked up on this. They probably won't because it is *too* true and too touchy an issue to speak about openly. Obama's thin resume only inflames their feelings and pushes them into McCain'c column.
Why did this happen? Why are we more likely to have a black male president before a women president in this country?
There are many female leaders/presidents in the world today ( a great google search). What is it about our country that seems to favor this order.?
So, I would suggest that they redirect their anger toward the real culprits supporting and promoting sexism in our society - churches, John McCain, republicans, the media, advertising, etc. Until they do that, I'm certain real supporters of women, those who have fought and continue to fight against sexism, will only feel disdain for them.
Answer: Because race is the one thing that retards constructive activity between the people's of the world
the most.
Boo, hoo. Life ain't fair. Hillary Clinton was NOT, imho, the best qualified person of the Democrat candidates for President in 2008, but she might have gotten the nomination on sheer name recognition except that she ran a fairly poor campaign. Would that have entitled Dodd, Biden and Richardson to scream "UNFAIR"? (In 2000, was Nita Loewy entitled to scream "UNFAIR" when she was elbowed out of the New York Senate race by the much less qualified Hillary Clinton?)
Most women my age are NOT psychotic whiners, still brooding about wrongs done to them decades ago. It's much more likely that the "PUMA" movement (tiny as it is) is largely filled with Republican mischief makers. It strains credulity to suggest that anybody who was seriously concerned about sexism would want to see a guy with a track record like John McCain elected President. But it's their privilege to throw their votes away if they choose. But it's not their right to keep whining about it.
It's kind of like for me, at 45, being told that Hillary must do this for "women". I'm a woman. She doesn't represent me. I wasn't consulted. I didn't sign the permission slip.
The chaos will clear in time. I hope.
No, he did not. But he did vote to deny both men and women their Constitutional Rights under the 4th Amendment__and that is by far worse.
All excuses for doing so are nothing but snakeoil.
(1) he had to move to the center
The Constition is neither a left, right nor center issue. Wise minds on all sides recognize the urgency of preserving our freedoms and the law. Nothing written in that document allows for abridgement for political expediency, anyway.
(2) what's the beef? FISA was going to pass no matter how Barack voted.
Then why not stand for freedom and the rule of law on principle?
(3) The Right would have used his nay vote to brand him as soft on national security
His yea vote hasn't kept them from still doing so.
Before FISA I was excitedly looking forward to casting my vote for President Obama. His FISA vote opened my eyes that eight years of a President spitting on the Constitution will only continue if Barack is elected.
Hillary Clinton kept to her oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States with her nay to FISA. She will get my write-in vote in November should there not be a miraculous reversal in Denver.
Clearly, many of her die-hard hold-out supporters suffer from a near-fatal form of reality-aversion. Being forced to consider facts can be harmful to those in such a delicate condition. Please be kind. Just let it go. Just let them have their dreams; eighteen million..., most votes in history..., ready from day one..., etc...
I've got news for you. He's always been at the center.
"The Constition is neither a left, right nor center issue."
The Constitution is open to interpretation of what the Founding Fathers intended. That's why we have a Supreme Court.
"(2) what's the beef? FISA was going to pass no matter how Barack voted."
FISA was and is the law. It was passed in 1978. This most recent law is intended to restore the checks and balances the goverment is supposed to follow, whether you agree with or not.
"(3) The Right would have used his nay vote to brand him as soft on national security"
True, though I don't think that's why he voted for it.
"His FISA vote opened my eyes that eight years of a President spitting on the Constitution will only continue if Barack is elected."
Oh please, with your drama. And again, FISA was originally passed in 1978.
"Hillary Clinton kept to her oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"
Oh, REALLY? How about her vote to authorize the invasion of a country that posed no threat to us? Was that protecting the Constitution? Or her bill that would have made burning the flag illegal? Was that preserving the Constitution? What a joke that is.
One question. You say that you don't think his FISA vote was necessarily done to deflect accusations of being soft on national security. What do you think the reason was? (I was upset at the time, but decided to move on. He can't really do anything til we get him in that White House.) Just curious what you think his rational was.
Obama/Biden'08
The FISA law was NOT intended to restore the checks and balances. That was ALL written into the ORIGINAL FISA law, all that had to happen was for the SCOTUS to actually admit that they are responsible to the CONSTITUTION!!!
Now the question is "What to do about it?" Just hate the media, the DNC, Obama? That does not help the cause of women, the country or the people who hold the hate like a poison inside.
Someone mentioned Rev. Wright. From all accounts, he yelled and screamed once in a while, but he did a lot of constructive work as well.
And most of all, if it's a "man" thing - why are they all chomping at the bit to vote for McCain? That will really assuage sexist-inflicted wounds.
Sorry, but this just doesn't make any sense at all.
By her logic; Laura Bush should be our next president.
I am over 60 and know all the 'stuff' that has happened. I was one to sign the contract to quit my job as flight attendant at 35 and not to be married. Fly me to Atlanta?? Oh yeah! That was fun. Paper dresses?? Yeah, fun also.
I would have been more likely to vote for Hillary if she had left Bill. Bill still runs her, that is obvious.
Let me say that again.
I would have been more likely to vote for Hillary if she had left Bill.