Hillary's Gift to Women

In Friday's New York Times, Susan Faludi rejoiced over Hillary Clinton's destruction of the myth of female prissiness and innate moral superiority, hailing Clinton's "no-holds-barred pugnacity" and her media reputation as "nasty" and "ruthless." Future female presidential candidates will owe a lot to the race of 2008, Faludi wrote, "when Hillary Clinton broke through the glass floor and got down with the boys."

I share Faludi's glee -- up to a point. Surely no one will ever dare argue that women lack the temperament for political combat. But by running a racially-tinged campaign, lying about her foreign policy experience, and repeatedly seeming to favor McCain over her Democratic opponent, Clinton didn't just break through the "glass floor," she set a new low for floors in general, and would, if she could have got within arm's reach, have rubbed the broken glass into Obama's face.

A mere decade ago Francis Fukuyama fretted in Foreign Affairs that the world was too dangerous for the West to be entrusted to graying female leaders, whose aversion to violence was, as he established with numerous examples from chimpanzee society, "rooted in biology." The counter-example of Margaret Thatcher, perhaps the first of head of state to start a war for the sole purpose of pumping up her approval ratings, led him to concede that "biology is not destiny." But it was still a good reason to vote for a prehistoric-style club-wielding male.

Not to worry though, Francis. Far from being the stereotypical feminist-pacifist of your imagination, the woman to get closest to the Oval Office has promised to "obliterate" the toddlers of Tehran -- along, of course, with the bomb-builders and Hezbollah supporters. Earlier on, Clinton foreswore even talking to presumptive bad guys, although women are supposed to be the talk addicts of the species. Watch out -- was her distinctly unladylike message to Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong-Il, and the rest of them -- or I'll rip you a new one.

There's a reason why it's been so easy for men to overlook women's capacity for aggression. As every student of Women's Studies 101 knows, what's called aggression in men is usually trivialized as "bitchiness" in women: Men get angry; women suffer from bouts of inexplicable, hormonally-driven, hostility. So give Clinton credit for defying the belittling stereotype: She's been visibly angry for months, if not decades, and it can't all have been PMS.

But did we really need another lesson in the female capacity for ruthless aggression? Any illusions I had about the innate moral superiority of women ended four years ago with Abu Ghraib. Recall that three out of the five prison guards prosecuted for the torture and sexual humiliation of prisoners were women. The prison was directed by a woman, Gen. Janis Karpinski, and the top U.S. intelligence officer in Iraq, who also was responsible for reviewing the status of detainees before their release, was Major Gen. Barbara Fast. Not to mention that the U.S. official ultimately responsible for managing the occupation of Iraq at the time was Condoleezza Rice. 

Whatever violent and evil things men can do, women can do too, and if the capacity for cruelty is a criterion for leadership, as Fukuyama suggested, then Lynndie England should consider following up her stint in the brig with a run for the Senate.

It's important -- even kind of exhilarating -- for women to embrace their inner bitch, but the point should be to expand our sense of human possibility, not to enshrine aggression as a virtue. Women can behave like the warrior queen Boadicea, credited with slaughtering 70,000, many of them civilians, or like Margaret Thatcher, who attempted to dismantle the British welfare state. Men, for their part, are free to take as their role models the pacifist leaders Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. Biology conditions us in all kinds of ways we might not even be aware of yet. But virtue is always a choice.

Hillary Clinton smashed the myth of innate female moral superiority in the worst possible way -- by demonstrating female moral inferiority. We didn't really need her racial innuendos and free-floating bellicosity to establish that women aren't wimps. As a generation of young feminists realizes, the values once thought to be uniquely and genetically female -- such as compassion and an aversion to violence -- can be found in either sex, and sometimes it's a man who best upholds them.

Comments

[candomath]

The Democrats would rather lose with Obama than win with Clinton. And they WILL lose with Obama.

[Justeesh]

False. Obama has higher approval amongst indepedents, brings in the youth vote, and has consistently polled better than Clinton in national matchups against McCain.

[Simonanunhappydem]

This comment above is factually false: Clinton is polling better against McCain than Obama. These distortions, stated as facts, seem to be the staple of the Obama crowd. Cadomath is correct: we all will lose by nominating Obama. But is seems like another one of those years: we had a clear shot to win the white house and we are in the process of just giving it away, in the name of some lofty but empty slogans.

[truthskr]

Candomath, I beg to differ, with your points as well as your name. Since Hillary can not possibly win this nomination in any mathematically legitimate fashion, how would she then, as an illegitimate nominee, win against McCain? She mathematically lost the nomination back in February. The percentage of remaining votes left that she needs to overtake Obama (something like 85%) is a nearly impossibly occurrence, and even if FL and MI are seated exactly per the Clinton metrics, Clinton would STILL be losing to Obama.

If Obama loses in the GE to McCain, a result that I will concede IS entirely possible, it will not be because of Obama. It will be because Clinton and her supporters will have proved themselves to have absolutely no loyalty to the Democratic party or it's principals by sitting out of the GE, not helping Obama (and God help Obama and his supporters if Clinton were to win and WE sat out, which we wouldn't), and pouting at home waiting to be asked to the dance in 2012. And by that time McCain will have us much deeper into the Middle East, on the brink of domestic economic and social collapse, and all will have named God knows how many neo-con right-wingers to the bench of the Supreme Count all the way down to the lower courts. But at least Clinton supporters will have their pride to keep them warm at night, no matter how lonely a companion.

[Amminadab]

Then it might be a good idea to stop the demonization of Hillary and her 16.6 million supporters.

Demonization is not a good tool for building coalitions.

[lotuslike]

Great post, Ms. Ehrenreich! Hillary has tried to consistently out-good-ole-boy the good-ole-boys with her racial & gender & class pandering. She was and is still blind to the fact that most of us are sick to death (figuratively AND litterally) of that divisive, destructive behavior. She proudly touts the 'cojones' mantle that eager men (and herself) have ascribed to her---as if that somehow confers a legitimacy to her presidential run that other qualities about her ultimately fail to.

As a someone who consistently supported Hillary (and Bill) through the years, I have found myself both shocked and extremely disappointed with all of the base choices she's made throughout this campaign.

[AmHope]

I agree wholeheartedly with the post, Ms. Ehrenreich. And my sentiments exactly with this response--I also was an avid supporter of Hillary Clinton but her divisive tactics turned me off (plus when she went on national tv and made a joke about her Bosnia gaffe which in my opinion is something she should have been ashamed of).

She's certainly not the kind of woman I want my daughter to look up to. I can't tell you how disappointed I am in her. Shame on her for squandering this opportunity.

[pakaal]

"the woman to get closest to the Oval Office has promised to "obliterate" the toddlers of Tehran"

I wish the media would get their quotes right. It was "totally obliterate".

[mikekev58]

War is hell.

In the hypothetical, our allies' toddlers were obliterated first.

And I don't know of any Iranian toddlers who've been killed by Israelis, though I do know that Israeli toddlers have been murdered by Iranian-funded terrorists.

[YRM]

The only thing more discouraging than the unprecendented hostility shown towards Hillary Clinton is the fact that so many educated women are throwing the stones themselves. Has our gender, like the planet, arrived at a tipping point, when there's nothing left but to slide downward into oblivion? Are we so numb to the plight of working people that we're putting our internal self-loathing ahead of the need to keep the neoconservatives out of the WH? There must be a reason Ehrenreich and others of her stripe have turned a blind eye to Obama's abysmal record in Chicago supporting slumlords like Rezko and Davis in their influence peddling and extortion schemes. (It's called Google, folks...) What we've been hearing from this candidate is not change we can believe in but the same old "thousand points of light" the first Bush was peddling in 1988, and "compassionate conservatism" and "I'm a uniter, not a divider" schtick of the second Bush in 2000. It's a lie from start to finish, and if educated women can't see that, then things must really be bad. Sen. Clinton is as fallible as any other human being. She shouldn't run have those stupid Republican attack ads. But the fact remains that unlike her opponent, she's got a solid, verifiable record of accomplishment and representing the people. It's beyond me how cold, hard facts continue to be ignored in this election. Here are a few to consider: http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/OctoberSurprise.html

[lisakaz2]

Throwing stones? What, any women against HRC is self-loathing? Ever consider the fact that these educated women worked hard FOR THEMSELVES and didn't get where they got because their hubby got 'em a job or degree, etc?

What of YOU turning a blind eye here? Obama is a boy scout compared to the liar of Tuzla.

[mikekev58]

Do you honestly believe that Hillary Clinton did not earn either her degree or her various "jobs" on her own, no doubt with support from Bill Clinton once he came into her life.

I can see the dried-out froth as the corners of your mouth as you typed your post.

Pitiful.

[lisakaz2]

Why don't you look up Peter Paul v. Clinton while you're at it?

[Amminadab]

Yet another smear by surrogate.

It is the Obama way.

[truthskr]

It's called Google? Really? Surely you're not imply Obama supporters are the camp that doesn't understand how to locate information on the internet. Didn't Hillary JUST discover the wonder of small donor contributions via the internet?

I'm a woman and a feminist. But I do not support a candidate just because their gender matches mine, no matter how much my desire to see a female president may demand it. And I also don't vote on "experience" when all but 6 of those years were "served" as wife to an elected official. If either of these were reasonable criteria, then I guess the Clinton folks will have plenty to busy themselves with after Hillary finally concedes in getting Laura Bush elected to a Senate seat so that in 6+ years, she can run as the first female candidate on the Repulican side. You know, what with all of the "experience" she's undoubtedly accrued as the wife of a govenor turned 2-term president.

Even if all of Hillary's supposed experience were legitimate, I hardly see that as a positive at this point in history when so much of the country is yearning to move dramatically away from such Washington experience. Confessing to 35 years of complicity is no qualifier that I am seeking in any candidate, male or female.

[thepoliticalcat]

I wish I could agree with you, but you seem to forget that Clinton got most of her money from lobbyists representing big business. When I give money to anything except a charity, I expect a return. Are you asking me to believe that the people who funded Clinton will not expect a return if she takes the White House? Her advisor Mark Penn is a known unionbuster. He is a business partner of John McCain's advisor. When accused of taking money from lobbyists, her defense was that "lobbyists are Americans too."

Her health care plan of 1992 has yet to be enacted. She supported NAFTA without environmental or labour protections. And she has lied repeatedly about relatively trivial things and refused to apologize or admit her lies and errors.

Perhaps Obama is no better, but he has not supported the war, he has a good solid pro-labour, pro-child, pro-womens' rights record, and he has yet to be caught lying brazenly in public. Unlike her, he does not trivialize his Democratic opponent, nor has he run a dirty campaign. He could have said so much about Lewinsky, Marc Rich, the failed health-care initiative, countless other things. She stated she would "throw the kitchen sink" at him, "kneecap" him, and take the "Tonya Harding" option. Why should I vote for someone like that?

[Northshorewoman]

"Not yet caught lying brazenly in public?" So, I guess some do believe that even though he uses his -- I'm a regular, churchgoing famiy man -- he was deaf, too? Come on.

[brianwestchest]

Well said. Hillary did sink to new lows in this campaign- for a man or a woman.

[Amminadab]

You don't know what you're talking about.

Her campaign was no dirtier than Obama's...­... that's just politics.

[NorVaGal]

Amminadab: Please enumerate the ways in which Sen. Obama's campaign was dirty politics. I took the time to post of list of Hillary's Dirty Campaign tricks in response to your request (challenge?). Please return the favor for me. Thanks.

[mikekev58]

I am old enough to have been through the Nixon campaigns, the Reagan campaigns, the Bush 41 campaign, and the Bush 43 campaigns.

I recall the Ted Kennedy campaign to unseat Jimmy Carter and Kennedy's gracelessness in refusing to shake Jimmy Carter's hand at the 1980 DNC.

You have no idea what the low of a campaign are if you think Hillary sank to new lows.

No idea.

The rebuilding of the Democratic party will begin immediately following Barry's concession phone call to President-elect John McCain.

[TwoCentsWorth]

Great statements, Mike. Hang in there and continue to educate some of these folks who are obviously neophytes educationally and politically.

[Northshorewoman]

And, they are just beginning ot learn. What a cry-baby response to President Bush's comments in Israel. If you can't take the heat...

[essafaga]

In response to jojojo I can only say that there's a lot of people who don't care about the future as much as they care about the past. The damn war started in 2003 and is still going on. Has anyone looked at the names of the people who voted for it so many years ago? Try it, you'd be surprised, whether it was naivete, stupidty, wanting to join the majority for reelection purposes or whatever. SUCK IT UP! The war is fact and it no longer matters who voted for it and who didn't and should not be the reason that people decide who to vote for. As for being sexist - sure, she's a woman trying to compete against all the men who do not want her to succeed - the Mother complex or whatever. You're listening to all the propaganda that's being turned on the try to change your mind./

[SethBLiNK]

Get over it?

The single most damaging decision of the last godknowshowmany years, and your answer is to get over it? Of the 20 or so people who ran for President this year, about half supported the war and still support it. Three (Obama, Kucinich and Paul) didn't like it then and don't like it now, and the rest have changed their mind. However, of the ones who changed their mind after the fact, Hillary is the only one who has continued to defend her own actions. If it comes down t a race between Hillary and somebody who thinks we should stay there for another 100 years, I'm all for Hillary. But I'd rather have somebody who was right from day one.

[maggieb]

How many lives were saved because they changed their minds? Didn't change much did it. Get over it!!

[Amminadab]

Yes, we get it.

It's all Hillary's fault.

EVERYTHING is Hillary's fault.

That will be Obama's slogan for the general election.

[mikekev58]

Obama gave a speech; he did not vote on the resolution.

In fact, when asked in 2004 about how he might've voted had he been in the US Senate he said, "I don't know".

His record since coming to the Senate is virtually identical to Hillary's.

[Northshorewoman]

Sen. Clinton did not vote to go to war. Go read her Floor Speech on this and then come back. She has nothing to apologize for. President Bush does -- for his abuse of his power.

[gevan]

Kind of like George W. Bush exploding the myth of America being a "great" or even a "good" country.We can now get down and dirty with the most ruthless of dictatorships and throw our economic well-being into the dumpster with the rest of the third word countires.

[barbo]

I chose to vote for Hillary before Obama became Mr. Magic, Agent of Change. Bill and Hillary Clinton have historically supported minorities and it's funny that now she's being labeled a big racist. The Rev. Wright videos and stories broke through in the mass media via the FOX News Network, not the Clinton campaign, which Sean Wilentz, the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus professor of history at Princeton University, wrote about in the Philadelphia Inquirer on March 30, 2008. You Hillary bashers might be interested in a few other points about racist charges he makes. Hillary is also stating what may be fact regarding Obama's possible inability to bring in the (white) voters in some states, and if you're trying to decide who may be the best candidate to beat McCain in November, this little bit of info might be crucial to ensure a Democratic win. I'm voting for Obama if Hillary doesn't get the nomination, which seems likely, but I know quite a few conservative pals who think both Hillary and Obama are evil Socialists who would only bring this country down to it's collective knees economically. A vast, crappy, civil servant empire of social programs..­..........­.

[SethBLiNK]

They historically supported minorities when it served them to do so, and they quickly abandoned them when it was no longer helpful. Yes, the FOX folks piled on with the Wright thing. That's their job. Stating "what might be a fact" means stating your opinion. And if your opinion demeans your party's likely candidate for President it's best to keep to yourself.

[ghostwriter5]

I don't think they abandoned them--Obama played the race card by taking qutoes out of context and alienated them from Clinton. I agree with prof Wilentz and am profoundly sad to watch the Dems gets excited about another loser candidate and I have volunteered for many of them--McGovern, Mondale, Gore and Kerry. They know how to pick em. The only winner in the lot was Bill Clinton. Go figure. Let's throw awya the people who know how to win general elections and pick another sure loser for the fall.

[Simonanunhappydem]

It is refreshing to see that there are some readers of Huffington Post who are actually not dazed by the Obama myth. I fully agree with barbo. Hillary is the stronger, better, and yes, more honest candidate (as much as a politician can be honest, and Obama is a politician, same or worse than the others). But if Obama gets the nod from the super delegates (hopefully they are smarter than that) then I will vote for Obama, holding my nose, same as I did for Kerry. Any democrat is preferable to McCain in the white house.

[ShineTheLight]

Whatever violent and evil things men can do, women can do too ...

... backwards, in high heels, for 1/3 the pay and half the respect.

[essafaga]

Gee, Barbara, I think you're all wet. Why would anybody ever think that a woman running for the presidency would be anything but a politician??? If you want to be the President you need to do anything you can to win. Can you imagine if she ran th "Vision Thing - all rhetoric and no plans" as Obama has done? She would have been laughed off the stage as wimpy and soft "just like a woman."

I'm amazed and disappointed that you haven't given her the credit and respect she deserves for having racked up the millions of votes she has received and the fact that she's still standing after the abuse that's been heaped upon her. Do you place any credence at all on the rumors that the black community has exercised undue pressure on their constituency to vote for Obama - or else? The number of women in this country constitues more than 50% of the population. Don't we deserve to make our voices heard more than the 12% representing the African-Americans? Once again, the women of this country face the probability that we will be unable to crack the glass ceiling and finally be understood to be equal to all the men.

i say, "Shame On You," for ignoring the best chance we have to make this history real.

[Axolotl]

to essafaga,

why would you want the first woman presidential candidate to be such a vile, vulgar, lying person. she surpasses any other politician with her lies.

she is the worst representative and role model for girls and women. she earned little of what she has in the way of stature. and she never met a whopper she didn't like.

the only think to admire her for is her vigor and robustness and also for ceasing to use Botox after many experiments that made her look sick.

[Justeesh]

Way to elevate the discourse there, champ. There are plenty of valid grievances to have about Clinton, you don't need to go there.

[chelliza]

That's assuming that all women would vote for Hillary just because she is a woman. Myself and most of the women I know (most white by the way), are voting for Obama. We are doing so because we do not like the deregulations and continuation of the Reagan policies that happened during the Clinton years that Hillary supported. We do not want this country to become any more controlled by big corporations than it already has and she and Bill are very pro big business. If the 50% of the country that are women felt she was the best choice and voted for her, she would be the nominee. Even if it was true that the black communitee somehow said "or else" as you suggest, 12% would have made little difference. Privacy in voting makes that have no effect. By the way, having a black president is also making history.

[mikekev58]

"By the way, having a black president is also making history.'

Somehow, I think that for you, Barry's blackness is much more than a "by the way".

[dct1999]

Damn, you say:

"Do you place any credence at all on the rumors that the black community has exercised undue pressure on their constituency to vote for Obama - or else? The number of women in this country constitues more than 50% of the population. Don't we deserve to make our voices heard more than the 12% representing the African-Americans? "

The last time I checked we black people voted in private, just like everyone else. So I fail to see how any of us are being coerced into voting for Obama.

Not all women are voting for Hillary.

Not all women are white.

[mikekev58]

I think coercion is too strong.

I think the term is racial pride. When 90% of an ethnic group votes for the candidate who is a member of that group, there can be no denying that there is a desire to help that candidate make history based on mutual identity.

Not the best reason for voting for Barry, but understandable.

Not quite as brave as all the feminists on HuffPo, but understandable.

[loudspeaker]

Quoting neocon Francis Fukuyama's comparison of women and females in a "chimpanzee society"? Are we there now?

[loudspeaker]

General Janis Karpinski wasn't in on the torture. Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush were.

[fisharefreinds]

Let us remember that they recently came out with a Hillary nut cracker doll and were selling it in DC airport. Don't think they'd ever consider doing that to Karl Rove or any man runing for office do you Ms. B.?
God forbid!

[fisharefreinds]

I first wanted Edwards badly and donated to him!, then Kucinicth, then HC, then not HC, then HC again, then not HC--getting bitchy--then HC again,...O­Y. I feel a sadness for HC and her campaign coming to an end. She has alot to offer this country and
was loaded with programs she told us about, don't know much about Obama, but will vote for him cause he is not McCain and that is all.

[caral]

"Recall that three out of the five prison guards prosecuted for the torture and sexual humiliation of prisoners were women."

Don't you wonder why that is, when it's obvious that torture was acceptable to this administration and yet only the women were there to be held accountable?