Ignoble Hillary

Does anyone wonder why women who support Hillary Clinton for president get (excuse the vernacular) PO'd at some of our fellow Democrats?

It's because very time we turn around, someone is dissing our candidate in ways that infuriate us. He (or she) is using sexist, insulting language about the first woman to mount a viable run for the presidency, in ways that, to say the least, we do not appreciate.

While many of us see Barack Obama as an exciting, able and worthy candidate, and will gladly vote for him if he is the nominee, we do not see the same respect given to Hillary Clinton.

Take Ted Kennedy's remark that Hillary should not be on the ticket with Obama if he is the nominee. Instead, Kennedy wants someone who "is in tune with the nobler aspirations of the American people."

So what is ignoble about Hillary Clinton? Her health care policy, which is more inclusive than Obama's? Her work in 1972 with Marian Wright Edelman on school desegregation in the South? Her work in Arkansas, in the White House, and in the senate on children's rights? Her proposal to fully fund services for children with autism? (I have two grandkids who are mildly autistic, so this proposal does not seem at all ignoble to me). Or maybe her support for the right to choose, or her sensible plan to withdraw from Iraq in a way that does not put US troops at great risk?

I'd argue that Hillary Clinton, by her deeds, has proved herself every bit as noble as Obama, who also supports good policies. But Clinton, if just by virtue of longevity, has in fact done more.

I'll admit that as much as I admire Obama's idea about bringing Democrats and Republicans together, my years of covering politics -- especially in recent years -- make me skeptical. As long as the GOP operates on the Rovian principal of winning by keeping the base in constant upheaval, always recycling wedge issues, true bi-partisanship is next to impossible.

We women who wanted to see a woman president in our lifetime have been appalled by the sexism of the campaign. I personally have wanted to throw a shoe at the TV screen (especially when MSNBC is on) when panel after panel seems to consist of male pundits giving advice to the young prince about how to defeat the wicked witch of the west.

When Boston university journalism student Melissa Nawrocki examined campaign coverage, she found that the media accused Clinton of being insane, murderous, witchlike, depressed, and egomaniacal:

• On a Dec. 20, 2007 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews said that Clinton's political goal was "to smother the young senator [Obama] in his crib," using the visual of a murderous Clinton killing an infant Obama. Matthews also has referred to Clinton as "witchy" and a "stripteaser."

• In a Feb. 27 New York Times column, Maureen Dowd wrote that Clinton "has turned into Sybil," referencing the book and movie about a women with multiple whiny personalities. Just one day prior, CNN's The Situation Room commentator Jack Cafferty said that Clinton "[resembled] someone with a multiple personality disorder." Two days earlier, Chicago Tribune reporter Jill Zuckman said on MSNBC's Hardball that Clinton's recent behavior "comes across a little schizophrenic."

Sexist language has been over the top. In the course of her public life, Hillary Clinton has been called, in print, Lady Macbeth, the Wicked Witch of the East, a harridan, a virago and The Yuppie Wife from Hell, to name just a few. She's been compared to Glen Close as the murderous career woman in "Fatal Attraction." During the campaign, her "cackle" became the subject of countless media reports, as if she were indeed stirring a pot and chanting, "Double, double, toil and trouble, fire burn and caldron bubble."

On the blog mediaCrit, Ashleigh Crowther noted the coverage of Hillary's laugh. Patrick Healy of the New York Times dubbed it the "Clinton Cackle," Frank Rich of the Times called it " calculating," and pundit Dick Morris called Clinton's laugh 'loud, inappropriate, and mirthless . . .. A scary sound that was somewhere between a cackle and a screech.'"

On the O'Reilly Factor, a "body language expert" called Clinton's laughter "evil." ABC's Good Morning America, CNN's Situation Room, Fox News' Hannity & Colmes and MSNBC's Hardball included stories about it.

Sexist language often gets a chuckle from male media commentators -- such as the video clips of the young men who held up a sign, "Hillary Clinton, stop running for president and make me a sandwich." Imagine the outrage if that sign had said, "Barack Obama, stop running for president and shine my shoes."

Hillary's physical attributes have also been fair game. Matt Taibbi, national political reporter for Rolling Stone, referred to Clinton's "flabby" arms in his Apr. 3 piece, "Hillary's Flimsy Case." Writers have sniggered at her pantsuits, her wrinkles, her hairdos, her makeup, etc. etc. The men running for president this year displayed an array of paunches, double chins, bald pates, and jowls, and yet rarely were those cause for comment.

This reflects what Susan Sontag called "The Double Standard of Aging." There is just one standard of beauty for women -- the nubile 20-year-old, while men like Sean Connery and Harrison Ford can be considered sex symbols in their sixties, grey hair or no hair.

The double standard serves to silence women, keeping them out of the public arena. Mockery of one's physical attributes is especially painful. Hillary Clinton, in fact, looks great for a woman of sixty, fit and attractive. But she's often covered as if she were some kind of crone. Rush Limbaugh -- no poster boy of pulchritude himself -- spoke with dread of watching Hillary Clinton age in office. He made no such comment about 70-plus John McCain.

Might a future female candidate who doesn't resemble a pubescent supermodel shy away of running for fear of a vicious assault on her every sign of age? Or will she simply shudder at the expectation that she will be called evil, nutty and murderous? All this will give the next woman who wants to run for president a reason to pause -- and push the day of the first woman chief executive far into the future.

Boston University Journalism professor Caryl Rivers is the author of "Selling Anxiety: How the News Media Scare Women."

Comments

[thegaygardener]

You make some very valid points about language & sexism. I too thought it ridiculous to mock her (or anybody's) laugh. And some hateful word have been directed Sen. Clinton's way for a very long time now. But I have always felt that Sen. Clinton's candidacy shows the triumph of feminism. Is she strong enough? Smart enough? Capable enough? And surely Clinton has demonstrated she is all of those things & more. So it really is a woman for President? Absolutely. Just not this woman. I agree with Sen Kennedy & I find Sen. Clinton's behavior during this campaign to be ignoble. Her response to the Muslim question ("Not as far as I know") Her basic endorsement of John McCain & her recently offensive; "hard working white voters" Pair these with her unapologetic & cynical vote on Iraq (& Iran) belies your statement "her sensible plan to withdraw from Iraq in a way that does not put US troops at great risk"
Her continuation of her campaign despite all odds is hardly noble either. But just siphons off money & talent & support from the eventual nominee & other "down ticket" candidates (Just as her 1st Senate campaign took away from the Gore run for the Presidency) Given all of the evidence demonstrated on an almost daily basis by the Clintons (both of them) during this campaign, Noble is certainly not the word I would use.

[mitaka]

"We women who wanted to see a woman president in our lifetime have been appalled by the sexism of the campaign."
This sentence pretty much sadly exposes the bankruptcy of the thinking many Clinton supporters seem to hold.

[wrensis]

Thank you. You said it all.

[meileen]

The way this campaign season has been covered by the media, the ignorant and insulting posts I read here with regard to the former first lady, and the insults that have been hurled from Barack's supporters, have left me feeling that the party has left me behind.

With NARAL's recent backstab move, I am convinced that loyalty does not exist within the framework of the Democratic Party. I will no longer get involved, make calls, go door to door or do any of my typical GOTV. And from the insults I've received from visitors to this site, I know I will not be needed, as they have it all under control.

[Gma11]

Meileen - I'm truly sorry you feel that way. I don't like Hillary Clinton. However, I will vote against John McCain. If Hillary won the primary according to the rules established before the contest began, I would certainly vote for her.

I've fallen in love with losing candidates and I know how badly it feels. And I've been through these flaming wars before. I respect the choices individuals make. If you choose not to support Obama, I respect that. I sincerely support the importance of every citizen weighing their choices and voting for that candidate that they feel will best represent the common good for my six children and eleven grandchildren, according to their own conscience.

[ghop]

Thank you for that, Gma11. I have sympathy for the Clinton supporters going through a loss as well. I'm hoping other Obama supporters will start realizing what they are going through and lighten up on the Clinton-bashing. We have common ground for empathy here, we suffered together through two losses to W, after all :).

[ToddD]

Great!...a­nd just so you know ,when your sitting on the sidelines elects John McCain and he appoints say 3 Supremes and they take your right to choose from you and from your daughter and from your granddaughter .... don't come here and bitch to us....we tried to tell you but you knew better.

[devadasi]

If you don't feel needed meileen, you need to take a good hard look at yourself. Everyone is needed to do their part in the campaign. But your remark about NARAL's backstab sounds desperate. NARAL has the right to endorse whom ever they please. Loyalty? The Clintons expect blind loyality and that has turned many people against them. Hillary is easy to make fun of because she has no inner core, she's inauthentic, there's no there there and people pick up on that. She'a always acting.

[vanessa04]

Forget it, Ms. Rivers. They don't get the depth of the anger out there. They blithely choose to believe that it doesn't really matter to Clinton's supporters that their candidate has been reviled at every turn by so-called fellow Democrats. They don't get that millions of women WILL NOT VOTE for a party or a condidate that treats them and their candidate with such blatant disrespect and contempt. They just don't get it.

And this is why the Democrats will lose in November.

[meileen]

Spot on vanessa.

My hope is that there will be enough Dems voted into Congress to squelch any activist judges that President McCain tries to place. But even then, I am not so sure about the spine of the Dems to stand up and do the right thing. They certainly haven't yet.

I now understand the old feeling of, "I haven't left the party, the party left me."

[maritabox]

How crazy are you people. She has been "reviled" at every turn? I really think that you all have to use the brains that God gave you and take a deep breath.
This isn't a popularity contest. This is serious, deadly serious, as in our troops so you think that she was insulted and disrespected and held in contempt. That is way over the top I think.. Are you saying these things because you are angry and trying to be dramatic to make your point?
Because you can't be saying you want the republicans to win and be a willing participant in their success. Can our country survive it? Are you willing to keep our kids over in Iraq to keep getting killed and maimed? And commiting suicide at 18 a day? Over 1,000 attempts a month.
Bankrupting our country so we have no money for education, infastructure and healthcare
And screw global warming, it can wait !! We are running out of time!!! It may already be too late. Republicans don't even believe in it or science. What about stem cells research?
Please stop this insanity. Stop looking at this through the eyes of the Clinton's. Take off your Hillary GOGGLES!!!
AND TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK FROM THE REPUBLICAN
If you cannot than may God have mercy on your soul.

[maritabox]

McCain is crazy.

[mitaka]

"millions of women WILL NOT VOTE for a party or a condidate that treats them and their candidate with such blatant disrespect and contempt."
Since when is dissent and opposition called disrespect and contempt? You sound like a person who thinks nothing is wrong with me and everybody else is turned against me. Why don't you step out of the situation and try to objectively assess how and why Hillary started to lose this nomination when she was all but crowned with it only a short year ago?
And if millions of women WILL NOT VOTE for Obama and the Democratic Party then what? Is McCain and the GOP going to be a better choice? If, for example, all the disgruntled Hillary voters were to vote for the Green Party that would start a real revolution, which I would frankly welcome. Are you willing to go the distance or are you going to sit this out and usher the Republicans back to the White House?

[maritabox]

vanessa04
bauersox
Do you think it is funny to say we will lose in November?
So bauersox
Nothing I said earlier makes any difference to you?

[SouthFloridaDem]

Right, and HRC treated Obama with such respect, didn't she. It's a two-way street, honey.

[bentenrai]

It's not her good deeds, it's the way she conducts her campaign.

[sueelle]

Definitely nothing nobel about her campaign. And how is calling someone "schizophrenic" sexist? She was called that because she changes who she is with every state.

[vinny]

hillary has no soul... she threw obama under the bus umpteen times in favor of mccain... really who does that to one of your party members?

you know, the reason MSM hypes caricatures of candidates is the same reason you are writing this blog... to sell product...

who gives a hoot what book you wrote, if you start off your blog with why you are so PO'd at democrats, snipe at a kennedy sound bite, and then proceed to rattle off all the bad coverage your candidates has received..­.

makes no sense...

[LoRiseAntlers]

I'm sorry lady,but supporting a candidate who has mounted the most openly racist presedential campaign in modern history kinda makes me think you shopuld just go away.

[meileen]

Why bother posting if you have to be rude?

[ghop]

It is so strange that so many ardent feminists feel antipathy towards Hillary, myself among them. I hate the sexist attacks against her, but it doesn't make me want to vote for her. I found myself getting irritated with Clinton rather than sympathizing when she complained about the sexism in her media coverage. If she had given a speech on gender issues I might have been inspired, but the complaining just felt like political maneuvering. I also found some of her tactics, such as threatening to obliterate Iran and using the same "elitism" argument as the GOP, less than noble. I wish with all my heart that we could have had a strong female candidate this year, and I believe we will have one in the future. Clinton just wasn't it.
One thing - the "cackle". It is an annoying nervous response and Hillary does it when confronted with tough questions. I would find this annoying in a male or female candidate. Certainly we on the left have found W's stumbling, mumbling verbal tics to be fodder for critique, why not Clinton's laugh?

[chefrasta]

She voted for war in Iraq without reading the intelligence. Not learning from her mistake she supported Kyl-Lieberman giving the war criminals a excuse to attack Iran.She said she is willing to commit genocide against a nation that does not pose a threat to us.Now she embraces the racist attitudes of the least educated and squeal like a pig in shit that they vindicate her quest for the white house, no Ms Clinton can take her derriere to the dust bin of history.

[spencer628]

you are confusing sexism with the fact that the media, and the Democratic Party are just so over the Clintons.

[JXB]

No question that sexism is present in politics, just like racism, anti-semitism, homophobia, ageism, and other discriminatory attitudes continue to be. However,..­.

Her decision in February, after losing 10 contests in a row, to shift to a "kitchen sink" strategy based on "electability" and centered around tearing her opponent down was ignoble.

Her numerous attempts to change the rules in the middle of the game, including rules that she and the other candidates explicitly agreed to in writing at the outset, were, and continue to be, ignoble.

Her refusal to accept defeat and bow out gracefully were, and continue to be, ignoble.

Her explicit appeal to the identity politics of white vs. black in an effort to buttress her flagging campaign's viability was, and continues to be, ignoble.

And, perhaps most of all...

Her public statements clearly suggesting that the Republican nominee was more qualified than her Democratic opponent was ignoble, and possibly unprecedented in the history of primary politics.

These are not male v. female issues. These are not issues grounded in or arising from sexism. These are issues of basic primary decorum, not being a sore loser, and not placing your personal issues and ego above the interests of your Party. These issues would be just as pertinent, just as ignoble, if committed by a male candidate.

[CarrieMN]

This is an articulate and insightful post, and I agree with you totally.

[harriscrl3]

I think this post IGNORES Hilary's role in this you get what you give. She belittles people insults people is nasty to people particlularly Obama supporters and Obama has been nothing but kind to her supporters I dont find that to be noble qualities. So many times she could have taken the high road but chose NOT to. Its hard to feel sisterhood with someone who use gender when it suits her purpose even if she has to wallow in victimization to do so.

Carol

[Gma11]

I think of Madeleine Albright. She exuded gravitas. Yet she was also womanly.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, Hillary represents so much that I personally find reprehensible. I could easily have supported her up until Super Tuesday. Her behavior since then has been reprehensible, highly unethical. That is not a standard I want young women in America followig.A­nd I'm white, age 60. And where was her concern for all the young women her husband was . . . entertaining himself with for so many years? Or didn't those women count?

We've confused sex with a non-hierarchical perspective. Hillary represents the old dominator model. I prefer the partnership model of relationships as elucidated by Rianne Eisler, Anne Wilson Schaef, etc. Simply having a vagina doesn't change the game. I want to change the game.

[PKSSK]

Well said Gma11!!! You speak for this 54 year old white woman who could not possibly have said it better than you. Thank you.