Oops! She Did it Again: An Open Letter to Gloria Steinem

Posted January 10, 2008 | 10:43 PM (EST)



stumbleupon :Oops! She Did it Again: An Open Letter to Gloria Steinem   digg: Oops! She Did it Again: An Open Letter to Gloria Steinem   reddit: Oops! She Did it Again: An Open Letter to Gloria Steinem   del.icio.us: Oops! She Did it Again: An Open Letter to Gloria Steinem

In discussing the train wreck that has become Britney Spears, the headline "Oops, she did it again," (a reference to her 2000 hit song of the same name) has been used so much by the tabloids to describe her increasingly bizarre behavior that it has officially peaked to the point of cliché.

And yet "Oops She Did it Again" seems to be the perfect phrase to describe Gloria Steinem's recent New York Times Op-ed titled, "Women are Never Frontrunners."

Let me start by saying that on my very humble wall of fame in my very humble apartment, I have a framed photo of the time I met Gloria Steinem. Like many young women I consider her a feminist icon. So reading her much ballyhooed Op-ed and seeing just how far off the mark she was, was somewhat akin to when you have that first grownup realization that your parents are only human, and as humans are often just as prone to being wrong as everybody else. In the case of Ms. Steinem her Op-ed was yet another reminder of just how wrong, well-meaning, well-intentioned white liberals can be in their attempts to serve as moral authorities in our country's ever-evolving dialogue about race.

The primary question posed by Ms. Steinem is this:
Could a half-African, half-white woman with only a few years of experience in the United States Senate and two small children be considered a viable candidate for the presidency? The answer is obvious to Ms. Steinem. Absolutely not. Her gender would make it impossible. Ms. Steinem uses this hypothetical assessment as the springboard to opine at length about the inherent unfairness in the fact that a female version of Barack Obama would never have enjoyed the meteoric rise that he has. The moment I read this overly simplistic analysis, I knew that we were in for a bumpy ride.

To be clear, I agree with Ms. Steinem's fundamental point. She is right that a hypothetical female candidate with Mr. Obama's story and credentials might not be considered as viable a candidate. But I would argue that this is not simply because she is a woman, but because she is a black woman.

A new report out by Catalyst notes that white women in corporate America not only out-earn, their African-American female counterparts, but ascend higher and faster, in greater numbers than black women--numbers that cannot simply be accounted for in terms of population demographics.

Historically the feminist experience between black women and white women has been viewed through very different lenses, based on their very different American experiences. While some white women were treated as property by their husbands during the 19th century, most black women were property, and often the sexual victims of white men. (For anyone who ever wondered, that is why we, as black Americans come in so many different colors, from Vanessa Williams vanilla, to Denzel Washington chocolate). While white women struggled with second-class citizenship in the early 20th century, black women worked to help white women keep their homes and raise their children--becoming the first "working mothers" long before the feminist movement popularized the term in the 1970's and 80's.

So while I have great respect for Ms. Steinem, her Op-ed demonstrated an extraordinary level of naivete regarding the differences between the black experience in America and the white female experience; a level of naivete that only a white woman of privilege could. For instance, she notes that black men received the right to vote before white women. What she forgets to mention is that for decades many of those black men could not actually exercise that right because attempting to do so could result in death--and did many times.

Ms. Steinem writes, "I'm not advocating a competition for who has it toughest." That's good. She shouldn't. Because there is no competition. Speaking as someone who has both ovaries, and a God-given tan, I can personally tell Ms. Steinem that she has no idea just how tough it can be.

While I was disappointed by her Op-ed, I'd be lying if I said I was surprised. The feminist movement wasn't particularly known for its multi-cultural paradigm, and "Women are Never Frontrunners," was merely a continuation of a limited perspective.

What can I say? Besides simply, "Oops they did it again."

Comments for this post are now closed

 
 

Comments
63
Pending Comments
0

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

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
- melakfilms See Profile I'm a Fan of melakfilms permalink

I'm a Hollywood writer who has, because of the strike, too much time on his hands. I have read both sides of Keli's argument and I have come to the conclusion that Keli is, by far, hot enough to be right. Actually, I don't care what the argument is, Keli, by default, is correct. Just out of pure hotness.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:12 PM on 01/14/2008
- isis See Profile I'm a Fan of isis permalink

Hillary and Gloria are tired old warriors. We can only hope for a new day to dawn. Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:37 PM on 01/13/2008
- brooklyncitizen See Profile I'm a Fan of brooklyncitizen permalink

This is a great post and completely on target.
The Steinem editorial is a reflection of how whites no matter how well intended will not acknowledge their white privelege.

If anything, the Hillary campaign has been STRONG from the start when all the media told us she would be THE Dem candidate, no holds barred. Like it or not. THere have been no pejorative commentary towards Hillary certainly not from the Obama camp, about her gender. Zilch. THis is because people are comfortable with a white woman POTUS; just that many of us do not want THAT woman.

Obama on the other hand has been attacked on his race from DAY ONE.By Fox News who Obama boycotted; by the Clinton Camp and their staffers, all on his race, religion,ethnicity, and degree of blackness. Race in America is the trump card. Yet he is a golden child much like Tiger Woods, someone of enormous talent and ambition who will not be defined by simplistic stereotypes.

More to the point, black women have been running for POTUS for decades. One in particular was rather stellar: Shirley Chisolm. None have been taken seriously and most have been forgotten.TO say that their race and gender didn't play a role is preposterous.

Any book by bell hooks will shed light on this subject.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 PM on 01/12/2008
- Lisette See Profile I'm a Fan of Lisette permalink


Gloria Steinam -- Much ado about nothing!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:56 PM on 01/12/2008
- weddedgay See Profile I'm a Fan of weddedgay permalink

Both Ms. Steinam and Goff are shedding too many 'oh poor me' tears. I say to both of you it is time to get off the cross, somebody else needs the wood. Look to the model of Sen. and Ambassador Carol Mosley-Braun and you will see that she made and is both female and African-american.

If you really want to prejudice and bigotry in action, make your hypothetical a lesbian.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:48 PM on 01/12/2008
- Kansas Evans See Profile I'm a Fan of Kansas Evans permalink

In case anyone cares, Steinem would agree with Goff's assessment.

http://www.alternet.org/stories/73545/?page=entire

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:44 PM on 01/11/2008
- WintonyMay See Profile I'm a Fan of WintonyMay permalink


Ms. Goff:
I totally agree with your analysis, especially since there is patently a great deal more to Obama's resume than "half-African, half-white . . . (man) with only a few years of experience in the United States Senate and two small children." As a hypothetical, the quoted facts are sorely deficient.
Your observation is on the mark. Thanks.
WintonyMay.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:56 PM on 01/11/2008
- RAMHaiti See Profile I'm a Fan of RAMHaiti permalink


Dear Ms Goff,
I grew up in the States but have lived in Haiti long enough to know that the greatest tragedy of the "Black Experience" in the United States is "loss of Culture". The wiping out of African culture from Black people in the United States was so effective, that most people aren't even aware that the program exists.
You're attacking Gloria not because she's wrong, but because you've decided to identify with your race, rather than your gender. Its a noble choice many people will be making in the near future. Some Whites will be "going White" and some Blacks will be going Black".
One thing you should keep in mind though, Gloria is for real, Obima's a phoney.
Respectfully yours,
Richard Morse

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 PM on 01/11/2008
- Kansas Evans See Profile I'm a Fan of Kansas Evans permalink

Keli, I completely agree.

I don't think your blog was about who has it worse, but that Steinem was wrong in her analysis. And she was.

Let me add, some of the analysis on the effects of race/class/gender are absent fact. Though, I think part of Obama's charm is that his candidacy allows white voters to pat themselves on the back, ie post-Iowa, without a real commitment to neither race nor gender nor class equality. When Bill Bennet comments that Obama's win in Iowa is good for America, you know there's something amiss.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:15 PM on 01/11/2008
- DavidByron See Profile I'm a Fan of DavidByron permalink

If you look at such things as education and life expectancy (these are the two criteria usually used to judge quality of life) the order from most privileged to least goes:

White women
White men / Black women
Black men

White women live about 5-7 years longer than white men or black women and black men trail both of those by the same amount again. Similarly with education. Similarly with a lot of other very important criteria such as how the criminal system deals with people, or how much health care people get.

Of course there's nothing the slightest bit representative of their group or normal about Clinton or Obama. It's ridiculous to talk about what groups are represented when the truth is they are almost all representing the rich and powerful.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:46 PM on 01/11/2008
- JFaye See Profile I'm a Fan of JFaye permalink

The "viability" of Senator Obama's bid for President of the United States is because of his ability to bring together a broken America. Obviously, Gloria Steinem's comments as well others who attempt to compare Hillary's experiences, exemplify a willingness to oversimplify a complex issue and confuse race as well gender in the process.

From what I recall most of the Reagan years was Mr. Reagan's ability to appoint smart people under his leadership. I imagine Senator Obama's natural ability to incite people to work towards a common goal, will result in him following this example.

I admire the heck out of Hillary, yet the war in America must end. The Bush/Clinton/Bush cycle however has worn me down.

How much of an example is this post for Clinton's innate ability to polarize and divide?

America is hungry for change and regardless of race or gender, whoever can address this hunger is a viable candidate for president.

The experiences of women, black and white, in this country are very unique, respectively. For us to began a battle of who had it worse, is fundamentally retarded...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 PM on 01/11/2008
- SeanGardner See Profile I'm a Fan of SeanGardner permalink

"A new report out by Catalyst notes that white women in corporate America not only out-earn, their African-American female counterparts, but ascend higher and faster, in greater numbers than black women..."

I agree. And while many in the press rail against "racial preferences", it must be noted that white women are the majority beneficiaries of affirmative action in both employment and education. This is not supposition, or conjecture, or even emotionalism. Its true, and government and corporate reports confirm this.

So when the press says "Women and Minorities", what it should really say is, White Women and Minorities" because black and latino women are not counted as women, they are counted as black and latino.

I support Affirmatice Action, vigorously in fact. But the facts are the facts about who benefits the most, and while most white people don't benefit from it, it is truthful to say that more white benefit from it than anyone else.

Thanks for a great post Keli. Hope to see you on the HUFFINGTON again real soon.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 PM on 01/11/2008
- AnninCA See Profile I'm a Fan of AnninCA permalink

I completely concur with a great many of these responses.

Most of all, I think a blog that seeks to compete about who is the more "victimized" is the blog of a very immature writer/person.

Rethink, please.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 01/11/2008
- SeanGardner See Profile I'm a Fan of SeanGardner permalink

Yes, Gloria Steinam was pushing "gender unity" this week as an obvious surrogate for Hillary. Ok, Steinam supports Hillary. That's her right. But in the groundbreaking 1984 book "WHEN AND WHERE I ENTER: The Impact of Black Women on Race and Sex in America", author Paula Giddings takes Steinam to task for not supporting Shirley Chisolm over McGovern in 1972.

This is significant because the Honorable Shirley Chisolm was a member of the House of Representatives, who was the first African-American to run for president in this country. At the time, Steinam was the star of American feminism, and pushing it hard. So many black and white female activists (who were supporting Chisolm) were shocked when she supported McGovern for the presidency.

And in the past few days after Steinam's article, many older black women were asking, "Where was your feminist pride when Shirley Chisolm ran for president? Are you supporting Hillary because of gender AND RACE (or simply because of "gender unity" which you had a chance to do in 1972 but passed on it)?

Put your ears to the ground on this one, because its going to bubble to the surface. And I for one would like to see Gloria Steinam explain this one.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:08 PM on 01/11/2008
- AnninCA See Profile I'm a Fan of AnninCA permalink

Forgive me for asking the obvious, how could you possibly claim that you know one experience is more severe than another?

This is just another "I'm the bigger victim" blog.

God bless you.

That's a really, really wierd mind-set.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 01/11/2008
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in


 
 
Bloggers Index›
Read All Posts by
Keli Goff›