The Selfish Gene Is Female

With apologies to Richard Dawkins (author of The Selfish Gene), I have to point out a noticeable selfishness on the part of some Democratic women voters. When Hillary Clinton declared she was "in it to win", many women around the country felt a rush of pride and hope. As Senator Clinton progressed throughout the primary season, she galvanized women all over the country, who came out to work for her and vote for her.

But now that Clinton is not going to be the nominee of the Democratic party, we are hearing a terrible moaning and whining on the part of Clinton's women supporters, even to the point that some are saying they will not vote for Obama in the Fall. As much as many of us would have liked to see a woman President, it has become apparent that to insist on a woman candidate is mainly about "us" not about what the majority of Democratic voters may want or need. It is selfish of us to insist on a Clinton victory, and appalling to hear such women leaders as Geraldine Ferraro implying she might not vote for Obama because she is so disappointed that Hillary cannot win. A McCain victory would be anathema to the causes that Hillary Clinton has always supported like choice, a repudiation of No Child Left Behind, health care for all, and women's rights.

Selfish women like the ones who are grousing about Hillary's loss are precariously close to embarrassing our entire gender. If we can fight for a nomination as good or better than any man (and Hillary has fought as hard as any man would or could), then we ought to be able to lose as good or better than a man. That is, losing without pouting, without recriminations, without blaming -- the media, our opponent, men, etc. I so want women voters and Hillary Clinton to be exemplary losers. There is nothing to be gained now by this complaining and finger pointing. It has been over for months, and insisting on having Clinton fight to the finish is not only somewhat unique in political campaigns (most candidates bow out long before the so-called 'end'), it has been undoubtedly damaging to the fight against McCain in the Fall.

Clinton's argument that she can still win, as she has been proclaiming on the campaign trail for weeks, is completely incomprehensible to anyone who can count and dishonest to those who cannot. In order to overturn the long tradition of counting "delegates" as the measure of who is the Democratic nominee, Clinton would have to do a number of very damaging things -- to herself, her supporters and to the Democratic party. She would have to overturn an agreement she herself made not to campaign or count Michigan and Florida's votes; she would have to overturn the concept of using pledged delegates as the metric for victory and replace it with "popular vote"; she would have to convince 75 to 80% of superdelegates to change their votes or vote for her because of her version of an electoral map metric -- alienating not only the women who support Obama, but all of the other Obama supporters, who are more than half of the Democratic party at this point. Would that victory be worthwhile? Would that victory be a feminist victory? What would we have proved? Only that women are the most selfish of all voters.

Comments

[Bramptonian]

Nicely put.

[bluestatelib]

Thank you for this post. Some heavily emotionally invested Clinton supporters are understandably going through a rough time adjusting to Hillary's loss after such a long-fought campaign. To sink to baseless or exaggerated claims of sexism and to threaten to vote for McCain is not a productive response to this disappointment. Over time, more and more of her supporters will come to this realization.

[KarateKid]

Finally, a voice of reason. if women listen to Ms. Bergthold, you'll see a toning down of the vitriol, except from the ditto heads, who are easy to recognize.

There will be some who will not listen and vote for McCain, but that's life; some won't be able to let go, and some people just cannot bring themselves to vote for a black man. It doesn't make them racist in my view, it's not like they would go out and lynch a black person, they just don't feel comfortable, That's OK, it's a free country.

But, part of what election is about is to vote FOR something, not AGAINST. That is a waste of a vote and a sure path to a seat on the sidelines.

[kira181]

"The Selfish Gene is Female". No. Nothing sexist about that.

[sky2blue]

Did you read the post?

[kira181]

No, sky2blue. I didn't read the post.

But let me guess what it says:

a) Hillary should sit down and be quiet.
b) Hillary is Satan.
c) Women who are sickened by the sexism in this campaign are whiney and emotional
and should ...
d) Sit down and be quiet.

[ZinZen]

A voice of reason. Thank you Linda.

[mybelovedcountry]

nicely summarized....it will take an event of earth shattering proportions to hand the nomination to her

[honeychild]

Fantastic, fantastic article. I couldn't agree with you more.

[allonfla]

I have been so frustrated over these silly threats. Thank you for writing this article.

[SeriousBlack]

A voice of clarity and reason. Thank you Linda!

[grendl]

Wow, a voice of reason.

Nice article.

Theres two kinds of women, that play pool at the bar I occasionally frequent, those who will take any charitable act by some guy hoping to score points with them, who will take any ball that falls in the hole, who will giggle and dance around the table using it as a venue to spotlight their beauty, and magnificence.

They don't care about the rules, but want to play on a table where very good pool players play. That's Hillary Clinton, crying she didn't win the game in Iowa, ( for this country she said ). She cries sexism where there has been NONE. Not one iota.

And the second type of woman who plays at this particular establishment wouldn't accept a slop shot if you paid her. She wants to beat the boys, and girls on her own terms, a fiery Valkyrie who never bats an eyelash to win a game.

Shes the player I respect. Shes the player who represents the potential for real equality. The ditzy wilting lillies, no one really respects them, but they are tolerated for the eye candy they provide. And of course there will always be schmucks willing to bend the rules for them, and help them aim their shots, like Mark Penn.

[Magee]

Linda Bergthold's article is a well written and gentle nudge to encourage Hillary supporters to let go and get with the program. I applaud that. You undo the wisdom of her words with your vitriol about Hillary et al. Please, Please give Hillary supporters a chance to reach the right conclusion without beating them up. BTW, I certainly don't see Hillary as a "ditzy wilting lilly." Far from it.

[grendl]

"Selfish women like the ones who are grousing about Hillary's loss are precariously close to embarrassing our entire gender."

An excerpt from what i agree is a thoughtful well written article.

My post is aimed at the diehard supporters who only care that a women win, the ones like Geraldine Ferraro willing to watch another 4000 soldiers die because a female isn't occupying the White House.


Please dont tell others how to post.