Kamikaze Kittens, Faux-Feminism and All-Or-Nothing Politics

Smart, progressive women, where are you? We've got to stop this prolonged, gender-driven tantrum. Shrieking "I wanna woman in the White House. Now! Or else!" solves nothing. And it could cost us more than the election.

In light of a probable Obama nomination, Clinton supporters, some of them writers, are saying the damnedest things:

"The Democratic Party has sent a signal to women that Hillary's candidacy is not historic...Try winning in November without them!"

"Obama supporters are sexist..."

"He called a woman 'Sweetie'!"

"If they cheat Hillary out of this nomination, I'll never vote for Obama! He's a MAN!"

And, in response to a plea from Barack Obama for his supporters to be nicer to Clinton supporters: "This is one Hillary supporter who will NEVER vote for the most Liberal Nut Job in Training Pants...I'll let you know BO if a black kisses my butt today! I still won't be voting for you!"

Irate women for Hillary threaten to organize. Nationwide. If Obama wins the nomination, they say they'll do far worse than simply refusing to vote for him, they'll start a new women's movement to keep him out of the White House. Clinton Supporters Count Too and Operation Turndown are revving their engines like wild-eyed NASCAR drivers on a Sunday afternoon at Talladega.

To be fair, there are Obama women prattling like menopausal nutcases, too:

"All you: sore, losing bigotted [sic], ignorant butt holes can kick the biggest rocks you can find!"

"We don't need you [Geraldine Ferraro] adding to the divide in the party. If you are not going to support the democratic nominee and feel McCain better represents your values, then leave the party and shut the hell up!"

Obama women are angry about the tone Clinton supporters have taken, outraged to find themselves accused of being "traitors to the cause" and "betrayers of all women" because they support a man for president. But there are far fewer of them screaming and they are more likely to support whichever Democrat wins the nod. They're more apt to see ending the war, having access to affordable health care, education, the economy, the environment and civility in political discourse as primary objectives. Since Clinton and Obama are equally committed to women's reproductive rights as a private matter--between a woman, her husband, her doctor and her God--they don't see why the woman in the race must, absolutely and irrevocably, trump the man. Obama women, in the main, are not gender-driven. They didn't choose to support the senator from Illinois because he's a man, and they won't support Hillary Clinton because she's a woman.

I'm an Obama supporter. This Women's War worries me. The attention given the most vitriolic women on either side of the Clinton/Obama debate worries me. Those are not the women I know. These are:

Betty, eighty year old retired newspaper editor; South Carolina:

"I'll tell you what I told [a journalist] who came to interview me fifty years ago because I was the only woman editor in the state at that time: She asked me how I felt competing against men, and I told her that's just what the job had me doing. She asked if I was a feminist and I said, 'Listen, I love my husband and I love my son. I am in no way against men. I'm against women being underpaid when compared to men, being held down instead of being promoted to executive positions. So, that makes me a feminist, doesn't it?'

"I think what a lot of us were hoping for is that Hillary could become president. But that doesn't make me 'against' Obama...I'm a Democrat...both candidates are so much better than McCain, there's just no contest in my mind. I'll vote for the Democrat."

Lynne, thirty-eight year old college administrator, wife and mother; Florida:

"Am I a woman first, or an American first?...the reason I am allowed to vote is because I am an American citizen and, presumably, because I want what is best for my country...in every election it is my responsibility to vote for the candidate I believe will best lead our nation. If I fail to do so--regardless of the gender of the candidate--then I betray myself, my beliefs, and the other citizens of my country by failing...to make what I believe to be the best choice.

"I do not deny that it is because of feminists that women have made such great strides in the past fifty years. At this point, though, it has been proven that women can compete quite well with men. It is only a matter of time before a woman becomes president...and I'd rather wait for the right one than jump for the first one...I'm a woman with a mind of my own. I acknowledge that the actions of others made it possible for me to be where I am...I am grateful, but I don't feel beholden to push past progress into reverse discrimination. In any arena."

Tananarive, novelist, screenwriter, wife and mother; California:

"I'm a black woman--so I'm in a different position. I have attributed the greatest hurts and slights in my life to my race, not my gender...while the significance of Hillary's gender has never been lost on me, and I definitely felt pride in Geraldine Ferraro when she was on the 1984 ticket--I am not torn about Obama's nomination. Quite the opposite: I'm thrilled by it. I'm thrilled for all the aging civil rights activists of all races and genders who literally ducked gunfire--like my mother, Patricia Stephens Due--for causes like voting and gaining access to jobs, public restaurants and bathrooms only a generation ago...the same decade Barack Obama was born.

"However firm the glass ceiling may be fixed in place for women, the fight against racism has been so dominant in my experience that I am a little perplexed at the way some Hillary supporters seem convinced that a black man would get a fairer shake at the nomination than a white woman. Still, I know full well that if the candidates' positions were reversed, many blacks all over the country would be saying, 'See! A black man never had a chance.' I might well be one of them.

"These were two extraordinary candidates during an extraordinary time. The reasons for the outcome are many, and seem to have much more to do with organization and a generation gap than sexism. One won, one lost.

"What if there's no deeper significance than that?"

Gail, mid-fifties; Illinois:

"It's the message, not the messenger! All I want are issues important to me to be addressed, and my viewpoint represented fairly. I don't care about the face of the person who does that. Unfortunately, I would expect Clinton to give more weight to the interests of big business than mine. I like business, I even like big business, but I don't like them getting government bail-outs and corporate welfare...[welfare] which, we're told, [is] a really Bad Idea for everyone else. I want a level playing field.

"Someone who sees herself to be the victim of gender bias may be (too) quick to see gender bias in others. [The] same with religious bias, race bias, age bias, education bias, working mother bias, occupation bias...it's not just the lens we see others though, it's a magnifying lens."

Laura, 37, mid-level corporate executive, grad student, wife and mother; Washington, D.C.:

"I grew up in post-modern feminist society. I enjoyed the benefits of Title Nine, Affirmative Action, increased gender parity in the home and workplace.

"While I have experienced my share of sexism in and out of the office, I know that my experiences are not the same as my mother's generation, or even women 10-15 years older than I. As Senator Obama said in his speech on MLK Day, 'I stand on the shoulders of giants!' As true as his words were for a progress we've made in race issues, the same is certainly true for the benefits I reap as a woman.

"...I believe I am typical of my generation in that I do not feel a compulsory loyalty to the female trailblazers of the past. I am grateful for what they've done, but they do not have the right, nor will I give them the power, to dictate my vote."

Carol, late forties, respiratory therapist; Illinois:

"My basic nature is that of strategist. Challenges present me with the opportunity to review the content of my personal 'tool box', accessed for fixing things. Given that our nation's challenges are vast and often high-level, I examine the perceived 'tool boxes' of those running for the office of POTUS.

"POTUS is not a gender-driven issue for me. Neither is judge, doctor, carpenter or auto mechanic. MSM is emboldened in fanning the flames of gender divide while race talk is tippy-toed and 'white-gloved' as a risky venture with potential loss of advertising dollars and viewership. MSM's current blow-up of gender-divide amounts to we, as women, being safely 'had' as water cooler fodder. I'm an Obama volunteer, still feminist, and especially love Michelle Obama's example of being a contemporary empowered female.

"Any Clinton supporter who vows to support McCain over Obama is misplacing her anger. It's 'safer' to be angry at the DNC or the...primary opponent. The harder task is to self-analyze their own campaign's strategic errors.

"It would be the greatest betrayal [of] all women to demand an all-or-none loyalty with an all-or-none strategy, giving an all-or-none result. Coercion through threat of emotional meltdown and 'October surprise' is not a true feminist trait, is it?"

These are the women I know; they're bright, thoughtful, reasonable. They are representative of thousands, millions, of us who are strong women, feminists, hard working citizens, daughters, wives and mothers. Surely we outnumber the either/or crowd?

I raised three kids back in the day. I know a temper tantrum when I see one. I've seen my share of toddlers, furious because they've been told they can't have that ice cream cone they covet right this minute go kiddie-crazy with wild rage and batter their own faces or bang their wee little heads against the wall. Or hold their breath until they turn blue. The message? "If I can't have what I want I'll show you! I'll kill myself! Then you'll be sorry!"

Too many women, on both sides of the Democratic gender divide, are falling prey to the Bush/Rove "You're either with us or you're with the terrorists!" mindset. It smacks of a threat; the suicide bombing of the Democratic Party at the worst possible moment. Sadly, Clinton women seem to be the most willing to blow up the entire building if they can't have the front office.

This Kamikaze approach is nothing if not a disaster in the making. Feminism is about equality, about equal opportunity, equal respect, equal pay for performance in the workplace. The devolution of equal rights for women into a nasty, fist-flinging, name-calling temper tantrum is not feminism. It's self-destructive. It's an embarrassment. Worse, it may be indicative of a level of ugly immaturity that makes a mockery of a long, noble struggle for the rights of all women. And that's the worst kind of sexism.

Comments

[luckismine]

Well written, Linda. You are rapidly establishing yourself as an elderstateswoman of the Democratic Party.

[ButterflyWeed]

My hope is for the transition of the remaining HRC supporters into Impeach Bush/Cheney and End the War activism. Anger is a useful tool when rightly placed.

[ClareP]

Thank you. I have been extremely frustrated at the constant talk about Clinton's p-o'ed women supporters who are sure she has been defeated only by sexism and are going to practically riot and refuse to vote (or vote republican). The press acts and speaks as if they genuinely represent all women-- saying nothing about the large numbers of women who support Obama and are appalled by this reaction. There is no talk of the also large numbers of women who supported Hillary but get that this isn't about sexism, that she lost because there were legitimate reasons for people to support someone else over her, and that the election isn't about electing a woman, any woman, but about taking back this government from a destructive and dishonest administration and doing what is best for the country. I think reasonable progressive women, who are not ranting hysterically as these women are, need to do something to band together and be heard.

I also agree that these women are not genuine voices for true feminism, but an embarrassment that reinforces the stereotypes and sets us all back- and that's why they're getting so much attention from the media. The degree of irrationality and vitriol coming from that direction are truly frightening. It has become impossible to hold an actual dialogue with them. They have genuinely turned themselves into "scary women," and not in a strong sense- more in the Medea & Lady Macbeth mode.

[LeviCro]

you know Im with you on this one.. Im a big fan of women.... I like how they think.. how they are... and Ive seldom seen the legendary bitch side.. till now that is.. the tantrums ive seen would do credit to a two year old.... sheese.... sexism? you gotta be kidding... not this time.. sure Ive seen it before.. it exists.. I know it does... and it sucks.. just like all the isms out there.. thats why Im shocked that HRC has pulled out all the stops and went after racism.... you would think SHE of all people would have empathy for isms.... but noooooooooo....... and now all these tantrums... Im very sad..... very very sad....

[RKWM]

THANK YOU LINDA!!

I was a delegate to the National Women's Convention in International Woman's Year in Houston in 1977. I have never been more appalled or more ashamed in my life.

Hillary Clinton from as far back as New Hampshire has acted out EVERY negative stereotype that ever existed for women in this nation. From the weepy sympathy plea, to the naggy, ranting finger shaking 'shame on you' to the attempts to out macho the warhawks with the threat of OBLITERATING other women and children of this world Hillary has played to every stereotype of emotionally driven irrational female ever created.

Feminism was never meant to be a synonym for "Female". It has always meant far more than that. We knew, back in the day, that it NOT involve all women.

Feminists were thought to be essential to the political process in that they were believed to be competent and capable women who would NOT paint themselves as men in a pantsuit but rather bring something uniquely feminine to the table. At the core of these gifts were 1) a profound sensitivity and commitment to fair play for all mankind; 2) a unique and refreshing committment to truth and accuracy; 3) a creative and new approach to diplomacy that sought win-win solutions to the problems of the world.

Having breasts was not all that it took to earn feminist street cred! All women were not automatically presumed to be worthy of our consideration or .......

(cont'd in reply)

[RKWM]

support for political office. We sought women who showed feminist strength -- a calm, rational, loving, fair and honest strength that rose above the rauchy, boisterous, threatening, pissing match machismo that men so frequently brought to the political arena.

WE wanted to change the politics NOT merely the legislation! WE identified the need for our government to be inclusive of people of all types. WE identified the need for level headed individuals who could seek lasting peaceful and MUTUAL resolutions to the conflicts of the world.

I suppose Hillary must have been sitting it out somewhere in those days---as women marched through the streets in protest not only of the gender of the legislators but also in protest of their temperment and self aggrandizing approaches to the government. YES -- we SYMBOLICALLY burned bras but those bras were emblematic of the BOX that we were being told we had to think inside of in order for our worth to this nation to be validated. We burned the constraints. We burned the notion that women had to conform to standards of behavior that were not natural to us.

It was NEVER about changing the sex of tyranny it was always about ending the reigns of the tyrannical.

Hillary has turned her back on each and every core principle of feminism while telling women that this would be in their best interest. While shoving an 'ends justify the means' argument down our throats.

(still more in reply)

[RKWM]

(cont)

She has referred to herself as a "Paulette Revere" in an effort to illustrate that she was a voice trying to warn of impending disaster. Has she forgotten the names of Abigail Adams? Did she not know who Elizabeth Cady Stanton was? What about Angelina Grimke or even the oft invoked Susan B Anthony?

Here was a moment in history where a woman---who at that very moment was standing on the shoulders of literally hundreds of thousands of women with hundreds of historical lauded women to select from and Hillary--being of sound mind --- chose to feminize a male name to make her point as though no woman in history would do for her. As though the accomplishments of these women were not worthy illustrations of her point. As though only the mental imagery of a man would be adequate.

I was ashamed. I remain ashamed. A win for Hillary is putting teats on a bull! It is NOT a feminist victory!

[cincyr]

I remember my sister-in-law telling me she got out of a speeding ticket by crying. I admit that when I want to get my point across to my husband I cry. He knows that. But we're talking about the next President of the United States. This looks bad. Let's keep cool heads and follow the rules. That's what we're asking for in the work place, right? Equal pay, equal rights? I don't believe that sexism in the media led to a deficit in Clinton's delegate count.

This does not bode well for future female candidates for the Presidency. Clinton is a lawyer and we know there are lawyers who win court cases by pointing to the law or previous court decisions. And there are those who use emotional arguments to win their case. I hope she will lean on the side of the rules that she signed off on and leave the emotional arguments aside.

[goldstategirl]

No young girls of ours should think it's OK to lie 4 times in press conferences and TV interviews about dodging sniper fire--particularly when CBS news cameras were there to show you didn't.

She lost me there because even though I'm willing to accept sometime people lie--especially politicians--some lies are just too dumb to tell.

Based on her mismanaged campaign and the awful tone of her surrogates, as well as herself, she's not a good choice for president. I look forward to voting for a woman, but not this one. You didn't see blacks rallying behind Alan Keyes, Jesse Jackson, Carol Braun, Al Sharpton or any other blacks who've run for president.

Really, Barack Obama's as much white as he is black so to some he's not even "black," but mixed. I don't care. I just care that he's a smart, very well-experienced elected official--more than 8 years State Senator and 3 Federal--who's run a great organization and has a great record with women's rights. Those present votes helped to push through protections for women and avoided further delays. Plus he came to South Dakota'a aid when ladies faced with a women's repro/health threat.

Had Clinton taken her campaign seriously as him--and not floated on inevitability, entitlement--she'd be the nominee now. But she did not even have a plan past Feb 5, and despicably trying to change rules now. We can't stand for this. Let's teach our kids better.

[DIdaho]

What's really worrisome to me as a long-time (albeit male) feminist is that the comments play straight into the stereotypes those making them would presumably want to avoid. They sound unreasoned, hysterical, selfish, hateful and spiteful. I have no problem with a woman as CEO, or as President, but I would never want anybody, regardless of gender, to make an all-or-nothing demand on any issue based solely on sexism and then blame everybody else simply because they don't get what they want. The women doing this are setting back the cause of feminism by half a century.