Sisterhood's a bitch, isn't it? A friend e-mailed me recently as we wrestled with the vexing feminist question in the race for the Democratic nomination. She asked "am I a bad feminist if I don't vote for Hillary?" I shot back an estrogen-powered fusillade of arguments that began "No! SHE'S a bad feminist because....."
I wasn't always argumentative about this. I support Senator Clinton's policies, by and large, and I think she has been a diligent legislator who's won over unexpected congressional allies. But then came a compelling alternative, a candidate who I believe is more electable and less encumbered. That left me with the sisterhood dilemma: should I back a woman, no matter what? The answer was no, and in this, I was persuaded by two dear friends who, quite unexpectedly, slammed the Senator's feminist cred. Both of these friends influenced me in the biggest decision of my life, whether to have a baby. Now they can say they influenced me on another tough choice I had to make: who I wanted to be my son's first real president, the first he'll remember.
Maureen Dowd wrote in her latest Times column about the F word and speculated that perhaps some women will rally to Senator Clinton's defense in the face of attack, but my two friends are looking elsewhere, to Senator Obama. These women would seem at first glance natural Hillary constituents. They are both Upper West Siders, smart, liberal but sensible, and fervently supportive of other women in their lives and careers. I think of them as more second-wave feminist, though their age group would put them in the third-wave: they are unembarrassed by the word feminist, refreshingly lacking in irony, and earnest. One is Rachel, a Harvard-trained public policy expert; the other I'll call Beth, is a tenacious former journalist.
Beth sees a character issue in the whole Monica mess, and she's one of many I've heard this from. "I know I'm not supposed to judge people's private lives, but her husband did humiliate her repeatedly and publicly and after all these years I still ask, why did she stay with her cheating husband? Because she loves him so much? And that's what we women do, even the most accomplished among us, when we love a man? Or, did she stay with him because Hillary Clinton, the divorcee, didn't have a shot at becoming a Senator never mind a president. Either explanation reflects poorly on her."
This is part of what Rachel said about Senator Clinton. "While I naturally admire any woman who is a trailblazer and has gotten where she has in her career, I do feel like it's only because she was married to Bill that she's there. It's not like other women leaders who I feel got there on their own merits rather than on the coattails of their husbands."
The coattails disturb me, too. It bothers me that she seemed to pretty herself up and changed her name early in the Arkansas years, not to further even her own career, but to advance her husband's. And then I considered the idea of the boss' wife coming in to the workplace to make substantive changes, as Senator Clinton did as a new First Lady. Of course, a First Lady can have enormous power, but it is unelected power and there's a difference between advocacy and making policy, as she tried and failed to do with health care. All part of 35 years of purported unbroken "experience".
Beth and Rachel are not schadenfreude shrews. Beth said "I feel totally disloyal not supporting her... I'm not happy to watch her lose." I personally cringe when people call Senator Clinton a bitch, because as far as I can tell a male bitch is simply a hard-driving man. I'm horrified when people criticize her looks like she's running for America's Next Top Model. But I still don't want her to be the first woman president, one with an imaginary asterisk next to her name. I don't want to explain the whole drama to my son:
"Mommy, so....she's President Clinton. Wasn't there another President Clinton?"
"Yes, Frank, that was her husband."
"Oh. Is that's how she got to be President?"
The answer to me, unavoidably and unfortunately, is yes.
Since you have the magical ability to read their minds, I'm surprised you don't already know this.
You have a short memory, or are being wilfully blind. The black vote was actually supporting Clinton all the way through Iowa and NH... it was only right before SC that it turned to Obama because of the race-baiting remarks.
Blame the Clinton campaign - don't blame blacks.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/17/poll.blacks.democrats/index.html
We women will never get our "due" politically until we stick together and vote as a block for what we want. The men only give us so much and usually just enough to make us go away. Obama is as OhYeah08 has said, smiling, good looking, talks a slick line, good tan, but he is in the end a member of the boy's club and he will do their bidding, especially if he wants anything from them. I highly suspect, however, that McCain is the white boy's real choice in all this mess may prevail as the white boys almost always support "their own". I will not vote for Obama; this maybe the first Presidential election in which I "throw my vote away" - I may just write in Al Gore. So if I have to vote for a boy, then it will be one with credentials that only an ex-President can match or claim. Just remember, he was recently compared to JFK - I liked JFK and so did my father. BUT JFK was a womanizer, he is responsible for the mess in Vietnam and Cuba [for the most part]; inexperience can get you in the end. So unless Hilliary prevails, Al Gore it is.
It allows me to just judge based on the person's principles, the platform, and my sense of how well they could execute those plans.
I think it's almost sad that women are still even talking in these terms.
So 70s.
Geez, I had no idea! Guess I'll have to vote for McCain. But please don't tell me he's a transgendered woman. I'd have to kill myself.
I was happy to vote for Carter, Mondale/Ferraro, Dukakis happy to vote for Bill twice, etc.
It would be great to have a womman president. It would not be great to have another Clinton presidency.
He did a good job, but he -- and his wife -- shoulder a lot of the blame for the poisonous partisanship that makes Washington a parody of itself. I've seen this movie before ("vast right wing conspiracy," etc.), I have Clinton fatigue.
One more thought: the biggest thing Hillary and Obama have ever run is the same thing: their presidential campaigns. She started with all the advantages. He is beating her. He is running a better, smarter campaign. In the most significant test yet of their leadership and management abilities, she started with the advantage, and he has outmanaged, outled, outsmarted, and outcamapigned her. That has nothing to do with race or sex.
couple points i'd like to add. i am very much a self-hating third wave 'feminist'. it is not in my sensibility to be in the woman hear me roar thing. but im glad to have friends my age (and some older ones) who remind me of what came before and what many women still face. so i like to be reminded that supporting women is important to me, which it is. we are so behind other nations in electing women. our record is truly appalling.
that said, i want to make clear that i personally do not judge hillary for staying with her husband. but i know many many many women and some men who are disgusted by what they see as a faustian bargain she has made.
this is not what troubles me. what bothers me is that i do not believe she would be in the position she is in were it not for bill clinton. of course she is impressive. could hillary rodham made it this far? of course. but we only have the path she has taken not the one she could have taken and if she's going to be the first woman president i'd rather it be someone without the history of bill entangled in it. obama appeals to me policy-wise and i believe he will be able to move beyond the rancor of the past. it's not senator clinton's fault that she got saddled with this rancor, but there you go. it's there. why do you think the right wing radio wants her so badly? because they are terrified of a mccain or an obama. who will they be able to trash? and i will surely vote for hillary if she is the nominee. but if i have an alternative, and i do, im going to take it.
I vote with Rachel and "Beth" 100%. They speak for me exactly.
Jane (50 years old)
They are absolutely voting for Hillary. They can't tell you anything about her policies, or her voting history in the senate, but she is a woman...so she gets their vote. It bothers me, but I don't have the energy to keep arguing with them about it.
Typical of this year's democrats.
MSNBC had a poll stating that the two main responses for why republicans will vote for a candidate was: immigration and tax cuts.
Democrats main reasons were: gender (Hillary being a woman), and race (Barack being black). How embarrassing. I thought we were beyond that.
Are democrats so uneducated that we care more about race and gender instead of issues? Can someone explain why we are so fixated on "non-issue" issues?
1. Like many of you, I was devastated not only when Bush won the first time, but stunned the American electorate voted him in again. I keep a Bush countdown clock on my desk... 340 days and counting.
2. We have such exceptional choices this time. And from the discourse on these posts, the majority of us have come out strongly in favor of a particular candidate. Our decision is based on gender or race. This bespeaks our freedom of choice. This is not because we are a misogynist or racist. It is simply a choice, and like a woman’s right to choose... it is personal, and should not be dictated or bullied.
3. We need to come together in a unified front... for whoever finally fairly wins this nomination process. Yes, there is going to be enormous disappointment. But I suggest to you to reach back and remember how you felt when Bush was first elected. We cannot passively or resolutely allow the republicans to waltz into office again, on the rabble of our squabbling.
That all being said... vote for your choice. Do not belittle or begrudge another’s right to choose. Let the chips fall where they may... either Clinton or Obama would be exceptional compared to 8 years of the total devastation and blundering of the current administration.
Democrats main reasons were: gender (Hillary being a woman), and race (Barack being black). How embarrassing. I thought we were beyond that.
_____________________________________________
And you believe this MSNBC poll and think that most Democrats are really this shallow? These polls are pure bunk.
Relationships are a very personal matter and no one is married to the perfect spouse. Unless the relationship is obviously extremely abusive it is up to those in the relationship to make their own value judgments as to the worth of that relationship: it's not a good reason to vote for or against someone based on it.
> We'll never see a more qualified women run for president in our life-time.
I disagree here; there are many very qualified women out there and their number will no doubt continue to increase in your lifetime (unless your life expectancy is rather short).
They just don't understand that we haven't progress politically because we don't stick together and vote together, like all the black people are currently doing; which means we get pushed around politically, judicially and now have to endure all the sexism so open and prevealent in the media. AND until all these "independent" women [who conveneniently wall down the paths already trailblazed for them by earlier generations of women], we will always be at the mercy of those male politicans, who in reality are membere of the boys' club and will say or do anything to women to get what they want. If you want real change, they vote for the REAL CHANGE, vote for Hilliary. Barack is just another smiling, tall, good looking man with a slick pickup line and a wife who lets him "pimp" himself out to other women. I bet those who support him now will regret the morninig after; just like all the rest of the one-night stands.
Please read Joe Wilson's column in Baltimore Sun regarding Obama. There is link to it on HuffPost too.
Difference between Bush and Obama on foreign policy:
Bush wants to embrace Pakistan and bomb Iran.
Obama wants to embrace Iran and bomb Pakistan.
and of course McCain wants to bomb, bomb, bomb every one. His solution to illegal immigration is probably going to be let's bomb Mexico so there won't be ANY people who can cross the border.
The bullying will continue if we elect another boy to the White House. Let's change things for a fact and elect a new mind-set to the White House. The good old boys club needs to go under renovation for a while. :)