I have to applaud many feminist for showing their courage and doing the right thing by backing Obama rather than mindlessly approving the first female candidate because she appears to be anatomically correct for the female of the species. Howard Dean has already talked to both of these candidates about the negative image that would be projected to the electorate if the party went into the convention split on an appropriate candidate. If Hillary does not succeed in any of the state primaries today, her future actions could very well set the stage for a Democrat victory based on her willingness to suspend her campaign and further the progressive cause or a Democrat defeat brought on by her single minded push for personal gain. I do not dislike Hillary and she certainly has the academic credentials to do the job, but she cut her political teeth coached by a group of people that tend to play fast and loose with the rules. As the people in Arkansas say, she"s not totally chicken shit but she does have some hen house ways !
Picking a President: A Feminist's Right to Choose
A few weeks ago, I had lunch with an old friend, a lawyer and a judge who has been a long-time activist in the women's movement. We discussed the exciting Democratic political field and I confessed, somewhat nervously, that I supported Barack Obama.
"I'm so glad," my friend blurted. "So do I." She explained that the decision to withdraw support from Hillary Clinton, the first woman with a serious shot at becoming president, had become so contentious that she had to refrain from discussing it with her women friends for fear of destroying relationships.
I was saddened by this, but not surprised. After all, hadn't I been nervous about expressing my own decision? But the division between women on this issue, coupled with anger and accusations of betraying feminism, is a serious one, not just for the presidential election, but for the women's movement itself.
In its earliest manifestations, the women's movement was never only about economic and professional opportunities, it was also about freedom of choice. We stood for a woman's right to break away from the stereotypes that defined and confined us. We spoke of the bonds that united women, our "sisterhood" and formed support groups to encourage and empower ourselves and each other.
But, inevitably, differences arose, and when challenged, many of us reserved our support only for those who agreed with us. When, in large numbers, mothers joined the work force and found substitute caretakers for their children while others decided to give up or put off careers and stay at home, an eruption of verbal fire sallied forth from both sides. I wrote an article about that development for Newsweek in 1990. We called it "The Mommy Wars", and it detailed the anger and accusations each group lobbed at the other.
What happened to supporting your sister's freedom of choice? It turned out it was often only evident when she chose what you chose.
The woman's movement has grown and transformed since the 1990's, but many of us still don't seem able to tolerate honest differences among us. We early feminists, those of us now in our '50s and '60s and '70s, need to realize that as we have matured so has the movement we champion. And a true sign of a mature movement is the recognition that there is room for more than one point of view. We have reached a level of empowerment where we no longer have to be governed by a kind of gender tribalism, and can, indeed must, think of the needs of our country as a whole. If a man is more compelling than a woman candidate, if he generates excitement and inspires idealism in a way that she doesn't, and if he runs for office with a women's agenda, we are not betraying our feminist credentials by voting for him. In fact, we are affirming them.
Just as we thought differently from the generation of women before us, young women define feminism differently from us. They have adapted the movement to the times and have moved to the next step in their empowerment. These young women are at the forefront of a new wave of feminism that includes the men who have embraced our arguments and believe in our goals. Progress is always in the direction of inclusion rather than isolation.
Both young men and young women have embraced Barack Obama in large numbers because they see in him the embodiment of the multicultural, forward-looking new world they inhabit. They believe that we cannot give up on politics and politicians, but that we must change them and they don't think someone who has been part of the old system can accomplish that as well as he can. And they no longer think that gender needs to determine justice.
We are older women. Many of us are mothers. It is time to listen to our children. It is their future we are deciding.
Nina Darnton, a former frequent contributor to the New York Times and National Public Radio and a former staff writer for Newsweek and the New York Post is now a freelance writer living in New York.
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
Hen House ways? ..........more hate! Wow so many hateful people in this world!
Your comment that feminists who support Hillary Clinton "mindlessly" is yet another example of the pervasive sexism in attitude and language. It is also one reason that Clinton supporters find it so difficult to support Barack Obama and to have an open dialogue with his followers.
I have written elsewhere (http://www.salon.com) on this topic, but will summarize here.
Women who support Hillary Clinton, myself included, are doing so because she of her experience, deep understanding of the challenges our country faces, and because of the judgment and wisdom she has used and will use to solve the crises we face.
We see her candidacy as a clear signal that finally the scales might be balanced to show the world that women can accomplish anything. She embodies for us the reality-based struggle for equality. We support her not because she "appears to be anatomically correct for the female species," but because of her lengthy record of public service to improve the lives of women, children, the elderly, the abused, and the disenfranchised.
Dismissing Hillary Clinton as "cold" or "calculating" or her "hen house ways" or the incredible pressure being applied for her to "step down" for the good of the Democratic Party simply proves that sexism is still very much alive and thriving -- even in the Democratic Party and among those who call themselves "progressives".
We, as feminists, long for a "post-feminist" political world, where gender will not influence the way we think, or act, or speak, or behave. Unfortunately and in reality, we are not even close to such an ideal, so long as women earn less than their male counterparts for the same work, do not have the same promotion and advancement possibilities, fare worse than men in our pensions and Social Security, face daily domestic violence and less-subtle but equally powerful verbal and emotional put-downs, and struggle to overcome engrained cultural bias and discrimination in the political landscape.
Hillary Clinton's candidacy and possible nomination will move us many miles closer to that "post feminist" ideal. It deeply saddens me hat so many women cannot -- or will not -- acknowledge this.
GO HILLARY!!!
She is the best BY FAR of all the candidates running.
WELL SAID MABELLE55 and thank you!!!
I do think women have the right to vote for who they want - and it's an important point - but why not do it in the voting box - why all this effort to gain more votes and put another woman down - the first woman who has EVER gotten this far - and what's with this need to write these kinds of highly defensive tomes on the how and why they feel they just must vote for Obama? How many votes do you want to influence? If it's so personal - keep it personal and let those of us women who still don't have the rights we deserve relish in this possibility for the first time in history. If not NOW then WHEN? This race is a classic look at exactly what happens and has been happening for my long lifetime - that same old corporate profile of "the man" coming in out of nowhere - being given that desireable and important job despite his lack of credentials, experience or history - while the woman who has worked in the grueling trenches - worked her b....t off and done WELL - NO - she does NOT get that job and just because she's a woman! It's classic!
I do my best to be tolerant and patient with these women who it appears to me are turning their understandible self-hatred on Hillary by needing to write some of these pathetic cries for mercy - but I admit - my best in this case isn't really working. I don't like it but no doubt - it's clearly part of our gender growing process! The best to all of us, including Obama - and CONGRATULATIONS HILLARY ON YOUR WIN IN TEXAS, OHIO AND RHODE ISLAND! :-) You're such a winner!!!! You've never given up and you're going to continue to MAKE A DIFFERANCE! You've worked HARD and YOU DESERVE IT! WE DESERVE IT!
mabelle55: That is incredible shallow thinking. You are going to support or not support a candidate based on how you like what anonymous posters post on a website? How about voting for the love of your country? How old are you?
You sound like a right wing Republican! That's all. Of course you're going to talk like this ObGyn! Who cares? We've had eight horrible years of it! It's OVER no matter who wins!!!
Here is a cold sober truth: HRC will not be the next POTUS. Even if Republicans listen to Rush and vote for Hillary in the primaries, and even if she somehow gets the nomination, THERE IS NO WAY SHE WILL WIN THE GENERAL. Here"s why:
1. Hillary is loathed by the Republicans and she will energize them to go vote against her.
2. Hillary has lost the Black vote. Period. The Clintons were polling 80% to Obama"s 20% among blacks till they played the race card.
3. The only people supporting Hillary are misguided feminists who are voting for her because of gender and nothing else. There are at least as many Democratic men (as there are pro-Hillary lesbians) who are outraged by Hillary"s behavior that they will stay home or vote for McCain.
I am astounded that many people do not understand the overwhelming enthusiasm Obama is generating. The only reason he is drawing the crowds is that OBAMA IS EVERYTHING REPUBLICANS ARE NOT. Period. No other Democrat who ran was so completely against everything Republicans stand for as Obama. It is not his race. It is summarized by his statement: "I don't just want to end the Iraq war; I want to change the mindset that got us into that war."
Mark my words, Hillary will never become POTUS.
YEAH - SHE WON OHIO, TEXAS AND RHODE ISLAND TONIGHT! What a winner!!! So you better watch those words your marking dude!
She "won" Texas but Obama will get more delegates.
How can feminists who have any compassion for women working in Chinese sweatshops still support Hillary Clinton, friend of the Waltons and former member of the Wal-Mart Board of Directors? I am a middle-aged woman, active in the movement since high school days in the late sixties, and I cannot support her.
Decades ago I had the opportunity to vote for a woman who became the first woman governor of the state of Washington. Sadly, I couldn't vote for her either. She is now widely regarded as an embarrassingly poor governor. During the campaign I endured criticism from many women who prefer to forget they supported her. Fortunately, we now have a female governor, Chris Gregoire, who may be the best leader Washington has ever had.
It's a crucial time in our country's history and I want the best person to be our president.
Hillary would be supremely competent as President, but she would still be the equivalent of a pre-Reagan Republican in Democratic clothing.
There are some really good points being made on this discussion, but I have to take major exception with anyone who tries to inform me what my reasons are for supporting Hillary. I am not a "misguided feminist" who supports Hillary just because she is a woman. Am I more compelled by Hillary because she is a woman, like me? Of course. There's nothing wrong with that. But that's not the only reason. But people have all kinds of reasons for supporting the political candidates they choose. You sound like you are incredibly threatened by her candidacy, which I find interesting given that it is pretty obvious by now that Obama will be the candidate. "Outraged by her behavior?" For heaven's sake, what are you referring to? What are you so angry about? I think it's really sad, not to mention ironic, that Democrats are getting so nasty and DIVISIVE with one another over the fact that we have two very strong candidates running against a Republican with a pretty weak support base. I will be thrilled if either one of these candidates wins the presidency. And regardless of how you feel about Hillary, it would be incredibly naive to think that there is no sexism at play here. Regardless of who wins, I think it is fantastic that we have reached a time where a black man and a woman can be viable candidates for the presidency. It would be nice if we could put away the "race card" and "gender card" and just celebrate that for a moment.
I think it's funny that black people are not divided in any way between the candidates anymore. Ninety percent of them are voting for their color. Period.
I think it's sad that women are not doing the same. Women are 51 percent of this population, yet we have NEVER had a woman in the top spot and we are so easily swayed by our male counterparts.
Women today earn 25 percent less income than a man in the same job on average.
Vote for Obama and help to keep it that way, or vote for Hillary and help women finally achieve equality.
Why does America have the highest incident of rape than any other country in the world? Because women just don't fight to change it. Go Hillary
I'm with you on that one! Black people "get it" and I understand it - I think it's cool that they have a strong sense of loyalty for how long and how arduous the struggle has been - but WOMEN have always lagged as a gender behind advances as it relates to race! So I don't get it either - why exactly don't at least most all white women get it? I understand that black women will probably want to vote for Obama - because they want to see advancement........but it amazes me that that so many white women don't unite and have a keen sense of loyalty as black people so obviously do...... I've known so many women who bottom line - just must have a man around to feel protected.......they just haven't come into their own yet and understand that they are equal - and strong - and capable of standing on their own quite YET.
People are not refusing to vote for a woman, they are refusing to vote for Hillary. We have so many woman in this country that deserve the job. Why aren't they running. Hillary is tired, devious and diabolic. The country has had enough of the Clintons. She blew her campaign up to now because of her ego; now she will do or say anything to win. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
Wow.........the hate is extraordinary here - AND IT SO CLEARLY has NOTHING to do with Hillary! Instead we see that roneckley is really an unhappy person and no wonder - it's a GOOD example of why we need a a WOMAN as President as a role model like HIllary to raise consciousness! WE DESERVE so much more than this..........Wow......such hatred here.........
I don't see any hate-filled language in roneckley's post, but I do in yours...
HRC is losing women because she is running an incompetent campaign. She was the shoe-in front-runner, but the insurgent Obama won the very first contest because Hillary was not ready on day one. Women rallied to her and gave her New Hampshire after she cried on TV. But for that fact, she would have been long gone.
HRC is losing because she is divisive and is alienating every Democratic demographic the more negative she gets. She lost the blacks because she showed racism, she lost men because she decided to run as a woman.
Then explain why the Clintons were polling 80% to Obama"s 20% among blacks before Johnson, Bill etc played the race card.
Then explain why white men are voting for him. No back door crutch for them. Just plain old fashioned reason and judgment.
Look it's one thing to support the message it's completely another to only support the messenger. Obviously the message is not what matters to you. It"s the "appearance" that female civil rights "moves forward"...
Once again. Thank you Nina for having the guts to articulate the importance of your vote.
It's amazing to hear that even judges can be spun into the wave of propaganda that has enswirled the Obama campaign, to include the staged faintings (conveniently within camera range of the candidate offering a glass of water) the oldest trick in the book, straight from the good old holy roller book of tricks...working people up into a frenzy, then having them see the power of it with people fainting...my my my ......Like I stated once before ...Oprah and Barack speaking like african american preachers from the pulpit.....its just like a sermon...invoking a popular leader MLK...(someone who actually did accomplish something, as Obama doesn't actually have anything to show that he has done)..will the gullible please unite...and they have!..........promises,wishes, hopes...all very untangible....with of course not one thing to back any of it up. Gee but it sounds good, and he speaks well.......the prophet, as has been said... the sky opens up and here floats down Obama with a halo over his head.....saying I want to do this, or we should want, or we will............. but NO I HAVE DONE this, or I have a plan to do this...........all fluff and no substance. In a important time of strife as our country is in at present , I don't want pipe-dreams, I want someone with a record of getting things done! sorry , but women like this are the reason women are not as loyal to their own gender as men are to their gender or african americans are to their race.
"we no longer have to be governed by a kind of gender tribalism, and can, indeed must, think of the needs of our country as a whole."
Thank you for realizing that this is much bigger than our own selfish desires. THAT is his primary message. We ALL have to grab a paddle and row so we all DESERVE a piece of this country. "Entitlement" is so played out and to the point that it has become comical. We can all find a reason to feel "owed".
Let's just take a high level look at the landscape and "see" for a "change".
This is the kind of argument made by people who enjoy all the benefits the union fought for, but now don't support unions. This is the kind of argument made by minority members who enjoy all of the freedoms that their forefathers fought for, but now distance themselves from that history. What the feminist movement did for the writer is unmistakeable, but now she distances herself from feminism. Ah, enjoy all of the good, take it for granted, but when it comes down to supporting a sister......later. Women are their own worst enemies.
Bravo, Jonny!
Far too many women -- like Nina Darnton -- shrug off "feminism" and an opportunity to make the world better for women (realizing, finally, the goal of a "post-feminist" culture) by falling for a pied-piper (male) who points to some land of Canaan, someplace over the horizon, and promises them they will be free and equal and have their dreams fulfilled.
Ann Richards used to tell a story about her daughter, who would come home all excited because she had met a new "guy" and was falling in love, and how "ga-ga" she was over this new guy. Then, in her humorous way, would give the punchline: "When she was little, my daughter loved the stories about the princess, waiting in her castle for the prince to come and carry her away. Well, today that prince is most likely to be some guy on a motorcycle or in a cool car, who comes to pick her up and take her off. But eventually the guy on the motorcycle or in that car loses interest or gets travelin' feet and is off to the next princess."
That's what we have in Barack Obama: the smooth guy on the motorcycle or in the cool car...
to Jonny38103: I'm old enough to remember when the feminist mantra was 'all men are rapists!'. If you don't agree that 'feminism' can evolve, are you advocating a return to that line of thinking? I'm sorry, but I'm with Nina on this one: it's great that 'feminism' has moved forward to the point that a woman can feel happy to vote for a male candidate who she feels will best advance her interests.
Both Hillary and Obama are excellent candidates. If you think one candidates stands out against the other - vote for them! If you feel, on balance, that they are both of equal merit then you (as a woman) may wish to vote for Hillary to advance 'your' cause. If you are African American you may wish to vote for Obama to advance 'your' cause. (If you're an African American Woman - d'oh!)
Either way, vote for whomever you think is best regardless of what the blogs, polls, and pundits tell you.
The author is not distancing herself from feminism, she is saying that feminism needs to evolve and become a more inclusive movement, one that tolerates diferences of opinion and respects them--if we fail to do this feminism will become so out of touch with the women it is supposed to represent (if it hasn't already become so) that it will die out.
Feminism is too important to allow this to happen, we still have too many things to do. We need to think about the future and how to create the kind of feminist movement that will attract both our daughters and our sons, people with new ideas, and from different walks of life, the same way that the civil rights movement attracted white people and black people, men and women, people from all backgrounds.
As long as the old guard stands there insiting that things MUST be done a certain way women, and men, will walk away in disgust.
Thank you so much!! I have had several of these conversations.
To be honest, I was an Edwards supporter first. Then I had to learn more about the "others". I came out of that process an Obama supporter and thus voted.
As time has gone along, I have seen more reasons - based upon fact - to know that I made the correct choice. For example:
1. The more pressure - the more Hillary flip-flops on issues
2. The more pressure - the more Hillary behaves like a child
3. The more pressure - the more Hillary seems to enjoy gutter tactics
I have spent a life-time trying to be a good example of gender equality and supported other women in their efforts to move forward. Anyone with that background knows that it is not enough to SAY "because I'm a woman" - you have to EARN the respect you seek.
I will continue to work for gender equality - but one thing is for sure, I will NOT support Hillary Clinton.
60 YOA, white, professional woman and an Obama voter - and proud of it.
Nonsense.
Why don't you judge Hillary by the same standard you judge the male candidates, because you're not currently doing that. You are holding her to a different standard than the other candidates. Did anyone come down on Joe Biden or John Edwards for their votes for the war? Of course, not. Why is Hillary being blamed for NAFTA when she wasn't actually responsible for signing it. Why is her healthcare plan being scrutinized for mandates when such a plan has been approved by so many independent economic experts as the most plausible solution to our national healthcare disaster, and Obama's plan - which independent economic experts has confirmed will leave 15 million people uninsured, receives no scrutiny.
Sexism is so ingrained in this society - it's pathetic.
Well, let's see...neither Edwards nor Biden are still in the race, and Edwards admitted the vote was a mistake, which is something it took Hillary a loooooooooooong time to do. Hillary isn't being "blamed' for NAFTA, but she's been an ardent supporter...until it was no longer fashionable to be a supporter i.e. she began a presedential campaign. Her healthcare plan is held to higher scrutiny because we've been down that road with her before...she was a champion of universal healthcare and she failed to get it pushed through. The stink of failure is hard to wash off, fair or not.
Why do Hillary's supporters believe that anyone who doesn't get in line behind her is sexist? Perhaps some believe she's actually a POOR CANDIDATE. Isn't that possible?
Right to choose??? but, then so many are pro life with no right to choose. If American courts decide in there infinite wisdom to reverse roe v wade then be prepared to pay more taxes to support thousands of unwanted pregnancies Right to choose? you can choose anything except how to run your own life, we need more crack babies right? or more of our young in prison right? well choose your candidate wisely and hope that the economy don't fall apart the price of fuel ain't done going up yet. and when no one has a job we are in a Depression . Recession? well yes a year ago at least. but, its not politically correct to say the truth anymore.
Touché.
Thank you for your support of Barack Obama and for this article. I too have waited my whole life for a woman to have a viable shot at the White House, but Hillary's behavior during this election process has left me witht he sound conviction: Senator Clinton is (Yes, I'm willing to go out on a Dixie Chick limb) an embarrassment to women, and for women to continue to condone her behavior and to continue to support her simply because she is a woman does more damage to our cause as women than it does to promote it.
As a single father of three young daughters - I thank god for the women's liberation movement that started when I was a youngster. But I don't think women or men should underestimate the devastating implications of the destruction of the family unit. Being a stay at home dad or stay at home mom is and always will be a full time job. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves. The notion that you (either a woman or man) can have it all - balance a career as a breadwinner and full time parent -doing justice to either endeavor in the process - is ludicrous. And we are seeing the results of this errant assumption - the highest prison population of any country on the planet, one of the worst education records of any industrialized country, and a huge increase in divorce and single parent households. I don't think the concept of women's liberation and traditional family structures are mutually exclusive. However, the stupid notions of the "me generation" that "you can do and have it all" are insane and simply not working. And the expectations of society have unfortunately shifted so that it is expected that both parents in a middle class household must work to get by financially - requiring that children at an early age be placed with and raised by daycare workers. If there ever was a barometer for the decline of society in general - you have it right here with this issue.
I would LOVE to elect a woman president. So would millions of others.
Just not Hillary.
Just not one that allowed Bush free reign to do what he did, without slowing him down one iota. She didn't want to appear "non-presidential." So instead she appeared to manipulate herself into what the polls told her might win. It is her lack of spunk in this regard, a lack of central conviction about where she herself stands, that deems her unworthy of a post that has seen seven years of manifold unworthiness.
Had Hillary voted for impeachment, I would be marching for her today.
. "If a man is more compelling than a woman candidate, if he generates excitement and inspires idealism in a way that she doesn't,"
Is that supposed to be an argument? I clearly recall that's exactly what we heard about GW Bush, as opposed to "boring old Al Gore". I certainly don't equate Obama to Gore, but the argument is the same.
I am excited to think that a woman candidate and an African-American candidate have both come so far. I
Posted March 3, 2008 | 04:04 PM (EST)