Maureen Dowd's Sexual Frustrations

by Taylor Marsh

Seriously, the woman is so sex obsessed and 1950s centric, it's hard to imagine such a retro feminist viewpoint in the age where the first viable female candidate for president is making waves and headlines. In Dowd's world, however, it's still all out for daddy or Rudy, in her case.

Once again, to Whiskey Fire:

The debate dominatrix knows how to rattle Obambi. ... ..

In MoDo's world, where strong women must be balanced out by weak men, the idea of a mutually strong relationship is unthinkable (which may be why Hill and Bill confuse her so much). I can see a similar dynamic with Michelle, who strikes me as less bitchy than funny and self-deprecating, realistic rather than idealistic about the person who shares her life, far from the doe-eyed adoration expected of your Jeris and Judis of the world.

And so Obama is a pussy, and Hillary a bitch: " The debate dominatrix knows how to rattle Obambi."

But Hillary will be crushed when faced with A Real Man, MoDo is sure. Or at least, a much less convincing cross-dresser. ... ..

Ms. Dowd wants her president locked and loaded, but if we're talking Hillary, please take away the magazine because a woman shouldn't be given the same toys of war as the boys. Why Dowd uses a sexual reference that connotes submission on the part of "Obambi" is another matter all together. That this man's supposed willing submission allows the dominatrix to play her part because he likes it evidently escapes the New York Times' old maid. Hey, if she wants to be back to the 1950s, well, so be it. That's what her daddy boys would have called her back then.

Dowd is stuck in the "Leave it to Beaver" past, while modern romance and now politics is finally moving on. Even her title, "Shake, Rattle and Roll," (at least she refrained from "Let's Roll!") further exposes her. Ms. Dowd's not so subtle slam at Clinton who dares to be equal, especially on those traditionally male platforms that has her using all angles to get the job done, is sister sexism at its worst. It's Dowd's unwillingness to acknowledge the huge hurdle involved in Clinton's campaign for president, rendering it to a dismissive Freudian fight that levels a woman once again to her sexual prowess, leaving all manner of intellect and cunning ignored. Dowd's preferred male counterpart, Mr. 9/11, is hoisted once again on a 20th century macho pedestal, as the intellectual male in the drama, "Obambi," is seen neutered. But not because of the female's unbounded talent, but because Obambi's a wimp, willingly playing the submissive role, according to Dowd's dominatrix juxtapositioning.

What this is really about is Dowd's throwback fetish for Republican tough guys and the old schoool John Wayne image of her preferred macho party, and Dowd's disdain for all things Democratic and intellectual, but especially any woman who dares tread on her traditional sensibilities that she might one day be rescued from her sexual frustrations. How dare Hillary! She could never pass Ms. Dowd's drooling Rudy muster. She and Chris Matthews should talk.

Other guys, like Rudy, wouldn't even be looking for a chance to greet Hillary, as Obama always does. Other guys, like Rudy, wouldn't care if she iced them. ...

If Rudy's the nominee, he will go with relish to all the vulnerable places in Hillary's past. At the Federalist Society on Friday, he had barely spoken the word "she" before the audience began tittering appreciatively. ... ..

Hillary has her work cut out for her. Rudy will not be so easy to spank.

Dowd is the other bookend to Camile Paglia. It's hard to know what to make of these screeching, shrill mud slinging merchants when it comes to Clinton. Dowd uses the term dominatrix to describe Clinton, implying willing submission by the men in a human drama she obviously doesn't understand, while Paglia chooses Diane Feinstein, a torture nodding senator from California who said yes to Mukasey. Dowd and dominatrix. Paglia and torture.

Isn't it interesting to see such supposedly strong females scared of one of their own getting the ultimate power post. So much for the era of "post-feminism" the conservatives are always shouting about. Clinton has clearly frustrated these grand dames of rhetoric. They're all tied up.

Comments

[Nonamnesiac]

The most recent Dowd article on Hillary was truly devastating -- and accurate -- pointing out clearly that Hillary's "accomplishments" are nearly wholly based on being Bill Clinton's wife, as opposed to her own record. Maureen pointed out that Hillary obtained her partnership in her law firm, her Senate seat and her "frontrunner" status based wholly on being Bill Clinton's wife. Dowd pointed out that had she not been Bill Clinton's wife, she would not be a New York Senator or a frontrunner.

The Clinton machine is going to hit her back hard for that article. This post by Taylor Marsh is just the beginning.

By the way, do any of you Hillary supporters believe Hillary would have been Senator -- and/or a frontunner for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States -- if she was not Bill Clinton's spouse?

I'm not asking for a diversion answer that glorifies her undistinguished career absent being Bill Clinton's wife, or that just because she's his wife doesn't mean she didn't do it on her own (hahahaha), just would she be there without being his wife.

From my perspective she's not nearly as bright as he is and is much more a warmongerer, perfectly willing to put my family, and other families like mine, at risk of losing family members or having them maimed in wars that are against U.S. interests because of her incredibly limited world view, blind ambition and a willingness to enhance her own career regardless of the number of lives and limbs get sacrificed so she can advance personally.

[dijo]

Taylor has been an outspoken supporter of Hillary, and that is fine. I am not, but I can respect that everyone will not have the same viewpoints.
I have one thing that I find curious about Hillary's supporters. They are downright nasty to anyone who does not support her. Ms. Dowd has the right to her opinions as much as Ms. Marsh does. Taylor is not the only HRC supporter who acts this way. What is up with that? Has anyone else seen this pattern?

[Bulbul]

I don`t know what`s with her but she is losing her skills. I used to subscribe NYT online just to read her column. Now it comes free and still most of the time I don`t even finish reading the full length of it .

[TyroneTanic]

MoDo has been a BTOC every since Michael Douglas kicked her to the curb.

[SamEllison]

I hesitate to say this because I like MoDo but when it comes to Bill and Hill it's like a woman scorned....(You know the rest)

[TommyMcCarthy]

In general I like Taylor Marsh....

Some times she makes no sense whatsoever....

This post is an example of the latter

tm

[klondiker]

Taylor, I rarely disagree with you, but on this occasion, I do.

1. Maureen Dowd is an equal opportunity critic. She disses Democrats just as often as she disses Republicans. Nobody gets a free pass from her.

2. Yes, she has a different approach to writing than most mainstream columnists, but I like it. Her column is as much about style as it is about substance. It's a political comedy of manners. Kind of like a Jane Austen meets Carrie Bradshaw. And that does not make it any less valid than a heavy, traditional column. Beneath the gloss and the wordplay and the puns, she actually has pretty solid insights.

3. With regards to the Hillary and Obama issue, I think her basic argument (as developed over several columns) is this:

- Hillary: it is sadly ironic that the first female candidate to have a real shot at being elected is someone who has made many compromises with her feminity and principles.

- Obama: a worthy, well-meaning candidate who has been too tentative and hesitant in taking on the front-runner.

It seems to me that there is a measure of truth to both these arguments.

(Btw, what do you think of Gail Collins, the other female columnist at the times, who recently joined? I like her stuff!)

[Lazslo]

I liked the Dowd piece. But I did not agree with her perception that Obama flip-flopped on immigration. In fact, he articulted a complex point quite well and did not flip-flop. But that doesn't read well in a piece centered on dominatrixes and cowering men at the feet of Hillary. Additionally, the cat calls from the Vegas audience against Obama and Edwards were Clinton staffers, so spare me the shuck and jive on that issue. As far as I know, not one vote has been cast yet, and so if I were Maureen Dowd, I would not be annointing Hillary just yet.

[arks]

Maureen Dowd went too far Sunday, but I find it amazing that the claws come out rather than the substance, and instead of addressing her on her merits or lack of them as a columnist, she's sexually frustrated? Looks like we have two cases of "sister sexism."

Someone mentioned Ivins. She spent her career fully functioning in a "man's world" without all the gender analysis about whether or not the men were letting her play equally. They didn't dare try it.

How anyone could read the following explanation she wrote last year of her refusal to support Hillary Clinton for president and still support Clinton is beyond me:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/20/ivins.hillary/index.html

[emjay1954]

MoDo's cutesy sexualizing of politics, as vapid as it may be, does nothing to make Clinton more worthy of support. If she is elected, the war will continue, health insurance companies will continue to control our health care, there will be no immigration reform, and there will be accelerated "globalization" with ever more catastrophic results for our economy. You'd never tolerate this from a Republican. Why tolerate it from a pseudo-Democrat?

[Countess]

People who go on and on about Mrs. Clinton's gender without any serious analysis of her consistent right wing positions are not to be taken seriously.

[onlymoments]

With such a sexy picture fronting your article it was very difficult to keep my concentration on what you were writing. Oh, my my! Ms. Dowd has written some interesting left-leaning columns in the past that I have enjoyed, however, her support of Rudy has me bewildered as she should know better based on his past. Hillary is in a no-win situation that she can actually overcome but will need to use every bit of cunning and skill she has. She's being judged by different and unequal parameters by those of her own sex. It's about who can do the best job, not who is the prettiest, who is the best talker, who is whatever. The perception is what counts and that is all there is, unfortunately. Maureen has my vote for the best looking old maid working for the NY Times. She wouldn't make a good dominatrix..Hillary on the other hand with boots and whip in hand...yes I can see it.

[lgillooly]

I am sick to death of Maureen Dowd also. Where have all the Molly Ivins' gone. Boy,do I miss her!

[Brainoverbraun]

Wow...you really missed the point. Why do American women get so threatened by a chick who is confidant and comfortable with her sexuality. I also notice Angelina Jolie continually taking shots for the dreaded sin of having been bisexual.

The point Maureen was making is that Obama has been an easy mark for Hilary - he has not risen to the challenge of her remarks but has seemed defeated by them on more than one occassion. His wife comes off as more masculine than he does.

The point Maureen makes is that Rudy (or whoever wins the Republican nomination) will not be so easy to "handle"

I think Hilary could be a great President but ignoring the gender issues that are a factor here will not make them go away. The US has huge issues with racism and sexism that will need to be resolved before equality is possible in your society. Maureen faces the world with an arsenal of sarcasm and ridicule - It may not work for everyone but I think she's great.

[OhPlease2007]

So Taylor, are you expressing that it is finally official that Hillary Clinton DOESN'T have a lock on the female demographic? ;)

LOL

-No worries Taylor; I think you are charming and a decent writer. You will be happy to know that even though I never agree with what you write, I am now a fan of your work here at Huff Post!

Have a great day Taylor! :)