Pages

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Not About the Election

I've got a favor to ask you, dear reader. I ask that you read this next article, not as it pertains to the specific election that is occurring in the US right now, but as a general view of gender politics in the US. If you have read this blog for long, you realize I am not a huge Clinton supporter (and the article has been edited to remove some of Steinem's views on Clinton specifically, rather than just a statement of gender) and the italics are mine because gender rights are only one set of rights I am concerned about and committed to. All that being said, I'm still not a huge Clinton supporter ~ but this article spells out why I wish I could be.

Women Are Never Front-Runners

By GLORIA STEINEM

Published: January 8, 2008


THE woman in question became a lawyer after some years as a community organizer, married a corporate lawyer and is the mother of two little girls, ages 9 and 6. Herself the daughter of a white American mother and a black African father — in this race-conscious country, she is considered black — she served as a state legislator for eight years, and became an inspirational voice for national unity.

Be honest: Do you think this is the biography of someone who could be elected to the United States Senate? After less than one term there, do you believe she could be a viable candidate to head the most powerful nation on earth?

If you answered no to either question, you're not alone. Gender is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House. This country is way down the list of countries electing women and, according to one study, it polarizes gender roles more than the average democracy.

That's why the Iowa primary was following our historical pattern of making change. Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot, and generally have ascended to positions of power, from the military to the boardroom, before any women (with the possible exception of obedient family members in the latter).

If the lawyer described above had been just as charismatic but named, say, Achola Obama instead of Barack Obama, her goose would have been cooked long ago. Indeed, neither she nor Hillary Clinton could have used Mr. Obama's public style — or Bill Clinton's either — without being considered too emotional by Washington pundits.

So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects "only" the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more "masculine" for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren't too many of them); and because there is still no "right" way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what.

I'm not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That's why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that.

But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex.

What worries me is that she is accused of "playing the gender card" when citing the old boys' club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.

What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didn't.

What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age.

This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. It's time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers.

Those are Pobble Thoughts ~ voiced by Steinem. That and a buck fifty will get you coffee...and maybe a little more.

12 comments:

Nemeria said...

Good excerpt. I'm not sure where I stand with Hillary yet. I think she's done some great things for NY. What gets me, though, is how she is crucified for being so cold and then ridiculed when she showed just a hint of emotion. She didn't cry, she just looked wistful. And she gets slammed for it. She really can't win no matter what she does and the issues get lost.

Dammit.

Jaded said...

You know how I feel about Hillary. I don't support her, even though there are those among us who would consider me a traitor to my gender.

I'll refrain from ranting about my particular reasons for not supporting her...I've blogged about it, we've talked about it...I'll just suffice it to say that when she had the opportunity before to institute some real change, she didn't. She promised the moon and the stars when she was the first lady, and we saw nary a twinkle. When you have proven to me that you are ineffective, no matter what partisan obstacles you claim were the reasons, I can not support you. She can say that things will be different this time, but I don't believe we're in a place in this country to HOPE that she'll do something good for us this time, when her track record suggests otherwise.

It has never occured to me to consider gender or race when deciding which candidate will best serve our country. I have always simply tried to decide which PERSON will do the best job under the current set of circumstances. I'm not sure if that's Obama, although he's really growing on me. I am sure that it's not Hillary, at least for me. I am currently torn between Obama and Edwards. I do NOT want Romney or Huckabee, either. I was once a fan of McCain, but once he said that Roe v. Wade must be overturned, I was done with him.I like Ron Paul. I don't hate Giuliani.

Again, I feel like we are trying to choose a savior from a group of devils. Which is the lesser evil?

Anonymous said...

I knew the beginning was about Obama. I don't like him. He's not been around long enough to be in this position without owing somebody, or several somebodies, something big. I'm not a big fan of Clinton either. It does however irk me that she was slammed for getting a bit teary. Big freakin deal! The problem is that I don't really feel a 'kinship' with any of these folks running. That worries me. Alot. The whole gender/race issue ought nought be an issue in this country, or anywhere for that matter, and I wonder how many more generations it will take before people figure that out. Peace.

Jaded said...

I think she got teary simply because she is no longer a shoe in for every primary. Last month she had a double digit lead over Obama. This month, she finished 3rd in the Iowa caucus and as of this morning, won NH by only 2%, which equated to fewer than 8 thousand votes. She was frustrated because she wasn't winning, so she cried about it. Yeah, now THAT'S what presidents are made of... didn't get her way and cried. It has nothing to do with her gender, but her arrogance.

nRT said...

Well said. I was having a 'discussion' with my husband about Obama, he feel he is too green. I agreed but I felt he was OK better than Hillary. I am an Independant voter and have not made a decision...I usually void my husbands vote, not on purpose but it just happens.
The article really has me thinking!
thanks

kimber said...

Great exerpt...

I can relate to what you're saying about Clinton: I remember feeling rather conflicted when Kim Campbell became Prime Minister, because while I was happy we finally had a woman leading our country, I didn't necessarily agree with her politics. Just because we both have vaginas (and really, I haven't checked her, so I can only comment on myself, and *looks down pants* yep, there is is...) doesn't mean we shared the same ideology or political opinions.

christine mtm said...

the princess kitty told me last night that she wanted the "girl to win" because she thought we needed a girl president. i hope once she's old enought to vote that gender really isn't an issue.

i still don't know who i'm going to vote for (though at one point i did.)

D-Man said...

Amen Miss Gloria.

akakarma said...

I actually like Hillary although I know she is a political animal and a player and I hate the idea of the Clinton dynasty. I liked the "that hurt my feelings.. comment, it was very smart. Sometimes I feel that being a player is important. But a big part of me loves Barack- the outsider of him, he makes wonderful speeches that are so inspirational and there is a centered- ness to him that I respect. I am a BIG supporter of change and I mean lots of it so I loved the article Pobble! Thanks.

2 Dollar Productions said...

I think there are several valid points here, although I can't say I'm a Hilary fan. I don't loathe her, and actually think she would OK in the position.

I'm all for breaking barriers, however, it should be for the right reasons and the right person versus simply shattering them for the sake of it.

CrackerLilo said...

Very interesting. Sometimes I think Steinem just nails it, and with the Hillary support excised, this is one of those times. :-) I just wrote about how embarrassing I found Clinton's bit of self-pity (I think that's what it was, and am disgusted that the question comes up.) I feel un-feminist because of that, really.

I think Jaded makes good points as well.

Cats, I would have said that when I was little! I was really enthusiastic about Geraldine Ferraro in fifth grade! I have learned.

Thanks for the discussion, Pobble!

Anonymous said...

I really wish I could support Clinton, wish I could look at her with pride instead of feeling as if something were crawling over my skin...looking at her I feel...I feel scared...

God, I want to stand up and say, "GO YOU! Go you for having the vagina to stand up and go for your dreams!" I want to...but I'm left speechless and cold.