Is it just me, or is there something about this notion that Hillary Clinton's supporters are fragile flowers in need of careful treatment that's profoundly at odds with the whole notion of feminism as being about empowering women?
This is the theme we've heard over and over again since Tuesday, that it's Barack Obama's job to "win over" the disappointed bands of Clinton supporters, lest they cut off their daughters' noses to spite their own faces by voting for John McCain -- all because Chris Matthews is an ass.
Of course this is reductio ad absurdum, but the point remains: If women want to be regarded as being just as strong as men, can we please stop having the vapors and tantrums every time things don't go our way? I'm not saying we need to back down. If having a woman president is that important to you, then start cultivating the next generation of women from the ranks of whom that woman president is likely to come. You could, for example, start with women like Donna Edwards and Darcy Burner, two terrific progressive House candidates this fall; women who, if elected, can obtain the kind of real experience that will be unassailable. That's how we get a woman president.
Joan Walsh, an avowed Hillary Clinton supporter, makes some very valid points about not just the sexism that permeated so much of the media coverage of Clinton's campaign, but about the ageism -- the same kind of fear and loathing of crones that led previous generations of men to burn as witches so many women who somehow managed to survive the births of multiple children, disease, pestilence, and oppression by males that today's women can't even fathom:
Beyond Christian's deplorable reference to Obama as an "inadequate black male" was a wail worth hearing. She also said, "I'm proud to be an older American woman!" I can feel her pain. Reading the sexist attacks on Clinton and her white female supporters, as well as on female journalists and bloggers who've occasionally tried to defend her or critique Obama, has been, well, consciousness-raising. Prejudice against older women, apparently, is one of the last non-taboo biases. I've been stunned by the extent to which trashing Clinton supporters as washed up old white women is acceptable. A writer whose work I respect submitted a piece addressed to "old white feminists," telling them to get out of Obama's way. I've found my own writing often dismissed not on its merits (or lack thereof) but because as a woman who will turn 50 in September, I'm supposed to be Clinton's demographic. Salon's letters pages, as well as the comments sections around the blogosphere, are studded with dismissive, derisive references to bitter old white women.
As a woman over the age of 50 fighting an ever-more-losing battle against middle-aged spread, who doesn't want to spend thousands of dollars on Botox, and who sees new things in her face every morning, it would be very easy for me to succumb to resentment at a male-dominated society's emphasis on female fuckability. After all, not all of us can be Susan Sarandon. I think that because I was never "one of the pretty ones", but rather, "the funny girl" (which in youth means men think you should have a bag over your head but which serves you well in middle age), it may be easier for me to regard this as a freeing phase of life instead of a depressing one. It also helps that I am lucky enough to have a husband who realizes that if you live long enough, you age, that he is aging too, and who doesn't expect me to look like a nineteen-year-old. But bitterness is not something that's imposed on you by the outside world, it's a state of mind that you choose.
I've seen the comments about washed-up white women, and for all that what little self-esteem I have can be packaged into an eight-ounce Tupperware, even I recognize that all this says more about the people saying it than it does about me.
We are never going to be able to outlaw assholes, as much as we might like to.
For years, feminism has given lip service to creating some kind of gynotopia, and in the process has neglected some of the very real problems facing the very real women not lucky enough to even have to worry about whether they're going to make partner, or be able to play golf at the same country club that the senior executives do, or whether they'll be successful at running for president. It's a lot more important that the woman who operates a forklift for a living not have to deal with pictures of a woman fucking a donkey tacked to the gearshift than it is that Harriet Christian be courted with candy and flowers by Barack Obama.
Joan Walsh again:
Mainly I think he has to reach out to women the old-fashioned way: individually, warmly and respectfully. He needs to schedule meetings with Clinton's top female supporters. (It's probably too much to ask, but I'd love to see a lunch with Geraldine Ferraro. Ask for her thoughts on winning women and Reagan Democrats. Explain that being the first serious black presidential candidate is a little harder than maybe it looked.) It's still too early for me to be certain what Obama should do with his vice-presidential pick, except I know he needs to quite publicly take a Clinton candidacy seriously. I'm not sure picking another woman would cut it. It would look like a form of tokenism, and it wouldn't necessarily do the trick: It's one particular woman, not just any woman, who earned 18 million votes that he will need in November.
What Walsh is saying here is that a man who was told by a woman that the only reason he's doing well is because he's black ought to go out and "court" this woman? Why does Geraldine Ferraro need to be treated with kid gloves? Is she that much of a fragile flower?
Of course Barack Obama needs to treat women voters with respect. I've followed his campaign, and aside from the unnecessarily snarky "You're likeable enough, Hillary" moment, I haven't seen him do anything that requires that he serenade Geraldine Ferraro with a string quartet. And he doesn't need to atone for Chris Matthews' sins. But no one said politics is easy. And if Democratic women voters require that the Democratic male candidate who adores his wife and daughters bring them flowers and candy and woo them with pretty words to keep them from voting for a man who called his much-younger rich trophy wife a "cunt" and a "trollop" in public; if these women require "courting" so that they don't sentence their daughters and granddaugters to a lifetime of government control over their bodies and an even MORE male-dominated society, then I would say to you that they really aren't feminists at all.
UPDATE: I'm not saying that women who fervently supported Hillary Clinton's candidacy the way I supported Howard Dean's in 2004 aren't entitled to feel hurt, depressed, or even hopeless. I know that depression, I've lived it. But it's one thing to feel hurt and disappointed, and quite another to vow some kind of revenge that's really just a kind of lashing out -- with disastrous consequences. Barack Obama is a smart guy who is fully aware of whose votes he's going to need, and has already begun trying to bring the party together. This is no longer "a feminist issue" if indeed it ever was. This is now about saving our country. So hurt if you must, cry if you need to. And then let's all get to work.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire