I would feel remiss if this blog didn't mention the fact that for the first time, a woman is running a serious presidential campaign in the United States. In one of the most exciting primary contests in recent history, both candidates are running on a platform of change and both have had to run a race that acknowledges the race/gender card without overplaying it. My female friends and acquaintances have pointedly not supported Hillary simply because she is a woman and almost no one I know (save Merle Haggard) has even spoken very much about what having a woman in charge might mean for the U.S.
Hillary's gender, however, does appear to be salient for older women, our mothers and grandmothers who remember what life was like when girl power was yet a gleam in Gwen Stefani's eye and before schools were pouring resources into improving boys' performances. Third wavers may not be making gender an issue in this race, but the very few young men who support Hillary's bid indicate to this feminist at least that it is affecting how people evaluate the candidates. Hillary's tears in New Hampshire melted an "ice queen." CNN has talked more about Hillary's laugh or hairdo than her detailed policy plans, and a major Clinton opponent started the 527 Citizens United Not Timid to funnel campaign funds into her opponents coffers. (Get the acronym? Can you imagine a similar one for any other candidate that would not provoke a major outcry? I can't. )
6 comments:
You've got to be kidding about that acronym!
While I love both of the democratic options this time around, I've been hoping to volunteer time (with my girls) for the first woman president's campaign. I'm a bit shocked that young, highly educated women are unimpressed by the impact a female president would have on the road map young girls draft for themselves. Not to mention that she's brilliant, and has fabulous policies. Why is it so out of vogue for a liberal woman to support Hilary!?
Yes! Exactly. I feel like I have to hide my love for Hillary. I mean, I like Barak and I have some doubts about 20 years of rule between two families, but in the end, Hillary has a stronger policy platform.
Another Blogger's input
http://journals.aol.com/mdiv94/DoireMusings/
No one should vote for someone MAINLY because that person is man or woman, black or white. That's a form of prejudice.
To give advantage to someone because of their gender or skin color is almost the same thing that giving that person a disadvantage! (And that's what has been always done in our societies!)
Gender shouldn't be the sole determinate of the vote, but it's already affecting how the media portray the two candidates, so I think it's fair to capitalize on the historic chance Hillary's bid for the presidency gives to young women every where. I think Hillary's presidency would be a symbolic victory for equality.
Someone named Roger Stone, a longtime Republican campaign consultant known for dirty tricks, started the 527 Citizens United Not Timid. I got the sense from your post that it was someone affiliated with the Obama campaign. See http://tinyurl.com/35tsyp.
Post a Comment