2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum"The Era of 'The Bitch' Is Coming"
MICHELLE COTTLE, The Atlantic
A Clinton victory also promises to usher in four-to-eight years of the kind of down-and-dirty public misogyny you might expect from a stag party at Roger Ailess house. . . .
Raw political sexism is already strutting its stuff. At Donald Trumps coming-out party in Cleveland, vendors stood outside the Quicken Loans Arena hawking campaign buttons with whimsical messages, such as Lifes a Bitchdont vote for one and KFC Hillary Special: Two fat thighs, two small breasts left wing. One popular T-shirt featured a grinning Trump piloting a Harley, grinning as Hillary tumbled off the bike so that you could read the back of Trumps shirt: IF YOU CAN READ THIS, THE BITCH FELL OFF. . . .
It would be nice to think that this is all merely a heat-of-the-campaign thingthat if Hillary wins in November, the baser attacks will fade, and she will be treated with a smidge more respect. Fat chance. (Just ask Obama how that panned out for him.) It will probably become even more overt the more power she attains because the more threatening she is, predicted Farida Jalalzai, a political scientist at Oklahoma State University who focuses on gender. People will have no problem vilifying her and saying the most misogynistic things imaginable.
Just as Obamas presidency helped bring unresolved issues about race into the mainstream political discussion, a Hillary presidency would likely do the same for issues like equal pay and child care. And while such discussions clearly need to be had, they pretty quickly can get heated. Clinton will be walking a fine line, said Leonie Huddy, a professor of political science at Stony Brook University. She will be a historic figure who brings a different perspective to the job. But she is also going to be evaluated through the lens of, Is she just there for women? Maybe she will do something bad to men. There is a latent fear among men that their position in American society will decline further. So while there are a lot of guys on board for equalizing gender power, there are also quite a few who arent.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/the-era-of-the-bitch-is-coming/496154/?utm_source=atlfb
This doesn't mean that failing to elect Clinton will save the country from sexism. Exposing and confronting social problems like gender and race inequality are essential to combatting them.
ismnotwasm
(41,921 posts)The primaries were so contentious that the sheer symbolic power of the first woman president of the United States was often either ignored, belittled or dismissed.
A storm is coming--and it won't just be middle-class white women who represent it will be all women. Hillary has been reaching out to women all over the world for decades. There is no turning back from this, no going back--This- this first of bigotries, this first "othering". We will change the world.
A powerful time in human history, and I pity those who can't see it.
JustAnotherGen
(31,683 posts)niyad
(112,435 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Far more people are decent and accepting, and fully ready for a woman to become president, a disposition that allows them to keep their attention on what's important to them in their lives, as opposed to ranting anger against others. The media abets that by pretending this election does not involve an enormous advance for women.
But this kind of extreme nastiness breaks through the attention barrier from the dark side and creates both awareness that this battle of the "first of bigotries" is still on and an unmistakable realization that they are on the other side.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)Also more than half of voters are women.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Consistently.
This is yet another in an unbroken string of elections in which the groupthink in the MSM is just plain wrong in a number of ways. Another big change I want is in that. Just like Republicans with the GOP, when will MSM viewers finally get tired of being grossly mislead, finally hit bottom and say "no more!"?
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)!!!
hamsterjill
(15,214 posts)Yes, a powerful time in human history. And it's about damn time!
Thank you.
Glimmer of Hope
(5,823 posts)calimary
(80,699 posts)There will be a whole new world of people who refuse to accept this.
They're the same crowd that's wrongly believed, for the past seven-and-a-half years that "there's a Black guy in the Oval Office and he isn't the janitor!!!!"
This coming January, I expect that attitude to shift to "there's a woman in the Oval Office and she isn't the cleaning lady!"
This contingent needs to be forcibly yanked into the 21st Century which they seem grimly determined not to acknowledge or accept.
Some of them will NEVER accept that times have changed. I have a half-brother like that. He actually told me flat-out a couple of months ago that he sure likes the 50s and 60s better. Well, those days are GONE! They're OVER. LONG over. Evolution is a fact. And there's nothing so constant as change! And try as they might, they - and we - CANNOT turn time back. There is NO "Wayback Machine." All those science fiction shows (and there was WAY too much of it in all the "Star Trek" series) that go back in time - that's why it's called "science FICTION".
Besides, if it REALLY were to happen, those same people who think they want things back the way they were in the 50s and 60s HAD to marry the girl if they knocked her up.
HAD to make do with pistols and maybe an Al Capone-style machine gun instead of those cool slick carnivorous assault rifles and the specialized camo gear that are so widely available today.
And maybe they'd have to put up with a creaky old Studebaker rather than their hot new muscle car.
And few of those cars in civilian circulation back then went over 70 or 80 miles per hour.
And they wouldn't like the looks of their women in the bathing suits available back then.
And forget popping something in the microwave, right quick. There were NO microwave ovens. OR cell phones. OR computers. OR internet.
You wanted to research something? You had to go to the library and make sense of the Dewey Decimal System and go find the BOOK. Or look through the Encyclopedia Britannica the hard way - by leafing through page after page after page. No "search" button to click on, much less Google.
The phone? Land lines only, and probably a party line that you'd have to share with several neighbors. Good luck getting a call through - somebody else down the street would be monopolizing the line.
You went to the dentist to get a cavity filled? There'd be mercury in your filling because that's how they did it back then.
And - go out to a restaurant, and you'd gag your way through your meal which you could barely taste or enjoy because of the smokers at the next table who didn't have to take their cigarettes outside.
And forget about flying coast-to-coast in five hours. It'd take you all day and probably at least two or three plane changes. And if the weather was iffy, you simply stayed on the ground.
You MIGHT have a TV. Or, if you were lucky, your next-door neighbor did. But it'd be black & white and there'd be three channels to flip through. Which you'd probably have to do by getting up out of your chair to go over to the TV and manipulate the round channel-changer dial. Remotes weren't widely available back then.
And there wasn't an easy way to avoid military service. There was a draft back then.
Life expectancy was lower.
And most women's options for work were what used to be called "pink collar" jobs: maids, manicurists, secretaries. You could be a teacher or a nurse maybe, or a librarian, or MAYBE a stewardess if you were lucky and liked taking risks. Otherwise, opportunities were WAY fewer. You were called "a career gal" and you were often the subject of jokes, and seldom taken seriously. Your pay in ANY job was substantially less than a man's. And to gain any advancement, you were much more often expected to sleep with, or to have slept with, the boss. After all, how else does a gal with ambition get ahead?
Gays stayed in the closet and nobody talked about it, admitted to it, or tolerated it. And you were called things - in the open - that most of us except for many Trumpsters wouldn't utter in polite company.
And Blacks? Oh man, what THEY were called... And their best options for work were as waiters or porters or janitors or shoeshine men.
And more.
And they'd be fine. Until they couldn't get their Lactaid or their Pampers and had to wash all those cloth diapers in an old-fashioned washing machine, which more often than not didn't have a companion dryer. You hung those clothes out on the clothesline across the back yard. And your kitchen would likely NOT have a garbage disposal, so you'd have to wrap up all that garbage and take it out.
I'd LOVE to see some of 'em land back in the 50s and actually have to live in that era for more than a few hours. It's no "Back to the Future" two-and-a-half-hour romp with popcorn and a Coke on the side, guaranteed!
classof56
(5,376 posts)Copying your post for future reference, so thanks!
maddiemom
(5,106 posts)The really hot "muscle cars" came in during the latter Sixties. Some of those body styles, with usually fewer cubic inch engines, are being copied today. The old family sedan was probably a huge unwieldy beast, but was still (not for the best, safety-wise) usually much more powerful than today's "family car. " Back in the day, muscle cars were often the first to have seat belts, then shoulder harnesses. Cars have gotten much advanced in safety features and gas mileage---but cars of the Sixties were NOT "boring" in comparison to current automobiles, even those the major automakers have styled to copy them in recent years.
calimary
(80,699 posts)"Muscle cars" is probably not the right way to describe what I was thinking, anyway. But you did remind me - there weren't seat belts in the cars back in the 50s and 60s (at least early 60s).
Studebakers, as I recall, were kinda boring back then. Certainly wasn't like one of those souped up machines we saw and loved in "American Graffiti"! And it was all about station wagons for households with kids. My mom had a red Rambler station wagon, and then a blue one afterwards. Those were REALLY boring!
maddiemom
(5,106 posts)As I remember, the later Studebakers had some pretty advanced styling, appearance-wise. I don't know about handling and power, however. But the Rambler (my grandfather's car of choice)---now THERE was a boring car. I do remember that they had early reclining front seats (at least the passenger seats). A boyfriend who often drove his dad's Rambler startled me with this feature on one memorable occasion. I don't recall "Grandpap" ever using this feature, however.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)johnp3907
(3,723 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,683 posts)Than a smart tough woman who by virtue of winning is all up in their grill!
This is gonna be beautiful!
TexasBushwhacker
(20,044 posts)"Bitches get stuff done!"
But seriously, do we really elect presidents on the basis of how "nice" they are? We want them to be tough negotiators, confident in their vision for America and strong enough to carry it out. If that translates to BITCH, then bring on the bitches.
getagrip_already
(14,250 posts)luv it!
GoCubsGo
(32,061 posts)Turn it into a compliment. When someone calls me a "bitch", I just smile at them and say, "You're damn right I am!"
volstork
(5,394 posts)One of Tina and Amy's finest!
Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)And yes - BRING ON THE BITCHES!
stopwastingmymoney
(2,027 posts)BainsBane
(53,003 posts)niyad
(112,435 posts)evillemike2009
(13 posts)I think that's it - embrace the characterization. Own it. And them.
"She's a ball breaker"
-- Well, yeah, but apparently you have nothing at risk, so why worry?
"She's a bitch"
-- Yeah, like driving a Shelby 428 - maybe you should stick with peddle cars for a while.
-- Gee, it's almost like she's a grownup woman - not that you'd know anything about that.
It just gets shitty if you can't make it fun.
calimary
(80,699 posts)Excellent retorts! Mine is usually some version of "you're damn right!" or "And proud of it!" But I like yours better!
niyad
(112,435 posts)yeah, and your point is????"
"I am not A bitch, I am THE bitch, and, to you, I am MS. BITCH"
Being
In
Total
Control of
Herself
"and. . . . your opinion matters to me. . . . why????"
"that's my name, please don't wear it out"
apnu
(8,722 posts)I'm not surprised by this in the least.
The only people who refer to Hillary Clinton as "that bitch" and "that cunt" are the people who are threatened by people of color or women in power.
Misogynist, racist, or bigoted, doesn't matter, it is the same group of people. They are the folks who have lived with privilege their whole lives, who were raised with privilege and it penetrates every level of their lives so much they can't see it. They think the world lives as they do and can't fathom why people object to the unjust culture and communities we've built.
But all that's been changing for decades now. There's enough growth and voice today that their rose colored glasses are shattering and they're just now realizing America is changing and they are being left in the dust. To them this is a shock, to everybody else, we say: you're late to the party.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)NewJeffCT
(56,827 posts)I said that on here years ago - if Hillary had won in 2008, we'd have seen the Tea Party with signs that had the B word or the C word on them instead of the N word. Instead of Obama dressed in primitive African garb, we'd have gotten Clinton probably dressed in Nazi garb. Republican politicians would have gotten in trouble for forwarding emails that had those key words in them.
That said, I don't think anybody would have questioned her citizenship. But, I'm sure she'd have been subjected to far more fashion critiques and hairstyle criticisms than Obama (the only one I remember was him wearing the "mom" jeans?)
apnu
(8,722 posts)That's a thing solidly in the racist category. Hillary's whiteness will not be challenged. Everything else, and especially her gender, will.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)It'll just be out and loud, as with racism under Obama.
MrScorpio
(73,626 posts)thucythucy
(7,986 posts)all these men worry "maybe she'll do something bad to men," "Is she just there for women?"
But we've had men in the office from day one, and how many times have we heard anyone in the MSM say, "Maybe he'll do something bad for women?" or "Is he just there for men?"
It reminds me of a town where I used to live. Voters elected its first woman mayor in the late 1990s. After she served two successful terms, another woman ran to replace her, and all these men I knew were "worried" because, you know, "TWO women IN A ROW!" How unfair! How unrepresentative. Unlike the previous fifty or sixty mayors, who all just happened to be men. No problem with that, none at all...
How fragile these poor fellows must be. Or, perhaps I should say: how invested in their male privilege.
Squinch
(50,774 posts)Rare exceptions, but mostly yes, those male politicians did not concern themselves overly much with women's issues.
FighttheFuture
(1,313 posts)the liberal Labor party.
I do think she may harbor a deep anger, well understandable, to the right wingers for the hunting they did of her and her husband when Bill was President. A conspiracy she called it, and it was. I hope she really fucks up their chili, in a nice way, of course.
hamsterjill
(15,214 posts)That is my one dislike of the Obama administration - the fact that in my opinion they didn't use the majorities in Congress when they had them.
FighttheFuture
(1,313 posts)don't hold back!!
As for Obama, he kept trying to strike bargains with them especially the first term+; splitting the baby. Still, if he was too pushy or forceful they would have exploded with the "angry black man meme". As it is they still try that but it rings pretty hollow with most people, especially with their Orangutan they let out of the cage. Now, he is much more "I don;t give a fuck" President, at least with respect to them.
hamsterjill
(15,214 posts)I felt Obama was almost forced to "play nice" or face the "angry black man meme". I do realize that he had a very difficult tight rope to walk.
Hillary will most assuredly face the "angry older woman" meme, but I think she's already at a point where she doesn't give a fuck. If she wins, and I believe she will, I think she will kick some ass and let the haters sort it out. And I'll be right there behind her, enjoying every minute of it!
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)FighttheFuture
(1,313 posts)retrowire
(10,345 posts)"Just as Obamas presidency helped bring unresolved issues about race into the mainstream political discussion, a Hillary presidency would likely do the same for issues like equal pay and child care."
Shouldn't they mean her presidency will do the same issues for sexism? I see equal pay as a sexism issue but how is childcare a sexism issue? Isn't that something both genders need help with right now?
KMOD
(7,906 posts)In my first pregnancy, my husband and I reserved a daycare spot in his office complex. When the ultrasound showed I was carrying twins we reserved a second place. The cost of the childcare for two infants would have taken 75% of my paycheck. For me it wasn't worth spending 75% of my paycheck to have someone else care for my children. So I left my job and worked part time evenings instead.
Squinch
(50,774 posts)DinahMoeHum
(21,737 posts)or Minerva McGonnigal
lillypaddle
(9,580 posts)But it will make me so angry, and very very sad. Hillary, as Obama, deserves so much better.
Iggo
(47,487 posts)LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)"whispered" it into Connie Chung's ear, I would say that it came a long time ago.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)though I can't say I'm surprised. I've heard the insult a few times making phone calls for the campaign.
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)here you go
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)I do vaguely recall it.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)DawgHouse
(4,019 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)DawgHouse
(4,019 posts)Sybster1001
(5 posts)Women are definitely taking their place in the future. It will be interesting to see how this changes the country.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/womens-college-enrollment-gains-leave-men-behind/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/12/11/women-are-dominating-men-at-college-blame-sexism/
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)LeftRant
(524 posts)Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Shoonra
(518 posts)Don't suppose that electing Donald Trump will mean that this country will suddenly show compassion and consideration for people with emotional or personality problems. Quite the contrary, with any snag or stumble in a Trump presidency, we will flashes of temper that will effectively set back the acceptance of people with mental illness for decades. Just as George W. Bush made us hard of heart to people with intellectual limitations, so a Trump presidency will encourage intolerance toward people with personality defects.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)I find offensive the equation with Trump and the struggles of the mentally ill.
raven mad
(4,940 posts)Go Hillary!