http://tomwatson.typepad.com/tom_watson/2008/01/the-sexist-medi.htmlWhat kind of progressive American leader would stand silent, supporting with the cold reserve of ambition the disgracefully sexist, blatantly anti-feminist attack on a well-respected woman of the same party, a political foe perhaps, but a national Democratic leader?
Barack Obama - so far.
Make no mistake, Obama's breakthrough says something wonderful about the state of racial politics in our nation - or perhaps the lack of racial politics - and the involvement of young people in politics. But his silence in the case of the cynical media lynching of Hillary Clinton by a national press corps obsessed with her gender is telling. And unless Barack Obama speaks out, his campaign's chilling acceptance of the gender bias stirred by our national media will also remind many of Ronald Reagan's acceptance of the race-baiting southern strategy - because if Obama accepts the presidency, at least in part, because of abject sexism, a brutal gender attack on a female rival - the most famous female Democrat in history - he will set feminism in our country back a generation.
There is no hope for John Edwards, of course. His cruel, stony reaction to the news that Senator Clinton got a little emotional during a New Hampshire diner visit was a window on the man's soul, a window into an empty room.
But Obama claims a mightier throne, one forged in liberal ideals of justice and equality and hope. He is the secular messiah of the Democratic Party, ordained by Oprah Winfrey as the chosen one and given to preaching about transcending petty politics. Yet there he was at the New Hampshire debate, throwing a scornful "compliment" at his rival when asked about Senator Clinton's "likability," one of the many sexist code words deployed against her in this race. "She's likable enough," he smirked, looking downward.
I think every woman reading this post knows exactly how Hillary Clinton felt in that moment.
Obama has benefited mightily from sexism in this campaign, and has remained silent. And that sexism is starting to be noticed, and commented on - even in places you don't expect it. John Cole, to say the least, is no Hillary Clinton fan but the gender-based attacks have gotten to him:
Quite frankly, I hate to say this, but I think what we are actually seeing is a double-standard here, and the feminists may be right. This is all about Hillary being a woman. John Edwards has been 150 times as angry the whole campaign, and has built his entire campaign around it. Howard Dean was angry, and people lapped it up. Here, Hillary isn’t really angry, just matter-of-fact and frustrated, and people are giving her shit.
I don’t want Hillary as President, but it sure looks to me like she isn’t getting a fair shake and is being subjected to a double standard. It’s bullshit.
Then there was Clinton's flash of anger in the same debate as the two men teamed up to bash her - she showed her anger, something male candidates (think McCain) do every debate, and was promptly accused of having a "meltdown." More people are beginning the see this media lynching as a negative story for Democrats of truly historic; here's Kevin Drum at the Washington Monthly:
snip
It's ugly, the MoDo Syndrome - not something lefties believe exists on our side. But it's there. Taylor Marsh is right - the reaction to a little emotion, a little fire from the leading woman in American political history may be too much. Maybe we're not ready for a female president.
Hillary quite simply let them have it. Women everywhere know how she feels. There isn't one person in business or any level of professional life, even college, who hasn't had it happen to them. But having a woman show it in public? It's an emotional cleavage moment inspired by a flash in time when weaker men joined together to take their more formidable female adversary down through a round robin rough up.
You could see it in the fire and flash in her eyes.
This is a defining moment in American history. To see if we can grow up from "bitch" to "strength," while appreciating that an infuriated woman standing up for herself and her record is a sign of real heart, passion of conviction and determination. It all depends if America likes the look of feminine power when it's released through a flash of fire in a potential commander in chief's eye.
snip
Me either. At the start of the campaign, I didn't think the national media could possibly be successful in an anti-woman campaign against a Democrat. I thought surely that the left wouldn't allow it, that the rest of the Democratic field - avowed feminists all - would object, and object loudly. I may be proved wrong. And Barack Obama is silent.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
