Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The future: Is Clinton the Iron Lady aka Thatcher or the 'Cry Baby Clinton'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 10:59 AM
Original message
The future: Is Clinton the Iron Lady aka Thatcher or the 'Cry Baby Clinton'
It is how they are perceived. Not just in this country but world wide.

Is Clinton going to be President with the 'Margaret (Iron Lady) Thatcher stance' which made her so successful on the world stage or will it be the meek and mild Mrs Clinton, the wife?

For the first time the USA will likely have a woman president and that is a great success. However, how will she behave as Commander in Chief in crisis? How will she deal with mischevious world leaders and many of them thugs? I think this is something the GOP may be looking at too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. Ugh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldtime dfl_er Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
2. With apologies
to Garbo in "Ninotchka" - don't make an issue of her womanhood.

Seriously, though, the real question is can we possibly treat her as a human being first, rather than constantly judging, assessing, and labeling her with female tags?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. they questioned constantly about Thatcher in the UK
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. Yes, if her supporters will do likewise
Either the fact that she is a woman makes a difference, or it doesn't.

Her supporters can't one one hand claim to want her to be judged and treated just like a male, but at the same time constantly brand all criticisms of her as "sexist." (I don't mean the obvious sexist attacks.)

Nor can her supporters claim to be trying to move beyond gender, while simultaneously supporting her "because she is a woman."







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
3. This just keeps getting funnier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. I think you may be
I think you may be missing the point. The scrutinizing of women is not funny. Her enemies will be doing what they can to undermine her. Read the post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Saying Hillary is Thatcher-like is a significantly mischaracterization.
Reagan had more in common with Thatcher than Hillary does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftCoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
4. It's how many people perceive any woman in power
They're either a bitch or 'too emotional'. It's somewhat surprising to see so many people here fall into using those stereotypes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. Does that mean no woman in power is ever
- to use a less loaded word - a total jerk? Or even a semi-jerk?

It's my experience that PEOPLE who seek power over other PEOPLE tend to be controlling and manipulative to a greater or lesser extent. Of course their are exceptions to every rule, but do we really believe that women never abuse their power? That women never act in a way to justify the title "jerk?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftCoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. When have you seen a woman called a jerk?
That's never the terminology used. Invariably women, unlike there male counterparts, are described as either a bitch (variants include ice-princess, cold, 'cunt', etc), or 'too emotional'. Listen to how people describe any woman in power and those two issues always seem to come up. Now, look at men in power. Trent Lott has cried a couple of times - no big deal made of it. Criticism of him seems to run a wide gamut - in other words there isn't a focus on whether he's a 'prick' or a cry-baby. One caveat is that men can't generally show too much emotion without getting labeled queer, but that's a whole other issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 12:27 PM
Original message
I used "jerk" because I wanted to avoid the "b" word entirely
I'm not arguing the semantics of terminology. Neither am I arguing that - in general - men get more of a free pass when they are "jerks" than women do. Women get called bitches and cunts and cold (which I don't think is in the same category - but I digress). Sometimes independent of their actions and sometimes because of their actions.

What I'm saying is that people in power are generally in power because they are able to do certain things which might cause the rest of us discomfort, like firing people or slashing budgets, demeaning underlings - what have you. In some cases that crosses the line into "jerkiness" (maybe you could provide me with a better word here?)

I guess what I'm getting at is do you presume that "jerkiness" precieved in women, is neccessarily evidence of sexism (I mean every time), or do you think that this perception is sometimes correct even if the language used to describe it is offensive? Because sometimes I think (especially in regards to Hillary) people miss the forest of Hillary's flawed personality for the trees of sexism against her.

Let me give you a specific example. I had a viscerally negative reaction to Hillary's "crying" video. It wasn't the crying that bothered me. I just felt that her tone and body language gave her away as insincere and manipulative. Is my instinctually negative reaction to that video necessarily sexist? Or am I justified in trusting my intuition when it comes to judgements of a person's apparent manipulativness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. I used "jerk" because I wanted to avoid the "b" word entirely
I'm not arguing the semantics of terminology. Neither am I arguing that - in general - men get more of a free pass when they are "jerks" than women do. Women get called bitches and cunts and cold (which I don't think is in the same category - but I digress). Sometimes independent of their actions and sometimes because of their actions.

What I'm saying is that people in power are generally in power because they are able to do certain things which might cause the rest of us discomfort, like firing people or slashing budgets, demeaning underlings - what have you. In some cases that crosses the line into "jerkiness" (maybe you could provide me with a better word here?)

I guess what I'm getting at is do you presume that "jerkiness" precieved in women, is neccessarily evidence of sexism (I mean every time), or do you think that this perception is sometimes correct even if the language used to describe it is offensive? Because sometimes I think (especially in regards to Hillary) people miss the forest of Hillary's flawed personality for the trees of sexism against her.

Let me give you a specific example. I had a viscerally negative reaction to Hillary's "crying" video. It wasn't the crying that bothered me. I just felt that her tone and body language gave her away as insincere and manipulative. Is my instinctually negative reaction to that video necessarily sexist? Or am I justified in trusting my intuition when it comes to judgements of a person's apparent manipulativness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
5. That makes as much sense as
asking if Obama will act presidential
when faced with a crisis or will he act
'black'.

Sexism and racism need to be left out of
this race - they aren't running.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. when you look at other races when a woman was running
in each country we had the same thing

I hope that she is ready
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. It just amazes me
that sexism towards Clinton is
so readily accepted but, racism in
reference to Obama is forbidden when
both are wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. it shouldn't happen but it will
sexism and racism shouldn't be factors at all but in the past unfortunately women were scrutinized, ridiculed and it is still there today. She has a hard road ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calico1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
7. Oh Lordy..
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
10. It matters not - we don't want either "a war monger" (Iron Lady) NOR "a cry baby" for President.
I'm seriously disgusted with any fawning over an "Iron Lady" descriptor for HRC that old blood-and-guts Thatcher wore like a medal. :thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 31st 2024, 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC