Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gloria Steinem on the appalling double standard

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
 
KennedyGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:07 AM
Original message
Gloria Steinem on the appalling double standard

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.htm...
Im supporting Senator Clinton because like Senator Obama she has community organizing experience, but she also has more years in the Senate, an unprecedented eight years of on-the-job training in the White House, no masculinity to prove, the potential to tap a huge reservoir of this countrys talent by her example, and now even the courage to break the no-tears rule. Im not opposing Mr. Obama; if hes the nominee, Ill volunteer. Indeed, if you look at votes during their two-year overlap in the Senate, they were the same more than 90 percent of the time. Besides, to clean up the mess left by President Bush, we may need two terms of President Clinton and two of President Obama.

But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex.

"What worries me is that she is accused of playing the gender card when citing the old boys club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.

What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didnt.

What worries me is that reporters ignore Mr. Obamas dependence on the old for instance, the frequent campaign comparisons to John F. Kennedy, though Senator Edward Kennedy is supporting Senator Clinton while not challenging the slander that her progressive policies are part of the Washington status quo.

What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age.

This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. Its time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers. We have to be able to say: Im supporting her because shell be a great president and because shes a woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. Stellar endorsement of Clinton. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
2. Gloria: a breath of fresh air.
Edited on Tue Jan-08-08 10:10 AM by Evergreen Emerald
I hope more people come out and condemn the press. It is time to stop this bias crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. yes and yes and yes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
3. Ms. Steinheim, President Obama will make your proud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #3
23. I bet he would also. Meanwhile though she made some very pointed observations
And she made them very very well. The specifics she raised go much deeper than whether Obama or Clinton is better qualified to be President or will do a better job. I would like to see more people take the time to actually consider the implications of her observations, even if you disagree with her choice of candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
4. I would have no problem supporting Gloria Steinem for the presidency.
But we disagree on the choice in the current field.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marylanddem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. Gloria, while I respect and admire your work on

behalf of women, you don't have much of a clue on this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SIMPLYB1980 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
6. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
7. I've been waiting for this,
thank you Gloria!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elixir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Eloquently put. So clear to us now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #8
19. I'll say more then,
Edited on Tue Jan-08-08 10:28 AM by seasonedblue
beginning with MSNBC, the media has waged a biased, and many times sexist war, against our only Democratic woman running for POTUS.

I'll let Tom Watson say it more "eloquently:"

The Sexist Media Lynching of Hillary Clinton

http://tomwatson.typepad.com/tom_watson/2008/01/the-sex...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #19
37. SBlue, this should be an OP . Please repost it ....
if you haven't already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
9. "unprecedented eight years of on-the-job training in the White House"
Edited on Tue Jan-08-08 10:25 AM by zulchzulu
Laura Bush has that too. What about Nancy Reagan?

As for more years in the Senate, that's true. But Barack has eight years as State Senator with legislation that he authored and got passed. He knew how to work together instead of mobilizing partisan gridlock.

Despite the notion that Steinham is not "playing the gender card", she actually IS. People who didn't vote for her in most cases didn't vote against her because she was a woman. They voted perhaps against her because she ran a negative campaign. Speaking of unprecedented, many political experts were confounded to find where ANY political candidate used their opponent's kindergarden paper as some kind of smear tactic.

Gloria, I love you for all you've done. But your endorsement is pretty transparent to me.

On edit: Steinham mentions that Ted Kennedy endorsed Hillary. Um...no he didn't. He hasn't endorsed anyone yet.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:20 AM
Original message
zulch, you the person!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Of course she is, look at how she ends her piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeFleur1 Donating Member (973 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #9
15. Laura Bush and Nancy Reagan?
Surely you are not comparing them to Hillary Clinton?

Laura, I must admit, has opened a book. Nancy was a friend of Sinatra and believed in astrology. I guess those backgrounds qualified them for President. Please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Both were in the WH for as long as HRC...what other 8-yr on the job training...
...would Ms Steinem by referencing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Azathoth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #9
28. Bingo
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
11. and a big REC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
12. Oh shut up and put your bunny ears on and fetch me a cocktail...
:eyes:

Maybe your candidate will stop playing the gender card by crying when things get tough...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KennedyGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #12
20. there ya go gals..
don't forget the bunny tail..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. ..and the fishnets....can't forget the fishnets...
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #12
32. Mr. Hefner!
Action slow in the grotto today?
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. Very much so...
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
14. No masculinity to prove? Gloria, give me a break
I found that statement offensive on so many levels. First, it implies that Edwards and Obama have to prove their masculinity. Secondly, I would think that some as immersed in gender awareness as Gloria would never say that a woman does not possess masculinity. I've probably read statements by her a dozen times talking about how human beings possess both the masculine and the feminine. And if Hillary's hawkish moves have not been attempts to prove her masculinity, then I don't know how else to explain them. There are some qualities that are feminine, there are some qualities that are masculine. Agression, violence, toughness, certain expressions of strength, are masculine qualities. We all have them. And unfortunately i think at times Hillary goes overboard trying to prove she possesses them.

Sorry, Gloria, you lost me in the first line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Azathoth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
17. "...on-the-job training in the White House..."
Edited on Tue Jan-08-08 10:28 AM by Azathoth
You know, if Hillary was a man claiming that his eight years being married to a female President was "on-the-job training" that qualified him to be President, Gloria Steinem would be livid -- no make that apoplectic.

I'm glad Ms. Steinem is supporting Hillary because "she'll make a great president and because she's a woman." I'm supporting Barack Obama becuase he'll make a great president. There is a difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
18. Gloria Steinhem has long been a hero to me
Women today, and men also, ignore her at their own risk if they think the fight she has devoted her life to has already been won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrsBrady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
21. I'm tired of this double standard on Hillary
I lean more towards Edwards and Kucinich...
But if this double standard crap doesn't stop, I'm gonna have to go for the "sister".

The race has just freaking started, and already they have her out? Are you freaking kidding?

I would be glad to have any of the Democrats running as president. If Hillary wins the nomination, I'll be more than happy to vote for her.

Some how she's seen as "loser" if she's coming in second or tied with Obama?
Since when would a male candidate be considered a "loser" (or irrelevant????) in such a close race.

I don't hear Edwards being talked about in this way.

Give me a break, this is driving me nuts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
22. She is divisive because of her vote on the IWR, and failure to admit she made a mistake
She is divisive because of her vote on the Kyle/Lieberman ammendment
She is divisive because of her vote for the patriot act

and she is divisive because of this:

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jB8n288YSUL-mMk3_2p ...

This is nothing to do with sexism, it has everything to do with her positions




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
24. There is an error in the op-ed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Ted Kennedy did not endorse Hillary Clinton, as Steinham states
Ted hasn't endorsed anyone yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Article corrected. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
29. I'm breaking a gender barrier by saying "I don't support her, even tho she's a woman."
Edited on Tue Jan-08-08 10:41 AM by Armstead
Has nothing to do with the fact that she's a woman. That's a point in her favor.

I just don't believe she should be president for a whole host of other reasons.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Agreed
That's what I think as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crawfish Donating Member (252 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
30. Do we?
We have to be able to say: Im supporting her because shell be a great president and because shes a woman.

If I thought the former, I would have no problem with the latter. The simple fact she's a woman doesn't make her worthy to be president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
youthere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
31. Apalling...perfect word for it.
It IS apalling. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
35. She makes a very good point
I just don't like Clinton's record in the Senate that much, and I prefer the records of Edwards and Obama.

However, Clinton would make a fine President as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandem5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
36. kick
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 Mon Jan 20th 2020, 10:04 AM
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