Letters to the Editor
-
I'm just wondering
if Clinton supporters hold the Clinton campaign and other Clinton supporters liable for the racism and Islamophobia directed at Obama. ...No? What makes the so-called sexism so much worse?
And what ever happened to reasonable differences of opinion in politics and candidates?
-
why?
yeah, it makes no sense for feminists to be mad at women who call themselves feminists but who don't actually believe supporting female political candidates and especially the first female presidential candidate in the history of the country and the last for the foreseeable future, is important. When you come down to it, from even the rabid male anti-hillary media outlets, the candidates are essentially the same on issues, except Hillary demands universal health care so why wouldn't women support her? The same reason men aren't, she just isn't likeable, or is that she isn't likeable enough. Grow up, powerful women will always be seen that way, mostly by men, but also by media obsessed women. Maybe the Wapo piece is right, women are stupid and just want to faint over their candidate. They certainly aren't as interested in coming together to advance their own place in history they way african americans are for Obama. Why is that?
-
Way to go Captainlarab
As someone whom originally supported neither Clinton or Obama, I have looked objectively and have witnessed up close almost exactly what you stated. My occupation requires that I come in frequent and usually daily contact with supporters of both remaining Dem candidates and the sometimes open contempt the older and younger generations have for one another is really starting to show itself. Walk into Clinton's campaign office and it's almost entirely traditional Dems in thier late-50's or early 60's angry at not having the slightest clue as to why Obama's in the lead and raising more money. The most common rant is usually along the lines of how they could never entrust that much power to somebody who's "much to young to handle this level of responsibility" and therefore could never be considered a "safe choice". Go into Obama's office and it's a little more of a mixed bag with some as old as me (just turned 40) but lots of people in thier early 20's and you can just sense the flat-out disgust they have built up towards the previous generations as they talk about how these baby-boomers have done nothing but put themselves above every other issue facing the country and even the planet, could care less that thier "safe choices" have always led to disaster for every generation behind them and how they were sick of having having a bunch of old people continually make a mess like Iraq and then wring thier hands and duck accountability while younger kids had to go fight and die over there with the added insult of the younger and even next generation having to pay for the whole fiasco because the boomers are too spoiled. And I thought I sensed some frustration at boomers when GENERATION DEBT by Anya Kemenetz. She was tame compared to some of the Obama die-hards.
I've heard all the feminist angles on the candidates and I can understand what drives the motives to some degree, but it's starting to appear that some on one side want a symbolic victory so much that they may have lost sight of that the movement started out as a vehicle to someday ensure that women would be able to have access to and freely make choices. Feminism is(or at leasst was) a movement, and not blind allegiance to one candidacy or another.
-
@ Ellis Diablo: A Perfect Summary Of Clark-Flory's 'Theory'
Don't forget the ameliorative effect of an approach that utilizes disparate intergenerational currents, within a cross-cultural dynamic, in order to precipitate a palliative precursor to true social change among our key demographics.
-
Old/young/experience argument irony
The irony about this "experience" argument is that Bill Clinton was about as young and inexperienced when he ran in 1992 as Obama is now. In a way, Obama is the new Bill Clinton. I seem to recall George Bush (the elder) criticizing Bill Clinton for having no more international experience than dining at the International House of Pancakes, and for being nothing more than a charismatic speaker.
It has been said elsewhere, but it bears repeating: If his wife were not in the race, Bill Clinton would probably be watching Barack Obama with amazement and approval, seeing a younger version of himself (without the bimbo-eruption-type baggage, I guess I should add).
-
Yeah. Let's Blame All the Old Feminists -- That Will Fix It!
What a terribly disappointing and disturbing piece this was.
Old feminists are to blame for being called hags, bitches, broads, old ladies, pre-menstrual, post-menstrual, "Midol-Maids", stupid, angry, calculating, racist, power-hungry, brainless, and spineless.
And of course we are supposed to sit quietly when we -- or Sen. Clinton -- are called any of the above and more, or when we are accused of basically eating small children for lunch.
But this is the best part: This trash-talk comes from men and young women who want to change the world.
Yeah. I have a lot of faith in THAT goal -- especially since these very same people don't even accept Sen. Clinton's experience around the world for human rights, women's rights and children's rights as "real" experience!
As long as people like Tracy Clark-Flory are willing to ignore, minimize and deny the blatant and ongoing misogyny from Obama and his followers and continues to blame it all on "old feminists", I guarantee we won't get far.
Maybe she should try talking to me when she takes her head out of wherever it is...and THAT'S being charitable!
-
It's a victory to elect a feminist woman president
When you get down to it, it would be a great thing to elect a feminist woman president - and Hillary is one. It's a choice and a great one. And I as a woman can stand up and say so. Isn't this a great country?
But the implication that there are no younger Clinton suppporters or that Clinton supporters are "insert your age putdown here" is a transparent rhetorical ploy for someone trying to sell a book on "young feminists."
It's cheap and weak and not a proud moment for feminism to try to create drama of terrible older "mainstream" feminism in opposition to younger feminists. Frankly, that is feminism as learned in Disney movies where the evil older women plot against the ingenue. Somewhere there's a terrribbble MMMMainsssstream feminist plotting to take away the vote of a younger woman for Obama....OOOOOOOO, very scary!!! And the younger woman is sooooo noble and pure (like snow white or something). Very dramatic.
But honey, just vote and spare the drama. Say your opinion of candidates, but spare the hatred.
That sort of oppositional older vs younger drama sells, I have to admit. But it's not the feminism we're working for.
Younger feminists are strong and proud and do not need "foremother" hatred and put-downs to "mainstream feminism" to inspire them to be active. Women hating is something we do not need to curry. But I suppose women hating sells, particularly the encouragement of hating "older" women.
And it would be a great thing for article writers to not try to make hay by selling a product called "I'm against mainstream feminism" or "the usual suspects" of feminism and the problem with feminism is all about the older feminists.
How convenient. But it's not thoughtful or admirable. Not to mention, it hardly works toward the bringing together. And I suspect that across the years, the writer will be embarrassed by it. On the contrary, it's a about stirring up something to sell product. It's as charming as the FemiNazi approach of conservatives talking heads marketing themselves to who ever has the coin.