Letters to the Editor
-
Wow
I'm sure this comment will be lost in the deluge. This election has made me really sad. Clinton-hating, Obama-hating, hating Clinton-supporters, and now . . . hating Obama-supporters. Personally, I love both Obama and Clinton -- imperfections and all. And I love women that identify with Clinton as a powerful female within spitting distance of the presidency, and I love black people that see Obama as a transformationally powerful role model. Are some men uneasy with powerful women, and is that fueling support for Obama? Yes. Will that translate into votes for McCain -- probably, but hopefully not many. Is every male Obama supporter a closet sexist? No. Is every "feeling" that support for Obama is sexist legit? No. Is some of the support for Clinton based on racial fears? Yes. Is it likely that Traister has much contact with Clinton supporters with lots of racial fear? No. There's a lot of subconcious sentiment here, both in who we identify with, and how we view the supporters of other candiates. And, as this article shows, those perceptions drive lots of anger. Its good to give vent to that anger, but it's also important not to let it poision our party and turn the election over to McCain. Frankly, the fact that some racists may support Clinton doesn't dull my positive feelings for her one bit -- it'd only be if she actively courted that vote by stoking racial fears that my support for her would be affected. Likewsie with Obama. While some supporters of his may be sexists, unless he tries to court that vote (which, as far as I can tell, he certainly has not), the the feelings of those sexists have no impact on how I feel about the man.
-
So if we guys prefer Obama to Hillary we're sexists, now?
Did it ever occur to Ms. Traister that alot of people don't like Hillary simply because she's a deeply unlikable PERSON? If we guys were really down with Patriarchy, we would be supporting McCain. Duh. But here's the real deal, I'm supporting Obama because I think he has a better chance to win and I don't want another Republican in the White House. However, if Hillary wins the nomination, I will still support her as a Democrat. Now I'm a guy, and I will argue passionately for my cadidate - does that offend Ms. Traister's magical sexism sense? I think the real problem here is that sometimes people who "write about sexism for a living" need to invent new outrages to write about when none exist. Oy Vey!
-
isms
My wife, who is the primary breadwinner for our family, while I am the primary caretaker for our son, experiences sexism every day at work, from the pay scale to the casual remarks people make. And surely Clinton has had to deal with sexism in her life and during this campaign. At the same, time Obama has had to deal with racism (and even McCain is dealing with an ism--ageism), which is no less formidable than sexism, and I don't believe my support for Obama is sexist. I believe it's based on the merits.
In fact, from the beginning, I felt pretty much evenly split regarding Obama, Edwards, and Clinton (my early favorite, Kucinich, never had a chance). But Obama has run a campaign that has been remarkably above board; he brings a wonderful set of experiences to the table; he has a strikingly able mentality that bridges intellect, compassion, and judgment; and he has behaved in a consistently decent manner that I believe shows true integrity.
I think some of these things can be said of Clinton as well, but not all. That is why I support Obama. If he were a woman and Hillary were Bill, I think I'd still be supporting Obama. I believe he's just the better candidate, and if I sometimes get a faraway look in my eye about it, it's not because I'm being sexist, it's because I'm hopeful that he'll win and live up to my hopes. And if my support of him is made stronger by contrast with Clinton's skullduggery in recent weeks (or is it months now?), that's not sexism, it's just the result of comparing the two candidates on the merits.
One last thing: It's a trivial reason in the scheme of things, but one other small factor in Obama's favor, for me, is that I'm tired of Bill and don't want to hear his finger-wagging admonitions for four more years.
-
Verbal Strategies
You all should listen to yourselves as you want everyone else to listen.
1. We're TIRED of hearing about feminism.
2. This is BIGOTED
3. This isn't sexism; that's BIGOTED
4. It isn't Hillary, coupled with adjectives like "shrill" and "strident"
5. Insults, ranging from the scatological to the sexist plus the wish that someone with a wonderful wife and sons could have those sons dump the writer (four-letter works included)
6. There's no need for this discussion.
7. The dream machine.
8. MORE denunciations
9. Attempts, including inept economic analyses involving increase of site traffic, to invalidate the author, the editor and the site.
10. Justification by demographic other than the candidate's (although Hillary's background is still open season). To me, this sounds like a double standard.
11. Hillary should withdraw gracefully (how ladylike!).
Now, please make very sure you follow me on this: GRANTED, I am an Ivy League-educated Second Wave feminist who supports Hillary. GRANTED, like Obama and Hillary, I'm Midwestern-born. GRANTED, I am a liberal Democrat. Those are not the demographics from which I am now observing and posting.
I am observing and posting from the points of view of someone who has a Ph.D. in literary analysis (text, context, and subtext) to evaluate these posts. I am also posting from the point of view of someone who's been on the internet for almost 20 years and held my own in more than my share of flamewars.
To me, many of these posts, especially the repetitive, brief yelps, add up to polysyllabic STFU because you want people to. That is a strategy employed by sexists, but not only by them. It is also employed by people who want to argue from, or impose their own, authority when, as far as I can see it, they have no more authority than anyone else online: i.e., precisely as much as their articulacy can win for them.
What is the value of your communications? Are you achieving your goal, or are you making noise? That is not a set of rhetorical questions: it's a request for you to please consider.
As I am. Believe me, if I decide to be aggravating, you'll know. For now, I am trying to be wholly analytical.
If your candidate wins, I will be fighting beside you. But when you come up against the Republican meatgrinder, you WILL need to pay even more care not just to what you say, but how you say it.