posted on May 11, 2008 10:33:57 PM new
The Fight Stuff
By SUSAN FALUDI
Published: May 9, 2008
San Francisco
Kim Bost
NOTABLE in the Indiana and North Carolina primary results and in many recent polls are signs of a change in the gender weather: white men are warming to Hillary Clinton — at least enough to vote for her. It’s no small shift. These men have historically been her fiercest antagonists. Their conversion may point less to a new kind of male voter than to a new kind of female vote-getter.
Pundits have been quick to attribute the erosion in Barack Obama’s white male support to a newfound racism. What they have failed to consider is the degree to which white male voters witnessing Senator Clinton’s metamorphosis are being forced to rethink precepts they’ve long held about women in American politics.
For years, the prevailing theory has been that white men are often uneasy with female politicians because they can’t abide strong women. But if that’s so, why haven’t they deserted Senator Clinton? More particularly, why haven’t they deserted her as she has become ever more pugnacious in her campaign?
Maybe the white male electorate just can’t abide strong women whom they suspect of being of a certain sort. To adopt a particularly lamentable white male construct, the sports metaphor, political strength comes in two varieties: the power of the umpire, who controls the game by application of the rules but who never gets hit; and the power of the participant, who has no rules except to hit hard, not complain, bounce back and endeavor to prevail in the end.
For virtually all of American political history, the strong female contestant has been cast not as the player but the rules keeper, the purse-lipped killjoy who passes strait-laced judgment on feral boy fun. The animosity toward the rules keeper is fueled by the suspicion that she (and in American life, the regulator is inevitably coded feminine, whatever his or her sex) is the agent of people so privileged that they don’t need to fight, people who can dominate more decisively when the rules are decorous. American political misogyny is inflamed by anger at this clucking overclass: who are they to do battle by imposing rectitude instead of by actually doing battle?
The specter of the prissy hall monitor is, in part, the legacy of the great female reformers of Victorian America. In fact, these women were the opposite of fainting flowers. Susan B. Anthony barely flinched in the face of epithets, hurled eggs and death threats. Carry A. Nation swung an ax. Yet they were regarded by men as the regulators outside the game. Indeed, many 19th-century female reformers defined themselves that way — as reluctant trespassers in the public sphere who had left the domestic circle only to fulfill their duty as the morally superior sex, housekeepers scouring away a nation’s vice.
While the populace might concede the merits of the female reformers’ cause, it found them repellent on a more glandular level. In that visceral subbasement of the national imagination — the one that underlies all the blood-and-guts sports imagery our culture holds so dear — the laurels go to the slugger who ignores the censors, the outrider who navigates the frontier without a chaperone.
Certainly through the many early primaries, Hillary Clinton was often defined by these old standards, and judged harshly. She was forever the entitled chaperone. But that was then. As Thelma, the housewife turned renegade, says to her friend in “Thelma & Louise” as the two women flee the law through the American West, “Something’s crossed over in me.”
Senator Clinton might well say the same. In the final stretch of the primary season, she seems to have stepped across an unstated gender divide, transforming herself from referee to contender.
What’s more, she seems to have taken to her new role with a Thelma-like relish. We are witnessing a female competitor delighting in the undomesticated fray. Her new no-holds-barred pugnacity and gleeful perseverance have revamped her image in the eyes of begrudging white male voters, who previously saw her as the sanctioning “sivilizer,” a political Aunt Polly whose goody-goody directives made them want to head for the hills.
It’s the unforeseen precedent of an unprecedented candidacy: our first major female presidential candidate isn’t doing what men always accuse women of doing. She’s not summoning the rules committee over every infraction. (Her attempt to rewrite the rules for Michigan and Florida are less a timeout than rough play.) Not once has she demanded that the umpire stop the fight. Indeed, she’s asking for more unregulated action, proposing a debate with no press-corps intermediaries.
If anyone has been guarding the rules this election, it’s been the press, which has been primly thumbing the pages of Queensberry and scolding her for being “ruthless” and “nasty,” a “brawler” who fights “dirty.”
But while the commentators have been tut-tutting, Senator Clinton has been converting white males, assuring them that she’s come into their tavern not to smash the bottles, but to join the brawl.
Deep in the American grain, particularly in the grain of white male working-class voters, that is the more trusted archetype. Whether Senator Clinton’s pugilism has elevated the current race for the nomination is debatable. But the strategy has certainly remade the political world for future female politicians, who may now cast off the assumption that when the going gets tough, the tough girl will resort to unilateral rectitude. When a woman does ascend through the glass ceiling into the White House, it will be, in part, because of the race of 2008, when Hillary Clinton broke through the glass floor and got down with the boys.
--
_____________________
posted on May 12, 2008 11:54:05 AM new
An unusual view of Clinton's campaign. Can't say that I agree with the writer. Clinton smashing through the glass floor to fight hard and dirty is a fun image but I would hardly say this equates to Clinton being the great groundbreaker. (I think this is what the writer is alluding to, but maybe I misread her)? There have been other women more outspoken, more innovative and more courageous than Clinton. The fact that they never ran for president has less to do with their ballsiness and more to do with the fact they didn't have coattails to hang on to. Just MHO.
posted on May 12, 2008 01:01:18 PM new
To me, it seems everything Clinton does is contrived. I really don't think she "got down with the boys" as much as she PRETENDED to get down with the boys. I don't think she has a spontaneous bone in her body or thought in her head. She has metamorphed into a cipher ... what she says and does and how she acts is all designed to get votes. I wonder if there really is a human being inside the Hillary-persona any more.
It is time for a woman to break through the glass ceiling but I don't think Hillary's problem is gender. The lady has no soul.
-------------------------------------
posted on May 12, 2008 07:21:37 PM new
I noticed when men go on stage or on TV(same thing),they wear a suit and a tie,Obama was on CNN and he wears a dark blue suit with a white shirt.
But I dont recall Hilary ever wearing a business attire?
Does it hurt or help?
Lately she has been wearing heavy makeup and she could use a haircut and I thought one big complaint men have for women is 'Too much makeup' or does it matter anymore?
You never know whether she is going to stroll down the aisle of Bloomingdale orgoing to give a speech on healthcare reform?
*
Lets all stop whining !
posted on May 12, 2008 11:22:43 PM new
Hwahwa: Hillary IS wearing business attire! (Unless you think she should be wearing a tie, too, which is too cutesy by far.) I don't know where you live, but women in business these days wear jackets and bottoms (skirts or pants) in nice fabrics. I think she's been dressing very appropriately, although I don't like dark brown or black on her, even with a bright blouse.
_____________________
posted on May 13, 2008 12:04:28 PM new
This is a column by Stanley Crouch, addressing the "white working class" appeal Hillary Clinton is so proud of. It is rather long, but interesting.
Enemies of 'elite' Barack Obama show contempt for education
Monday, May 12th 2008, 4:00 AM
Gardner/Getty
Barack Obama
Nothing has been quite as exciting and as disappointing or even disgusting as the grand drama of this Democratic contest for the nomination.
We have seen Barack Obama rise and, with a new tone, make biracial identity a public fact of American life. We have also seen Americans reinvigorated, surging with a refreshing patriotism that is fully aware of the country's shortcomings.
We have seen America's history of struggling toward fairness become, perhaps for the first time, a common heritage that crossed lines of color, class, religion, region and sexual identity.
In Obama's world, every American can lay claim to the Constitution, to the Abolition movement, to the destruction of the slavery system by the Civil War, to women getting the vote, to organized labor, to the defeat of fascism and to the victories of the Civil Rights movement. Those were not the struggles and the victories of special interest groups.
As Patrick Buchanan predicted, the only hope for Obama's foes was to knock him off of his pedestal and into the mud-wrestling we have seen define our politics. But the Rev. Jeremiah Wright was the big bomb that didn't quite go off.
Wright's ethnic Gong Show - and the vast right-wing conspiracy that Hillary Clinton joined when she helped to give it credence - may have allowed Clinton to greasily slip through the door of victory in Indiana, but it raised issues that should make us stop on a dime.
Columbia- and Harvard-educated, bad-bowling Obama is an elite, the conservatives - and the Clintons - claim. He is out of touch with the working class, they say.
It has become commonplace for the predictable millionaire puppets of Fox News and their conservative talk radio counterparts to present themselves as the voices of the working class in combat with an educated elite from places like Harvard.
But beneath those cliches fester ideas that are deeply anti-democratic.
They are anti-democratic because they scoff at this basic truth: Education is the key to social mobility in our country. The stereotyped working class has no innate limits. It has produced the majority of doctors, engineers, architects, educators and others who realized the dreams of their families by studying hard and moving into careers quite different from those of their parents and their neighbors.
Education has always been viewed as suspect by everyone from slave owners to totalitarians. Wherever in the world you find them, they share one hostility: They hate books.
The presidency is not an Academy Award for Best Performance as a bowler, a fast food gobbler, a whisky and beer guzzler, a hard-hat-wearer or a hunter. We ought to know how far leadership capabilities are from surfaces, slogans and costumes.
And we should be ever suspicious of anyone or any group that scorns education, that pretends to believe that only the simple and the uncomplicated can express the national ethos.
That is absolutely ridiculous in a country from which so much technological and scientific innovation has come. Tell that to Thomas Edison, the Wright Brothers or Bill Gates, none of whom were from the upper class. Or are we to believe they were just simple men looking for a loud bar and a cold beer?
The precious opportunity that our democracy provides is the chance to stop, look, listen and think through all that history has taught us about the bottom and about the top.
Real leadership is something internal, not superficial, and should be judged by substance, policy and solutions that are empathetic but realistic, inventive, fiscally responsible and feasible. No one knows the taste of pie in the sky, but we have all felt and smelled the putrid humidity of hot air.
posted on May 14, 2008 05:33:29 AM new
I wish some of the women journalists will stop making gender related degrading remarks on Hilary Clinton,it shows how petty and shallow they are,it shows they cannot rise above the gender barrier to offer the readers a clear objective opinion of what is going on .
*
Lets all stop whining !
posted on May 14, 2008 09:34:41 AM new
""I wish some of the women journalists will stop making gender related degrading remarks on Hilary Clinton,it shows how petty and shallow they are,it shows they cannot rise above the gender barrier to offer the readers a clear objective opinion of what is going on ."""
You mean like you did in your first post?
Have you discussed any of the ISSUES? Like her stupid gas tax relief farce? How does her Health Care Plan compare to Obama's?
OK, so let's say Hillary wore the exact same thing the men did...dark suit, lighter shirt, matching tie....EVERY man wears it...she would be criticised for THAT!
Why aren't you discussing just what shade of navy blue McCain looks best in?? Haircut? isn't he bald with a comb over!!!!!!
Oh, and the MALE politicians wear makeup especially for TV and photo OPs......Gee, a man wearing makeup...gotta wonder if I'll vote for HIM!!!Unless, of course, his makeup is perfect!
Oh, BTW, Men LOVE women in heavy makeup(and pay them lotsa money for their services)...just not their wives or girlfriends !
Hillary will do anything to get a vote???
Well, ya....she's spending millions to run for President of the United States...she OWES her contributors that effort..
Any male politicians out there that you think aren't doing everything they can to win election????? Women should run for office and not care if they get elected????
posted on May 14, 2008 10:11:37 AM new
Well said, Mingo! Nice to see you pop up here again.
McCain was a guest on Regis & Kelly and I just caught the last of it - he was talking about the number of people employed on eBay and he said 'that is the future of America' - like it was the new job opportunities to look forward to. He's kind of clueless if he's banking on that to save the economy.
posted on May 14, 2008 12:13:38 PM new
"Hillary will do anything to get a vote???
Well, ya....she's spending millions to run for President of the United States...she OWES her contributors that effort..
Any male politicians out there that you think aren't doing everything they can to win election????? Women should run for office and not care if they get elected????"
We all know what both male and female candidates will do to get elected. In my opinion, Clinton is way over the top in this area, a la the Bushies. The gas tax foolishness is just one example. Pandering at its worst for both Clinton and McCain. Obama could have taken the easy way and agreed, but he chose to be more honest and realistic. At the beginning of the campaign, Clinton said she did not think Michigan and Florida were important (she agreed along with all the democratic candidates, that they would not participate in the primaries in those states.) Now, that she is behind in the numbers, she is rabid about those votes being counted. The story she kept repeating about being strafed with gunfire at the airport; the covert racism--all of these don't sit well with me. It is not because she is a woman--I vote for the candidate, not the gender or race. However, there are many in this country who consider gender or race before issues or character. Unfortunately, I doubt anyone could get elected these days without white lies and spin, but these Clintonisms take it to a different level. JMHO
posted on May 14, 2008 04:05:51 PM new
Well,my first post is to ask how you folks feel about Hilary's appearance?
Should she wear more business like attire and the answer is supplied by Roadsmith -she is wearing business attire.
The next question is -is she wearing too much makeup?
Well,the answer came from MINGOTREE(DRUMROLL PLEASE),that her male counterparts wear makeup,so why not her?
I am referring to some rather condescending remarks on her by Peggy Noonan and some other female journalist that she is a blond man with breast wearing pantsuits and a cartoon of her strapped and tied and left at the railroad track so it would all be on our conscience if she is killed!
I guess I will sign off and beat up my dog ,I need to #*!@ on someone or something today!
*
Lets all stop whining !
posted on May 14, 2008 04:12:05 PM new
BTW,
talk is cheap,whether it is a gasoline plan or healthcare plan.
The fact is ,as of now,we dont have any of these plans!
I promise all of you a chance to be a billionaire if you just vote for me and I dont mean the White House,all you have to do is to write my name on a sheet of toilet paper and mail it to address which I will reveal soon.
And it does not stop there,you also get to be the most glamorous man/woman ,the most admired,the most loved and sought after man/woman wherever you reside.
Wanna live in Siberia,no problem,I will make sure you are loved and adored by all the natives there.
I also promise all of you a fulfilling spiritual life and a ticket to Heaven,I have my connection,I can bend His ears,no matter what you do in this world.
posted on May 14, 2008 04:48:00 PM new
McCain was a guest on Regis & Kelly and I just caught the last of it - he was talking about the number of people employed on eBay and he said 'that is the future of America' - like it was the new job opportunities to look forward to. He's kind of clueless if he's banking on that to save the economy.
/////////////////////////////////////////
If it quacks like a duck and it walks like a duck,then it is a duck!
Look at yourself in the mirror and ask why are you selling on Ebay?
It is not the future of America,it is the now of America,may be in the future the cyber landscape will change for the better-better organised and better service.
Just because he said many of us sell on Ebay does not mean he is banking on it to save the economy?where did you hear him said that?
Just think -did Henry Ford start tinkering with his car in a spacious factory with a team of college degreed engineers bringing him the tools ?Did Steve Job sit in an air conditioned office and have some secretary bring him a cup of coffee and hold all incoming calls so he can focus on his first design of the personal computer?
Just because some of us do not think much of Ebay as a job does not mean others are doing poorly.
*
Lets all stop whining !
posted on May 14, 2008 08:46:20 PM new
Hwahwa, I certainly meant no offense to you or anyone else that sells on ebay, many do make a living and many others supplement their income that way.
Seriously, I doubt McCain gave much notice to ebay until he teamed up with Meg Whitman so his comments about it being the future for America sound like he's a decade behind in time when it comes to a solution for job losses. Years ago there was more hope for a venue like ebay to evolve into something promising and I don't see that optimism now. To me it's just another example of McCain being behind the times and not quite in touch with the economy. JMHO
posted on May 16, 2008 12:04:27 PM new
Kiara, McCain, being a repub, meant people like MEG can makes lotsa money with ebay....he thinks we're all like Meg....poor old slob hasn't a clue.
posted on May 17, 2008 08:34:37 PM new
coach, I really enjoyed reading the column you posted here. I would never have dreamed that a black man would run for president and be seen as the elitist/education candidate, and a white woman would represent the working class.
I guess some people need a reason not to vote for Obama.
I saw some West Virginian women interviewed after their election last week as to why they didn't vote for Obama.
#1: I just don't like the name "Hussein."
#2: I'm not ready to vote for a black man.
#3: He's Muslim, of course, and I can't vote for a Muslim.
And these people are allowed to procreate.
_____________________
posted on May 22, 2008 11:16:28 AM new
Hi Roadsmith, Just got back from a cruise to Bermuda--heavenly though colder than I had hoped. I am starved for news and my campaign fix.
It is amazing to listen to reasons given for voting or not voting for a candidate. This year with racism and sexism involved, it is even more mind-boggling.
posted on May 22, 2008 05:02:00 PM new
It would have been interesting to ask those poll answerers who said they'd never vote for a black man the following:
Q: Obama is as much white as he is black. If he looked white instead of looking black but you knew he was half black, would you still not vote for him?
You gotta give those people some credit. At least they wear their bigotry on their sleeves and aren't ashamed of it.
