Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Why Some Feminists Aren’t Supporting Hillary Clinton

Posted by Biodun , Firedoglake at 2:09 PM on January 25, 2008.


She remains highly suspect to her cohort: middle- and upper-middle-class educated and professional white women over 40 years old.
hillaryclintonhowardu400a062907

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Election 2008 in your
mailbox!

 

Quite a few feminist activists are not supporting Hillary Clinton in her bid for the presidency. And that may seem odd, given that she's the first viable woman candidate to run for the White House. She remains highly suspect to her cohort: middle- and upper-middle-class educated and professional white women over 40 years old.

Rebecca Traister gives her own reason why she's not supporting her:

Unlike its sister gem, "I'm not a feminist, but ..." (an utterance that nearly always gives away the fact that its speaker is in fact a feminist), the Hillary disavowal, in my case, has been true: I really am not a Hillary Clinton supporter. A feminist by trade, I have wished that I could get behind Clinton, a woman I admired when she first arrived in the White House 15 years ago. But there has been nothing in her steady, ineluctable move to the center that I could embrace; I understood why she did it, but it cost her my support.

And Frances Kissling states her own reason:

The sad fact is that Clinton has felt compelled to run as a stereotypical male. In her own mind it is only a certain kind of man who is qualified to be president and she will be that man: tough on everything from war, flag burning, kids' access to video games, illegal immigrants and Palestinians. She has missed the opportunity to talk about what it really means for women to be equal in this country. She has shown no interest in using her extensive international experience to push for more women in party leadership, state legislatures and even the Senate. A woman candidate who considered her gender a strength (as opposed to something she needed to overcome) would announce a series of measures specifically designed to ensure that women's needs and rights were at the forefront of her agenda.

In 30 Ways of Looking at Hillary, a recently published anthology in which thirty well-known women writers reflect on the candidate, Susan Morrison (who edited the book) says:

As I talked with women about their reactions to Hillary, some themes came up again and again. Many women were divided within themselves as to how they feel about her, and I noticed a familiar circle of guilt: these women believe they should support Hillary as a matter of solidarity. But, because they expect her to be different from (that is, better than) the average male politician, she invariably disappoints them; then they feel guilty about their ambivalence. Some feel competitive with her. Having wearily resigned themselves to the idea that "having it all" is too much to hope for, they view Hillary as a rebuke: how did she manage to pull it off--or, at least, to appear to pull it off? Other women say they want to like her but are disturbed by the anti-feminist message inherent in the idea of the first woman president getting to the White House on her husband's coattails.

All these reasons more or less span the spectrum of feminist reaction to Hillary Clinton, but perhaps her decision to stay with her husband during the Monica Lewinsky scandal seems to be at the core of why she's highly suspect to feminists.

And she has also been accused, by metonymy, of throwing highly accomplished women she had been close to under the bus during her husband's first term in the White House: Lani Guinier; Marian Wright Edelman; Zoe Baird; and Kimba Wood, among others. In fact, during the campaign for that first term, a reporter's question to her more or less captured her reputation as a polarizing figure in contemporary American politics: "You know, some people think of you as an inspiring female attorney mother, and other people think of you as the overbearing yuppie wife from hell," the reporter said. "How would you describe yourself?"

This last question is quite apt and cogent: Over fifty books have attempted to scrutinize her (the most recent cited above), but she remains unknowable and inscrutable, forever elusive even to those who are supposed to be close to her. "I'm a Rorschach test," Clinton herself once told a reporter, meaning the way people project into her their own preconceptions and obsessions, and how they see whatever they want to see in her. The most interesting point for me about Hillary Rodham Clinton is that in spite of all these books about her, she has managed to retain control over her own narrative, has managed to elude all the frames and grids people have constructed for her.

Digg!

Tagged as: clinton, feminists

Biodun is a blogger for FireDogLake


Broken Glass
This is no doubt one of the ugliest periods in American political history.
Post by DCap. October 11, 2008.
Bipartisan Concern About the Dangers of McPalin’s Hate-Mongering
"I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate ..."
Post by Emptywheel. October 10, 2008.
Stock Market Drops 107 Points During Bush's Speech on the Economy
That's the kind of confidence Bush inspires these days.
Post by Amanda Terkel. October 10, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
What's odd?
Posted by: Joshua Holland on Jan 25, 2008 2:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And that may seem odd, given that she's the first viable woman candidate to run for the White House.

Doesn't seem odd to me at all. Feminism is a political movement, and feminists, like everyone else, have multiple overlapping interests that influence their choice of candidate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's odd? Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: What's odd? Posted by: left_libertarian
» RE: What's odd? Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: What's odd? Posted by: YogiBear
Go Hillary
Posted by: Verjenie on Jan 25, 2008 2:40 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thought I'd just cut and paste some of her bio (previous to Bill)
Courtesy of Wikipedia:
Rodham attended the 1968 Republican National Convention in Miami, where she decided to leave the Republican Party for good; she was upset over how Richard Nixon's campaign had portrayed Rockefeller and what Rodham perceived as the "veiled" racist messages of the convention.[20]
Rodham returned to Wellesley, and wrote her senior thesis about the tactics of radical community organizer Saul Alinsky under Professor Schechter. In 1969, Rodham graduated with departmental honors in political science. Stemming from the demands of some students,[24] she became the first student in Wellesley College history to deliver their commencement address.[22] According to reports by the Associated Press, her speech received a standing ovation lasting seven minutes.[25][26] She was featured in an article published in Life magazine, due to the response to a part of her speech that criticized Senator Edward Brooke, who had spoken before her at the commencement;[8] she also appeared on Irv Kupcinet's nationally-syndicated television talk show as well as in Illinois and New England newspapers.[27] That summer, she worked her way across Alaska, washing dishes in Mount McKinley National Park and sliming salmon in a fish processing cannery in Valdez (which fired her and shut down overnight when she complained about unhealthy conditions).[28][29]
Law school
Rodham then entered Yale Law School, where she served on the Board of Editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action.[30] During her second year, she worked at the Yale Child Study Center,[31] learning about new research on early childhood brain development and working as a research assistant on the seminal work, Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (1973).[32][33] She also took on cases of child abuse at Yale-New Haven Hospital,[32] and volunteered at New Haven Legal Services to provide free advice for the poor.[31] In the summer of 1970, she was awarded a grant to work at Marian Wright Edelman's Washington Research Project, where she was assigned to Senator Walter Mondale's Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, researching migrant workers' problems in housing, sanitation, health and education;[34][35] Edelman would become a significant mentor to her.[35]
In the late spring of 1971, she began dating Bill Clinton, who was also a law student at Yale. That summer, she interned on child custody cases[36] at the Oakland, California, law firm of Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein,[37][38] which was well-known for its support of constitutional rights, civil liberties, and radical causes;[38] two of its four partners were current or former communist party members.[38][39][40] Clinton canceled his original summer plans in order to live with her in an apartment in Berkeley, California,[41] later writing, "I told her I'd have the rest of my life for my work and my ambition, but I loved her and I wanted to see if it could work out for us."[41] The romance did develop, and the couple continued living together in New Haven when they returned to law school.[39] The following summer, Rodham and Clinton campaigned in Texas for unsuccessful 1972 Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern.[42][43] She received a Juris Doctor degree from Yale in 1973,[8] having spent an extra year there in order to be with Clinton.[44] Clinton first proposed marriage to her following graduation, but she declined at the time.[44] She began a year of post-graduate study on children and medicine at the Yale Child Study Center.[45] Her first scholarly paper, "Children Under the Law", was published in the Harvard Educational Review in late 1973[46] and became frequently cited in the field.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: Verjenie
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: Verjenie
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: rury
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Go Hillary S/B GO AWAY!! Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» Bio invites lots of questions. Posted by: bluesmanjohnson
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: jmooney
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: 2dogarage
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: Go Hillary Posted by: anna132
so...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jan 25, 2008 6:26 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its not odd that they don't automatically vote for anyone with the right genitals.

Seems sort of sexist to suggest it is odd that they don't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

exactly, joshua!
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Jan 25, 2008 11:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
voting for hillary because she is a women is just as sexist and stupid as not voting for her because she is a woman...

i will not vote for hillary because she does not reflect what i think this country needs...in fact, since kucinich announced his withdrawal from the presidential race, i will not be voting for anyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: exactly, joshua! Posted by: kabac55
Would Anyone Care for a Freshly Sharpened #2 Pencil?....
Posted by: Turiye on Jan 26, 2008 2:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
________________, put pencil in hand of ones choosing, proceed to 'Write in Candidate', DENNIS KUCINICH...........

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why President Hillary Clinton Would Be Dangerous
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jan 26, 2008 7:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What scares me about Hillary is that she is the type to immediately start a war as soon as she takes office just to prove she is a man. I am not saying this because she is a woman. I am saying this because this is H Clinton's MO. She tries so hard to look tough, she could be just as dangerous a president as any Republican.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Triangulation seems more accurate than Rorschach test.
Posted by: Christie on Jan 26, 2008 9:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Triangulation seems more accurate to describe Hillary than Rorschach test. Here is a definition of triangulation (politics) from Wikipedia. Triangulation is the act of a candidate presenting his or her ideology as being "above" and "between" the left and right sides of the political spectrum. It involves adopting for oneself some of the ideas of one's political opponent. The logic behind it is that it not only takes good ideas away from your opponent, but that it insulates you from attacks on that particular issue. Seems to me that her votes to support Bush’s war and her adaption of Obama’s emphasis on change are two good examples. Maybe she triangulates so we can react to her as we would to a Rorschach test or in other words, all things to all people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Open up your minds and get active, people!!
Posted by: realmuzik on Jan 26, 2008 1:58 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are other party candidates who would LOVE to have your vote. Resist the Dems' schemes forcing you to vote for one of their own. STAND UP FOR TRUE DEMOCRACY AND VOTE FOR CADIDATES WHO ARE MOST QUALIFIED TO LEAD. Wanna write in Dennis Kucinich? Go for it! ;-)

Worried Ralph Nader will run again? Should he decide to, he will not appear on the ballots of states with Democratic legislative and even gubernatorial controls--guaranteed. Wishing he would run again? Start collecting signatures.

Let's also send a LOUD AND CLEAR message to the Conglomerate media reminding them that THEY DO NOT RUN THE COUNTRY. Given their coverage of the campaign so far, it's as if THEY are running for President and NOT any of the candidates. The airwaves are supposed to BELONG TO US, not RULE US.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nader supports Edwards Posted by: 2dogarage
No, that's not the reason
Posted by: Linda in VT on Jan 26, 2008 2:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
White, well over 40, overeducated, liberal, feminist from the first lap of the Second Wave, I do not hold it against Hillary Clinton that she stayed with her husband after Lewinsky. It's her right and her decision; get over it.

But I don't support her for President (and I most emphatically DO support John Edwards!) because he has grown beyond his Democratic Leadership Council origins and she's still stuck there, in the supposed "center" = center-right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another diversion
Posted by: Julian on Jan 26, 2008 9:30 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My, how the “identity” navel-gazers like the blogger “Biodum” – unaccountably given a megaphone by Alternet – cut and slice the ever-narrowing apolitical “identity groups” with which they seek to persuade Americans not to vote for any principle whatsoever. Hillary Clinton’s “cohort” is supposed by this blogger as “white, middle class, educated, professional, female”.

Here’s a real political and moral identity group the navel-gazers might contemplate: War criminals. Vulgar to say this, I know. War criminals invade other countries, plunder their assets, murder their citizens, and try to crush resistance. They have their own traditions and infest every nation – Google “Nuremberg trials”. Aiding and abetting criminals is a criminal act. Voting in Congress for appropriations for criminals is a criminal act. America is currently ruled by war criminals and first cab off the rank for support must be those – whatever age group or gender of “ethnicity” or taste in hat style – are not war criminals and will work unambiguously to bring them to book. This is what America as a nation did when it fought to crush yesteryear's crop of dangerous war criminals in the 1940s. That focus needs to be regained now that the disease has taken root in America itself and its satellites.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The right to choose
Posted by: Northshorewoman on Jan 27, 2008 5:58 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every time I read that any woman critcizes Hillary Clinton for her choice to stay with her husband, I am surprised by the feeling of disappointment I have in those women. First of all, it is not our business, second of all it has nothing to do with how one does one's job, and last of all, the real disappointment lies in the fact that we do not support each other, despite the choices we make. I am a Hillary supporter, but I am supporting her because I believe she is the best person for the job and because I can do that without judging other women's choices --particularly their personal choices. I can only hope our leading feminists who judge her for her personal choices will recognize that they are not being true to or serving their own cause. Judge her on her merits and not on what you believe she should have done in her personal life -- Please!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the reason in a soundbite
Posted by: pbutler on Jan 27, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of all the Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton is the most Republican.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the reason in a soundbite Posted by: colleenwhalen
Let's punish her!
Posted by: cajel2 on Jan 27, 2008 1:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, Hillary is too cold to be our feminist heroine. And she had the nerve to disappoint us by not kicking her philandering husband to the curb! We know she is mean, uncaring, secretly a republican,in cahoots with big business, not promoting women's rights...But oops, I forgot, she is unknowable,..I'm confused...Which Hillary bashing book should I read? Uh, how about starting with her autobiography?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Throwing Women Under the Bus? That's a stretch and unfair
Posted by: colleenwhalen on Jan 27, 2008 7:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Zoe Baird was earning $500,000 a year as a judge and paying an illegal immigrant nanny $5.00 an hour to work as a babysitter/housekeeper. IMHO, Hillary didn't do anything to "throw her under the bus". Zoe Baird's nomination was torpedoed due to her own skinflint, exploitaton of her undocumented nanny. Lanie Guinier's nomination fell apart when it was brought to light that she was actually Anti-Constiutional. Hillary and Marian Wright-Edelman are still extremely close friends. I didn't think the section which alleged Hillary abandoned her female cohorts was founded on a shred of evidence or truth.

That being said, I loathe Hillary and consider her a Carpetbagger limply trying to masquerade as a friend of the working class. Look at the money trail - her PAC campaign donations are from corporate HMO's, Big Pharma pharmaceuticals and military defense contractors.

I voted for Bill Clinton twice in the 1990's and was a gung-ho supporter. I lost respect for them after they left the White House. It was Hillary's escapade as a furniture theif and unrepetent kleptomainac which initially turned me against her. Upon vacating the White House and moving to New York, Hillary unabashedly stole doeznes of pieces of priceless antiques and furniture, paintings and objects d' art from the White House which were government property. When the White House curator insisted she return the stolen property she nearly burst an artery and denied she stole the antiques, insisting it was her property. Only upon threat of criminal arrest did she begrudgingly return the items.

After leaving office, the Clintons appear to have abandoned all of their progressive values and morphed into becoming "Republicrats". What iced it for me, was when Hillary was among the most strident, pro-war Hawks wanting permanenet military bases in Iraq. It wasn't until she was hammered by other presidential contenders that she finally, under extreme duress softened her stance on Iraq. She has consistently voted YES to keep funding the war and wasn't interested in withdrawing troops until she realized a few months ago it was politically expedient to be viewed as wanting to end the war in Iraq.

Her version of national health insurance would benefit pharmaceutical companies and HMO's and not the American people - tantamount to Bush's horrid Medicare Prescription Drug plan - Hillary's nationalized health insurance would reap huge profits for Big Pharma and HMO's.

I don't give a damn she enabled her husband to be a skirt-chasing adulterer - they've always had an "open marriage" - when they were in college he cheated on her according to their close friends. What DOES bother me is that Hillary knowingly has enabled her husband's sexual assaults on several women who he tried to coerce into having sex with. 90% of the women he committed adultery with were groupies who consented to having sex with him - 10% of the women were victims of his unwanted sexual advances. He has a sexual addiction, and from what I understand - he currently has a girlfriend. Their "open marriage" is nobody's business - but his disgusting habit of forcing unwilling women to have sex with him, made me lose respect for Hillary. Feminists don't enable husbands who committ attempted rape.

I'm voting for Obama in the February 5th California primary on Super Tuesday. I really like John Edwards a lot more than Obama, but now that he's trailing behind in third place, a vote for Obama is the only way I know how to keep Hillary from getting the Democrat Party nominationat the convention.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]