Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
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.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Reproductive Justice and Gender

Goodbye to All That -- This Time, In The Elections

By Robin Morgan, Women's Media Center. Posted February 5, 2008.


Long-time feminist Robin Morgan updates her famous essay, arguing that Hillary Clinton is the most qualified and the most ground-breaking candidate.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

AlterNet is a non profit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by our writers are their own.

"Goodbye To All That" was my (in)famous 1970 essay breaking free from a politics of accommodation especially affecting women (for an online version, see http://blog.fair-use.org/category/chicago/).

During my decades in civil-rights, anti-war, and contemporary women's movements, I've avoided writing another specific "Goodbye … " But not since the suffrage struggle have two communities -- joint conscience-keepers of this country -- been so set in competition, as the contest between Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC) and Barack Obama (BO) unfurls. So.

Goodbye to the double standard …

-Hillary is too ballsy but too womanly, a Snow Maiden who's emotional, and so much a politician as to be unfit for politics.

-She's "ambitious" but he shows "fire in the belly." (Ever had labor pains?)

-When a sexist idiot screamed "Iron my shirt!" at HRC, it was considered amusing; if a racist idiot shouted "Shine my shoes!" at BO, it would've inspired hours of airtime and pages of newsprint analyzing our national dishonor.

-Young political Kennedys -- Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby Jr. -- all endorsed Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort "See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him." (Personally, I'm unimpressed with Caroline's longing for the Return of the Fathers. Unlike the rest of the world, Americans have short memories. Me, I still recall Marilyn Monroe's suicide, and a dead girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in Chappaquiddick).

Goodbye to the toxic viciousness …

Carl Bernstein's disgust at Hillary's "thick ankles." Nixon-trickster Roger Stone's new Hillary-hating 527 group, "Citizens United Not Timid" (check the capital letters). John McCain answering "How do we beat the bitch?" with "Excellent question!" Would he have dared reply similarly to "How do we beat the black bastard?" For shame.

Goodbye to the HRC nutcracker with metal spikes between splayed thighs. If it was a tap-dancing blackface doll, we would be righteously outraged -- and they would not be selling it in airports. Shame.

Goodbye to the most intimately violent T-shirts in election history, including one with the murderous slogan "If Only Hillary had married O.J. Instead!" Shame.

Goodbye to Comedy Central's "Southpark" featuring a storyline in which terrorists secrete a bomb in HRC's vagina. I refuse to wrench my brain down into the gutter far enough to find a race-based comparison. For shame.

Goodbye to the sick, malicious idea that this is funny. This is not "Clinton hating," not "Hillary hating." This is sociopathic woman-hating. If it were about Jews, we would recognize it instantly as anti-Semitic propaganda; if about race, as KKK poison. Hell, PETA would go ballistic if such vomitous spew were directed at animals. Where is our sense of outrage -- as citizens, voters, Americans?

Goodbye to the news-coverage target-practice …

The women's movement and Media Matters wrung an apology from MSNBC's Chris Matthews for relentless misogynistic comments. But what about NBC's Tim Russert's continual sexist asides and his all-white-male panels pontificating on race and gender? Or CNN's Tony Harris chuckling at "the chromosome thing" while interviewing a woman from The White House Project? And that's not even mentioning Fox News.

Goodbye to pretending the black community is entirely male and all women are white …

Surprise! Women exist in all opinions, pigmentations, ethnicities, abilities, sexual preferences, and ages--not only African American and European American but Latina and Native American, Asian American and Pacific Islanders, Arab American and -- hey, every group, because a group wouldn't exist if we hadn't given birth to it. A few non-racist countries may exist -- but sexism is everywhere. No matter how many ways a woman breaks free from other discriminations, she remains a female human being in a world still so patriarchal that it's the "norm."

So why should all women not be as justly proud of our womanhood and the centuries, even millennia, of struggle that got us this far, as black Americans, women and men, are justly proud of their struggles?


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: elections, gender, barack obama, hillary clinton

Robin Morgan's new book, Fighting Words: A Toolkit for Combating the Religious Right, comes out in September (Nation Books). She is a co-founder of The Women's Media Center.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

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:
Litmus Test
Posted by: LMNOP on Feb 5, 2008 6:53 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was and is no acceptable excuse for voting to authorize Bush to go to war. It was clear by 2002 that Bush and Cheney were hawks and liars and not to be trusted about weapons of mass destruction or matters related to oil, that he and the neocons had been champing at the bit for war with Iraq since 1998 or earlier (Project for a New America), that Hussein and 911 were not related and that the appropriate response to terrorism, if there were foreign terrorists at all, was a police action, not a military response. What did I forget?

I knew not to authorize that war, so Senator Clinton did too. Yet she did, and continued to support the war effort thereafter. Who does she represent if not Halliburton and the corporatocracy? If she was sincerely looking out for our interests and not deliberately sustaining the war to bolster corporate profits, then her judgment is abysmal and unacceptable. What else do you need to know to disqualify her?

As far as her being a woman, so what? What we need is a feminine sensibility, not two X chromosomes behaving like a man. Clarence Thomas is black. So what? He's as antithetical to black interests as Strom Thurmond was, and as a black man, more dangerous for it. Likewise Hillary. Gore and Kerry were both more in touch with their feminine side than Hillary.

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

» Afterthoughts Posted by: LMNOP
GROW UP!
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Feb 5, 2008 8:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Got it. Excellent article. Think I'll read it again. ANNA

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

Thank you Robin
Posted by: Arlene on Feb 5, 2008 8:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I joined the National Organization for Women back in 1973 and am gratified that NOW has endorsed Hillary for President. The traditional media has sunk back into its sexist morass that it occupied prior to the 1970's. What is different, though is that many of the news readers are now heavily made up, dyed blonde attractive thin women. Print media are likely to have female bylines although editors are still male and determine content and presentation.

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

It's not the gender, or any of the side issues you mentioned.
Posted by: rickiey on Feb 6, 2008 10:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sometimes opposition to a candidate, has nothing to do with the gender or race. Occassionally, and yes, the media typically neglects to mention it, but on occassion, its the actual positions.

That is the case with Hillary. When you look at Hillary's stance on almost ever position, it is obvious that she takes the side of government control over personal responsibility. She is a socialist, barely masquerading as a progressive. She believes that you can measure opportunity based on outcome (a rediculous concept). She was the largest supporter of the Iraq (not named Bush or Cheney), claiming that she knew it was the right thing to do from the information she got during her time in the White House. Obviously her honesty is in question and has been for quite some time. A former board member of Walmart is NOT a person to expect to help unions, nor cut down on the imports from China.
This is why I'm voting against her. These are the reasons that most people who are voting against her are doing so. None of them have anything to do with her gender, or woman's rights. Villifying people because they disagree with the person that you support because (as you put it), you're a woman, is placing sexism INTO the political arena, a place that it does not belong.

I fully support women's rights. Most thinking people do. But I won't support a dishonest closet socialist in the name of women's rights.

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

terrible article
Posted by: lovepassionfury on Feb 6, 2008 11:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary would not be a good president. End of story. Theres no way around it.
1. shes part of the estabolishment. She will change NOTHING.
2. While on the walmart board she did nothing to help the unions...
3. she has almost no experience, even though experience does not necesarily equate to quality.
4. Does anyone else see anything wrong with bush/clinton/bush/clinton
5. little off topic but needs to be said. Bill Clinton was not a great president when it comes to the economy as everyone says he was. HE had the fortune to be president when the internet hit. the internet is the most powerful force created since the nuclear bomb and is more responsible for the great economy than anything he did.
6. Shes for NAFTA and wants to increase it? export more jobs, sounds good hilldawg.

Let me just say, i would love a woman president. im just as sick of this dominant monkey ego male shit as im sure you are.
BUT HILLARY IS NOT THAT WOMAN! this country cant afford her right now. Sure her ideas sound good as sound bytes- "universal health care" but that would bankrupt us at the moment.

i havent heard her say anything about the federal reserve.. that should be a red flag to anyone with 2 brain cells. How can she be for america if shes for the reserve which is probly the single greatest threat to the economy and the world. please google the reserve and find out what exactly it does..aka print money out of thin air.

Im a democrat, however this season im voting for republican ron paul (kinda ironic since its my first election i can vote in). Ron Paul is the only candidate left who is actualy for the people, not political or dynastic power. Please google ron paul and see what he stands for b/c the mainstream media certainly wont!

also id just like to point out that the womans movement was started by masonry. Because, they could only tax half the population (men)and why not have the ability to tax them all?
its a rather sad point! But yes i would like to point out that there is a "good 'ol boy" network that wants to keep things the way they are and unfortunately hillary is just another part of it. same with obama! CFR anyone?

"The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the American Branch of a society which originated in England... (and) ...believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established."
- Carroll Quigley, member of Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), mentor to Bill Clinton

these people are agents of change yes, but is that change in your favor?

sorry about the spelling and whatnot

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

This Article is Another Classic
Posted by: Equalitynow on Feb 7, 2008 2:10 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wonderful, fabulous, thought-provoking!It is hard to comment on perfection. I have been emailing this wonderful article to all my friends. This article is an explanation of the both subtle and overt sexism and misogny which has been so pervasive in the political talk media (TV and radio)and in the blogs aainst Hillary Clinton.

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

This Arcticle is Offensive to Young Women and Not Truly Feminist
Posted by: vegangypsie on Feb 8, 2008 4:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To imply that the only reason a young woman would support Barack Obama is "to win male approval" denies my agency in the political process. I am a feminist, a professional woman (an engineer in fact), and a proud Obama supporter for many reasons, not the least of which is Hillary's support of the Iraq war, which I had the foresight to oppose from the start, and was amazed at how many didn't. It seems Obama was one of the very few with common sense. Hillary engages in behavior you would not let her get away with as a male, and would probably blame on too much testosterone if she did posses a y chromosome.

I think that some of your ageist rhetoric is due to a cognitive disonance in the baby boomer generation. You were never supposed to get old - "never trust anyone over 30" and all that - and now you are all 60, this wasn't supposed to happen; youthful optimism is supposed to belong to only you. You bemoaned the "apathy" of the youth until it evaporated and threatened your status-quo. Please consider the possibility that a healthier way to deal with these changes may be to work with the younger generation of feminists, and maybe even listen to their input. Many of us feel that different types of oppression and -isms are related, and that they must all end for any of us to be really free. Consider being more open to the young idealism that once was the basis of so much of what you now point to as your feminist accomplishments.

my feelings about this type of HRC supporter are more eloquently expressed in the article "Feminist Ultimatums: Not In Our Name" by Kimberle Crenshaw and Eve Ensler. Which can be found on huffingtonpost.com. If something about Robin Morgan's article felt wrong to you as a woman, you may like to read and widely forward this one instead.

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