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.

Reproductive Justice and Gender

The Change Candidate Needs to Change His Tone Towards Women

By Karen Stabiner, Huffington Post. Posted February 17, 2008.


If Obama wants to prove himself as the truly progressive candidate, he shouldn't fall back on the oldest gender clichés in the book.
obamahillarywinmcnamee

The first time Hillary Clinton ran a television ad complaining about Barack Obama's unwillingess to debate in Wisconsin, he fired back with an ad of his own about the 18 debates he's already participated in and the two more that are scheduled.

She wouldn't let it go; her subsequent ad speculated on whether he was reluctant because his health insurance care plan wasn't as good as hers.

At a televised campaign stop, someone asked him how he felt about the ad campaign. Obama, grave-faced and sympathetic in tone, opined that when Senator Clinton was 'feeling down,' she went on the attack to make herself feel better; that is, she committed an error in judgment because she was in a bad mood. That was the moment when I, and other women of a certain age, all over the country, winced.

The change candidate had embraced one of the oldest clichés in the book -- that women are held hostage by emotion, that we can't be trusted with the big decisions because, depending on our age, we're either on the rag or having a hot flash. The overtly sexist position used to be that you didn't want to entrust the red phone to a woman because women are unpredictable and irrational; a fit of hormonal pique and kaboom, we all glow in the radioactive dark. The ones who aren't instantly vaporized, that is.

The kinder, gentler version? A soft-spoken observation about what a female candidate does when she's "feeling down," the implication being that Hillary's distress over the delegate count had impaired her judgment, and that someone who loses her way like that is not strong enough to withstand the rigors of the presidency. If you think that I and the indignant gal friends I've polled are overreacting, try the acid test: Imagine any major candidate making that kind of subtle put-down about a man's psychological fortitude. In 1972, Thomas Eagleton had to have shock treatment to get us to raise a national eyebrow about his mental health, ending his brief tenure as George McGovern's running mate. Short of that, we tend to assume that the boys are steady enough to handle the job.

The interesting question is where the inspiration for the dig came from. If it was truly an off-the-cuff remark, then it's just gender-role business as usual, and the French, sadly, are right: The more things change, the more they remain the same. This might help to explain why women stick to Hillary; any woman who grew up in the transitional generation between Betty Crocker moms and Betty Friedan daughters has a special antenna for this kind of slight. We've heard it before, we know we're going to hear it again, and we'd just as soon hang with a smart girl who gets it, for all her flaws. As for the more highly educated women who poll for Obama, let's see how they feel when they find out he would think better of them if they were guys.

If it wasn't a spontaneous comment -- if someone in Senator Obama's camp thinks it's wise to use code to address and exploit our primitive fears about whether women can cope -- then whoever came up with it ought to be ashamed of himself, and the man who uttered it needs to rethink the strength of his opponent and her supporters. Beat her on better ideas, or oratory, beat her with passion and energy, but beat her fair and square, if you can. Don't talk about change and then quote from a 1950s playbook on the battle between the sexes.

Digg!

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

Karen Stabiner is the author of seven books. The Empty Nest: 31 Parents Tell the Truth About Relationships, Love, and Freedom After the Kids Fly the Coop will be published in May 2007. My Girl: Adventures with a Teen in Training was a finalist for the 2005 Books for a Better Life Award and has just been released in paperback as Reclaiming Our Daughters. Other titles include All Girls: Single-Sex Education and Why It Matters, and To Dance with the Devil: The New War on Breast Cancer, a New York Times Notable Book. A regular contributor to the Los Angeles Times Opinion section as well as to major publications, she lives in Santa Monica with her husband and her daughter, Sarah, who leaves home for college in the fall of 2007.

For more information, visit Karen's page on EveryWoman'sVoice.com

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


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:
"…a smart girl…"
Posted by: SBean on Feb 18, 2008 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So now who's using the sexist cliche's? Can you imagine anyone referring to a male candidate as "a smart boy"? A tad hypocritical, it seems, to expect our candidates--male or female--to step outside our culture so much more successfully than we can ourselves. Or is it just the male candidate who is expected to display that exceptional quality?

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

» RE: "…a smart girl…" Posted by: chicano2nd
This is where you lost me
Posted by: foreverhope on Feb 18, 2008 11:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
" the implication being that Hillary's distress over the delegate count had impaired her judgment, and that someone who loses her way like that is not strong enough to withstand the rigors of the presidency.

I agree with Obama. It would be more accurate to say that both Hillary and Bill are upset, VERY upset, and it is in fact majorly impairing their judgement, but also giving us a better look at both of them. IMO their judgement has never been that great under the best of circumstances.

Barack is rocking their world and it is deeply offensive to them. How dare this no nothing Obama get in their way. How dare he inspire in voters what the Clinton's combined strengths and experience can not deliver.

lol, after the references to 'spade work', Barack suggesting Hillary is more than a little miffed at how things are turning out is mild, if it was meant to be sexist at all. Most of us can see it IS indeed affecting her judgement. The Clintons appear desperate, angry and frantic. I would say Obama's comment was not sexist at all but was right on!

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

One of many overt and covert sexist remarks/acts
Posted by: Cd123456789 on Feb 19, 2008 4:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Senator Obama‘s overtly and ever growing sexist swipes at Senator Clinton should not go unaddressed, e.g., “claws,” “attacks” associated with ‘periodic downs,’ “all men are created equal,” describing her foreign policy experience as “tea with ambassadors.” Reframing a woman's criticism as an emotional attack is a sexist, belittling, oft used power play, and should not go unexamined. Senator Clinton’s China speech and her work in the Northern Ireland peace process should be juxtaposed with Obama's dismissive ‘drinking tea’ remarks. The "all men are created equal" quote in his recent selectively plagiarized 'words have power' speech appears to be just the latest dogwhistle. Ask yourself, why did this guy insist on going on his Harvard educated wife's job interview?

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

The "either/or" feminists have nothing else to say
Posted by: Kym525 on Feb 19, 2008 11:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So they fall back on Obama's "supposed" sexism. Wouldn't it be something if they could actually focus on THE ISSUES rather than being upset because more people from all walks of life are responding to Obama's REAL message of inclusiveness? I'm still waiting to hear all these "sexist" comments.

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

I'm sorry to find this baseless and inane article reposted on AlterNet
Posted by: ruscle on Feb 19, 2008 1:14 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Doesn't someone on this site make a choice as to what is an honest and realistic look at the candidates versus what is silly mud-slinging and overstated hyperventilating? This story doesn't deserve to be posted on a progressive news site. It is regressive, divisive and concocted wholly out of thin air.

It is the kind of story I expect to see on FOX.

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