Believe it or not.
But it has occured to me that I took my citizenship entirely too casually. I just assumed that guys in their twenties were raised better, that their mothers dope slapped them every once in awhile when they said something stupid about their female friends in day care. I should have known better, living here in the middle of ticky-tacky land where the neighborhood Christmas parties are strictly segregated by sex, the ladies gathering in the family rooms to relate their labor stories to the pregnant acolytes, the men in the kitchen next to the garage discussing 401K’s and lawn mowers. I made the stupid assumption that this was just a peculiarity of the suburbs and, sure, there’s plenty of sexism at work. But I just figured it was a generational thing and when the old guys retired, the women would move up to take their place.
But I was stunned recently when the only female manager in my department, the hardest working, most collaborative, fairest and mentoring woman I have ever worked for was passed over to be director for a man who I barely know and who carefully kept in the shadows spreading rumors about the women in my group. The day the announcement was made that this man was taking over the department, my manager, I., gave a little speech of support. I knew she was disappointed but she made the best of what was a very bad situation for her. Not only did she miss out on a promotion but the department was reorganized so that what power she did have was diminished. Nevertheless, this talented lady made an inspiring speech and urged us all to put in our best efforts to produce quality work. She completely outshined the man who took the place that should have gone to her. He struggled in vain to figure out how the AV equipment worked and no one stepped up to assist him. Maybe it was wrong, but we were just so angry about the whole thing that we let him fumble around with the projector until he finally give up in frustration.
People, there *is* plenty of sexism in the world today. And it would be stupid for us to assume that it doesn’t exist, that we aren’t all running around with our XX chromosomes pinned to our chests so that everyone can see that we are women first and professionals, intellectuals, hard-workers, gifted musicians, artists, cooks, citizens second. We’ve all met men who talk to our tits instead of our eyes. We can be dismissed, shoved aside, lied about. Negative campaigning works all too well against us.
There’s only ONE good reason to vote for Hillary Clinton for president. It’s because she is the best candidate to run the country in a post-Bush era. That’s the only reason as the letter from Feminists for Clinton demonstrates very clearly.
But let’s not kid ourselves. The women of the country were criminally complicit in their own diminishment as fully enfranchised persons in their own right, regardless of their chromosomal makeup. That was what feminism was all about. It is about becoming recognizable persons deserving of respect and with the same opportunities as anyone else who is qualified to do a particular job.
You don’t have to vote for Hillary because she’s a woman. Vote for her because she’s the best *person* for the job.
*Yes it is.
One other thing: Check out this map. This is where the Equal Rights Amendment did and did not pass. There isn’t a lot of correlation with the present primary and caucus wins but look at where Illinois fell on the map. Weird. It does suggest one thing to me, however. The caucus states may not be the best place to get a feel for the will of the electorate.
Filed under: Gender Equity, Hillary Clinton, Presidential Election 2008 | Tagged: Feminists for Clinton, Hillary Clinton, persons
Correlates reasonably well, doesn’t it? Clinton didn’t win a single state in the unratified group.
Yeah, actually, there are some correlations worth noting. For example, Clinton won AZ, NV, AK, OK and FL. AK and OK are easy to explain due to the Clinton years as governor of Arkansas and a geographical spillover. But how to explain FL, AZ and NV? Well, these states have undergone a population boom in the past 30 years. NV has expanded very rapidly just in the past decade. AZ and FL are full of retirees from the Northeastern states. And there are a large number of latinos and hispanics in all three booming states. But latinos and hispanics have a patriarchical culture so Hillary’s appeal to them might be due to something else. I’m going with the large number of retirees to these states that make the difference. Women who did not grow up in the traditional South are making the difference, I think. And if this map is a sign of things to come, I think we can expect Hillary to do quite well in the fall.
I had a well educated, earning great money 32 year old woman living in a prominent red state tell me she would never vote for a woman to be president. I thought, well guess who isnt going to help you get promoted?
Whew! I’m so glad this isn’t a feminist blog, because I’m not a feminist, no way, uh-uh….
But This One’s For The Girls:
Judith, that woman is undoubtedly the daughter of one of the women who used to drive me to drink by saying “well, I’m NOT a feminist, but . . . .” The other daughters of these women are all busy writing blog entries saying “I’m a feminist, but I’m voting for Obama because he’s so wonderful, and I just can’t stand that bitch Hillary Clinton.”
And riverdaugher, please don’t dismiss women who grew up in the south as mindless ninnies who will not vote for a woman. We’re getting enough insults from the Obama camp. Let’s not fight amongst ourselves.
But latinos and hispanics have a patriarchical culture so Hillary’s appeal to them might be due to something else.
Perhaps they respect talent and are really voting for the MOST qualified person, and the person who has promoted their interest to boot.
It goes back to your point about your Asian collegues. They value hard work, talent, knowlege and exprience. These are values, not stuff to be dismissed as boring.
The matter of language also holds. I think when you listen to a speech in your first language, you get swayed by emotion very easily. But if it’s not your first language, you actually think more about what it means, and less about the fluidity of platitudes and beautiful phrases.
So perhaps latinos and hispanics listen and decide, there is no substance there.
Sorry about the first sentence above: it should have been in quotes or italics.
I think you have a valid point but I still think her appeal to hispanics and latinos is a little different. I’m going to hazard a guess that it is racial and economic things at work against Obama. Just a guess. Not trying to get all racist here. Just speculating that there may be an adversarial relationship going on here.
MessyMarcy: I meant no offense. I too spent some time in my youth in the south (in South Carolina and Southern Virginia). I don’t think yu are a brainless ninny at all, or at least your comments don’t say that. But there is heavy church related indoctrination in the south. Lots of Evangelical churches there are very much of the “Women should submit gracefully to their husband’s leadership”, is it not so? I’ll betcha there are many, many ladies and gentlemen in their 50’s and older who have to overcome not only racial but gender conditioning and these people are disproportionately located in the south. That’s all I;m saying. When you get a bunch of northeastern liberals moving into a state like Florida, the Maudes start to outnumber the Anita Bryants.
I still disagree. You’re quite right about the sexist influence religion has on this country; but, sad to say, it is not limited to the south (and I’m sure the GLBT community would agree, the bias is not limited just to sexism). And please explain to me the difference between the old boys in the evangelical community and the old boys in the Catholic community.
We lived in a northern state for several years, and from my observation, there is very little difference in the north and the south as far as the various prejudices and biases (but my opinion might be somewhat skewed by the fact that we lived in a VERY republican area). You are accepting as fact another one of these pernicious stereotypes that diminish and divide us. Saying southern women are more docile or compliant than northern women is just as insulting as a man saying women can’t do math or lead the military.
Oh, Marcy, I’m not trying to perpetuate a stereotype. I don’t think it holds for women in Obama’s generation. But even living here in the suburbs of NJ I know how strong the pressure is to not rock the boat. For women my mother’s age who came of age during the 50’s and 60’s, there is a certain amount of social conditioning and the church, yes, even the Catholic Church, has a lot to do with that. I spoke to a couple from Alabama at YearlyKos and they told me that the churches in Alabama are the authority. You don’t buck them if you expect to have a social life.
Anyway, my point was about the influx of northeastern retirees, a lot of women, some of them secular Jews who just didn’t grow up with the cotillions and the white gloves of that era. They were the ones who supported the Civil Rights activities and for the most part, didn’t understand what segregation was all about because they never experienced it directly. I’m saying that the northeast megalopolis is less of a stratified society in a way. It’s more open, accomodating to diversity and eccentricity and maybe just a bit less concerned with gender. I know this because my immediate family lives in central PA and they aren’t kidding when they say it is the bible belt between Pittsburgh and Philly. Life there is a lot more traditional and less accepting of different points of view and my family who lives there spend a LOT of time at chuch. For my brother, his wife and their two girls, their church is *very* traditional and they are raising their children to be very deferential to men. We’ll see how long that lasts.
But as I said before, I am referring to a generation of women who are ahead of me when I commented about Southern women.