Lysistrata was written by the Greek playwright Aristophanes in 410 BC. It recounts how the women of Greece conspired to end the Peloponnesian War by withholding sex, among other things, from the men. This play has been praised as proto-feminist based on its strong female characters. Others have claimed it is meant to mock women by presenting their sexuality as dangerous and their libidos as insatiable. I like the first interpretation. In my opinion the women aren’t weak because they want to please the men. Their weakness is that they want to be pleased themselves (just like men). Anything that was written over 2000 years ago and portrays women as strong capable leaders has to have some merit in my opinion.
We have been talking a lot lately about the “sweetie” commenters that will try to butter us up and convince us that we must “take them back”. Most women have been through this before. They will promise you the moon and the stars if you just give them one more chance. This time it ain’t working. I know I’m a man, but I am right there with you all. I propose that we, like Lysistrata’s women, make a pledge of solidarity to resist the call to “make nice” with “the boyz”. Until they come to their senses and ditch Obama, the party’s over.
This really is a test for what appears to be a new brand of feminists. Women have far too many times acquiesced to further the goals of men. Women’s suffrage is an example:
During the American Civil War and immediately after little was heard of the movement, but in 1869 the National Woman Suffrage Association was formed by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, with the object of securing an amendment to the United States Constitution in favor of woman suffrage, thus opposing passage of the Fifteenth Amendment without it being changed to include female suffrage.
Another more conservative suffrage organization, the American Woman Suffrage Association, headed by Lucy Stone, was also formed at this time by those who believed that suffrage should be brought about by amendments to the various state constitutions. They supported the proposed the 15th amendment as written.
Many women opposed the 15th amendment which gave black men the right to vote because it didn’t include women, but in the end many deferred. The reasoning was that any movement toward universal suffrage was good for all suffragists. Unfortunately it was another 50 years before women got the vote.
There are plenty of other examples. Feminists in the ’60’s allied with men to end the Vietnam War, only to have the men abandon them once their goal was accomplished. See, the war did end, but afterward when women wanted to pass the ERA, support from a lot of those men evaporated. According to NOW, Ronald Reagan, who opposed the ERA, got much of his advantage from men:
November: Exit polls on election day show that for the first time ever recorded, men and women vote quite differently in the race. AP/NBC News reports that men backed Reagan by a 56- 36% edge, but women split their votes 47-45%.
I was recently reminded of this type of behavior in the gay community when many (John “crybaby” Aravosis to be more specific) wanted to throw transgendered people under the bus to get the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) passed.
The moral of the story: Anyone who says that transgendered people have always been accepted as part of the gay community is simply wrong. A little over ten years ago, NGLTF, the group that was quite possibly at the forefront of pushing the inclusion of T in LGB (and who is leading the effort to include trans in ENDA) didn’t even use the T themselves. So the question remains, if NGLTF has only accepted transgendered people as part of the community for a little over ten years, when did the rest of the gay community do the same, and has it yet?
Always there is the promise to “come back for you later”. Well I for one have heard that tale one too many times. We all need to stick to our guns. Hillary must be our nominee. Promises and sweet talk will not work this time. These promises, I should add, are more and more resembling threats as they get increasingly desperate. Not going to work. Not this time. We have the power, and we’re going to use it.
Filed under: Blogosphere, Gender Equity, General, Hillary Clinton, Politics, Presidential Election 2008 | Tagged: Blogosphere, feminism, Feminists for Clinton, Greek theater, intimidation on the blogosphere, Lysistrata, The Boyz, transgender, woman suffrage, women voters
Great post, Gary.
Right on, Gary! We are with Hillary all the way to convention when she becomes our nominee! I LOVE Lysistrata, by the way. I share your interpretation.
We must have a third party. The strength lies in numbers. A two person race will send some of us back into the shadows waiting “for someone to come back for us later”. A withheld vote will not guarantee an Obama loss. A McCain win is equally unpalatable. An historical third party must emerge from this mess. Women, gays, Asians, Hispanic, blue collar, all those whose voices have been muted and denied.
Pat, that’s not going to happen. We live in a republic. You can not win a national election without a national apparatus. It just won’t happen.
So true. When people show you their face, believe them.
Unfortunately, the way the American political system works, a three party system isn’t viable. Unlike in a parliamentary system, all the rules are set up such that everything boils down to two parties vying for power, and every other political movement is marginalized.
The only way to work the system is to do what the right did with the Republican party: vote Democratic and constantly pressure the leadership for change in the direction you want it.
Pat: it would be nice to have other voices, wouldn’t it?
Laura, I think many on the right would disagree. They get plenty of lip service and the GOP throws them a bone once in a while, but if this primary season has taught us anything, both the Dem and Rep parties really have been taking large portions of their respective bases for granted for a while now. And some of us are getting pretty pissed about it. In the end I think they both serve the same corporate lords, and a third party maybe the only way to really get the “change we’re looking for” to riff off a certain dem pol…
Laura, the sentiment to “constantly pressure” the leadership does not offer much solace. In 2006 the country voted to end the war. The Dems took power and did nothing but acquiesce, from Pelosi to Reid. They had options. Cut off the spending. The country cried for this yet the “pressure” was ignored. Every excuse was offered, from that old tried and true, “we must support the troops” to “we need 2/3rds in the Senate to overturn”. It was silent agreement, played out for political purposes, that was what we got with this congress. They even took impeachment off the table and Bush had supplied them with plenty of grounds for “high crimes and misdemeanors”.
So no, I cannot buy into the pressure argument. No one is listening. While Obama calls for “hope” and “change”, and while the same faces sit on these committees year after year, there will be little movement or motivation to make that happen. Where he says it coming from while the same people continue to rule is a mystery. A third party may very well create enough shift to ensure someone takes notice. Otherwise we are in for the same old, same old.
I have been voting straight Democratic tickets for 40 years and am still waiting for ERA. We need to keep voting Democratic? I don’t think so. I am now an Independent and I will vote for anyone that I believe is the best candidate regardless of what letter follows his or her name.
I have been a feminist most of my life. I grew tired of being patted on the head and treated like a “cute” little pinhead long before I reached puberty. I was told to behave like a “lady” and given dolls as gifts when I wanted a baseball glove. Like many others of my era I was treated like a womb in waiting as if my heart and mind we of little consequence so long as I got married and procreated.
I did what was expected of me and I have resented it my whole life.
I support Hillary Clinton for many reasons. But her words in Beijing are tattooed on my heart and in my mind. “Woman’s rights are human rights.” The women-hating tactics by the Obamacrats and the media has turned me from a Democrat to an Independent.
I will never vote for Obama. I will not vote for McCain, not just because he’s a Republican but because I think he stinks on the economy and I think he honestly believes that we can “win” in Iraq.
But I can and will if necessary vote for a Green or do a write in. I don’t mindlessly vote Democratic any more. What have they done for me lately that I should do so?
Nice work Gary!
“Until they come to their senses and ditch Obama, the party’s over.”
And that is the key! The party must come to their senses and give us the canidate that can win in the fall- Hillary!
I think I am immune to the nicey nice ploy- it reminds me of how my abusive ex acted when he wanted something.
The Obama trolls are wasting their breath (or keystrokes if you will) on me.
Gary: Another great post. You’re absolutely right that solidarity is key. I propose we call ourselves Cold-Blooded Pragmatists for Clinton to show that this time, we are not susceptible to threats, intimidation or emotional mindfucks.
I will take your pledge. I will not waver. There is no “sweet” thing that can be said that will make me go to Obama.
I beliee the cult of personality that surrounds him could be dangerous to our country and he must be stopped. There is that same Bush thing that you are either with us or against us, and he is a diisive force withint the Democratic party.
It is no longer the party of the working people, that promotes equality for all. That is why this week I registered Independent.
Sorry, Riverdaughter, I will vote Republican for Prez,if it is the only way to stop him. (I live in a swing state, PA, where I can make a difference.
This nation survived a civil war, WWI, WWII, and the sixties. It survived Ronald Reagan and Clinton survived impeachment. We’ll survive four years of John McCain. And if McCain appoints a judget that overturns Roe v Wade, so be it. My generation protected it when and where we could. if young feminists fail to protect it by supporting jokers like Obama for the Democratic nomination, well, they have to deal with the fall out. The failure I see here is that young feminism has taken the work that’s been done for granted.
If McCain wins, then I’ll just look forward to running against him in four years. That simple. I’d rather have McCain ignore healthcare than have Obama poison our chances for getting universal coverage. I’d rather the Pubs overturn Roe v Wade, and be saddled with the fall out from that disaster than the Dems.
Obama can be considered a 3rd party candidate. He reject the FDR coalition, his health care and social security plans are closer the McCain’s than to Hillary’s. He clearly does his best to offend women, blue collar workers and anyone supporting Hillary. That doesn’t sound like a Democrat.
Women and blue collar worker, the creative class skin heads call them the Appalachians which is another insult, were trampled on, spit in the face and treated like shit. Why would they ever consider voting for Obama?
sarah: do what your conscience dictates. But you already presume that there will be only Obama and McCain to choose from and I think that is the wrong attitude to take while we still have three months ahead of us.
It is a fallacy there is some relationship with us being a Republic and not being able to have a third party. While it is true a national base is essential, the emphasis should be on the un-democratic pressures that keep those bases disunified.
First and foremost one of the greatest pressures is plurality.A non-majority system in which only the votes of the top two contenders count. If we believe that all votes should count then Instant Runoff Voting is an essential reform.
Rather than say we can’t do A because of some given structure, we should acknowledge that A is the only way those structures have ever changed.
I once had a professor who was found of saying there are 3 things you can do with power; hoard it, share it, or throw it away.
I agree with Riverdaughter. There are many alternatives to voting for Obama. My request is that the dem party come to its senses and get rid of Obama. That for me is the dealbreaker. IF and that’s a big if, Obama is the dem nominee I will not vote for him no matter what. Hopefully I will have alternatives at that point that are more attractive than voting republican
Lori: Being called Appalachians isn’t an insult in the least little bit. The Applachian area was settled by fierce, fighting Scots-Irish who never took shit from anyone. As someone whose ancestors were from the area of southwest Pennsylvania, I am proud that my Scots-Irish background makes me part of the Appalachian tribe.
Damn, straight, I’m Appalachian and we’re itchin’ for a fight.
BTW, if they start that shit, they’re going to lose Senator Jim Webb. They’re his people too.
I also take the pledge. My state of MA will more than likely vote Obama should he be the nominee. It is bluer than blue so my not voting the top of the ticket won’t matter either way. However, since I have to live with myself, the only avenue of dissent is to not vote for a candidate I sincerely believe is wholly unqualified and inexperienced simply because of the “party”. The party has squandered us. They have stood by while another more qualified candidate has been ridiculed, demeaned, insulted, ignored, and deconstructed. You do that to her, you do that to me.
“The Hillary Lesson”
I was paging through the Sunday New York Times Magazine, the one with John McCain on the cover (he was really cute as a young pilot). With Obama all set to crown himself on Tuesday, I am investigating alternatives to the Chicago political machine. Came across this essay entitled “The Hillary Lesson.”
This takes place in that bastion of liberalism–Berkeley, California:
(excerpt follows).
One recent morning, as my 4-year-old daughter and I strolled to our favorite diner, she pointed to a bumper sticker plastered on a mailbox. A yellow, viraginous caricature of Hillary Clinton leered out from a black background. Big block letters proclaimed, “The wicked witch of the East is alive and living in New York.”
“Look, Mama,” she said. “That’s Hillary. What does it say?”
The mother had to confront how what should be endless possibilities for her child are truncated because of her sex.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/magazine/18wwln-lede-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin
Another article in the NYT was about who might be the first woman president now that Obama has the numbers. Among the photos of possible women, such as Hutchinson, there was also a photo of Chelsea. The article commented that Hillary Clinton has set the bar so high, who could match her?
We have to thank Hillary for being such an extraordinary candidate that she has single-handedly shifted the collective thought-process. At first I was incredulous when she said “When I am president,” and now it is absolutely possible!
I do believe that she’s the candidate who could actually win!
Gary: As usual, another superbly written diary. I think solidarity is more the key than a third party, for a couple of reasons:
1) It takes a tremendous amount of money to run a campaign these days, even at the local level. One of the biggest problems that third parties suffer from is lack of money. Even when Ross Perot was running, campaign costs weren’t a fraction of what they are today.
2) The candidate must have exposure at the national level before running for President, and so must those running on the third party ticket. This is why Greens are so anxious to get their candidates in at the Representative level. Unfortunately for the Greens, they haven’t been able to seat anyone nationally.
3) Even within the Democratic party we have group schisms. For example, AAs may all belong to the CBC, but they don’t all belong to the Progressive Caucus; quite a few are Blue Dogs. So I doubt that even all our elected women would favor joining a party that had, at its core, a platform espousing women’s issues.
It’s all very discouraging from the standpoint of starting a party that would truly represent traditional Democratic values. On the other hand, a massive protest vote by women–women who resent having a less qualified man pushed on us by the Dem. party and the media–especially a protest vote that resulted in the defeat of the Dem. presidential candidate, would, IMO, have massive repercussions. Personally, I could live with McCain in the White House if we had veto-proof majorities in the House and Senate, so I’m thinking more and more of a protest vote for McCain.
HA I believe that was full on tantrum (green) mode.
Agree with Pat Johnson at 2:40.
This is an historic opportunity for a third party. The electoral tactics employed by the Obama campaign, but especially the DNC have split the party – I think irreparably .
Usually third parties fail because they are narrow in focus: taxes (left or right view), environment, etc. I have heard some people talk of a centrist party. I think you need to be broader.
I am not a centrist. I am a good old fashioned liberal and I absolutely despise what is going on. There are many liberals who have not drunk the kool aid and they need a place to go also.
There’s nothing wrong with being a big tent so long as it’s an honorable and ethical big tent.
The amount of effort put into repairing the damage that was done to continue a big tent with giant holes in the ceiling could be better used putting together a new big tent.
The Dean/Pelosi group are fast making themselves irrelevant. They have nothing to offer that I’d care to buy. I don’t trust them to sell us out.
Leave the party forever? What kind of nonsense is that? It’s Obama we object to, not Democratic principles.
The first female President of the US of A will be Hillary Clinton, God willing, in 2008. Or, else, 2012.
“My request is that the dem party come to its senses and get rid of Obama.”–Gary
Yup, Gary, me too.
Pat- I haven’t read the NYT article, but it seems fitting that they would argue that Hillary, by being such an incredible candidate, has raised the bar so high that other women will suffer. Damn Hillary, stop her before she wins again. Once she creams him in Kentucky and wins (hope hope) Oregon, how will any woman ever be able to run for president in the future. We will never have a woman president and it is all that Hillary Clinton’s fault.
Oh, by the way, I’m not the one who made the comment about Appalachia. My family is from southern Illinois and Georgia and fought on both sides of the Civil War. I got no call turning my nose up at anyone.
I’m with Lori and Sarah. I pledge not to vote for Obama. If Hillary is not the nominee I will vote for McCain. The way I see it, four years are a walk in the park. The DNC, media hacks, Obama and his supporters will not be rewarded with my vote, and not voting is not strong enough. The DNC must be sent a message. And no, I will not get over, I will not join hands in the end and take it like a beaten wife, going back for the “sake of the marriage”- Well, the marriage with the DNC will be over if Hillary is not the nominee. Not out of sour grapes, but because of the way a qualified, competent candidate with huge victories has been treated over someone who comes to the table for the job with two books( where he established his own positive narrative for the media to carry around as the Bible) and a speech. Hell no!
And we don’t want you here. Any more of your BS and we’ll show you the door….
Slick Willie, eh? I bet you voted for Bob Dole. What is it about obama that attracts so many GOP trolls to his camp? It’s part of the reason I won’t vote for him.
grayslady: I disagree with the interpretation of a third party catering to “women’s issues” as the sole criteria for membership. It is the sons of men and women who are sent to war. The cost of rising food prices is not merely a woman issue. A falling economy effects all members of the household. Birth control and the right to choose effects the future of a family. Gay rights are human rights. A clean environment is desired by each and every one of us. A strong and free educational system is the right of all. Universal healthcare is to the benefit of man, woman, child. These issues are the recipe for a platform that would be inclusive to both genders. I don’t believe that envisioning a third party to be the sole undertaking and affiliation of only one gender is the goal. But if the incorporation is to be developed by feminine voices I would welcome the opportunity to explore.
Slick Willie, eh? I bet you voted for Bob Dole. What is it about obama that attracts so many GOP trolls to his camp? It’s part of the reason I won’t vote for him.
You are becoming what you dont like. All of you are going to vote for McSame, need I say any more.
I have never voted for the GOP for any office. I am from the Democratic wing of the democratic party not the DLC wing.
Go_Bama_2008: Your peanut butter and jelly sandwiches with the crusts cut off just the way you like them are ready. Your Mom wanted me to let you know. Then after your nap you can come back and play with your computer. The blogs are breathlessly awaiting your next brilliant proclamations.
If you were from the Democratic wing of the Democratic party, you wouldn’t use terms like Slick Willy. Most of us will vote for neither McCain nor Obama. Obama is to the right of Clinton on virtually every issue, so I know of no reason to vote for him.
Pat J–You’re correct, of course. It isn’t just about a “women’s party” as a third party. I simply used the women in Congress as an example. Also, I like your platform! That about sums it up. Sadly, I used to think that the issues you summarized were what held the Dems together.
grayslady: Sad isn’t it that we find ourselves so out of step with what passes for the Dem Party today? It is also the corrupt way they have handled the process and the simple fact that not one of those who had the opportunity to voice objection to the treatment of Hillary Clinton chose not to come forward. If we are all supposedly on the “same team” then they should have cleared the benches long ago to proclaim their disgust. I no longer respect, nor do I support, what was once my party. We need a fresh start.
Sounds like the Obamabots have entered the tantrum phase.
Henry: I can hear the sound of their little toenails drumming the floor by the entertainment center in the basement next to the Guns and Roses poster and alongside the six pack of Mountain Dew. And they have been this way since they got up at noon.
Pat: HA!!!! I’m sure there’s a x-box down there somewhere too….
Pat, that Mountain Dew has tons of sugar. Explains a lot, doesn’t it?
It’s a good thing little gobama doesn’t know that Barack Obama is the first choice of the DLC and that several of his advisors are DLC board members. The poor little guy would be soooooo disillusioned.
gary: Remember Jack Black in Orange County? That’s how I picture some of these idiots.
It’s the Sweetie Rebellion, sweetie!
http://nobloodforhubris.blogspot.com/2008/05/its-sweetie-rebellion-sweetie.html
Delurking once again to type that I love this blog and it’s commenters. Keep up the good fight!
Let’s concentrate on Hillary getting the nomination. Spread the word about recent polls — she’s gaining ground, Obama is losing it.
Go_Bama_2008 — All of you are going to vote for McSame, need I say any more. I have never voted for the GOP for any office.
Well you almost did in 2004 when Kerry and Daschle begged McCain to run as Kerry’s VP.
here are the 10 key values of the Green Party:
Grassroots Democracy
Social Justice
Ecological Wisdom
Non-violence
Decentralization
Community-based Economics
Feminism
Diversity
Responsibility
Future Focus
nothing not to like there, imo. if we’re thinking 3rd party, we ought to at least take a look at one that’s already in existence and could use an infusion of members.
one point I’d like to make to all the people who are saying they’ve been Democrats for 35 or 40 years and it’s hard to leave…..that’s so true. the first candidate I volunteered for was Gene McCarthy, and I have supported and voted for Dems since then. but they started losing me over the last 18 months. remember how exciting the election results were in Nov 2006? remember what we elected them to do? enable Bush and his war, right? wrong!
they are no longer who we thought they were. this primary season was simply the icing on the rotten cake.
Gary, you’re my new hero.
and we don’t even need to reach as far as fiction. In one region of India, about 10 years ago, the women came together to demand that home-made alcohol be banned – primarily because the men would never work, steal their wives’ earnings (the wives worked as maids in people’s homes), and the men would just drink all day, come home, and beat the same wives – and often even beat their mothers and daughters.
These women used some VERY innovative mobilization techniques – one of them was the whole village locking their houses every night and living in one woman’s house – all 40-50 of them, taking turns as to whose house they lived in. That way, the men couldnt force themselves on any one of the women.
The next stage was to convince the wives of some of the male government officials to withhold sex, often publicly announcing this as well, to embarass the guy.
And viola, they won their battle and the State government banned the sale of alcohol. I’m not exactly in favor of prohibition, but I found these techniques very kewl. And they did work like a charm!
Great comments!
Which gets to a question of: what did NARAL get out of endorsing Obama? Some say, jobs in the admin for the higher ups. Because they did not do their jobs of advocating for Choice. They pissed off the affiliates and pissed off the Clinton supporters – ripping their contributor base.
Because you know the one that gets more in a political race is the one who quietly gives more, not asking for much. That sort of selflessness is always rewarded, isn’t it?
It is far better to get something. Would it not be a better promise if the candidate had been made to support a LAW giving Choice a clearer legal support? Choice has been based on privacy interpretations – how about a law that the Supreme count must enforce? Why do we stay satisfied with “hey he votes present and will not outlaw choice…” Why not get the promise of firmer laws supporting choice?
But the naral endorsement pissed that politcal pressure away. They must be, as in their words “courageous” to endorse a candidate early. For…what now? The courage is to demand more, not lay down and behave. Or worse, sell out so you can get a job in a supposed admin, your organization be damned.
We should work toward real benefits. Take your time, money and resource and put it on our coalition. Not be taken for granted until tomorrow. Always tomorrow. It is not our jobs to be sweetie nurse maids and helpers to Obama so perhaps one day, he’ll remember the ladies.
Or trot out his wife again as an example of “see I know a woman and support her…”
[...] Solidarity Sunday (by garychapelhill at The Confluence) We have been talking a lot lately about the “sweetie” commenters that will try to butter us up and convince us that we must “take them back”. Most women have been through this before… Women have far too many times acquiesced to further the goals of men… Many women opposed the 15th amendment which gave black men the right to vote because it didn’t include women, but in the end many deferred… Feminists in the ’60’s allied with men to end the Vietnam War, only to have the men abandon them once their goal was accomplished. See, the war did end, but afterward when women wanted to pass the ERA, support from a lot of those men evaporated… We all need to stick to our guns. Hillary must be our nominee. Promises and sweet talk will not work this time. These promises, I should add, are more and more resembling threats as they get increasingly desperate. Not going to work. Not this time. We have the power, and we’re going to use it. [...]