A World Changing Win
The following was written by my dear friend Jen. It is as impassioned, articulate and intelligent as she is:
To my progressive friends.
I have never been more proud to call myself an American than when a woman and an African American man (and earlier, a workers' advocate) became the leading contenders for US President. My progressive sensibilities were giddy -- and I stand ready to fall in line with whatever these fine candidates need for November.
But I have been disturbed by the virulent tone of even the most mainstream coverage of Hillary Clinton. What most troubles me is the deliberate blindness to the personal significance that the major candidacy of a woman has to millions of people just like me. It is not the reason I think Clinton is qualified. But it is inspiring nonetheless.
I will not get into a reactive Clinton Administration defense here. (Although, I have observed that those most vocally against her are the ones who do not understand historically what the nation was facing in 1992 -- and what real inspiration, coupled with the practical acceptance of the state of Republican rhetoric that dominated American culture came to Washington in January 1993.) Bill Clinton is not running for president. Hillary Clinton is, and I happen to agree with her on most of her policy proposals and appreciate that she had to make some difficult votes in the Senate... particularly those that were the tough choices that other candidates did not have to face.
That aside, it is the coverage of this campaign that offends me. I'm not hearing about differences among the leading contenders' policy proposals or in the need to change the neo-con arrogance of the past eight years. What I do hear is the punditry about a new energy in the Party among people who have never been so inspired; what is disturbing is the dismissive-ness of those who pontificate that one of the candidates is "same old same old." Because none are the same old anything we as voters have had the privilege of considering before. For those who think that sexism is no longer an "ism," who think that we should be all Po-Mo past our 20th century divisions and "identity politics," I tell you: that's a lovely dream. But that simply is not the case.
As a woman in her thirties, I have seen what millions before me and millions still are affected by every day. Every day.In the 6th grade, my male math teacher used to hand back our graded tests, announcing scores lowest to highest. Inevitably he would get to the final two, and then call my fellow student Ted and me up to the front of the class. He would ask everyone to vote on who they thought was best. Although Ted and I regularly traded that top score, I never forgave this teacher for smiling while telling the class that of course Ted would do better since boys are better at math.In the 10th grade, my friend's father, the coach, approached our lunch table and asked my male friends if they'd like to run track. He laughed and said I should not run since I would probably bruise myself with my breasts. In college in 1993, when I completed my Washington DC internship, I asked an influential man at the agency for a reference for graduate school. He clearly suggested the way I could get that letter. I declined.
I understand that we are expected to pretend that the glass ceiling has been shattered and that sexism is a nasty remnant of a time gone by. But for anyone who has downplayed her own accomplishments in order to protect the feelings of boys and men in her life; for anyone who suppressed her own needs out of belief that doing so is better for the family; and for anyone who has been furious about the arrogance of those who do not have ovaries but dare to legislate how those with ovaries should use them: this campaign is personal.
I hear you when you say that the presidency of Barack Obama could bring a New Day for America, symbolic in showing the world that America is tolerant and moving forward. Or, you may see it as a sign that the American experiment of democracy is finally reaching a more civil and post-political politics. I would agree. This entire campaign is inspiring for a progressive-liberal like me.
But please, in your celebration of what you think Obama could do for the spirit of the country, or in your press coverage of this campaign and its candidates, do not discount the same power, the same heartfelt feeling of evolution, the same courageous symbol for the world of an enlightened America that the presidency of Hillary Clinton would bring. Just because you don't like that she knows how to play the game, it does not make her win any less world-changing for me.
To my progressive friends.
I have never been more proud to call myself an American than when a woman and an African American man (and earlier, a workers' advocate) became the leading contenders for US President. My progressive sensibilities were giddy -- and I stand ready to fall in line with whatever these fine candidates need for November.
But I have been disturbed by the virulent tone of even the most mainstream coverage of Hillary Clinton. What most troubles me is the deliberate blindness to the personal significance that the major candidacy of a woman has to millions of people just like me. It is not the reason I think Clinton is qualified. But it is inspiring nonetheless.
I will not get into a reactive Clinton Administration defense here. (Although, I have observed that those most vocally against her are the ones who do not understand historically what the nation was facing in 1992 -- and what real inspiration, coupled with the practical acceptance of the state of Republican rhetoric that dominated American culture came to Washington in January 1993.) Bill Clinton is not running for president. Hillary Clinton is, and I happen to agree with her on most of her policy proposals and appreciate that she had to make some difficult votes in the Senate... particularly those that were the tough choices that other candidates did not have to face.
That aside, it is the coverage of this campaign that offends me. I'm not hearing about differences among the leading contenders' policy proposals or in the need to change the neo-con arrogance of the past eight years. What I do hear is the punditry about a new energy in the Party among people who have never been so inspired; what is disturbing is the dismissive-ness of those who pontificate that one of the candidates is "same old same old." Because none are the same old anything we as voters have had the privilege of considering before. For those who think that sexism is no longer an "ism," who think that we should be all Po-Mo past our 20th century divisions and "identity politics," I tell you: that's a lovely dream. But that simply is not the case.
As a woman in her thirties, I have seen what millions before me and millions still are affected by every day. Every day.In the 6th grade, my male math teacher used to hand back our graded tests, announcing scores lowest to highest. Inevitably he would get to the final two, and then call my fellow student Ted and me up to the front of the class. He would ask everyone to vote on who they thought was best. Although Ted and I regularly traded that top score, I never forgave this teacher for smiling while telling the class that of course Ted would do better since boys are better at math.In the 10th grade, my friend's father, the coach, approached our lunch table and asked my male friends if they'd like to run track. He laughed and said I should not run since I would probably bruise myself with my breasts. In college in 1993, when I completed my Washington DC internship, I asked an influential man at the agency for a reference for graduate school. He clearly suggested the way I could get that letter. I declined.
I understand that we are expected to pretend that the glass ceiling has been shattered and that sexism is a nasty remnant of a time gone by. But for anyone who has downplayed her own accomplishments in order to protect the feelings of boys and men in her life; for anyone who suppressed her own needs out of belief that doing so is better for the family; and for anyone who has been furious about the arrogance of those who do not have ovaries but dare to legislate how those with ovaries should use them: this campaign is personal.
I hear you when you say that the presidency of Barack Obama could bring a New Day for America, symbolic in showing the world that America is tolerant and moving forward. Or, you may see it as a sign that the American experiment of democracy is finally reaching a more civil and post-political politics. I would agree. This entire campaign is inspiring for a progressive-liberal like me.
But please, in your celebration of what you think Obama could do for the spirit of the country, or in your press coverage of this campaign and its candidates, do not discount the same power, the same heartfelt feeling of evolution, the same courageous symbol for the world of an enlightened America that the presidency of Hillary Clinton would bring. Just because you don't like that she knows how to play the game, it does not make her win any less world-changing for me.
posted by Elizabeth at
12:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home