Monday, May 12, 2008

WTF?

The image “http://www.t-shirthumor.com/Merchant2/graphics/fullsize/dwt2_lg.gif” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.Dear People for the American Way:

Please remove me from your mailing lists, your membership lists, and stop sending me email and mail asking for my financial support.  I interned for PFAW while I was law school, but I will never support PFAW again.

I cannot support institutions that support people who do not support the Constitution of the United States.

Cal State isn’t asking Wendy Gonaver to take up arms to support the Constitution. Cal State is not infringing on her religious freedoms.  They didn’t fire her because she is a Quaker or a pacifist. Cal State is asking whether professors support the United States Constitution.  Why can’t she sign that?  They do not have to hire individuals who do not support the United States Constitution.

She should know, being an educated person, that she already has a First Amendment right to her religious beliefs.  Religious objections to military conscription is already guaranteed without People for the American Way rewriting a state university’s statement.  Cal State is a state and tax supported institution.  They have a right to hire faculty that support the United States Constitution.  I don’t really want to support someone who doesn’t want to support the U.S. Constitution.  The Constitution protects her right to refuse to fight—Clay v. United States.  That is the Constitution that I freely support and support it without reservation.

Please tell me that your attorneys have read that case.  Please tell me that your attorneys know that Clay v. United States protects everyone’s right to conscientious objector status.  The Constitution protects everyone’s right not to take military action to defend the Constitution.

The law and the Constitution protect her. Why does she need a qualifying statement?  Why does she need to explain her beliefs on an employment contract? Why can’t she support the law, the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings that support her rights?  I will not support someone who does not support the Constitution.  I do support people who do not want to fight in wars.  I support religious freedom and free speech.  I do not support people who cannot support the Constitution.

If you like this post, please buy this t-shirt for me http://www.t-shirthumor.com/Merchant2/products/dwt2AP.html?Category_Code=retr

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Obama should call Clinton a thespian and be done with it

Guess what: there are racists in America and, yes, the occasional rubes (even among Obama voters). Some of them may reside in Indiana, which hasn’t voted for a national Democratic ticket since 1964. But there are many more white working-class voters, both Clinton and Obama supporters, who prefer Democratic policies after seven years of G.O.P. failure. And there is little evidence to suggest that there are enough racists of any class in America, let alone in swing states, to determine the results come fall.

Is there anything racist in what Frank Rich had to say in the New York Times this morning?  No of course not.

But the Sunday morning talk shows tried to say that Hillary Clinton was saying something unseemly when she noted that she was the candidate of hard working white people.  Those are the people who have voted for her and she making an observation about their jobs that require hard work.  The jobs that people stand on their feet doing, the jobs that require long hours, little benefits, and of course are often in unsafe, unairconditioned conditions.  Not jobs like oh, college classrooms, executive suites, offices, and the like.

But did she say something racist?  No of course not.

Television programs and candidates know who supports and watches them.  It is called demographics.  It is how CBS and ABC and NBC know that white men over 55 are more apt to watch their news programs--notice they are white guys themselves and all the commercials for investments, laxatives, and Viagra--than blacks.

But if the Clinton's say it, it is racist.

The Obama campaign knows that their demographics are that black voters were more apt to vote for him as were college educated whites.  The Clinton campaign knows that white, lower income, less educated men and women are more apt to vote for them.  In an effort to continue the fiction that the Clinton's played the race card against Obama, the Obama people offered one more parting shot to explain why Michelle Obama a woman with more in common with Hillary than the voters who support her husband has denied Hillary a place on the ticket.  Hillary is a racist.   The only thing they haven't done is call Hillary a thespian.

It isn't true.  It hasn't ever been true.  But it isn't true that the Obama campaign is about change.  He has used every trick in the very old play book.  He needed the black vote, so he made sure that the Clinton's who made perfectly innocent and intelligent remarks like, "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina, too," were seen by the press as ignorant racist remarks. 

Bill Clinton who offices in Harlem is a racist?

Hillary was talking about a demographic reality and the press played along with Obama because the script has been written for them by the Obama campaign.  The press wouldn't be so vulnerable to manipulation if they didn't already hate Hillary.  Ask Al Gore about the press repeating baseless statements like, "Al Gore says he invented the Internet."  He never said it.  But get the mainstream press to admit they made that up and they will not do it.  Half of the statements the press attributed to Namoi Wolf were not her statements.  But the press won't admit that, either.  Gore couldn't get a fair shake in the media and has written and spoken about how dumb the press is.  Their retort, "Al Gore is an egghead."

The Obama campaign has used the old trick of calling themselves new and improved when in fact they are not. They label the same box of soap flakes, "new" and sell it with a sort of religious spell binding that would make Elmer Gantry blush.  And if you criticize Gantry--er--Obama then you are a bigot.  And hate God.  There is a classic story of a sheriff that got elected because he called his opponent's wife a "thespian." They name call, they misconstrue, they fan the flames of race, they are vague as Ronald Reagan.  They make weird statements like Obama noting they have visited 57 states. How does someone say something like that? If the press says, "Obama said he has been to 57 states," reporters are called down for questioning the man of hope.

Reporters and networks are terrified of losing the small black audience that they have.

And why won't that woman get out of Obama's way?  She is just going to damage the party, herself, Obama.  As Bob Schieffer asked, "What does she get out of it?"  Well, Bob, until yesterday, she had more super delegates than Obama and there are more delegates to go.  Are you kidding or is your mind unable to get around the fact that millions of people want to vote for a woman?  "Well, Puerto Ricans don't get to vote for president," Schieffer sniffed.  And we don't have 57 states, either Bob.

So if Hillary makes a statement using demographic information, she is labeled a racist and Democratic Party operatives can't answer it coherently because they are frankly horrified that a reporter would be so stupid as to make such an outrageous statement.   Democrats don't have much taste for telling the press that they are full of it to the press' face.  They write missives about it later, like Al Gore, instead of saying, "What the hell are you talking about, George, Bob, Tim."  At least most of the Democratic Party knows the difference between Matt and Tim.  But if you point out that Obama doesn't know the difference between Lauer and Russert, then you are a racist.

When I was in high school, we regular competed against an African-American kid who gave an amazing oratory where he said that if he didn't walk away with a first place trophy, the judge was "ripping my pride."   He won more times than he didn't.  But he smiled and charmed when he threatened the judge who was usually white by saying, essentially, "you don't want to be another white person standing in my way."  It was an amazing speech with an incredibly ability to touch on emotions like guilt, shame, and horror.   And it was done with humor, art, manipulation, leadership and grace.  And it worked.  Was it reality?  Of course not.  Was it a great communication with his audience?  Yes, even better than the speech judge knew.


If  you liked the post, please tell the Houston Chronicle that you did.  dwight.silverman@chron.com

Friday, May 09, 2008

Schafly doesn't think that married women's husbands can rape them

Could you clarify some of the statements that you made in Maine last year about martial rape?

I think that when you get married you have consented to sex. That's what marriage is all about, I don't know if maybe these girls missed sex ed. That doesn't mean the husband can beat you up, we have plenty of laws against assault and battery. If there is any violence or mistreatment that can be dealt with by criminal prosecution, by divorce or in various ways. When it gets down to calling it rape though, it isn't rape, it's a he said-she said where it's just too easy to lie about it.

Was the way in which your statement was portrayed correct?

Yes. Feminists, if they get tired of a husband or if they want to fight over child custody, they can make an accusation of marital rape and they want that to be there, available to them.

So you see this as more of a tool used by people to get out of marriages than as legitimate-

Yes, I certainly do.

Phyllis Schafly, woman, political activist, lawyer, and tool for the right wing does not believe that married women can be raped by their husbands.  She told the Washington University student newspaper those very words.  She is the reason that the majority of people in this country do not have an Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Schafly is probably having a rough time of it.  What with Senator Hillary Clinton seeking the Democratic Party's nomination for President, Nancy Pelosi serving as Speaker of the House of Representatives.  One would think that Schafly isn't as influential as she once was, however, if she didn't exist, the right wing would have to invent her.

She is saying that married women lie about rape.  That the lie is used to get out of marriages in which feminist are tired.  She is saying that assault and battery is law enough to prosecute wife beating.  But when a woman gets married that she has consented to sex with her husband and cannot say no. 

Once upon a time it was perfectly legal for a husband to beat his wife.  And it isn't legal for a husband to rape his wife now.

But Phyllis Schafly marches on.  And Washington University gives her honorary degrees.  Rewarding her idiotic statements like the one she made about how English literature classes at Virginia Tech caused the shootings at that campus.

Do you think perhaps she will speak at the Republican National Convention on the State of Women's Affairs?  Oh, I hope so.

Sunday, May 04, 2008

did you bring some rocks so you can stone her and the baby?

Teenagers give birth in all sorts of bathrooms.  Airplane restrooms, school restrooms, and now home in the shower. 

The miscarriage on the airplane wasn't actually birth but that doesn't stop the general public from commenting and giving the rest of us a perfect example of how Enlightenment thinking that we get smarter and progress is so very, very wrong.  Comments about police questioning of the young girl who dropped a fetus in the trash were amazingly ignorant.  Some of my feminist sisters, careful to make pregnancy and miscarriage a hateful statement said, why did the police question her?  It isn't like miscarriage is a crime?  Are the police experts in fetus development?  Do they know if a fetus is malformed, or full term, or ready to enter the country illegally?  A person, including oppressed women of minority persuasions cannot simply dump genetic material resembling a human being into the nearest trash receptacle and wash their hands.   Too be fair, no girl or woman regardless or race, color, alienage, or religious persuasion can do same such act, either. 

There will be questions.  Probably few problem solving answers, but there will be questions.

Did the police offer to take her to the hospital?  Some dumb ass would surely wonder out loud in the comment section of the newspaper or even here on this blog, who was going to pick up the hospital bill.

Or the middle school student who delivered in a school restroom after the school nurse told her to get back to class with her menstrual cramps.  The girl walked into the school toilet and gave birth and tried to flush the full term infant down the toilet.  She doesn't remember what happened.  Of course every expert on being under 16 and facing a life threatening trauma like giving birth without the aid of a saddle block in a junior high school public restroom after the nurse ignored the fact she was pregnant and in labor doesn't buy her story that she simply doesn't remember at least one of the top five traumatic things that ever happened to her. No one who knew the girl knew she was pregnant including her friends, her friends' mothers, the school nurse, the teachers, the gym teacher, the science teacher, and her own mother. 

But we certainly believe combat victims of violence don't remember what happened to them or others, unless of course we don't.  It has only taken us almost 90 years to accept something once called "shell shock" as post traumatic stress disorder.

Well, getting pregnant at 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, is at least as stressful as combat, especially when these children are often impregnated by grown men, funny uncles, their older brother, or their older brother's friends, or a teacher or coach, or their own fathers,  and many, many young people live with a level of violence that certainly is not being discussed at dinner tables and presidential campaigns.

And everyone has an opinion.  But no answers, talent or ability to discuss public policy problems.  Can we have a one year moratorium on commenting on things we don't understand?  Can we ban snarkiness as some indication of intelligence.  Can everyone shut the hell up?

Now comes this, as they say in court cases, a young girl goes into labor in the shower in the morning before school.  She hadn't told mom she was pregnant because she didn't want to wind up in the streets.  She did make arrangements to live with a friend if her mother did indeed throw her out.  She gives birth and doesn't kill her infant son.  She wraps the baby up, gets dressed, and walks four blocks to the hospital. 

The hospital didn't judge her or her son.  Placenta and umbilical cord intact, they told her "Don't move."  They helped her.

No recriminations.  No stoning.  Just medical attention.  They didn't hurt her.  They helped her.  And may be mom and dad, who wouldn't comment while their daughter held their grandson and talked to the press--smart girl--may be someone will help her pay for day care so she can finish high school and work in a hospital like she wants to when as she says, she "grows up," will help her, too.

But those who often care to comment in one of America's newspapers are so stunned by their own inability to grasp reality, they really don't  have anything but hatred and anger for a stand up, courageous young woman and her innocent son.  Same people who criticize her and her baby played dice for Christ's robe.


Thursday, May 01, 2008

odds and ends

Jack the Cat, a little ocelot marked tabby, who came into our lives, was struck and killed by a car on what has become a busy street behind our house.  I have resisted letting every cat who comes to the back door into the house to stay, but I can't resist it any more.  We have three males who are all neutered who stay in the backyard on the porch most of the time, but seeing little Jack's mangled body has completely changed my mind.

I will get a shovel and a box and pick him up off the jogging path and bury him in our flower bed near a stray tuxedo from Austin who lived with us all over the state until she died of breast cancer and a torty from Sugar Land who found me and produced the best kittens who now live with my parents until she too was struck by a car in the same place as poor little Jack.

Everyone is due shots anyway.  So they are going to the vet for shots, flea medications, and bathes.  I am going to also pick up a water pistol.  One of the males cats, Monroe Moonpie, hates the female Callie Calico so much he frightens her into horrific howling.  They can get a squirt when they squabble.  They hate it but it doesn't hurt them and will stop the fighting.

For some odd reason, I can't get the Houston Chronicle to carry this blog anymore.  It isn't on their list on their on-line edition and it isn't ever recommended reading.  I used to get picked up by the Blog Watch section of the opinion page in the Chronicle regularly, but alas, no more.  Care to ask them why?

My husband had gastric by pass surgery one year ago in March.  He has lost 170 pounds this year since his surgery.

I had knee surgery at the end of this March.  I am still trying to recover.  I have an appointment with the surgeon today.  I probably need more physical therapy.  I still have pain and it still gives out on me.  I may require another surgery or Synvisc injections.  Aging isn't for sissies.

There are other things happening besides politics.  There are many things we need to do this summer, install a new air conditioner, think about new cars, build a shed in the back yard, paint inside the house, find some nice bookcases, read more.

Saw an interesting Ed Harris movie The Third Miracle on cable.

I am reading the first book of the Dexter series by Jeff Lindsay.  My husband is reading The Moviegoer, again.  I can't open the email or pick up the phone without someone shouting about the Democratic Primaries.  I can't keep explaining to people that the television press is so corporate as to not matter.   No more news about preachers and politicians.  The speech that was supposed to denounce the preacher became a speech about race and the preacher has come back for more limelight and a bigger book advance.  Why is the image of victim hood more attractive to media? The Obama campaign isn't about the war or oil prices or insurance--it is about why he didn't leave a church years ago that was so offensive to most Americans?  And now why he can't change the conversation away from the preacher back to the campaign? 

Will he have so much trouble with unpleasant political problems as he has with unpleasant preacher problems?

There is no information in the news.  All of it looks like bad press releases and publicity stunts.   Reminds me of that Russian expression about no news in Izvestia and no truth in Pravda. 

Not one more word about that Disney girl not liking the photos everyone saw and discussed with her and that baseball pitcher and underage country singers.  Way too much ink on young girls singing country music and being inappropriate with adults who were being inappropriate with them.  Not one more picture of an underage girl with fewer clothes--we went through that 30 years ago with Brooke Shields.  Not another news story about baseball drug use and use of underage girls.




Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Obama save me from your followers

If being a liberal means I have to tolerate being told what to think and what to believe and what to say, you can keep it.

This is a missive, an email, from some Olbermann fan.  Read and ponder what abuse blogging invites:

You are ostracizing a person who has taken incredible personal career risks to bring real news to TV, for one remark.  This is the act of a fool.  Do you think Keith's continued efforts to promote the career of Rachel Maddow, who would be the first openly lesbian national TV commenter, is a sign of a woman hater?

The fact that you would turn on Keith for one remark indicates to me that your opinions are coming not from rational analysis, but from some kind of inner emotional turmoil.  This election is too important for pettiness and foolish distractions to get in the way of our unity.  The Republicans cannot defeat us this year, but we can defeat ourselves.  Don't be a part of that.

I am not part of that.  I am an individual.  I am not part of some movement.  I voted for Hillary.  I don't like men advocating beating women.   

What personal risk?  No one watches that network.  If he really wants to lay it on the line, he will broadcast that Bush should be impeached and make the case the Democrats in Congress won't make.  And to paraphrase Lyndon Johnson, what is personal risk for but to lay it on the line.  Brave would be looking into the camera and making an on air apology and examining what reduces people to want to physically harm Senator Clinton.  Why, America, do you not blink when men say women should suffer violence?

Goddamn it I am sick to death of celebrity worship in this country.  If it is on the television it must be worshiped even when it is wrong.  And Olbermann was wrong to advocate violence against Senator Clinton and if you can't see it you are more fucked up than I am as I advocate boycotting that smirking spoiled overpaid teenager on television.

What are you threatening me with?  Not being part of Obamarama?  I am not part of it.  Not being on the winning team?  I am a Clinton Democrat.  I know what it means not to feel the love.   Beating women isn't petty, it isn't foolishness.  It is deadly serious.  And your fondness  for Obama over standing up for any woman anywhere makes me sick.

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Boycott Olbermann

Keith Olbermann, normally a rational human being, advocated violence against Hillary Clinton on his program tonight.  He said of her insistence in running against Barak Obama that a man should take her into a room and only a man should come out.  Equally repulsive is Newsweek's Howard Fineman, who sat there and then agreed with Olbermann.  When called down by Huffington Post, Olbermann said he should have made it gender neutral and politically specific.  No.  Because as I told him via email tonight:

No matter what you think of the twice elected Senator Clinton, no one deserves violence used against them. Not one person deserves a beating for who they are, what they think, what they say, what they believe, their politics, their religion, their sexuality.

Mr. Olbermann, what is wrong with you? A perfectly normal appearing man is so angry that a woman will not allow him to have his way that he thinks someone should go into a room with her and only he comes out?

This is sick. And it must stop. And the only way to redeem yourself is look at that lame excuse of an apology, pull yourself off the air and get into some intensive therapy for your hatred of women.

You essentially thought that Don Imus should. And you should too. I will not watch your program or anything else on NBC until you do.

MSNBC should be boycotted.  He should be suspended as other idiots have been over such "pimping out" Chelsea remarks and "nappy headed ho," remarks.  Advertisers should be called and told that women control considerable dollars in this fabulous economy and won't tolerate such talk.

Thursday, April 24, 2008

McCain keeps breasts and vaginas from causing more lawsuits

The_big_lebowski_5 John McCain opposes legislation, which died in the Senate, to give women with sex discrimination claims against their employers the ability to sue to uphold women's constitutional rights against unequal pay for equal work or sexual harassment.

McCain said that pursuing these claims would cause more lawsuits.

That is like arguing that white collar crime shouldn't be prosecuted because it would put more white collar workers in jail.  Like arguing that we shouldn't pursue murderers because it would cause more prosecutions against alleged murderers.  Like arguing that we shouldn't build more courtrooms or jails because well, we would just use them to sue people and lock people up.

Maude Lebowski's (pictured here) work is commended as being strongly "vaginal." 
And John McCain and the U.S. Congress think your's is too, honey.
   

We shouldn't pursue freedom because more people would be free.

We shouldn't pursue unequal pay because more people would get equal pay for equal work.

We shouldn't treat people equally before the law because then more people would be treated equally and then people would, Oh My God, actually be equal.

And you thought George W. Bush had problems with language and logic.

That is like saying it is ethical and legal to pay someone less money because they are black or Hispanic.  Well, if you did that people would obviously see that it is discrimination.  But if we stop paying women less than we pay men then those damn women are going to want more rights like the right not to have their asses slapped at work, or the right not to be treated as just another qualified employee when it comes to job performance reviews.  Or the right to be judged on the merits, not on her breasts or vagina. 

Those breasts and vaginas cause a lot of trouble.  They have a lot of purposes other than ogling and fondling.  You can use them to keep women from being paid the same salary as a man.  You can use them to keep a woman off a golf course.  You can use them to keep a woman in her place which according to some is still prone on her back.  You can use them to say terrible things about a female presidential candidate that you would never say about a male candidate.  You can use them to judge a woman's intelligence, fitness to lead others, and use them to justify violence, hate, ignorance and fear about women.

Women cause trouble.  Not only do we cause men to rape us we cause litigation when we think that there is something wrong with being discriminated against because we have these uncontrollable urges to be treated the same as men in the workplace and the courthouse and the three branches of government.

Thank God we have men like John McCain taking care of our breasts and vaginas.  Thank God he understands what women just cannot.

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

women as meat

323564391396872
from the WCMessenger.com

Give these fine folks a call. Tell them what you think.
Chicken Express in Bridgeport ring off the wall: 940-683-5012.
Also, if you are so inclined, call their corporate headquarters: (817) 594-9300.

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Goodbye To All That (#2) by Robin Morgan

February 2, 2008

                                           

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 (www.womensmediacenter.com). 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?

                     

Goodbye to a campaign where he has to pass as white (which whites—especially wealthy ones—adore), while she has to pass as male (which both men and women demanded of her, and then found unforgivable). If she were blackor he were female we wouldn’t be having such problems, and I for one would be in heaven. But at present such a candidate wouldn’t stand a chance—even if she shared Condi Rice’s Bush-defending politics. 

                     

I was celebrating the pivotal power at last focused on African American women deciding on which of two candidates to bestow their vote—until a number of Hillary-supporting black feminists told me they’re being called “race traitors.”

                     

So goodbye to conversations about this nation’s deepest scar—slavery—which fail to acknowledge that labor- and sexual-slavery exist today in the U.S. and elsewhere on this  planet, and the majority of those enslaved are women.

                     

Women have endured sex/race/ethnic/religious hatred, rape and battery, invasion of spirit and flesh, forced pregnancy; being the majority of the poor, the illiterate, the disabled, of refugees, caregivers, the HIV/AIDS afflicted, the powerless. We have survived invisibility, ridicule, religious fundamentalisms, polygamy, teargas, forced feedings, jails, asylums, sati, purdah, female genital mutilation, witch burnings, stonings, and attempted gynocides. We have tried reason, persuasion, reassurances, and being extra-qualified, only to learn it  never was about qualifications after all. We  know that at this historical moment women experience the world differently  from men—though not all the same as one another—and can govern differently, from Elizabeth Tudor to Michele Bachelet  and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.

                     

We remember when Shirley Chisholm and Patricia Schroeder ran for this high office and barely got past the gate—they showed too much passion, raised too little cash, were joke fodder. Goodbye to all that. (And goodbye to some feminists so famished for a female president they were even willing to abandon women’s rights in backing Elizabeth Dole.)

                     

Goodbye, goodbye to .  . .

                     

—blaming anything Bill Clinton does on Hillary (even including his womanizing like the Kennedy guys—though unlike them, he got reported on). Let’s get real. If he hadn’t campaigned strongly for her everyone would cluck over what that meant. Enough of Bill and Teddy Kennedy locking their alpha  male horns while Hillary pays for it.

                     

—an era when parts of the populace feel so disaffected by  politics that a comparative lack of  knowledge, experience, and skill is actually seen as attractive, when celebrity-culture mania now infects our elections so that it’s “cooler” to glow with marquee charisma than to understand the vast global complexities of power on a nuclear, wounded planet.

                     

—the notion that it’s fun to elect a handsome, cocky president who feels he can learn on the job, goodbye to George W. Bush and the destruction brought by his inexperience, ignorance, and arrogance.  Goodbye to the accusation that HRC acts “entitled” when she’s worked intensely at everything she’s done—including being a nose-to-the-grindstone, first-rate senator from my state.

                     

Goodbye to her being exploited as a Rorschach test by women who reduce her to a blank screen on which they project their own fears, failures, fantasies.  

                     

Goodbye to the phrase “polarizing figure” to describe someone who embodies the transitions women have made in the last century and are poised to make in this one. It was the women’s movement that quipped, “We are becoming the men we wanted to marry.” She heard us, and she has.

                     

Goodbye to some women letting history pass by while wringing their hands, because Hillary isn’t as “likeable” as they’ve been warned they must be, or because she didn’t leave him, couldn’t “control” him, kept her family together and raised a smart, sane daughter. (Think of the blame if Chelsea had ever acted in the alcoholic, neurotic manner of the Bush twins!) Goodbye to some women pouting because she didn’t bake cookies or she did, sniping because she learned the rules and then bent or broke them. Grow the hell up. She is not running for Ms.-perfect-pure-queen-icon of the feminist movement.  She’s running to be president of the United States.

                     

Goodbye to the shocking American ignorance of our own and other countries’ history. Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir rose through party ranks and war, positioning themselves as proto-male leaders. Almost all other female heads of government so far  have been related to men of power—granddaughters, daughters, sisters, wives, widows: Gandhi, Bandaranike, Bhutto, Aquino, Chamorro, Wazed, Macapagal-Arroyo, Johnson Sirleaf, Bachelet, Kirchner, and more. Even in our “land of opportunity,” it’s mostly the first pathway “in” permitted to women: Representatives Doris Matsui and Mary Bono and Sala Burton; Senator Jean Carnahan . . . far too many to list here.

                     

Goodbye to a  misrepresented generational divide . . .

                     

Goodbye to the so-called spontaneous “Obama Girl” flaunting  her bikini-clad ass online—then confessing Oh yeah it wasn’t her idea after all, some guys got her to do it and dictated  the clothes, which she said “made me feel like a dork.”

                     

Goodbye to some young women eager to win male approval by showing they’re not feminists (at least not the kind who actually threaten thestatus quo), who can’t identify with a woman candidate because she is unafraid of eeueweeeu yucky power, who fear their  boyfriends might look at them funny if they say something good about her.  Goodbye to women of any age again feeling unworthy, sulking “what if she’s not electable?” or “maybe it’s post-feminism and whoooosh we’re already free.” Let a statement by the magnificent Harriet Tubman stand as reply. When asked how she managed to save hundreds of enslaved African Americans via the Underground Railroad during the Civil War, she replied bitterly, “I could have saved thousands—if only I’d been able to convince them they were slaves.”

                     

I’d rather say a joyful Hello to all the glorious young  women who do identifywith Hillary, and all the brave, smart men—of all ethnicities and any age—who get that it’s in their self-interest,  too. She’s better qualified. (D’uh.) She’s a high-profile candidate with an enormous grasp of foreign- and domestic-policy nuance, dedication to detail, ability to absorb staggering insult and personal pain while retaining dignity, resolve, even humor, and keep on keeping on. (Also, yes, dammit, let’s hear it for her connections and funding and party-building background, too. Obama was awfully glad about those when she raised dough and campaigned for him to get to the Senate in the first place.) 

                     

I’d rather look forward to what a good president he might make in eight years, when his vision and spirit are seasoned by practical know-how—and he’ll be all of 54. Meanwhile, goodbye to turning him into a shining knight when actually he’s an astute, smooth pol with speechwriters who’ve worked with the Kennedys’ own speechwriter-courtier Ted Sorenson. If it’s only about ringing rhetoric, let speechwriters run. But isn’t it about getting the policies we want enacted?

                     

And goodbye to the  ageism . . .

                     

How dare anyone unilaterally decide when to turn the page on history, papering over real inequities and suffering constituencies in the promise of a feel-good campaign? How dare anyone claim to unify while dividing, or think that to rouse U.S. youth from torpor it’s useful to triage the  single largest demographic in this country’s history: the boomer  generation—the majority of which is female

                     

Old woman are the one group that doesn’t grow more conservative with age—and we are the generation  of radicals who said “Well-behaved women seldom make history.” Goodbye to going gently into any goodnight  any man prescribes for us. We are the women who changed the reality of the  United States. And though we never went away, brace yourselves: we’re back! 

                     

We are the women who brought this country equal credit, better pay, affirmative action, the concept of a family-focused workplace; the women who established rape-crisis centers and battery shelters, marital-rape and date-rape laws; the women who defended lesbian custody rights, who fought for prison reform, founded the peace and environmental movements; who insisted that medical research include female anatomy; who inspired men to become more nurturing parents; who created women’s studies and Title IX so we all could cheer the WNBA stars and Mia Hamm. We are the women who reclaimed sexuality from violent pornography, who put childcare on the national agenda, who transformed demographics, artistic expression, language itself. We are the women who forged a worldwide movement. We are the proud successors of women who, though it took more than 50 years, won us the vote.

                     

We are the women who  now comprise the majority of U.S. voters.

                     

Hillary said she found her own voice in New Hampshire. There’s not a woman alive who, if she’s honest, doesn’t recognize what she means. Then HRC got drowned out by campaign experts, Bill, and media’s obsession with everything Bill.

                     

So listen to her voice:

                     

“For too long, the history of women has been a history of  silence. Even today, there are those who  are trying to silence our words.

                     

“It is a violation of human rights when babies are denied food, or drowned, or suffocated, or their spines broken, simply because they are born girls. It is a violation of human rights when woman and girls are  sold into the slavery of prostitution. It is a violation of human rights when women are doused with gasoline, set on fire and burned to death because their marriage dowries are deemed too small. It is a violation of human rights when individual women are raped in their own communities and when thousands of women are subjected to rape as a tactic or prize of war. It is a violation of human rights when a leading cause of death worldwide along women ages 14 to 44 is the violence they are subjected to in their own homes. It is a violation of human rights when women are denied the right to plan their own families, and that includes being forced to have abortions or being sterilized against their will.

                     

“Women’s rights are human rights. Among those rights are the right to speak freely—and the right to  be heard.”

                     

That was Hillary Rodham Clinton defying the U.S. State Department and the Chinese Government at the 1995 UN World Conference on Women in Beijing (look here for the full, stunning speech).

                     

And this voice, age 21, in “Commencement Remarks of Hillary D.  Rodham, President of Wellesley College Government Association, Class of 1969.”

                     

“We are, all of us, exploring a world none of us understands. . . . searching for a more immediate, ecstatic, and penetrating mode of living. . . . [for the] integrity, the courage to be whole, living in relation to one another in the full poetry of existence. The struggle for an integrated life existing in an atmosphere of communal trust and respect is one with desperately important political and social consequences. . . . Fear is always with us, but we just don't have time for it.”

                     

She ended with the commitment “to practice, with all the  skill of our being: the art of making  possible.”

                     

And for decades, she’s been  learning how.

                     

So goodbye to Hillary’s  second-guessing herself. The real question is deeper than her re-finding her voice. Can we women find ours? Can we do this for ourselves? 

                     

Our President, Ourselves!

                     

Time is short and the contest tightening. We need to rise in furious energy—as we did when Anita Hill was so vilely treated in the U.S. Senate, as we did when Rosie Jiminez was butchered by an illegal abortion, as we did and do for women globally who are condemned for trying to break through. We need to win, this time. Goodbye to supporting HRC tepidly, with ambivalent caveats and apologetic smiles. Time to volunteer, make phone calls, send emails, donate money, argue, rally, march, shout, vote.

                     

Me? I support Hillary Rodham because she’s the best  qualified of all candidates running in both parties. I support her because her progressive politics are as strong as her proven ability to withstand what will be a massive right-wing assault in the general election. I support her because she knows how to get us out of Iraq. I support her because she’s refreshingly thoughtful, and I’m bloodied from eight years of a jolly “uniter” with ejaculatory politics. I needn’t agree with her on every point. I agree with the 97 percent of her positions that are identical with Obama’s—and the few where hers are both more practical and to the left of his (like health care). I support her because she’s already smashed the first-lady stereotype and made history as a fine senator, because I believe she will continue to make history not only as the first US woman president, but as a great US  president.

                     

As for the “woman thing”?

                     

Me, I’m voting for Hillary not because she’s a woman—but  because I am.

                     

May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
My Photo
Bookmark and Share

My Other Accounts

  • AIM AIM:
  • Other Other: pierlight.blogspot.com

dazzling urbanites & urban achievers

billboard

mile markers



  • C-List Blogger



  • View My Stats

  • Links to Site



Blog powered by TypePad