So what happened?

Unlike the sadly vitriolic Maureen Dowd, some of us hope that Clinton’s win means in part that some of the electorate can question and reject the sexist reporting that has surrounded her candidacy.  Whether or not one supports her, feminists are unlikely to want her to lose because powerful women cannot be tolerated.

For another interesting take, you might like the three minute-plus video on today’s Guardian.  Watching it is a bit like going for a walk with an intelligent friend.  More questions than answers, but some nice observations.  To see it, click here.

7 thoughts on “So what happened?

  1. After reading Dowd I come away wondering “why”? Why write a piece like that? Also does anyone else think that all this flack over having a few tears well up is just as ridiculous? Can that really be what people are responding to? I have to remind myself that this is the same media that has done such a poor job of keeping us informed about Iraq and being generally bullied by the Bush. It seems that the only way that our (U.S. mainstream) media knows how to report on anything these days is sensationally. Brittany Spears and the Democratic Nomination…all the same.

  2. Sharon makes an excellent point about U.S. media and sensationalism. I agree it is ridiculous as I cannot see such a big deal being made about tears if it were a man. Though I attempt to pull out of the traditional feminist stance on this, there is a double standard going on. Further, I ask the same question regarding Dowd’s piece: “Why?” My added “why” is, why knock the “voice” thing as though Hillary should have already found it? Is it not possible that this election has presented Hillary with something “new” to discover which could in some way change or create a “new voice”?

    It wasn’t Hillary’s display of emotion that caught me, it was her comment “I’ve had so many opportunities in this country. I just don’t want to see us fall backwards…I see what’s happening. We have to reverse it.” that clinched it for me. I see what’s happening too and her tears showed a genuine care for what happens in Washington, to the American people and ultimately what America becomes in the future within our global community.

    As an immigrant daughter, I have dual love for two countries. America offered more promise. Bush took a lot of it away. Hillary deserves a chance as her words signified what is important to me: a passion to give back to a country that offered opportunities in the first place, one’s I would have never had from where my parents defected. For me, this election is personal as well; it’s not just political rhetoric to suck up and make a choice. This election is important because it requires the experience of a seasoned individual to tackle some of the serious challenges W. Bush offered American and of course, the world.

    Because of Hillary’s experience and Washington “wisdom”, I simply feel her knowledge is more valuable than Obama’s and thus, she is the right choice. And, as a Euro-American, I’d like to be proud of my country again. I’d like to not wear a scarlet letter anymore. It would be nice if someone would comment on the positive nature of Hillary’s words that accompanied her tears. That’s what was valuable in determining how I feel about her not as a candidate but as a human being. Everyone is out to win but but the person who displays the genuine care that I have for America and the reversal of the status quo is who I’ll vote for. Thus far, Hillary is proving her “value” to me.

    I’m sorry for the length. I thought I could add an insight to the mystery of “what happened”. I don’t know if I offered anything substantial other than another opinion on the matter.

    I truly enjoy your blog. I’m not a seasoned philosopher, merely an undergrad student but I learn a lot by reading your pages and the various views you and others offer. I’ll work to shorten my comments in the future :-). It’s past midnight and I felt fired up to comment (rather than go to bed) and I’m too tired to attempt to shorten this and convey the passion I feel on this issue at the same time.

    Thank you for your continued efforts in providing the information that you do. Personally, I love visiting.

  3. I liked (most of) the Dowd (the non-gratuitously sexist bits). Especially this:
    “But it was grimly typical of her that what finally made her break down was the prospect of losing.”
    There hasn’t been any choking up over a war that has killed hundreds of thousands of people has there? Some of what Dowd says needs to be said. What’s more, Hillary can take it.

Comments are closed.