Playing the Victim Card, Hillary Clinton Betrays Women
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/playing_the_victim_card_hillary_clinton_
betrays_women_20160215/
Posted on Feb 15, 2016
By Alexa Sue Amore
Young women listen to Hillary Clinton in Portsmouth, N.H., in early
February. (Jacquelyn Martin / AP)
February has been a tumultuous month for feminism. Former Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright damned young women who prefer Bernie Sanders to Hillary
Clinton, and Gloria Steinem dismissively attributed what she perceives as an
irrational preference for Sanders among young women to their raging
hormones. The following day she apologized "for what's been misrepresented
as implying young women aren't serious in their politics" but failed to
acknowledge the blatant sexism of her remarks, sinking her reputation as a
feminist in the minds of many. Albright eventually published her own mea
culpa in The New York Times.
Meanwhile, the popular trivialization of Sanders' supporters as "Bernie
bros" and "Bernie-splainers" perpetuates Steinem's misrepresentation of
Sanders' supporters as "boys" followed by brainless female groupies. Both
Albright and Steinem accuse young women of treachery and abandonment for
having their own political opinions, encouraging them to reverse their
position out of a sense of shame and guilt.
Little surprise: The recent eruption of comments belittling young women's
mental faculties emanates directly from Clinton herself.
Whenever Sanders confronts her about her record, Clinton casts herself as
the victim of a sexist brand of male condescension. Her defensive,
faux-feminist tone derails meaningful conversation about the factual
political differences between the two candidates, undercutting young women's
ability to meaningfully participate in the political process.
During the Feb. 4 MSNBC debate in New Hampshire, Clinton claimed that
Sanders' criticism of her taking Wall Street money was, "by innuendo, by
insinuation," "a very artful smear"; she framed his perfectly sound
criticism as a personal, rather than political, attack. Clinton bets that
female viewers will find Sanders condescending if she reacts to him as if he
were being condescending to her-even though he is not. In response to
Sanders' point that she claims to be a progressive on some days and a
moderate on others, she characterized Sanders as "the self-proclaimed
gatekeeper of progressivism" and "the only person who I think would
characterize me, a woman running to be the first woman president, as
exemplifying the establishment."
By cultivating an underdog persona, Clinton sends a harmful message that
women in politics are too weak to participate in meaningful debate, and that
female viewers will be too caught up in the glorious prospect of a female
president to notice her reluctance to discuss the objectionable parts of her
record.
As the self-proclaimed victim of a smear campaign, she wallows in, rather
than overcomes, the male-dominated political establishment, insensitively
invoking women's shared experiences of sexism to avoid talking about issues.
Clinton and her supporters frequently downplay Sanders' progressive agenda
as too idealistic, while touting the conviction that the symbolic act of
electing a female president will substantially improve women's lives across
the country. Many young women simply aren't buying into this propaganda.
Far from signaling women's triumph over a patriarchal establishment,
Clinton's election to the presidency would symbolize that a woman can only
win the general election by compromising her integrity in compliance with a
rigged campaign finance system that serves the same corrupt political forces
that have subordinated women and people of color for generations.
Perhaps women and society in general are skeptical of the glass-ceiling
argument for electing Clinton because we have seen how that worked out with
the first African-American president. The election of Barack Obama did not
magically elevate the status of blacks in this country. It did not result in
better education in black neighborhoods or end mass incarceration or keep
the lead out of the water in Flint, Mich. The appeal of symbolic victories
just does not hold up against reality.
By supporting Sanders, many young women are seizing an opportunity to
dismantle a racist, sexist, classist political establishment that until
recently may have seemed unalterable. These radical, independent-minded
young women want to reclaim their ability to bring about real change through
the democratic process. They refuse to have their voices drowned out by
so-called political pragmatism, passivity-and shaming by rich and powerful
women.
Young, female progressives are perfectly aware that while Clinton paints
herself as the target of a smear campaign, we are in fact the ones being
patronized and condescended to by Clinton and her prominent female
supporters.
The 2016 presidential election is not about helping one woman win. It's
about helping all women improve their lives, and it's about empowering women
to dig deep into each candidate's positions in order to determine who can
accomplish our common goals. Women are intelligent enough to make informed
political decisions and to resist peer pressure and manipulation, even from
our fellow feminists.
The next step for feminism is to stop allowing anyone, male or female, to
tell any of us, of any gender, that we have to vote and make decisions
according to our bodies.
Alexa Sue Amore is a graduate student in medieval studies at Fordham
University. She previously wrote "Levi's Labor's Loss" for Truthdig.
http://www.truthdig.com/ http://www.truthdig.com/
Playing the Victim Card, Hillary Clinton Betrays Women
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/playing_the_victim_card_hillary_clinton_
betrays_women_20160215/
Posted on Feb 15, 2016
By Alexa Sue Amore
Young women listen to Hillary Clinton in Portsmouth, N.H., in early
February. (Jacquelyn Martin / AP)
February has been a tumultuous month for feminism. Former Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright damned young women who prefer Bernie Sanders to Hillary
Clinton, and Gloria Steinem dismissively attributed what she perceives as an
irrational preference for Sanders among young women to their raging
hormones. The following day she apologized "for what's been misrepresented
as implying young women aren't serious in their politics" but failed to
acknowledge the blatant sexism of her remarks, sinking her reputation as a
feminist in the minds of many. Albright eventually published her own mea
culpa in The New York Times.
Meanwhile, the popular trivialization of Sanders' supporters as "Bernie
bros" and "Bernie-splainers" perpetuates Steinem's misrepresentation of
Sanders' supporters as "boys" followed by brainless female groupies. Both
Albright and Steinem accuse young women of treachery and abandonment for
having their own political opinions, encouraging them to reverse their
position out of a sense of shame and guilt.
Little surprise: The recent eruption of comments belittling young women's
mental faculties emanates directly from Clinton herself.
Whenever Sanders confronts her about her record, Clinton casts herself as
the victim of a sexist brand of male condescension. Her defensive,
faux-feminist tone derails meaningful conversation about the factual
political differences between the two candidates, undercutting young women's
ability to meaningfully participate in the political process.
During the Feb. 4 MSNBC debate in New Hampshire, Clinton claimed that
Sanders' criticism of her taking Wall Street money was, "by innuendo, by
insinuation," "a very artful smear"; she framed his perfectly sound
criticism as a personal, rather than political, attack. Clinton bets that
female viewers will find Sanders condescending if she reacts to him as if he
were being condescending to her-even though he is not. In response to
Sanders' point that she claims to be a progressive on some days and a
moderate on others, she characterized Sanders as "the self-proclaimed
gatekeeper of progressivism" and "the only person who I think would
characterize me, a woman running to be the first woman president, as
exemplifying the establishment."
By cultivating an underdog persona, Clinton sends a harmful message that
women in politics are too weak to participate in meaningful debate, and that
female viewers will be too caught up in the glorious prospect of a female
president to notice her reluctance to discuss the objectionable parts of her
record.
As the self-proclaimed victim of a smear campaign, she wallows in, rather
than overcomes, the male-dominated political establishment, insensitively
invoking women's shared experiences of sexism to avoid talking about issues.
Clinton and her supporters frequently downplay Sanders' progressive agenda
as too idealistic, while touting the conviction that the symbolic act of
electing a female president will substantially improve women's lives across
the country. Many young women simply aren't buying into this propaganda.
Far from signaling women's triumph over a patriarchal establishment,
Clinton's election to the presidency would symbolize that a woman can only
win the general election by compromising her integrity in compliance with a
rigged campaign finance system that serves the same corrupt political forces
that have subordinated women and people of color for generations.
Perhaps women and society in general are skeptical of the glass-ceiling
argument for electing Clinton because we have seen how that worked out with
the first African-American president. The election of Barack Obama did not
magically elevate the status of blacks in this country. It did not result in
better education in black neighborhoods or end mass incarceration or keep
the lead out of the water in Flint, Mich. The appeal of symbolic victories
just does not hold up against reality.
By supporting Sanders, many young women are seizing an opportunity to
dismantle a racist, sexist, classist political establishment that until
recently may have seemed unalterable. These radical, independent-minded
young women want to reclaim their ability to bring about real change through
the democratic process. They refuse to have their voices drowned out by
so-called political pragmatism, passivity-and shaming by rich and powerful
women.
Young, female progressives are perfectly aware that while Clinton paints
herself as the target of a smear campaign, we are in fact the ones being
patronized and condescended to by Clinton and her prominent female
supporters.
The 2016 presidential election is not about helping one woman win. It's
about helping all women improve their lives, and it's about empowering women
to dig deep into each candidate's positions in order to determine who can
accomplish our common goals. Women are intelligent enough to make informed
political decisions and to resist peer pressure and manipulation, even from
our fellow feminists.
The next step for feminism is to stop allowing anyone, male or female, to
tell any of us, of any gender, that we have to vote and make decisions
according to our bodies.
Alexa Sue Amore is a graduate student in medieval studies at Fordham
University. She previously wrote "Levi's Labor's Loss" for Truthdig.
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/does_hillary_clinton_care_about_
the_gender_pay_gap_not_when_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/does_hillary_clinton_care_about_
the_gender_pay_gap_not_when_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/does_hillary_clinton_care_about_
the_gender_pay_gap_not_when_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/george_w_bush_who_mirrored_inflamed_publ
ic_passions_donald_trump_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/george_w_bush_who_mirrored_inflamed_publ
ic_passions_donald_trump_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/george_w_bush_who_mirrored_inflamed_publ
ic_passions_donald_trump_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_death_of_the_republican_party_201602
16/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_death_of_the_republican_party_201602
16/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_death_of_the_republican_party_201602
16/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/despite_syria_cease_fire_belligerents_pl
ot_military_victory_video_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/despite_syria_cease_fire_belligerents_pl
ot_military_victory_video_20160216/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/despite_syria_cease_fire_belligerents_pl
ot_military_victory_video_20160216/ http://www.truthdig.com/
http://www.truthdig.com/
http://www.truthdig.com/about/http://www.truthdig.com/contact/http://www.tru
thdig.com/about/advertising/http://www.truthdig.com/user_agreement/http://ww
w.truthdig.com/privacy_policy/http://www.truthdig.com/about/comment_policy/
C 2016 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
http://www.hopstudios.com/
http://support.truthdig.com/signup_page/subscribe
http://support.truthdig.com/signup_page/subscribe
http://www.facebook.com/truthdighttp://www.facebook.com/truthdighttp://twitt
er.com/intent/follow?source=followbutton&variant=1.0&screen_name=truthdightt
p://twitter.com/intent/follow?source=followbutton&variant=1.0&screen_name=tr
uthdighttps://plus.google.com/+truthdighttps://plus.google.com/+truthdighttp
://www.linkedin.com/company/truthdighttp://www.linkedin.com/company/truthdig
http://truthdig.tumblr.com/http://truthdig.tumblr.com/http://www.truthdig.co
m/connecthttp://www.truthdig.com/connect
