BlogHer - Women, Race and Hillary Clinton - Comments

Great point

Jill Miller Zimon — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:03:12 -0600

Where you say, "And sometimes I have to represent becasue if not, there would be no one at the table. And the prevailing stereotypes would go unchecked and unchallenged. "When and where I enter so goes the Race"

That is true, you are right. Even if we don't want to. That is very, very true.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

Exactly

Jill Miller Zimon — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:58:01 -0600

And then you also want people to realize that if you're not the stereotype they were expecting, chances are, whomever they think is in that stereotype shouldn't be thought about that way either.

Thanks for sharing all those categories! Wow. When we think about, there are so many aren't there?

Me. How about just the category of "me" - Joan Armatrading, Me Myself I - still something I blare.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

Thanks :)

Jill Miller Zimon — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:55:22 -0600

Also not like this isn't a tangly web of ideas and experiences. I always say blogs are like HDTV - because you get to look sooooo closely. I love it.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

We're all outsiders

alyssaroyse — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:31:38 -0600

Damn, that was beautiful. thanks.

Somehow, we've all, as a culture, been so busy identifying ourselves that we've alienated everyone else. huh. there's a whole of of "us and them" going on and not enough "we."

thanks for your reply. it was thoughtful and right on.

assumptions are dangerous things.
___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE
make some good news!
www.JustCauseIt.com

that's why conversations matter

alyssaroyse — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:28:11 -0600

i almost never get it right the first time. :) it's only when we all chew on things outloud that we can see out own trains of thought and hitch a ride. :)
___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE
make some good news!
www.JustCauseIt.com

I love this comment

Erin Kotecki Vest — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:22:14 -0600

Babz I think you just clearly stated to me exactly why I am still undecided. Watching people become uncomfortable with these topics, challenging each other...I love it. And I for one am firmly grounded in both candidate's ability to lead, their politics, and their race and gender. I can't ignore it because it is NOT a non-issue in our country. I wish it was, but it's not.

To me their resume's and stances on issues are close enough that I'm forced to think of the bigger picture for our culture and society as a whole and I am very sure that is a valid reason of influence on my vote. Politicians are politicians, I want to know if this will really change anything. I'm hoping, and I think well rounded discussions like we are having proves there is at least something in the air.

Erin

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

Hey back at you!

Lovebabz — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:50:11 -0600

Hey,

When I say your profile picture I thought: Shit that woman looks like me!

I am always asked if I am Jamaican or something--which is fine, I am so used to being asked. And I am always looked at carefully when I am shopping--who can tell I have master degrees by looking at me! Or that i stood in the Oveal Office with then-president Bill Clinton accepting an award for an organization I ran. Nope all they see is a big black woman with a lot of kids who maybe dangerous and will probably rob them blind (LOL)

Our plight often goes un-noticed and so few of us complain about the everyday small injustices that sting and sting and sting. (sigh)

I sowed diamonds in my backyard...

Love,
Babz
www.lovebabz.blogspot.com Personal
www.lovebabz08.wordpress.com Political

Hey!

fabooj — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:28:34 -0600

I do know a black woman who is a trained chef. She had dreadlocks to, but had to get rid of them for school.

I have dread locs and I am not of carribean descent and I do not do drugs.

Ugh. Me too...that is one I just try to avoid too.

"I am so perfect so divine so ethereal so surreal. I cannot be comprehended except by my permission. I mean...I...can fly like a bird in the sky." Ego Trippin' by Nikki Giovanni
Visit me at faboo mama

I represent....

Lovebabz — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:20:45 -0600

Yep me too, now add:

Black Mother of adopted children

Felon/White Collar Criminal---How many Black women do you know are white collar criminals...overall less than 1% of the 5-14% of federal criminals

Chef--how many Black women do you know are formally trained chefs.

Was elected to public office in a New England State.

I have dread locs and I am not of carribean descent and I do not do drugs.

I am the odd Sister out...all the fucking time. (sigh)

And sometimes I have to represent becasue if not, there would be no one at the table. And the prevailing stereotypes would go unchecked and unchallenged. "When and where I enter so goes the Race"

I walked to the furtile crescent and built the spinx...

Love,
Babz
www.lovebabz.blogspot.com Personal
www.lovebabz08.wordpress.com Politcal

Race or Gender which carries more weight?

Lovebabz — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:08:45 -0600

This conversation is rich and this is what I love about this political season- that so many people are having these types of conversations.
I would add that I am fine with folks voting their gender or their race. What I am not fine with is the notion to do so is some emotional psychosis. Look, for the last 20 years...and I am 44 years old, I have heard that women ought to pull together, Black people ought to pull together. We all join groups and clubs based on our comfort levels and gender. I am in a Sorority--the largest African American Sorority in the world, Delta Sigma Theta, Inc. Carol Mosely Braun is my sorority Sister and she ran for President--she is Black and a woman. The problem I am having with all of this is the notion that women have a candidate they can rally behind in Hillary Clinton and somehow she isn't good enough? African Americans have a candidate they can rally around and somehow he isn't good enough. If it were solely about qualifications and likeability we all would vote with our eyes closed. But now we have to ask ourselves the hard questions--will having a woman in the oval office further womens issues? And what the fuck are women's issues? Will having a Black man in the Oval Office undo 400 years of oppression, predjudice, racism and a general maligning of all things Black in America? This moment is what we all have worked for and we are here and we are uncomfortable with it. I am even fine with that becuse now we have to deal with our hidden racism and our gender exclusions. And for Black women this is difficult. My other Soror, Paula Giddings wrote a book--"when and where I enter" meaning when and where I renter so does the race. Barack has the weight of the entire Balck community on his shoulders--13-15 million of us! and Hillary has to represent women dead and or alive. And the reality is THEY CAN"T and that is what hurts and that is why we are having all this drama. No one can be all things to all people 24/7, but we can't hear that and we can't accept that.

As I said this is rich. This conversation is worth having and continuing through-out the election.

Love,
Babz
www.lovebabz.blogspot.com Perosnal
www.lovebabz08.wordpress.com Political

You talk of being left out

fabooj — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:07:55 -0600

On Sunday, I had a conference cal/web meeting with various women of color, all age, education and economic scales discussing this issue with the campaign. The youngest was 18 year old college student (mom of 3 kids). The oldest was my aunt who is almost 70. There were 23 women on the call. We were about an hour into the call before someone realized that there were no white females represented. Not even a half-white person. I asked why. My cousin, said, "Well, if we had a white person on the call, would we talk freely? Could we without hurting someone's feelings?" There were mumbles of 'no'.

I mentioned that it was odd, the fact that we were discussing how people like Steinem may view us (as non-contemporaries, that is) and yet, not one of us actually considered inviting our own Steinem. I know that my best friend, who is white, would have loved being on the call and could have contributed a lot. She grew up in a poor, Latino neighborhood and that was all she knew before moving to the burbs down south. Yet, for whatever reason, it didn't cross my mind to invite her to the call.

When I talked to her about it, she said the same thing you did. That now she's feeling left out of discussions. People see her blond hair/green eyes and assume a lot about her. She knows that at her school she's excluded from issues handling a Latino kid even though she speaks Spanish and could probably read the child better than any of the other teachers. She knows that the black teachers don't think she'll "get it" when they discuss certain things. She said, "After my first year at that school, I spent the next two years trying to establish my 'person of color' creds. It didn't make me more accessible, it made me look like I was desperately saying, 'But my best friends are black!'." It's been really frustrating for her and I hadn't even realized it because she's always been my chica. Now extend that out to white females who aren't my best friend, or I don't even know.

On the flip of that, I know that I'm excluded because of my race or my economic status or my education. I'm excluded by everyone, including black women. So, I completely get how you feel.

It makes a lot of sense

fabooj — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:46:43 -0600

It seems that I'm always the representative

The black person.
The black female.
The college educated black person.
The college educated black female.
The Muslim person.
The Muslim female.
The Muslim females who's Sunni AND Black.
The black female married to a non-black man.
The mom.
The black mom.
The black mom who lived in an upscale neighborhood (that was before I blessedly moved).
The mom of biracial kids (I actually detest this category the most)
The hetero person (as most of my friends are LGB and/orT)
The WAHM
And yes, the blogger.

I completely get trying not to be THE representative. It's a lot of pressure and you don't want to make an impression on someone to give them the wrong idea about that sub-group. It gets to the point where, I have to drive home that sometimes I'm talking about ME and my experiences.

I understand

fabooj — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:38:30 -0600

Funny, but your post started a whole other thing on my friend's listserv among the 40+ crowd. Regardless of age, they focused on the age thing. It just goes to show that there are so many different dynamics and facets that there isn't one person in the world who could write something that encompasses everyone. Unless they right about stubbing a toe. LOL!!!

I wasn't as artful as I thought, I think!

Jill Miller Zimon — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:31:39 -0600

What you wrote here "BUT, what I really want is for that not to be the case. Understand that your actions IMPACT others, but do not necessarily represent them." was exactly what I was intending to imply/have you infer. Sorry about that!! Long-windedness can be an affliction of mine. lol

But yes - that is exactly the point I was trying to make. Thank you for making it/clarifying it for me.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

Point well taken, and, but....

alyssaroyse — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:50:02 -0600

I think you're right, and there is certainly something humbling in thinking that what you do does represent a world larger than you.

BUT, what I really want is for that not to be the case. Understand that your actions IMPACT others, but do not necessarily represent them.

My most current case in point was the blog post i wrote called, "I resolve to NOT want to lose weight." In it, i discuss being almost 40, my body not looking anything like it did when i was in my 20's - sagging, puffing, drooping, dripping - and still feeling happy and proud and free in it. The picture that i originally included with the post was of me at Burning Man in a goofy outfit that really could only be worn by someone who was comfortable in her body. There wasn't much to it - but a lot more than a bikini, for reference.....

The outcry was massive.

1. As a representative of women business leaders, i should not be seen in such an outfit.
2. As a small woman (i'm a szie 2) i have no business discussing body image.

I was slack-jawed. I am not a representative of all women in business. I am me. And if i represent anything larger than that, it is that women - even those of us who run businesses with investment capital - are multi-faceted. We are smart, sexy, fun, generous, sharp, gentle etc.... And I want to be seen as ALL of those things. So does my behavior impact others? I hope so. The impact I hope to have is to help create a world in which we can all be EVERYTHING that we are without shame. Part of what I am is someone who likes to go to Burning Man, walk around in a pink wig and nothing else, and that's okay. (And no, i didn't put that picture on the web site.)

The other one, about my being too small to have body image issues, really concerned me. After all, most of our struggles are more universal than we think. We have all grown up and are bombarded by the same issues. In fact, the fact that even I am impacted by those messages was precisely the point - we have created a cadre of iconic images such that NONE OF US are ever good enough.... our images are so distorted that nothing even vaguely real resonates as being "good."

These are, of course, not race issues - which is where this thread started - but to your point, we do hold individuals responsible for representing their "group," without giving them the affirmative dignity of self identity or the responsibility of claiming their impact.

And it supports the idea that we have each decided what a "struggle" is, and tend not to legitimate anyone who's struggle is different than our own.
___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE
make some good news!
www.JustCauseIt.com

Women, Race and Hillary Clinton

fabooj — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 11:49:46 -0600

Indulge me a bit in posting on "old news", but there's a discusion going on in the blogosphere about the Senator, with the basis in feminism. On BooMan Tribune, Arthur Gilroy has decided that women, particularly left-leaning, blogging women, hate Clinton because:

They resented her success. They resented the template ITSELF. To some degree, the fact that this woman had become a truly DOMINANT woman...not just independent,. but dominant over the lives of many, many men as well as children and women pressed buttons in both of their heads that had been implanted in their early "I ENJOY being a girl!!!", "Play with those damned dolls or ELSE" youth.

You have to read the entire post to fully appreciate that women, according to Gilroy, can not make a decision regarding Clinton because we're preconditioned.

Hijole!

Over at BlogHer, there's been a very robust discussion on the Senator. Morra Aarons submitted the entry Why Thirtysomething Women need Hillary Clinton, and Why She Needs Us. She exhorts us to vote for Clinton for president, because "it's time". Ironically, the same arguement Gilroy used for why lefty, blogging females hate Clinton, Aarons uses as to why women should vote for Clinton:

I think many young women are coming around to Hillary because despite our hesitancy to re-join the Feminist Majority, we know it’s time. Oddly enough, I think it took a reminder from the godmother of feminism, Gloria Steinem, to wake us up. As (male) uber-blogger Markos put it: “You underestimate that sympathy at your own peril. If I found myself half-rooting for her given the crap that was being flung at her, is it any wonder that women turned out in droves to send a message that sexist double-standards were unacceptable?”

It’s time. Older women have understood that and overwhelmingly support Clinton, but younger women have been slower to support Hillary. I think, though, we are realizing that perhaps having a woman in the White House will let us breathe a little easier at work.

These posts, in and of themeselves would be interesting enough if I was white. But I'm not. I'm black and there is a high level of disinterest of how racism AND sexism can effect a woman's outlook among white females. Especially of white females of certain economic classes and educational levels.

Gloria Steinem, the so-called Godmother of Feminism, wrote a piece for the NYT titled, Women are Never Frontrunners. Somehow, this title was chosen, despite the fact that Sen. Clinton has been the frontrunner since she announced her campaign. Indeed, the media declared her the frontrunner before she announced her campaign. Steinem's article does what most white feminist do, dismiss race. After all, black men were given the right to vote before women were. She neglects the Jim Crow south. She doesn't mention the inherent privilege that Hillary Rodham Clinton grew up with.

So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects “only” the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more “masculine” for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren’t too many of them); and because there is still no “right” way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what.

I’m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That’s why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that.

Yes, we should remember that, but Steinem spends the rest of the article, carefully not remembering that. At Jack and Jill Politics, dnA gives us a post titled Access to Power with the conclusion:

Women like Steinem are quick to invoke "the sisterhood" as a reason to vote for Hillary Clinton, but black women see few of the same benefits that white women do; yet they're still expected to feel (and act on) gender solidarity with people who essentially ignore the issues facing them. Unless it involves some high profile figure like Imus.

Indeed, that is exactly what Aarons did in her BlogHer post. I responded to the BlogHer post (my post is most definitely longer):

Gloria Steinem's NYT article was clearly directed to young, white females. Of privilege. She lives in a headspace that I could never occupy, would never want to occupy. Her arguments were specious at best and all I took away from the article was that her oppression was greater than my oppression. (I'm sorry...I should stop here and mention that I read the article yesterday and got pissed. As the day wore on, I was downright livid at Steinem's presumptions, assumptions and petty pitifulness.)

Over at TalkLeft there was a post Steinem's article. One person noted that Steinem seem to declare that racism is dead. I posted:

But Steinem is so incredibly wrong on this front. White women are more often "given" much more leeway, advantages and opportunities than any minority regardless of gender and if anyone should know that she should. For someone like Steinem to actually say that is laughable and insulting. Look at feminism, as a movement. Did Steinem ever have to face police dogs, fire hoses and be scared of lynching to get equal rights for women?

Didn't think so.

Other than that, the subject wasn't broached, yet ageism became the focus. On liberal blogs, in general, the subject is very rarely touched. And pointed comments like mine are usually ignored.

rikyrah's response at BlogHer gives you a little political perspective on how white women have more access than blacks in general.

There are, what, 9 White Female Governors?

1 Black male Governor.

NEVER a Black Female Governor.

There are what, 15 White Female Senators.

1 Black Male Senator.

Only 1 Black Female Senator.

Who are the biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action?

Sure in hell isn't Black folk..

Oh yeah, WHITE WOMEN.

Black women are only 'Sisters' when it's convenient. If not, our concerns are not addressed, like in that Steinem piece. Black women were INVISIBLE in that piece. She completely and deliberately ignores White Privilege - how convenient for her.

I usually like to keep my isms separated as, the liberal blogosphere has a horrible habit of ignoring one argument to bring up another to make a point. In this case, it's a little difficult, as the Clinton campaign has been quite active in the racism front. Does she get a pass on this because she's a woman? Because she's white. Judging from the media coverage and unreaction in the liberal blogosphere, it seems the answer is 'yes' to both. Female bloggers who are dismissing the sexism regarding Clinton's choking up moment, are extremely quiet on the campaign's race-baiting statements.

That's not to say that I would expect them to speak up. After all, someone like Jane Hamsher, who would be a Clinton contemporary, now has a very strong reputation as a racist in the black and Latino blogosphere. Her site seems to largely condone racism and since I've been oh-so-lucky as to meet some of the guest bloggers there, I'm going to say that this is something that is entrenched. I'm certainly not going to disabuse anyone of the notion that FDL is a blog with racist bloggers, when my experiences with face to face meetings reaffirms that.

While female bloggers recently gave us entries on Feminism, all of them took Steinem's lead with dismissing or ignoring racism. We've gotten rallying cries, as women, to back up Clinton, because she is female. These are the same women who tell me that black people who vote for Obama because he's black are short-sighted. I fail to see why that's not quite a double-standard. However in the comment sections of media sites, to blogs, to random discussions, these double-standards are enforced to the point of becoming conventional wisdom.

I think it's important for people to understand that many black people don't put the Clinton's a pedestal as the media and the Clinton's will have you believe. As I wrote on BlohHer:

But let's take that experience at face value and ignore the fact that she's basically asking us to elect her to a 3rd term...When someone like Clinton wants something from me, my first (selfish) question is, "What have you done for me lately?" With Clinton (Bill or Hillary), it's "What have you done for me period?" Because every core supporter they could have had (Blacks and Gays specifically), they threw under the bus long ago to strengthen their insider ties. At least Bill could make you feel good while he screwed you over. His mantra was always, "Later...your time will come later." Well, it's "later" and Sen. Clinton has most certainly picked up that refrain. What exactly are we waiting for? More backroom deals? More compromises that still leave many Americans with unequal rights?

With the race-baiting tactics from her campaign this past month, are black women supposed to ignore that and history and still back Clinton because she's a woman?

Let's keep in mind that Clinton is not the first woman to run for president and that Obama is not the first black person to run president. Indeed, in 1972 Shirley Chisolm was the first black woman from a major party to ran for president. In 2004, Carol Moseley Braun another black woman ran for president.

Would Steinem still back Clinton if Clinton was a black woman? Did Steinem back Moseley Braun's candidacy for president as she did her run for Senate?

Would the white women of New Hampshire have rallied behind Clinton if she was black?

Would female bloggers even be discussing Feminism if Clinton wasn't white?

For my part, just poking around these internets, I'm going to say the answers to all of my questions is 'no'.