I Am Woman, Hear Me Snore

[question everything]

I Am Woman, Hear Me Snore

In a new book, 30 female writers critique Hillary Clinton. Again. And again. And still miss the point.
By Julia Baird
NEWSWEEK
Jan 26, 2008

"I don't understand," wrote historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in his diary in late 2000, "why educated and professional women, otherwise intelligent and tolerant, are so unreasonably possessed by Hillary-hatred … I cannot extract a clear statement of why they all detest her." After reading a new book that addresses precisely this question—a collection of essays titled "Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary: Reflections by Women Writers"—neither can I. In fact, after reading all 30 essays, I don't want to know anymore.

The essays—written mostly by New York intellectuals, and edited by Susan Morrison, The New Yorker's articles editor — dissect Clinton's femininity, sexuality, clothes, mothering, marriage, mystique and, of course, likability. Or, more precisely, why so many educated, middle-class women have a visceral response to her. "My generation definitely has a Clinton problem," writes Amy Wilentz in an essay on Clinton's clothes, or "costumes." The reasons for their suspicion outlined here are mostly personal — she doesn't have a hobby, aside from cleaning closets and completing crossword puzzles. She doesn't appear to have been deeply attached to her family pets. She lacks sensuousness. She showed a hint of cleavage. She wore turquoise earrings with a yellow pantsuit. She liked prim headbands. She changed her maiden name. She married Bill Clinton. She stayed married to Bill Clinton. She is still married to Bill Clinton. Even her voice, Marie Brenner writes, "reminds us of the fifth grade teacher we despised."

Imagine if men wrote a book about Clinton containing this kind of minutiae — the same women would turn and savage them for trivializing her. And herein lies the conflict. Many of these authors would have expected to support a female presidential candidate. They came of age in the 1970s, were buoyed by the tumult, thrill and promise of the women's movement, but are now puzzled and discomfited by what appears to be the result of their labors, or their hopes — the polished, private, pragmatic Clinton.

(snip)

Whatever. Isn't the question: is she any good? Or, how will she lead the country? No one in this collection seriously analyzes her position on Iraq, her shift in health-care policy, her record as a senator, her promise of change, the likelihood that she can get elected or whether she has the right credentials. It is jarring—and worrying. Many of the essays are clever, entertaining, provocative and elegantly written. But as you read one after the other, a certain self-loathing is evident: do we dislike Clinton, they ask, because she is like us — or not like us?.. In a thoughtful piece, Dahlia Lithwick asks if women don't trust her because her suffering has been done in private: "We like to see all the crying and the dieting because we are still crying and dieting ourselves." Roiphe argues that what she calls Clinton's "phoniness" "may be so irritating, so unforgivable, to so many smart, driven women in part because it is our own."


The narcissism is overwhelming. And the standards she is held to are irrational. Jane Kramer admits she wants to know if Barack Obama has enough courage, ability and vision to be president. At the same time, she asks of Clinton: "Why do you want the job? What kind of woman does that make you?" "I take Hillary personally," she confesses, unnecessarily.

(snip)


URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/105587

[question everything]

1. Self kick

for all the ones who think that women should not support Clinton, while it is OK for blacks, like Jesse Jackson who admired Edwards' fighting poverty plan, to support Obama.

[femrap]

2. The American Culture has long

despised women...and after the invention of the Pill, we are not only hated, we are feared.

I, for one, like HRC. I think she will be very good for women and children....esp. after W kicked them in the teeth.

Women are taught from a very young age to hate women...I remember the lessons, but I remember a lot of lessons that I knew had an odor about them...like the one that you are always supposed to lose when playing a game with a boy.

There is the 'queen bee' syndrome which is sad.

I would really like to put the shoe on the other foot and have the repugnant boys be asked questions ab out their suits, HEIGHT, loss of hair, work-out schedule, favorite meal that they prepare, and what razor they use, what brand of shoes they buy, whose suits they buy, who's their tailor, and what moisturizer they use.....and what plastic surgeon is best.

Goddess, that would be a hoot.

[question everything]

4. "supposed to lose when playing a game with a boy"

According to Clinton, she was expected to play with her brothers like one of the guys, no special privileges. Perhaps this is why she is so good and tough and has never pretended to "stay home and bake cookies."

[femrap]

5. My grandmother told me that the boys

had very fragile egos and losing to a woman was the ultimate in well...'non-viagra.'

Oh...and don't get me wrong. I don't bake cookies for anyone. I eat the dough.

[goldcanyonaz]

3. Thank you for posting this.

[eridani]

6. "femininity, sexuality, clothes, mothering, marriage, mystique"

All the usual fluffy horseshit garbage. What about her policies? IWR? Kyl-Lieberman? Outsourcing? Biggest recipient of defense industry bux?

I don't give a flying fuck about her voice or her haircut or her husband's blowjobs myself.

[ursi]

7. then why did she whine and play the poor beaten down girl?

[Metric System]

8. Ha! When I saw the title I thought this thread was going to be about Gov. Sebelius

[question everything]

9. delete

[tandem5]

10. dead on - thanks for posting nt

[Stephanie]

11. I'm miffed I wasn't asked to contribute to this book.

damnit

[question everything]

12. Another kick (nt)