|
Edited on Sat Feb-23-08 05:22 PM by LadyVT
Three things first: I am a Democrat, and I voted for Hillary. I would also vote for Gore or for Edwards. This is not a post about why anyone should vote for anyone. This is for those who cannot understand why many of us react so strongly to the election.
After the debate, my husband and I sat on the couch together, and I tried to explain to him why I was so involved in this race. One of the primary reasons I voted for Hillary was that her record working for abused and neglected kids, and on women’s issues, is perhaps the strongest of any living person in this country. That’s not everyone’s priority, and it doesn’t need to be, but this has also been my life’s work, so it is one of mine, and it's an issue that cuts to the core for me.
But far beyond the issues that convinced me to vote for Hillary and to turn away from Barack, I realized that there is something very close to the bone that’s being hacked at in me, and perhaps in many of us. It explains the very deep pain I feel (regardless of who wins the nomination) about how the campaign is being portrayed. I explained it to my husband this way, and he urged me to post about it:
Imagine you live in a world in which nearly all the leaders of the country are women, and always have been women. Women Presidents, vice-Presidents, and until 4 years ago (when men were appointed for the first time in history), women Secretaries of State and Speakers of the House. In the entire history of your country, only 33 men have held cabinet level positions in government.
Even now, six out of seven members of Congress are women.
Sit a minute and try to imagine how you would feel if that were the case. Your entire life, the face of power has always been female. The vast majority of all newscasts include video and audio of women talking about what they are going to do to change the country, voting in Congress, travelling around the world, making news, and so on. All Presidents have been women. Occasionally, there is interest in the President’s spouse, and specials come out at the holidays about the first gentleman decorating the White House.
As you grew up, you took this for granted, and never even thought to imagine you could be in politics. Men are nurses, teachers, entertainers. The men on TV you watched as a kid took care of their families and had nurturing jobs. They didn’t run the country!
So you went to school, you began your career, you made 25% less than your wife, and you kept on. You did most of the work around the house, and did most of the childrearing. You were happy to have your family and your life. Eventually, you did get a bit tired of being governed by women. You thought, now and then, about how it would be to have a man in the White House.
Once, about a decade ago, a first gentleman, “Lawrence,” became active in politics. This was astonishing! You and your friends watched closely. You noticed immediately how great it felt just to SEE a man covered by the media who was speaking intelligently and articulately on issues of concern to you and your family and the world. This man was trying to pass a healthcare package, but the women-dominated, right-wing branch of the Republican party came out fighting, sent out a misleading mailer, and the healthcare package did not pass. Lawrence's wife, the President, "Barbara," went back to being the most dominant political figure on television.
Nevertheless, Lawrence continued to travel around the world, speaking out on men’s rights (working to stop penile mutiliation, sexual abuse of boys, and the rape of men during wartime), getting to know world leaders personally, and so on. Occasionally, he would end up on the news, and again, how refreshing it was to see a man on television (even for a few soundbites) who was not a pole dancer, talk show host, or entertainer of some type. It was as if, perhaps, men were gaining some credibility in the world. Perhaps men were going to be heard and equally represented at last.
Afterwards, though, a Republican administration took office amidst allegations of election stealing. During these years, people frequently longed for Barbara’s administration. One of the only positive things to come from these eight long years was that the electorate was so disillusioned and despairing about the state of the government and country that they seemed quite ready to elect a Democrat. By the end, Lawrence had been twice easily elected to the US Senate, we had a male Secretary of State and Speaker of the House for the first time in history, and you began to be hopeful about men’s chances in government again.
Last year, new candidates prepared to run for President. Several women declared their candidacy, only this time, a man joined them: the former first gentleman, Lawrence! You were riveted. How would the electorate respond? Initially, you said, “there is no way this country is ready to elect a man to be President of the United States!” With only 16% of Congress being male, it just didn’t seem likely.
Over the past year, what you’ve seen has shocked even you. Every time you go to CNN.com, you see advertised there a Lawrence doll with his pants down, his genitals streaming beer with just a click of a knob. It costs $19.99 and is called the “First Gentleman’s Beer Piss.” It is listed on an ad sponsored by Google. Also available for sale is a Lawrence toilet brush. (You also see these ads on the few sites where this kind of abominable advertising is criticized!)
Lawrence is accused of “pimping” his son because he campaigns for his father. Cameras zoom in on Lawrence’s groin, and comments are made. The media focus on his hair cut, clothes choice, whether or not he’s had a face lift, what hair gel he uses, how old he looks, instead of his position on the issues. There is little public outcry about most of this.
You’ve heard news commentators make remarks about Lawrence that they could never get away with if they were talking about ethnicity or social class. When he shows emotion, he’s too weak. When he asserts himself strongly to defend himself, he’s called “unhinged," "ranting," "flipping out." When he lists policies, he’s boring and cold. When the female candidates do this, they are brilliant and inspiring, genuine, and strong. This does not surprise you; you’ve been seeing this your entire life, and this has happened to you, as well. Your friend, Juan, a teacher, shares with you research demonstrating that students evaluate the performance of male and female teachers differently (females are evaluated on their competence, intelligence, and familiarity with the material; males are evaluated on how they dress, look, and on whether or not they are “nice”).
On message boards, you are astonished at the level of rage directed at Lawrence. Sexual comments, profanity, sheer irrational fear is spewed all over the internet at him. Again, you think, these kinds of comments would not be tolerated if they were about race or social class. And yet, a chorus of voices rises up sounding like the radical right-wing, attacking a fellow Democrat. You can’t believe this stuff could be tolerated. But then you remember--they are raging against a man, not a women. And that is somehow okay in America.
After the March 4 primary, you counted the number of times major media outlets used positive and negative adjectives in their headlines about each candidate, and found that the negative to positive about Lawrence vs. his opposing female candidates is 5 to 1. You notice Lawrence is described in ways that make him sound like an infant, an emotional wreck, or as some kind of lunatic sorcerer who wants to destroy women, including his opposing candidates. "Your candidate is going to destroy the party and the country!" they cry. The other candidates are described as if they were queens, tenders of the poor, or oppressed women. They are compared to famous historical figures. Lawrence is compared with warlocks, mental patients, and sexual deviants. You are shocked at many of your friends, who don’t seem to realize that this portrayal naturally affects the way Lawrence and the other candidates are perceived by voters.
George Steinhem, a longtime supporter of men’s rights, pens a column for the New York Times about his gender bias concerns. When you read it, and the few other pieces like it before gender falls right out of consideration as an issue, you know Lawrence probably doesn’t have a chance. And after him, there isn’t likely to be another qualified man to run for a very, very long time.
Then you see Lawrence’s last few moments of the Texas debate, and you feel so moved. You realize, in those last few minutes, that this may be one of the last times you ever see 90 minutes of a man on television who isn’t a half-clad dancer gyrating on VH1, a male model with siliconed biceps, or some other entertainer.
Lawrence has shown himself to be brilliant, articulate, empathetic, caring, competent, knowledgable, and strong.
And even all that is not enough. We miss our dancing boys just too much.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
