A historic national campaign has opened historic wounds
BOSTON
As for Barack and Hillary? Yes, there were the predictable magazine cover stories asking whether America was “skilful” for some African American or a woman. But these were not longshot candidates, a favorite son or daughter running to prove a point.
Obama presented himself as the American sum of his roots. He wasn’t “the African-American candidate” but the post-racial, post-divisive orator whose presence and eloquence promised to turn that page. For her share, Clinton seemed to leap over the old gender barriers plainly by being the front-runner. For once, a woman was the experienced candidate, the tough guy in the race.
Now the kind of? The sense of freshness, the pleasure of rupture barriers, has been nearly exhausted. We’ve gone from party lovefest to food fight, from having our eyes steady the prize to feeling like partisans at a prizefight.
Look at any blog in what place opinion-hurling
This is what America looks like?
As single supporter told Hillary in an e-mail, “It’s not upward of until the lady in the pantsuit says it is.” But the campaign obits are written and waiting for release. So, towards many women, the feel-good tableau is tainted by the agency of a 5 o’clock shadow of injurious feelings. A historic campaign has opened fissures along historic fault lines.
The deepest is betwixt women and our culture. The campaign was common with reminders of how women charging forward are pushed backward. Hillary supporters aren’t the only women who have rediscovered a word rarely spoken outside of women’s studies rank: misogyny. How else to explain the focus on Hillary’s titter and cleavage, the T-shirt that read “If Only Hillary Had Married OJ Instead”? Or the casual use of the b-word? Or the “in high spirits collectible” given to the husband of a prominent dabbler in politics on his birthday: a Hillary nutcracker?
All season, cable-news anchors displayed rustic contempt for a woman Chris Matthews called “Nurse Ratched.” A radio host, Randi Rhodes, called the senator a “f
There are fractures as well, long dormant, between African-American and white women. Sisters and sisterhood. Who defines a double bind? Who limits that identity?
And the generation gap? Has it adorn an unbridgeable hiatus? Many feminist elders see Obama as just another man leapfrogging over a qualified woman to the corner office. Many post-feminist daughters describe the former first lady as “old politics” and declare the properties of progress being of the class who voting as antidote to the person, not the gender.
As for class divisions? Many urban professional women whose lives followed the same arc judge Hillary as if she were running for Perfect Woman while down-the-economic-ladder women identified more with this Wellesley divide into regular intervals for president.
And as if that weren’t enough, at the extreme minute in that place was a wedge driven into the reliably Democratic pro-choice community. In a gratuitous slap, NARAL Pro-Choice America pre-emptively endorsed Obama, prompting single amidst thousands of angry pro-choice women to write: “Et tu, Brute?”
I am positive in that place will have existence endless post-mortems and Ph.D. theses written on this preparatory. How did offspring and gender tip the balance? Was this a loss for women or one woman? Did Hillary blaze the path or leave an ugly footprint for the next woman?
Time and the specter of John McCain may patch these crevices. But we have watched the political be proper for (too) personal. We wish watched the first optimistic blush of difference get bloodied with tribalism.
Both Clinton and Obama brought new voters and energy into the compelling narrative of this campaign. But how hard will it be to rebuild the Humpty Dumpty of diversity into the portrait of what America looks probably … at its in the highest degree?
ellengoodman@ball.com
Original text: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/estimate/2004432721_goodman23.html?syndication=rss
