Female presidents, real and imagined
Here, I think, is the question I have been trying to put into words for awhile now: If Hillary Clinton is not the first female president of our dreams, then who is? Does this person even exist? Like the fabled madonna/whore, I think the first female president would have to be able to hold impossible extremes.
She'd have to be likable, but not a pushover.
She'd have to be attractive, but not too "femme."
She'd have to be knowledgeable, but not a nerd.
She'd have to be tough enough to meet and contend with heads of the military. But, then again, she can't be a battle-axe.
She'd have to have deep charisma, but not so much that she incurs the jealousy of the media or the established conservative movement.
And on and on.
It's tough. I still say that the attributes that brought Hillary as far as she's gotten in this long journey, those are the same attributes that make her unattractive as a (presidential) candidate. Her centrist history is a reflection of deep ambition, and we distrust deeply ambitious women.
When I put myself in her shoes I can't help but sympathize. She married Bill in 1975 and, if the stories are true, she saw in him immense potential. It was a *shared* vision that took them to the White House. How, in 1975, could she have known that Democrats down the road would look down on her for marrying ambitiously?
Or let me put it a slightly different way. In 1993 I still felt COMPELLED to have a boyfriend because--doy--women don't HAVE any value if they aren't dating someone. 1993!
So, yeah, it's easy to now look back on HRC's choices and say marrying as part of a career package is questionable behavior. But I feel like that's a bit like saying that gay marriage is an obvious and unquestionable civil right. Those are both very immediate concepts that only reflect the last 30 seconds of human history, and in very select portions of the globe.
I feel like there are many counter-arguments that could be credibly made against what I've just said, and I sure welcome them. And I have made my enthusiasm for Obama clear enough on these pages. But I'm very interested in understanding what it is that the media and the voting public actually WANT from her, since so much of the criticism tends to veer towards the personal. You know, I think there are a lot of good, policy-based reasons not to support her. So calling her ugly, bitchy or politically aggressive just doesn't cut it with me.
She'd have to be likable, but not a pushover.
She'd have to be attractive, but not too "femme."
She'd have to be knowledgeable, but not a nerd.
She'd have to be tough enough to meet and contend with heads of the military. But, then again, she can't be a battle-axe.
She'd have to have deep charisma, but not so much that she incurs the jealousy of the media or the established conservative movement.
And on and on.
It's tough. I still say that the attributes that brought Hillary as far as she's gotten in this long journey, those are the same attributes that make her unattractive as a (presidential) candidate. Her centrist history is a reflection of deep ambition, and we distrust deeply ambitious women.
When I put myself in her shoes I can't help but sympathize. She married Bill in 1975 and, if the stories are true, she saw in him immense potential. It was a *shared* vision that took them to the White House. How, in 1975, could she have known that Democrats down the road would look down on her for marrying ambitiously?
Or let me put it a slightly different way. In 1993 I still felt COMPELLED to have a boyfriend because--doy--women don't HAVE any value if they aren't dating someone. 1993!
So, yeah, it's easy to now look back on HRC's choices and say marrying as part of a career package is questionable behavior. But I feel like that's a bit like saying that gay marriage is an obvious and unquestionable civil right. Those are both very immediate concepts that only reflect the last 30 seconds of human history, and in very select portions of the globe.
I feel like there are many counter-arguments that could be credibly made against what I've just said, and I sure welcome them. And I have made my enthusiasm for Obama clear enough on these pages. But I'm very interested in understanding what it is that the media and the voting public actually WANT from her, since so much of the criticism tends to veer towards the personal. You know, I think there are a lot of good, policy-based reasons not to support her. So calling her ugly, bitchy or politically aggressive just doesn't cut it with me.