Divided Dem Ticket: Woman vs Black Man

[Ripley]

(Many thanks to the person who gave me a star so that I can post in this group again. Namaste.)

First of all let me say that either of the candidates would be better than any Republican (McCain or any other "new entry") as the next President. Of course.

However, I can't understand the "thinking" of the Democratic Party who CHOSE this set-up for the primaries at all. Hillary (whether You like her or not) is the first Woman to get so far. And Mr. Obama is the first black man to get so far.

Their "platform" is nearly identical: they are both Centrist Democrats. However the HATRED towards Hillary is almost alway due to her gender. Pantsuits evaluation. Husband's adultery. Etc. Her looks, her sex life are evaluated, whereas Obama's are NOT.

Sigh.

[bliss_eternal]

1. Welcome back, Ripley.

You've been missed.

I've been uncomfortable with the manifestations of this race before it even began (if that makes sense). I don't like the way race or sex is being used. It's all very.......I don't even know what to call it anymore. I just don't like it and it's made me take longer and longer breaks away from here. I can't tell you last time I actually read in the main forums.

:shrug:

[Ripley]

2. Thanks, bliss!

Well, I believe the changes that allowed so many of the posts that incite "uncomfortable feelings" to warp this place were purposefully engineered in order to eliminate specific people's POV. There are some great minds here in this group (ismnotwasm is an outstanding writer and You, bliss_eternal bring up wonderful topics) who are stifled in the big forums, while long-time and I mean LONG TIME trolls since 2003 and before are allowed to post some pretty hateful sexist things. Over and over.

The sexism is glaring here with regards to HRC. I'm an Independent voter who sees neither of the two making much of a difference (too right leaning for me - no end to the war; no end to the Corporate Welfare, etc.) yet reading here one would think Obama was running on a New Paradigm platform. Granted, the Man can talk a great inspiring talk. But look a little deeper.. And funny that this Hopeful campaign by his supporters includes the most nasty attacks on HRC which are sexist in nature.

Sigh. Same as it ever was.

[noamnety]

3. Hi there.

I agree with much of what you say, including their platforms being virtually identical. However, I will say that if you are tuned into it, I think the racism is as strong as the sexism is - which is, in no way, discounting the sexism. It's true we examine her and her spouse's sex life in ways that Obama's is not under the microscope, and yes, that's part of the sexism.

The trade-off is that his relationship to his pastor is equally under the microscope, whereas Clinton's is not. He's been forced to denounce that uppity black preacher who dares to criticize white America. And his heritage has been under attack in the ways that people know is socially acceptable (by today's thoroughly offensive standards). So where we can't say out loud "ooooh, he's black, we know that's bad" bigots have taken the cue to refer to other aspects that draw attention to his not being white enough. His middle name is Hussein, maybe (whisper whisper) he's still Muslim. There is still plenty of weight being given to his skin being a little too dark, and it comes out in all kinds of ways that Clinton doesn't have to contend with.

[Ripley]

12. You bring up good points, lwfern.

Perhaps his heritage and name bring out the rage of the nut jobs, but in general, I don't see any Democrats or Liberals or even Independents dismissing him because of those things.

People listen to Presidential Candidate speeches and make choices in two ways: They are moved by the candidate's way of speaking and/or they are looking for a politician who will provide them relief of one kind or another.

I don't think there are that many people who are liberal who would not vote for Obama because he's black, yet I know for a fact that MANY people say they won't vote for Clinton because she is a woman.

Both of them court Corporate America which pisses me off.

[Bunny]

4. I think it was the media who chose the set-up, not necessarily the Dem party.

I think the media was determined to narrow it down to "the black guy vs. the woman" so they could have something interesting to cover. It was for their pleasure only, IMO. I think they purposely ignored all of the other candidates, giving them minimal coverage, so that they'd be forced to withdraw. (Or, I could just be a still-bitter Edwards supporter who is pissed off that he didn't get enough exposure!)

I am no fan of either Barack or Hillary. The sexism that Hillary faced was outrageous, and the fact that so many here on DU discount this is infuriating. She may not have lost the nomination due to sexism ( I think she's run a really bad campaign) but to deny that it had any role in her run for the nomination is just offensive.

Barack has had to deal with racism as well, this is still America, after all. But what burns me about DU is that any hint of racism is usually roundly shot down, but sexism just simply doesn't exist, and we're all just big whiney losers. I loathe people who don't "do" nuance - that's just like GW Bush - and he's proud of his obtuseness! So many here seem to have that same level of pride in their blindness to reality.

[Ripley]

6. Exactamundo!

Hi Bunny. Well I do think the Dem Party groomed both of these two for this race, but yes the Corporate Media made it the outrageous horserace it has become. I liked Edwards too and it sure was glaringly obvious how his messages about Two Americas and Corporate Welfare were hidden by the media. And damn, they kept Kucinich out of the debates early on!

Yes, it is extremely sad to witness the chorus of "I'm a Woman..." who deny that HRC has been on the receiving end of serious sexism, to me far worse than any racism Obama has had to endure. Sure, they made his pastor an issue, but not HIM. And not only do they try and dismiss things like a PAC called CUNT or Iron My Shirt or the host of Hardball saying she only got where she is because women feel sorry for her putting up with Bill's wandering dick. Just image if anything comparable was said about Obama? Yeah the MSM and repubs say trash about both of them, but only the Democrats themselves (and many right here on DU) sound as though they are reading a script from the worst on the right like Hannity and Limbaugh and Coulter. Yet, it stands.

The level of animosity and outright hatred of HRC is completely disproportionate for what she has supposedly "outraged" people with. It seems to me that it's that same old same old. She is held to a higher standard than men. She is criticized for having the exact same stance on issues re: the ME, the economy, healthcare, etc. that the men do, but she is expected to be better than them. Granted I wish she would move far left, but it ain't gonna happen. She is criticized for being emotional and crying (when she really didn't, ala the Dean Scream lie). Her pantsuits are criticized yet when she wore a dress I heard "cankles" mentioned. Women are frankly the worst when issues of "looks" are concerned which is really dismaying.

Thanks for letting me know it's not just me.

[Bunny]

7. O god! The cankles, the cackling, the pantsuits, the tears. O the humanity!

Not to mention those that condemned her because of what Bill's dick did. What an absurd collection of complaints about Hillary those were.

The end result of so much of the Hillary hate on DU is that I've really come to dislike Obama because of it. The same thing happened here in the '04 primaries, with the Howard Dean supporters. As a group, they were so over the top that they completely turned me off to Howard Dean. Now, had Dean won the nomination, of course I would have voted for him. Just like I'll vote for Barack when he wins (which I think he will), but I'll be damned if I'll fall in line with the positively rabid group-think of his supporters here.

Good to see you again, Ripley. Don't be such a stranger! :hi:

[susankh4]

21. I feel similarly.

And it's really a shame.

They would have (will?) make a good team. I have always said that.

[bliss_eternal]

9. Poor Kucinich...

...he never seems to get a fair shot with the media. They don't seem to take him seriously at all. Or maybe because his message and intentions are so serious, they just don't see him as "newsworthy." :shrug: Really frustrating to see. I've always liked him.

[bliss_eternal]

8. I've spoken with a few others....

...from this forum that were Edwards supporters. I was, too. :( That's so interesting, wonder why so many of us supported him instead of the others.

[ismnotwasm]

5. It's fascinating

In a picking a scab on a non-healing wound sort of way.

As a feminist, (and I need to qualify--a white feminist, because in my opinion the biggest set of mistakes western feminism made as a philosophy, social movement or way of life was to make assumptions based on "white" experiences)I believe that the root most social ills can be blamed on misogyny and sexism. Hell, the root of ALL social ills and a portion of medical and psychological ones.

At one time I would have said that the difference between the separate challenges experienced by Senator Clinton and Senator Obama was that sexist attitudes and comments are accepted and even encouraged by most people, whether they are "of color", men or women, both, transsexual or trangendered where as racism is not.

Boy did the primaries open my eyes. I'm so used to sexism--I pick it up like a load and face it every day-- the blatant racism or outright denial of what "I" always understood to be racist (like "tar baby", monkey's being compared to blacks etc.--And I don't think it's just my opinion, I could prove it by talking to certain relatives)found in the strangest places, blew me away. I still think sexism is considered socially acceptable, but many people aren't in tune with their own racism.

It's like the assumptions white feminism made. We have people who don't think they are racist because they never have needed to know that they are-- we tend to use blatant examples we can be shocked and appalled at.


I agree that the platforms are about the same. I lean a bit more toward Senator Clinton, but I don't see these overwhelming differences between the two others seems so in touch with.

What I do like and am excited by, is that even in our very flawed system a women and a black man have gotten this far. Perhaps what I would get really excited about, is a black women president. It would shake the world. Race and Gender Do Matter. They Do.

(Then I think of Condezella Rice and think again, well, maybe not)

Edit to an too long post, then I thought of what Ms. Rice would face If she ever ran for president and as much as I despise what she stands for, I had to just shudder.

[Ripley]

10. The root of social ills..

...can be blamed on misogyny and sexism." You know I think I agree with that statement. And it is so frustrating that as the cycles of awareness run, there are times like now when so many women eagerly participate in the whole fucked up charade. You know, the current trend of what's socially acceptable like thongs with cherries on them for preteens and discussing the "hotness" of prominent professional women. Of course not HRC. See, she's not hawt so that's another reason to hate her. Damn if she isn't having to fight the whole Madonna/Whore set-up right before our eyes. Her cleavage was discussed in the media for crying out loud. When do we get to see and discuss Obama's body? Oh, wait, he's Mister Cool with a cigarette. Damn, can You imagine if Hillary SMOKED? Look how they attack Laura Bush for smoking?

I could go on and on with the comparisons.

Yes, it's about damned time a woman or a black man got this far in America. But doesn't it seem odd that they both appeared at the same time? It almost seems like a Republican dream come true. What a way to split the ticket. I'm reading that 95% of blacks are voting for Obama and look at the howling over polls that show women are voting for HRC in large numbers oh, and they're called "sexist".

Unfortunately I think we are just now heading into a period of global economic/environmental crisis and it's too bad that whichever "first" of the Dems gets into the White House will be blamed for things that are a)totally beyond anyone's control and/or b)are the direct result of the rape and pillage policies brought to us by Cheney/Bush.

[ismnotwasm]

11. You know I was thinking about that yesterday

Why both? Why now?.

I went into GD-P, (I only lurk over there) and there was this disgusting thread, something about a photoshopped picture of Clinton in a bikini I think. (I read comments, and get pissed off right away and leave usually) Obama supporters minimized it over and over again. The whole obligatory "What if they would have done it to Obama" non-argument was there of course. Defended it because it was a comedy. Made fun of the OP.
MISSED COMPLETELY the blatant, destructive sexism of the whole thing. Ugly. If it was "only" GD-P, I would maybe shrug my shoulders.

But it isn't. It's the whole damn country.

I started to rethink the whole thing again, and while I'm very careful, or try to be, about racism, I think I agree with you. Clinton, is a dynamic woman who could be a very success ul president and the biggest drawback she has is getting tossed into the "just a woman" category. The undertone in the back and forth accusations in both camps of sexism and racism will acknowledge and reject blatant racism, but accept and tolerate blatant sexism. It's fucked up

[susankh4]

22. women eagerly participate

"there are times like now when so many women eagerly participate in the whole fucked up charade. You know, the current trend of what's socially acceptable like thongs with cherries on them for preteens and discussing the "hotness" of prominent professional women."

I have been so disappointed by the generation I have riased. For just these kinds of reasons.

Glad to see this forum getting active! I signed on when I joined D.U. but never saw much happening here at all.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

25. Great post, ismnotwasm.

I've been trying to adequately express why the blatant racism in this primary season bothers me more than the misogyny (which has been rampant against Clinton) and it hits me that it's precisely because I've been accustomed to sexism being more socially acceptable than other 'isms'. That's why the overt racism demonstrated by many, many people I've met (including, I'm sorry to say, women I respect as feminists) has hit me like a ton of bricks. All I can say is, if it's still so acceptable to be a racist, and it really appears to be, then we women are truly screwn. In perpetuity. :(

As for our first woman president, I've always believed she will be a right winger and a war hawk. Think Condoleeza Rice with a healthy dose of Phyllis Schlafly. I predict it will happen in about 20 years, as the political cycle comes back around to the reactionaries.

[LucyParsons]

13. I despise Hillary, but;

I hesitate to use the word "hate" - don't really hate her, or anyone else. But I do have the same reaction to seeing her on my TV as I do to seeing Georgie Bush on my TV.

I despise Hillary because she's a DLCer who voted, cynically, for the IWR; because she's transparently ambitious, cynical, selfish, and duplicitous; and because she has no moral courage or integrity, that I can see.

I am a very lukewarm, reluctant Obama supporter. I was originally for Kucinich. I don't think Obama is a great change-maker in the mold of MLK. His record and positions are too close to Hillary's for that to be the case!!! My point here is that I am not an "Obamabot" - far from it.

I just don't see what you're seeing. In the media or among my friends and colleagues.

And, frankly, I am getting very tired of cries of sexism.

However, Chris Matthews and his ilk continually piss me off by saying things like, "Wow, Hillary gave a surprisingly good speech, her voice wasn't *that* shrill." But I was also pissed off about how the corporate media had practically crowned Clinton as the nominee before a single primary.

Just my thoughts.

[Bunny]

14. Well, if you are "continuously pissed off" by the MSM calling Hillary "shrill", how on earth

can you be getting "very tired of cries of sexism"? What on earth do you think being called "shrill" involves? :shrug:

[LucyParsons]

15. I am conceding that some segments of the press have been sexist towawrd her, and that makes me angry

But since she's gotten 50% of the vote, in a race that was, in most states, only against a black man who many believe is a secret Muslim, cries of "sexism" vis a vis her loss ring hollow.

Just because I despise her individually doesn't mean I am not angered by television hacks resorting to sexist language.

[Bunny]

16. You did not specify that your complaints about cries of sexism related to her apparent loss

of the nomination. I believe she ran a bad campaign, and while sexism could certainly be a part of why she lost, I don't think that's the only reason she lost.

As I mentioned upthread, I get constantly irritated by people who don't "do" nuance. I am perfectly able to see sexism where it exists, but not see it as the only problem Hillary had. Some who are tired of hearing about sexism are assuming that anyone who complains about it in any fashion whatsoever is just a big, whiney loser. That apparent inability to see an issue from many differnt perspectives is what pisses me off.

Furthermore, if Barack Obama loses the general election, I fully expect that practically everyone here will chalk it up to racism, and racism alone. That would be just as wrong as assuming that Hillary lost due to sexism, and sexism alone. And to some, hearing constant complaints about racism will be just as irritating as hearing constant complaints about sexism.

[LucyParsons]

17. I agree.

With all that.

[Bunny]

18. Cool! And welcome to the Feminist Group.

Hope to see you here more often! :hi:

[LucyParsons]

20. Some nice person gave me a star

So I can post here!

Yay!

:hi:

[ismnotwasm]

19. The conversation here is more broad I think

It's not racism vs. sexism--a black man against a white woman. It's about the pervasive and socially acceptable sexism continually directed toward Clinton. If it wasn't such a contentious campaign, we would see a bit clearer what language media portrayal and attitudes do to shape this sexism and in some cases out right misogyny.

I have a friend who is non-political. She told me months ago, in response to my statement that America is a racist country, said "Well America will elect a light skinned black man before they elect a women" I had to agree, because even back then it was pretty clear what was going to happen and what would happen.

[susankh4]

23. Flip sides of the same coin.

Racism and sexism.

No liberation can happen, until both are freed of their constructs.

Noone is free, while others are oppressed. That's whay it's so painful to watch this either/or mentality in the party right now.

[gaspee]

24. And I get

The EXACT same feeling when I see Obama on TV. I think back to 2000 and say, oh shit, here we go again.

In my eyes, Obama is a fake, a charlatan and is leading a movement based on an illusion. He decided to run for President way too soon and he's doing it for his ego, not to "fix" anything. Obama might as well be a card carrying DLC'er if you actually looked at his voting record. Dude voted for Cheney's energy bill for chrissake.

His followers are just like Bush followers were -- the whole you're either with us or against us bullshit. They treat people who haven't bought into their religion with contempt and I find them contemptible.

When I met Obama in person at a private fundraiser in '06, I was unimpressed. Insulted actually, but I've posted about that before and I won't again.

So while you may "loathe" Clinton - like so many others brainwashed by the media (hey get this - they have the same damned voting record and Obama said if he were in the Senate in 03, he may have voted for the IWR) into believing Clinton is Satan and Obama is Jesus.

The sexism she has had to contend with on a daily basis should open the eyes of any so-called feminist of exactly what women's place is.

[bliss_eternal]

26. I agree with many of your points...

I've shared my opinion (privately--not on this board) that it was too soon for Sen. Obama to run (based on his experience alone).
I also agree with your assessment of some of his followers (the w/us or against us stuff). Not all, of course. I've talked with a few that don't have this mentality at all, (away from DU) and are capable of discussing "issues."

If you're around, please check your pm's. There's something I'm interested in hearing about, if you're open to sharing. :hi:

[Ripley]

27. Hyperbole much?

Yeah, Hillary is now as bad as George W. Bush.

Your sexist language is well noted. .."because she's transparently ambitious".. Oh, You mean she should get back into the traditional mold of a docile woman and HIDE her ambition? You mean she is not allowed to appear as an ambitious person? How in the hell can anyone be considered anything less than "ambitious" when they are running for the POTUS?

Lots of words used to describe her that apply to each and every man (and most women) who have run a campaign or are sitting politicians. Yeah, I'm disappointed with ALL of the Dem senators for "taking impeachment off the table" and a whole list of items. Why single her out?

You know maybe some of You young women should check Yourself when You say things like "frankly I am getting very tired of cries of sexism." Especially when You are in the Feminist's Group which has very specific rules about disruption.

[Zuiderelle]

28. I agree. It's really tiresome when people criticize her for things men would be praised for.

And when we get tired of cries of sexism, we've lost. I'm tired of sexism myself.

[susankh4]

29. They do not have to "check themselves"

because they are under the illusion that the rights we fought for will always be there for them. No matter how stupid they act. Or how willing they are to give them away.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

30. "Racism has been Obama's greatest asset"

Actual quote by self-identified feminist on DU. That was the title of her OP. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6153647&mesg_id=6153647

This is why I haven't been around here much, and why I haven't leapt to Hillary Clinton's defense as much as I probably should (not that she can't take care of herself very ably). It's precisely because of that type of sentiment. I am as acutely aware of the privilege I enjoy as a white person as I am of the disadvantages that accrue to me because I am female. It's not a freaking contest about who is more oppressed! The very suggestion that Barack Obama is "lucky" because he is black or that racism is an "asset" to him is as offensive as the suggestion that Hillary Clinton is "playing the gender card" or is "getting away with stuff because she's a woman".

Women are not "lucky" to be women.

Black people are not "lucky" to be black.

All women are not white.

All people of color are not male.

The Patriarchy screws over the vast majority of people who are not wealthy, old, white males. It has always been thus.

Fuck!! :banghead:

Maybe I'm not welcome here anymore because I am so disgusted by the racebaiting of the Clinton campaign. I'm so offended by it that it honestly bothers me more than the misogyny leveled against her. Which has been equally disgusting. It's just that I expected more from the feminist icons I admired, like Gloria Steinem, Robin Morgan, and even Geraldine Ferraro. For them to sit there and act like "Oh my no, there's been no racism at all! How dare you accuse the Clintons of such unsavory things!" is sickening. I really expected more from them. To acknowledge the existence of racism is NOT to ignore sexism, and vice versa.

[ismnotwasm]

31. I welcome you!!!

I honestly have been trying to stay away from all of it. I want a Democrat in office, and I'll be happy with Senator Obama.

It's a tough situation.

One thing I do find, is that many younger women seem to embrace Senator Obama, and reject Senator Clinton almost on a gut level, I mean if you ask about general voting records, or platforms, they don't know. They pick up some sort of resentment from somewhere. I have an idea or two why, I've tried to pick it apart a bit, but it ends up being my own personal psycho-babble mostly.
My oldest daughter "can't stand" Senator Clinton in the same way. There is no clear coherent reason (Unlike some of the more, we'll say excitable, posters in GD-P) Or course being ex-military, she thinks she's more of a Rebublican then a Democrat anyway. (She's not, but I'll let her find that out for herself, in the meantime, I'm indocrinating my grandson)

Please hang in there! Well get through this!

[bliss_eternal]

32. I can only speak for myself....

...and as far as I'm concerned, you are welcome here! :hi::hug:

I had issues with the race-baiting long before the primaries. It's frustrating to know so few that "get it" as far as this subject is concerned.

I understand your anger and frustration with the board, and respect your need to take time away. But please don't avoid this specific forum because you don't think anyone wants to hear (read) what you have to say. I for one, sincerely miss seeing you here.

[Ripley]

34. I don't see the racebaiting that You do.

First of all let me say that I never intended for anyone to feel unwelcome posting here. But saying something like And, frankly, I am getting very tired of cries of sexism. is against the rules for this Group. (I know YOU did not say that, thecatburgler.)

You give one example of a "self-identified feminist" in GDP from someone who as far as I can tell has never posted in this group. Why? Who knows who that is and what her/his motivation is? There are a lot of thoughtful feminists here who simply wonder why so many women are jumping on the bandwagon of Hillary Hate. It seems very obvious to some of us that this hatred is not about her policies or her record as a Senator. There are multitudes of things she has said that are hyper-inflated, exaggerated and purposefully twisted to taint the well. The assassination thing being the latest.

Then there are the very specific attacks based upon her gender. Her looks. Her emotions. Her voice. Her husband's affairs. Her clothes. None of these items have EVER been brought up about her male counterparts.

This is not about Hillary "needing" me to jump to her defense, nor is it an empty cry of sexism. It IS sexism and I for one refuse to let it be dismissed. Hate Hillary if You must, but do You (in the general sense) have to hate her because she is a woman?

Is there racism directed towards Obama? Yes, by the media, the racists and the republicans. Do I think HRC is a racist? No.

And lastly, I have not read all of the words by the women You have named, but I find the generational gap to be severe when it comes to women's issues today and hell, feminism in general. Those younger than 30 or so seem to be riding a crest of "Feminist Rejection" and they love to diss all the older women who paved the way.

Wonder why that is?

Not hard to see the glee in the Liberal Men's eyes.

[Ripley]

33. In order to make sure these fuckers get out of office

I believe that if Obama is nominated he should choose HRC as his VP. I know people on this website have their hate going on one way or the other but in real life most everyone I know in different states across our country want to GET IT this time. No ABB. No throwing the dice with polls. And the way would be to have both of them on the ticket. Now, I don't have a clue what Hillary has said in public about this situation. But we all know how Cheney changed the meaning of VP.

So, what's wrong with that ticket?

If Hillary is as smart as I think she is, she would accept this if offered.

Split ticket is a killer.

[bliss_eternal]

35. A little o/t....

...but after a long, tiresome conversation with someone this evening (where I did far more appalled listening than talking), I've realized something. Just why I've been rather quiet about this race in general (in the real world).

For the most part, ...reading fromt the DU sexism/bigotry files is one of the reasons.

I've seen too many comments over the years that say things like, "...my black friend" or "....my gay cousin", etc. usually endorsing something disgusting.

I refuse to become someone's personal "soundbyte." The obligatory friend, that's only mentioned for the sake of attempting to garner credibility with others. The person that is brought up to prove some sexist or racist assertion.

I think a part of me would die a bit, if somewhere...someone was using my words to make a sexist, racist, bigoted assertion, for example, "....bliss_eternal, my pro-choice friend didn't even support Sen. Clinton." :eyes: I just can't do it.