And the Winner Is...
I admit, when it is election season, I am the typical black voter. I do as I’m told by the Democratic Party and I vote the popular candidate, regardless of platform.
However, this election season things are a bit more thought-provoking than usual. For the first time since Reagan, I actually care about what’s going on. And while my concern is mostly due to the candidates, a black male and a white female, and the discussions of race and gender, respectively, that the American people are having with each other.
In my final year of college, I realized no department of my HBCU offered a course in gender studies or gender issues. I was floored. I had to learn world civilization, African Diaspora, and logic but nothing specific to my gender. After I graduated, I met a white woman who turned me on to Alice Walker’s “In Search of Our Mother’s Garden.” I devoured the book, loving every moment of self-knowledge and insight I was gaining. Whatever book, article or issue Ms. Walker discussed, I researched and sought out. I was like a junkie looking for his next fix. I found June Jordan, Sonia Sanchez and Barbara Smith. I found a voice which sounded like mine.
Shortly after my education, I proclaimed myself a feminist, not because I felt any solidarity to any feminist doctrine, but because there was nothing else I could call the passion I felt for gender equality.
With history in the making, I am paying attention to articles, debates, blogs and other outlets during this primary season. For me, the stakes are higher. I have the honor and privilege of being a double minority. You know, Black and female. I have always held this honor in high regard because there are only 209 million plus of us in this country. So of course being faced with having to chose between my race and my gender causes me to pay a little more attention.
I remember when Hillary Clinton was First Lady. She was ambitious even then. She wanted to fix the healthcare situation in America . And when her endeavor failed, she was demonized. When her husband’s sexual indiscretions were made public, she was martyred. So after the Clinton Administrations second term, she ran for Senator of New York and won. She became a superwoman to many and the whisperings of her one day being President began.
Here we are in 2008 and in full swing of the Presidential Primary. And for the first time in our country’s history, there are two minorities as front contenders for the Democratic nomination, a Black man and a White woman. Historic no doubt. And this historical moment leaves me and 209 million others like me in a curious position: choosing between our race and our gender.
I have a friend in LA who is all kinds of mad at the feminist blogging sites. She sends me a link every other day asking me to respond to this nonsense. It appears some white women in amerikkka are lambasting African American women because they feel we are voting the color line. She is outraged at the arrogance and insinuation that a race can’t judge among the issues. However, I see it as white feminist never really accepting us until they need us, like now.
See, when this race started, Hillary Clinton just knew she had the colored vote sewn up, after all, she was married to the first Black President, according to Toni Morrison – but even she has seen the light. And at the same time, media reports were about how Barack Obama would have to prove himself to the negroes to get their vote. Well, little did anyone realize that our “first Black President” would show his true colors – you know, southern white male.
And while many will say Bill Clinton is just passionate about the election and he really wants it for Hillary, I know what I’ve heard and I know he is no longer allowed to stump too hard for his wife.
So now we have an election that can’t be about race because America isn’t racist. And with that thought, the race becomes about gender. There was an op-ed piece by noted feminist pioneer, Gloria Steinem, in the New York Times about how the election would be different if Obama were a black woman. Many white feminists found the piece to be thought provoking and insightful. Many black people found the piece insulting and emasculating. What would be the purpose of two women fighting it out? Does Ms. Steinem think it would be easier for Hillary to beat a black woman than a black man? And to many black feminists, the piece reminded them of how irrelevant we are to the women’s movement.
Just recently there was a skit on Saturday Night Live where Tina Fey went on a rant on why people should vote for Hillary and how “Bitches get stuff done” and “Bitch is the new black.” And while I haven’t watched SNL since the not ready for prime time players, yeah, I date myself a lot, I found the outpouring of excitement for Hillary and anger for Obama to be interesting.
I read another article, this one in Newsweek, titled Obama: First Female President? Martin Linsky, the writer, goes on about how the Obama campaign embodies a more traditional female approach. He says Obama uses “…approaches that are usually thought of as qualities and values that women bring to organizational life: a commitment to inclusiveness in problem solving, deep optimism, modesty about knowing all the answers, the courage to deliver uncomfortable news, not taking on all the work alone, and a willingness to air dirty linen.”
My first response was, “WTF? What is this guy smoking?” While I am flattered that Mr. Linsky believes women to be viable candidates for the presidency, I am insulted at the narrowmindedness of his reasoning. I can’t believe only women are inclusive problem solvers, optimist, modest, courageous, and team players. I mean, isn’t this the mantra for many successful businessmen?
And Mr. Linsky goes on to say that while Obama embodies these womanist approaches, Hillary Clinton has none. He paints Clinton as the antitheses of these “gender specific” traits, ain’t she a woman? The author says of Clinton , “… she is the experienced realist, … understands the rules in this man's game of politics and governing, knows how to play by them and win, and can take the heat that inevitably comes with entering the fray.” Clinton is of the old school woman’s thought that you have to play like a man in order to succeed like a man. And it is that thought that is bringing her down. However, with her current bid, she is becoming a feminist icon, whether she admits to being one or not.
After reading the responses on blogs to the Tina Fey skit, I asked my girlfriend, “When did we accept being a bitch?” While I am sure there are many of people who know me who will say, “Duh, you accepted it a long time ago.” I would still have to say that when someone calls me a bitch, they should be ready to fight like a bitch. I don’t believe that “Bitches get stuff done” or that “Bitch is the new Black.”
I find phrases of that nature to be as insulting as the use of the world “Nigger.” I am not those things. And I don’t want a president who is. And if I am referring to my Commander in Chief as a bitch, how am I respecting the position?
Again, I am excited we are all caught up in some form of fervor over this election. I enjoy the arguements of gender and race. I find the comments on blogs to be enlightening even when they are shortsighted with no evidence to support their points. I don’t think since the first George W. Bush election has the country been so in tune to what is going on. I hope because of the unique nature of both Democratic candidates that we aren't missing the point. We need a strong candidate that can win and make changes and influence policy and make our country better.
However, this election season things are a bit more thought-provoking than usual. For the first time since Reagan, I actually care about what’s going on. And while my concern is mostly due to the candidates, a black male and a white female, and the discussions of race and gender, respectively, that the American people are having with each other.
In my final year of college, I realized no department of my HBCU offered a course in gender studies or gender issues. I was floored. I had to learn world civilization, African Diaspora, and logic but nothing specific to my gender. After I graduated, I met a white woman who turned me on to Alice Walker’s “In Search of Our Mother’s Garden.” I devoured the book, loving every moment of self-knowledge and insight I was gaining. Whatever book, article or issue Ms. Walker discussed, I researched and sought out. I was like a junkie looking for his next fix. I found June Jordan, Sonia Sanchez and Barbara Smith. I found a voice which sounded like mine.
Shortly after my education, I proclaimed myself a feminist, not because I felt any solidarity to any feminist doctrine, but because there was nothing else I could call the passion I felt for gender equality.
With history in the making, I am paying attention to articles, debates, blogs and other outlets during this primary season. For me, the stakes are higher. I have the honor and privilege of being a double minority. You know, Black and female. I have always held this honor in high regard because there are only 209 million plus of us in this country. So of course being faced with having to chose between my race and my gender causes me to pay a little more attention.
I remember when Hillary Clinton was First Lady. She was ambitious even then. She wanted to fix the healthcare situation in America . And when her endeavor failed, she was demonized. When her husband’s sexual indiscretions were made public, she was martyred. So after the Clinton Administrations second term, she ran for Senator of New York and won. She became a superwoman to many and the whisperings of her one day being President began.
Here we are in 2008 and in full swing of the Presidential Primary. And for the first time in our country’s history, there are two minorities as front contenders for the Democratic nomination, a Black man and a White woman. Historic no doubt. And this historical moment leaves me and 209 million others like me in a curious position: choosing between our race and our gender.
I have a friend in LA who is all kinds of mad at the feminist blogging sites. She sends me a link every other day asking me to respond to this nonsense. It appears some white women in amerikkka are lambasting African American women because they feel we are voting the color line. She is outraged at the arrogance and insinuation that a race can’t judge among the issues. However, I see it as white feminist never really accepting us until they need us, like now.
See, when this race started, Hillary Clinton just knew she had the colored vote sewn up, after all, she was married to the first Black President, according to Toni Morrison – but even she has seen the light. And at the same time, media reports were about how Barack Obama would have to prove himself to the negroes to get their vote. Well, little did anyone realize that our “first Black President” would show his true colors – you know, southern white male.
And while many will say Bill Clinton is just passionate about the election and he really wants it for Hillary, I know what I’ve heard and I know he is no longer allowed to stump too hard for his wife.
So now we have an election that can’t be about race because America isn’t racist. And with that thought, the race becomes about gender. There was an op-ed piece by noted feminist pioneer, Gloria Steinem, in the New York Times about how the election would be different if Obama were a black woman. Many white feminists found the piece to be thought provoking and insightful. Many black people found the piece insulting and emasculating. What would be the purpose of two women fighting it out? Does Ms. Steinem think it would be easier for Hillary to beat a black woman than a black man? And to many black feminists, the piece reminded them of how irrelevant we are to the women’s movement.
Just recently there was a skit on Saturday Night Live where Tina Fey went on a rant on why people should vote for Hillary and how “Bitches get stuff done” and “Bitch is the new black.” And while I haven’t watched SNL since the not ready for prime time players, yeah, I date myself a lot, I found the outpouring of excitement for Hillary and anger for Obama to be interesting.
I read another article, this one in Newsweek, titled Obama: First Female President? Martin Linsky, the writer, goes on about how the Obama campaign embodies a more traditional female approach. He says Obama uses “…approaches that are usually thought of as qualities and values that women bring to organizational life: a commitment to inclusiveness in problem solving, deep optimism, modesty about knowing all the answers, the courage to deliver uncomfortable news, not taking on all the work alone, and a willingness to air dirty linen.”
My first response was, “WTF? What is this guy smoking?” While I am flattered that Mr. Linsky believes women to be viable candidates for the presidency, I am insulted at the narrowmindedness of his reasoning. I can’t believe only women are inclusive problem solvers, optimist, modest, courageous, and team players. I mean, isn’t this the mantra for many successful businessmen?
And Mr. Linsky goes on to say that while Obama embodies these womanist approaches, Hillary Clinton has none. He paints Clinton as the antitheses of these “gender specific” traits, ain’t she a woman? The author says of Clinton , “… she is the experienced realist, … understands the rules in this man's game of politics and governing, knows how to play by them and win, and can take the heat that inevitably comes with entering the fray.” Clinton is of the old school woman’s thought that you have to play like a man in order to succeed like a man. And it is that thought that is bringing her down. However, with her current bid, she is becoming a feminist icon, whether she admits to being one or not.
After reading the responses on blogs to the Tina Fey skit, I asked my girlfriend, “When did we accept being a bitch?” While I am sure there are many of people who know me who will say, “Duh, you accepted it a long time ago.” I would still have to say that when someone calls me a bitch, they should be ready to fight like a bitch. I don’t believe that “Bitches get stuff done” or that “Bitch is the new Black.”
I find phrases of that nature to be as insulting as the use of the world “Nigger.” I am not those things. And I don’t want a president who is. And if I am referring to my Commander in Chief as a bitch, how am I respecting the position?
Again, I am excited we are all caught up in some form of fervor over this election. I enjoy the arguements of gender and race. I find the comments on blogs to be enlightening even when they are shortsighted with no evidence to support their points. I don’t think since the first George W. Bush election has the country been so in tune to what is going on. I hope because of the unique nature of both Democratic candidates that we aren't missing the point. We need a strong candidate that can win and make changes and influence policy and make our country better.
Also, if I read another article from a non-black feminist who infers that WOC voters are too stupid to think for themselves during this election, I will scream. Isn't gender equality for ALL women -- regardless of race? Then why do some non-black feminists (read: entitled white women) try to marginalize the concerns of black women? It’s one thing for Steinem, Jong, et. al. to have a dissenting viewpoint; it’s a whole nother thing to insinuate that sisters are being traitors to the movement if they don’t back Hillz. Sorry, call me a traitor, but I’ve been to several Obama fundraisers, I’ve heard him speak, I know his platform, and I consider myself an informed voter who is voting her heart – not her skin or her uterus. I hate that I have to explain why I support Obama, when Hillary supporters are never held to such stringent standards, and, in fact, are viewed as rational and politically savvy.
Another blogger suggested that white women do not have to be the face of feminism, and I agree. More and more black women feminists – womanists – are growing disenchanted with a movement that desires our numbers, but also our silence on issues that don’t advance their agenda. Make up your minds!
[steps down daintily from soapbox, and reads the latest polls favoring Obama]
(Comment this)
In 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and declared to the world and the more than 200,000 in attendances that he had a dream. In those days Washington, DC was still pretty much a segregated city with a long history of Jim Crow laws that just wouldn't go away thus making King's speech even that much more audacious.
But here we are, 45 years later in the primary elections of 2008 and the two Democratic Candidates still left standing are Barack Obama -- a Black U.S. Senator, and Hillary Clinton -- a female U.S. Senator. If you had asked me in 1963 if I would ever see a Black or a woman as President of the United States in my life time -- and many did -- I would say that it would take at least 100 years.
After all, we still couldn't attend many colleges and universities almost ten years after Brown v. Board of Education (1954) which overturned Plessy v. Ferguson (1897) which established the racist doctrine of "separate but equal" for nearly 60 years in public accommodations. Indeed, it was Thurgood Marshall, a graduate of the predominantly-Black Howard University who argued and won the case before the Supreme Court.
A Black President? A woman President? Give me a break! Girls took cooking and sewing classes so they could be good wives to their husbands not Presidents. Blacks were still being beaten and lynched in the South. There weren't even any Black Television shows during my childhood except for Nat King Cole in the 50's.
In so many ways we have come a long way in a short time but we still find time to find the things that divide us -- but now it's Black Man versus White Woman.
"Women's rights" rode the coat tails of "civil rights" and arguably made far more progress than the descendants of slaves that brought the outrage of segregation and discrimination to the national conscience. Men, white men included, have been checked in this country in ways that still seem foreign to the older generation. Careless speech, word, action, gesture, and/or even an opinion, will potentially bring out the ire of women against the perceived oppressor.
Thus the dilemma, for feminist Barack is a man, part of the power class, and Hillary is Lady Liberty atop the Capitol. For the descendants of slaves and others, Barack is an unquestionable achievement along the path to fulfilling Dr. King's Dream. For still others, Barack is the face of hope, irrespective of his race or gender. It is this third group that I find myself a member.
Barack Obama represents something that has been missing in this country for a long time "hopeful optimism". Hillary Clinton represents the hard fought wars of women who were legally disenfranchised for centuries. She and others have learned how to kick in the doors opened by the civil rights movement and play in the big boys club; she's tough, strong-willed, and a fiercely independent fighter for her causes -- traits that served her well for years.
Barack's hope however is none of the above. He's not fighting with the traditional weapons of political speech and artful politics rather; he is speaking to the people about giving a damn about our country and telling us that rolling up our sleeves and getting busy fixing our problems together is a worthy and achieveable cause.
Over the past decade, pessimism and blame have been allowed to creep, fester and grow like weeds in the gardens of our minds and hearts because we found ourselves either being a "blue-stater" or a "red-stater", a liberal or conservative, Pro-war vs. anti-war, pro-life vs. reproductive rights, small government vs. active government, tax-cuts vs. burden sharing and on and on and on.
We debate these issues while the country goes deeper and deeper in debt, while the entire planet's atmosphere is warming and heading for potentially catastrophic consequences, while incurable diseases are spreading like wild fire through our communities and around the world, while new and more addictive drugs are finding their way to our children every day, while children are killing other children with impunity, while adults are preying on children for sex at an alarming rate, and while we have more people incarcerated than any other developed country in the world.
We need a new dream. If Barack Obama sounds a little like Martin Luther King Jr. than there is good reason. This country needs a dreamer. We need someone to remind us that there is hope. As bad as things seem or how impossible the task looks, it is that voice of hope that captures our attention and motivates people to action.
So in the final analysis, for me it doesn't come down to a Black versus Female debate -- that debate is a time-waster and we don't have much time. For me, it comes down to who can unite the country, who can motivate our young to achieve all they can be, who can say to the world in a clear a demonstrative voice that "America, the land of the free and the home of the brave is back". Who can say we should have never have invaded another sovereign nation based on suspicions and can say boldly that we won't ever agin unless attacked of threatened.
These are the issues that should determine the selection of the candidate to represent this country not only for its citizens but for the rest of the world -- not the level of testosterone or estrogen.
(Comment this)
Good points and well stated. (Comment this)