Women attack Oprah for not endorsing Hillary.
Before I get started...
I want to establish a few things. My strong dislike of Hillary has nothing to do with gender. Indeed, I have stated that before. To reinforce that point, I stated in that same post that I would much rather vote for Barbara Boxer for President than Hillary. Now I will further reinforce that point by saying there are plenty of other women for whom I would vote rather than Hillary, including: Nancy Pelosi (House Speaker), Diane Feinstein (Senator), Claire McCaskill (Senator), Janet Napolitano (Arizona governor), Kathleen Sebelius (Kansas governor), Sarah Palin (Alaska governor), Olympia Snowe (Senator), and Kay Bailey Hutchison (Senator). I would include Jennifer Granholm (Michigan governor), but she was born in Canada and thus not eligible to be President. Notice that this list includes Republicans as well as Democrats. I will also state that some women in the list are either too liberal or too conservative for my tastes, but I would still vote for them over Hillary in a heartbeat. I don't have a problem with a woman being President. As I have said before, "I don't care if the President is a woman or a man. I want the best person for the job."
Why am I saying all this? Well, there is a better than zero chance that what follows in this post could prompt complaints that I am misogynistic and otherwise an insensitive asshole. For anyone who might feel that way, just keep the preceding paragraph in mind.
Some women are harshly criticizing Oprah for supporting Obama instead of Hillary.
This really blows my mind.
I initially found out about this via an article in London's Sunday Times. The article is entitled "Women turn on ‘traitor’ Oprah Winfrey for backing Barack Obama."
Allow me to illustrate using some of the comments from Oprah's site. I will start with some comments that make sense. For instance, kristinwd said
fjsell raised another very good point:
And now let's get down to the more blunt analysis. As mzskilz17 put it,
And speaking of ignorance, the Oprah discussion is full of claims that Obama is a Muslim, a racist, and that he refuses to say the pledge of allegiance in the Senate. All of those claims are patently false, and yet people keep repeating the charges.
So many people are willing to focus only on the fact that Hillary is a woman and support her, but they are unwilling to look beyond that fact at her characteristics and her record. Perhaps they are not ignorant, but simply refuse to look at what is plainly before them. I don't know which disturbs me more.
I want to establish a few things. My strong dislike of Hillary has nothing to do with gender. Indeed, I have stated that before. To reinforce that point, I stated in that same post that I would much rather vote for Barbara Boxer for President than Hillary. Now I will further reinforce that point by saying there are plenty of other women for whom I would vote rather than Hillary, including: Nancy Pelosi (House Speaker), Diane Feinstein (Senator), Claire McCaskill (Senator), Janet Napolitano (Arizona governor), Kathleen Sebelius (Kansas governor), Sarah Palin (Alaska governor), Olympia Snowe (Senator), and Kay Bailey Hutchison (Senator). I would include Jennifer Granholm (Michigan governor), but she was born in Canada and thus not eligible to be President. Notice that this list includes Republicans as well as Democrats. I will also state that some women in the list are either too liberal or too conservative for my tastes, but I would still vote for them over Hillary in a heartbeat. I don't have a problem with a woman being President. As I have said before, "I don't care if the President is a woman or a man. I want the best person for the job."
Why am I saying all this? Well, there is a better than zero chance that what follows in this post could prompt complaints that I am misogynistic and otherwise an insensitive asshole. For anyone who might feel that way, just keep the preceding paragraph in mind.
Some women are harshly criticizing Oprah for supporting Obama instead of Hillary.
This really blows my mind.
I initially found out about this via an article in London's Sunday Times. The article is entitled "Women turn on ‘traitor’ Oprah Winfrey for backing Barack Obama."
Winfrey’s website, Oprah.com, has been flooded with a barrage of abuse since the queen of daytime chat shows joined Obama on a tour of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina in mid-December.The discussion can be found here. As of the time of publishing this post, there are 988 replies to the initial post. I have read about 10% of those. From what I have read, few have agreed with calling Oprah a "traitor," but there are plenty of posts that otherwise reflect austaz68's views. There are also plenty of others that take views that are far more reasoned and rational. Let me get this out of the way right now. austaz68 and anyone else who thinks she is right is an IDIOT. It truly scares me that people like that could determine the outcome of any election. Why? Because they are not thinking.*******It started with a message on her website entitled “Oprah is a traitor” and rapidly expanded to include several discussions that attracted hundreds of comments.
In the original post, a reader called austaz68 said she “cannot believe that women all over this country are not up in arms over Oprah’s backing of Obama. For the first time in history we actually have a shot at putting a woman in the White House and Oprah backs the black MAN. She’s choosing her race over her gender.”
Allow me to illustrate using some of the comments from Oprah's site. I will start with some comments that make sense. For instance, kristinwd said
968. Re: OPRAH IS A TRAITOR!!!!!!!!! Jan 22, 2008 1:11 PM(emphasis added). And that's one of the points of this post, people. And by the way, voting for Obama JUST because of his race is equally ridiculous. Let's complete the analysis. Not voting for Hillary JUST because she is a woman, or not voting for Obama JUST because of his race is equally ridiculous. And yet, there are apparently lots of women that are going to vote for Hillary JUST because she is a woman, and here's an example from a poster named gahseward:
Are you kidding me? Everyone should vote for the person that will run this country the way YOU think it should be run. You should not vote on race or gender, EVER. Just because a women is running for President does not make her the best person for the job. I will not be voting for either of these people, as I do not believe they have the qualifications to be President, that does not make me a traitor (to the sisterhood) or a racist. If you are voting for Hilary JUST because she is a woman then you are the one that should be ashamed. Kristin
972. Re: OPRAH IS A TRAITOR!!!!!!!!! Jan 22, 2008 1:41 PM(emphasis added). So this woman draws the line at genetic/anatomical freaks and drug addicts. I guess it doesn't matter to her that--as I have shown in great detail--Hillary is a disingenuous, hypocritical, power-hungry person that does things just like George W. Bush. I guess it wouldn't matter to her if a woman candidate was certifiably evil and a male candidate was the confirmed reincarnation of Jesus or the Buddha or of similar grace. She would vote for the woman. But wait...there's more from gahseward:
I don't agree that Oprah is a traitor. She has more than likely gone through the same internal struggle that a lot of black women in this country are currently going through...that is that they are torn between what will likely be 2 "firsts", a first woman president or a first black president. It's clear from her endorsement that she decided Obama would be her choice.
That said, unless Hillary Clinton had 2 heads and was a raving crackwhore, I would vote for her over Obama (or any other man black or white). It's time for a woman's perspective in the White House.
I don't see my choice as a black or white issue because I would have a heck of a time deciding between 2 women of any color. A very well educated woman running against a well educated man is a no brainer decision for me. I'm going to vote my gender.Well, at least she's not a racist. In response to this close-minded approach, I offer this comment from the Oprah site by fjsell:
965. Re: OPRAH IS A TRAITOR!!!!!!!!! Jan 22, 2008 12:53 PM(emphasis added). That's a damn good question. Coultergeist got her undergraduate degree from an Ivy League school while Hillary went to Wellesley, and Coultergeist got her law degree from one of the top schools in the country--just like Hillary. So, gahseward--according to her own unambiguous words--would vote for an arrogant, hateful, bigoted woman like Coultergeist over any educated man.
How about (Oprah) just thinks Obama is the person for the job, and it's not based on anything as superficial as gender or so called "race"? Agree or disagree with her as you will, but do so based on something real. Not fear, not misinformation, not emotion, not some misguided gender loyalty. Would you have her endorse Ann Coulter if she were running?
fjsell raised another very good point:
The premise of the argument that Oprah is somehow betraying her gender is not only ridiculous, but it makes women in general look bad. The presidency is not a sorority. That argument is also couched in the assertion that she should instead "betray" her race - which is just as absurd. If one is bad, why isn't the other?(emphasis added). And I have yet to see an answer from anyone in the discussion thread.
And now let's get down to the more blunt analysis. As mzskilz17 put it,
So let me be clear. Oprah is a traitor for the simple fact that she has endorsed a candidate for the Presidency that is not a woman. Hmmm. How idiotic is that? We live in America, or so I thought, where many have fought for freedom of religion, speech, etc. And now after 20 some years of never backing any candidate publicly, you turn on Oprah. You turn on her because she has chosen to support someone who she believes has what it takes to make a good President. I didn't know that hav[ing] ovaries and mammary glands makes you qualified to be President? I truly didn't think that this type of ignorance still existed on this level.Having ovaries and mammary glands does not make one qualified to President, and the same holds true for having a penis and testicles. I will take this analysis further. Putting up with a philandering husband does not mean one is qualified or deserves to be President. Being mistreated by the "vast right wing conspiracy" does not mean one is qualified or deserves to be President. Being ganged up on in a debate does not mean one is qualified or deserves to be President.
And speaking of ignorance, the Oprah discussion is full of claims that Obama is a Muslim, a racist, and that he refuses to say the pledge of allegiance in the Senate. All of those claims are patently false, and yet people keep repeating the charges.
So many people are willing to focus only on the fact that Hillary is a woman and support her, but they are unwilling to look beyond that fact at her characteristics and her record. Perhaps they are not ignorant, but simply refuse to look at what is plainly before them. I don't know which disturbs me more.
posted by WCharles @ 1/23/2008 01:51:00 AM
2 Comments:
I just wonder... all these women who are so ardently pro Hillary merely because of her gender.... I have to wonder how they are registered to vote. Are they typically registered as Democrats or Republicans? Is the narrow minded "I will only vote my gender" woman a liberal or a conservative? Conservatives typically don't think that way, so you know what I think. And if I am right, it just illustrates how horribly narrow minded liberals can be when they want to be and they can be far more discriminatory than those of us to the right of center.
I don't know the answer to your question about party affiliation or liberal/conservative philosophy, but your guess might be right. However, in my experience and as shown in the Oprah discussion, not all women who are liberals have this narrow minded view. And I'm guessing that there are some far right wing women who would never vote for a woman for President. :-)
In this specific case, I'm also guessing that just about all women who are taking the "vote my gender only" approach are registered as Democrats because I do not know even one Republican woman that would vote for Hillary.
And as you and I have discussed just a few times before, the problem is with those toward the far end of either side of the liberal/conservative spectrum. But then again, what do we know?
Post a Comment
<< Home