Many of you have experienced the sharp side of my tongue in the last few months, as the media has debated the role of sexism in Hillary Clinton's defeat. Before the primaries even began I was arguing against Hillary running because she is so polarizing. I thought she ran a sloppy, ineffective campaign right through March, when she finally woke up and realized she wasn't going to be crowned queen without some actual work on the ground.
So the insinuation by some in her campaign (and out) that she lost because of sexism really rubbed me the wrong way. It seems clear to me that Hillary lost because of arrogance and poor leadership and we are all the luckier for it.
But I am forced to acknowledge that my vehemence reflects a little internalized sexism of my own. As I list Hillary's sins - an unwarranted sense of entitlement, disorganization, political ambitions that outweigh her integrity - I notice that I can think of only one politician who does not share these, and it's not fair to insist that every person have as much ethical force as Russ Feingold. So why do I hold Senator Clinton to higher standards than anyone else? Could it be that I am looking for a reason to be against her? Am I scared to get behind the woman and feel all that sexism and - let's just say it - hate, directed my way? Worth some reflection.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment