"But what worries me is that he [Senator Obama] is seen as unifying by his race while she [Senator Clinton] is seen as divisive by her sex.Here's the link to the full article.
What worries me is that she is accused of “playing the gender card” when citing the old boys’ club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.
What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didn’t.
What worries me is that reporters ignore Mr. Obama’s dependence on the old — for instance, the frequent campaign comparisons to John F. Kennedy — while not challenging the slander that her progressive policies are part of the Washington status quo....
This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. It’s time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers. We have to be able to say: “I’m supporting her because she’ll be a great president and because she’s a woman.”
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Gender and Race
I already Dugg this article earlier today but it's so good, I thought I'd give it some additional love in a post. The New York Times today published an absolutely brilliant piece from Gloria Steinem titled, "Women are Never Frontrunners." In the piece, Steinem looks at the role of gender and the role of race in the Democratic Presidential primaries and makes some observations on our media and culture that I found very astute. The whole article is worth a read but here are my favorite nuggets: