Bullshit Meter Level Higher

GLORIA STEINEM MAKES ME CRAZY. She wrote what I am sure many thought was a great column in the NY Times. Myself, I had to shoot off a "comment" right away but still disatisfied, I decided to insert my own comments into her text in CAPS. This is something therapeutic that I do when the reality of life does not allow me to say, call Gloria Steinem and tell her this shit myself. Nothing like a CLASSIC white feminist throwback moment to get me going like it's college, I'm 20, and I'm fucking pissed off. So again, below it's her, except when it's CAPS and actually making sense.


Women Are Never Front-Runners
The woman in question became a lawyer after some years as a community organizer, married a corporate lawyer and is the mother of two little girls, ages 9 and 6. Herself the daughter of a white American mother and a black African father - in this race-conscious country, she is considered black - she served as a state legislator for eight years, and became an inspirational voice for national unity.

Be honest: Do you think this is the biography of someone who could be elected to the United States Senate? After less than one term there, do you believe she could be a viable candidate to head the most powerful nation on earth?

If you answered no to either question, you're not alone. Gender is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House. This country is way down the list of countries electing women and, according to one study, it polarizes gender roles more than the average democracy.

FIRST OF ALL GLORIA STEINEM, DO YOU REALIZE IT'S A BIT OFFENSIVE FOR US REAL BLACK WOMEN OF COMPETENCE THAT YOU HAVE TO "INVENT" US FOR RHETORICAL PURPOSES? MAYBE TALKING TO REAL VERSIONS WOULD ELUCIDATE MUCH FOR YOU. FOR INSTANCE ABOUT HOW ALL THE ANALYSIS THAT YOU PRODUCE FALLS FLAT ON THE FACE OF MOST PEOPLE ON THE PLANET WHO ARE WOMEN AND HAPPEN TO NOT BE WHITE...

BUT ANYWAY, UNLIKELY THAT YOUR FEMALE OBAMA WOULD GET AHEAD? MAYBE. IT WAS CERTAINLY UNLIKELY THAT OBAMA HIMSELF WOULD BE WHERE HE IS, BUT YOU DON'T LIKE ADMITTING THAT, FINE.

TO ENGAGE YOUR DUMBASS HYPOTHETICAL, OK: THE HANDICAP A BLACK WOMAN HAS IS NOT THAT SHE IS A WOMAN. THE WOMAN YOU DESCRIBE WOULD BE HINDERED BY THE FACT THAT SHE IS A "BLACK WOMAN" IN AMERICA--YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT, A TWO WORD IDENTITY THAT YOU CAN'T PULL APART. CAN YA DIG IT? WE CERTAINLY CAN AND (DAMMIT) WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO EXPLAIN THIS SHIT TO YOU FOR OVER 30 YEARS...

That's why the Iowa primary was following our historical pattern of making change. Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot, and generally have ascended to positions of power, from the military to the boardroom, before any women (with the possible exception of obedient family members in the latter).

"AND GENERALLY HAVE ASCENDED TO POSITIONS OF POWER"--WOW SUCH COMPELLING STATISTICS, WON'T EVEN DIGNIFY THEM. ABOUT THE HISTORY LESSON: YOUR FOREMOTHERS FELT REALLY UPSET, NOT THAT BLACK MEN WERE GIVEN THE VOTE BEFORE "WOMEN OF ANY RACE" BUT BEFORE *THEMSELVES*--THAT'S WHAT THE STAKES WERE. WHITE WOMEN OF POWER AND PRIVILEGE IN A RACIST SLAVE CULTURE THAT THEY WERE, THEY WERE NONE TOO PLEASED. DON'T YOU SIT HERE AND MAKE SHIT UP. AGAIN, WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOU ALL BEFORE. OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

If the lawyer described above had been just as charismatic but named, say, Achola Obama instead of Barack Obama, her goose would have been cooked long ago. Indeed, neither she nor Hillary Clinton could have used Mr. Obama's public style - or Bill Clinton's either - without being considered too emotional by Washington pundits.

OH, ACHOLA--WELL SHE HAS A NAME THEN!

TOO EMOTIONAL--WACHU TALKIN BOUT WILLIS? THE SAME RULES DON'T APPLY! IF YOU WANT TO GET INTO THE AESTHETICS OF WHAT OBAMA IS DOING, OR WHAT BILL CLINTON DOES ANY CHANCE HE GETS, THAT'S A BLACK THING. (WELL THINK ABOUT IT, DIDN'T WE ALL JOKE THAT HE WAS THE FIRST "BLACK" PRESIDENT?) YOUR ACHOLA WOULD HAVE BEEN RIGHT AT HOME CALLING UPON THE RHETORICAL ORAL TRADITIONS THAT OBAMA EMPLOYS AND BILL CLINTON AND MANY OTHER AMERICAN LEADERS EMPLOY FROM BLACK LIFE AND THE BLACK CHURCH.

So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one?
SAYS WHO, STEINEM? DON IMUS'S NAPPY HEADED HOES?

The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; AS RACISM *ONCE* WAS?!!???!!! IS THIS REALLY BEING SPOKEN IN A COUNTRY WHERE WE'D RATHER INCARCERATE HALF A MILLION BLACK BOYS THAN PUT THEM IN SCHOOL? WHERE IN SCHOOLS WHERE CHILDREN OF COLOR ARE THE MAJORITY AN AVERAGE 60 PERCENT OR MORE ARE BELOW GRADE LEVEL? YOU'RE TELLING ME WE DON'T STILL THINK RACE IS NATURE, RACE IS DESTINY, RACE MAKES PEOPLE FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT IN THE PSYCHE OF THE AVERAGE AMERICAN?

because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects "only" the female half of the human race;
UNLESS OF COURSE SAID MALES ARE SAY,"BLACK MEN AGES 18 TO 24"
AND SAID FEMALES ARE SAY, "WHITE FEMALE TOURIST MISSING IN ARUBA", I GUESS.

because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more "masculine" for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren't too many of them); WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT WAS THE LAST BOOK YOU READ? NOW YOU JUST SOUND DOWNRIGHT DELUSIONAL

and because there is still no "right" way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what. WELL I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S TRUE SISTER, BUT I KNOW THAT ALL THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR THE WAR IN IRAQ *ARE* BITCHES, YES.

I'm not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. YES YOU ARE. IN FACT YOU HAVE FOR AS LONG AS YOU AND OTHERS LIKE YOU HAVE SOUGHT TO REPRESENT AND CO-OPT A MOVEMENT TO LIBERATE "WOMEN" WHILE PERSISTENTLY PRETENDING TO NOT HAVE OPPRESSED SCORES OF WOMEN IN TANDEM WITH THOSE MEN WHO OPPRESSED YOU AND PRETENDING THAT IN YOUR SPECIFICITY YOU WERE IN FACT CAPABLE OF SOME UNIVERSALITY OF EXPERIENCE. YOU'VE NOT ONLY ADVOCATED THIS COMPETITION, YOU HAVE HAD IT WITH NONWHITE MEN IN FACT, MUCH TO THE DETRIMENT OF NONWHITE WOMEN WHO HAVE DEALT WITH BOTH YALL'S BULLSHIT FOR QUITE.SOME.TIME. HENCE: CONDOLEEZA RICE'S MAJOR AND OBVIOUS CHIP ON HER SHOULDER...

The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That's why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. AND YET, IN THIS MOMENT HERE AS IN ALL THE HISTORY BEFORE IT, YOUR SENTIMENT SURE DOES NOT CALL ME TO COALESCE.

The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that. OH WE DO, AND WE ALWAYS HAVE.

I'm supporting Senator Clinton because like Senator Obama she has community organizing experience, SO?

but she also has more years in the Senate, I'M SURE IF HE COULD HAVE GOTTEN THERE SOONER, HE WOULD HAVE--SORRY!


unprecedented eight years of on-the-job training in the White House,
"ON THE JOB" TRAINING? AND YET SAID IS AN EXPERIENCE WHICH IF ANYONE FINDS FAULT WITH THEY ARE A SEXIST PIG--THEN YOU SAY WANT A HEALTHY DEBATE?

no masculinity to prove, UH, ACTUALLY, THAT WHOLE IRAQ THING WAS ABOUT PROVING HER MASCULINITY, IF YOU WILL--THAT'S HOW PROBLEMATIC SHE IN FACT IS.

the potential to tap a huge reservoir of this country's talent by her example, RIGHT, A WOMAN WHO JUST CLAWED HER WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE ALL ON HER OWN MARITAL MERIT: AFTER MY OWN HEART!

and now even the courage to break the no-tears rule.
FIRST OF ALL, SHE DID NOT BREAK THE RULE, SHE DIDN'T ACTUALLY CRY--NOR WOULD SHE EVER BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE TOO MUCH OFF THE CALCULATED EFFORT THAT IT WAS.

I'm not opposing Mr. Obama; if he's the nominee, I'll volunteer.
WOW, WHAT AN IMPASSIONATE ENDORSEMENT--THANK YOU SO MUCH!

Indeed, if you look at votes during their two-year overlap in the Senate, they were the same more than 90 percent of the time. POINT THEREFORE BEING HE'S JUST AS "CAPABLE" AS YOUR GIRL, NO?

Besides, to clean up the mess left by President Bush, we may need two terms of President Clinton and two of President Obama. OH SUCH QUAINT FEMINIST PRAGMATICS! OH I SEE, SO WE SHOULD LIKE, TAKE TURNS? YEAH? AND THE WHITE PERSON GOES FIRST? HOW RADICAL.

But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex. GASP! IT'S NOT THE LONG HISTORY BEHIND HER LAST NAME, IT'S NOT 20 YEARS OF PUBLIC LIFE AND SOME OF THE MOST CONTENTIOUS, NASTY POLITICAL TIMES IN RECENT HISTORY, IT'S NOT HER "VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY" POSITION, NOT HER OBVIOUS SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT THAT MAKES HER DIVISIVE?

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. ARE YOU SAYING EVOKING THESE STRUGGLES IS BOGUS FOR BOTH OF THEM?
(I THINK TO BE QUITE CYNICAL, YOU ARE MAD THAT HE'S A BLACK MAN IN CONTROL OF HIS PERSONA IN A RACIST COUNTRY, WHILE SHE IS A WOMAN WHO IS UNABLE TO DO THE SAME VIS A VIS HER GENDER IN A SEXIST COUNTRY. BUT THAT'S CYNICAL AND I TAKE IT BACK).

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. EVERY IOWA POLL HAD A DETAILED DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN, MEMBER? HE WON THE WOMEN VOTE BY 5 POINTS.

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. OH MY GOD, THE LENGTH OF THE BULLSHIT PEOPLE WILL ENGAGE ON THIS...

What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age.
TO SAY THAT BEING FOR HILLARY CLINTON'S POLITICS TODAY IS BEING "MORE RADICAL" IS BOGUS.

This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees.
FUCK WHAT IT CAN AFFORD GLORIA, IT'S WHAT IT DOES. EVERY DAY MY SON WAKES UP IN A COUNTRY THAT CHOOSES ALL POSITIONS OF POWER AND/OR SIMPLE RELEVANCE IN THE MOST MUNDANE AND ROUTINE WAYS (NOT JUST PRESIDENTS) BASED ON A PREDICTABLE CALCULUS OF SEX, RACE, CLASS, ETC. GIVEN HOW *SHE* CAME TO BE WHO SHE IS, I FIND *HIM* THE BETTER SLAP IN THE FACE OF THAT SYSTEM.


It's time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers.
FUCKING TAKE YOUR OWN ADVICE.

We have to be able to say: "I'm supporting her because she'll be a great president and because she's a woman."
NO, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SAY AND IN FACT WE DO SAY: I AM SUPPORTING HIM BECAUSE HE IS GETTING YOUNG PEOPLE TO ENGAGE IN THEIR POLITICAL PROCESS, IS INTELLIGENT, THOUGHTFUL, COMMITTED, WORLDY, SINCERE, INFORMED, SELF-MADE AND HIS ARRIVING AT THIS MOMENT BOTH IMPRESSES AND INSPIRES AN ENTIRE COUNTRY. (AND LOOK MA!, I CAN SAY ALL THAT AND NOT MENTION RACE!)

Gloria Steinem is a co-founder of the Women's Media Center.
AND SHE IS FUCKING LAZY WITH HER THINKING.