Now Driving Online Now Hiring Online Home Seller Subscribe to the JG-TC
79°F
If you could add a contest to Bagelfest what would it be?
More
Bagel toss
Bagel eating
Bagel stacking
Bagel recipes
Bagel crafts
View Results
 


















 
Wednesday, May 14, 2008 9:36 PM CDT
COLUMN: Give me a ball cap and a sweatshirt and I can prove sexism any day



You’re sick of reading about presidential politics, right? I know you are.

But may I weigh in just for one column? Please please please?

Oh. I guess if you’ve read this far, that’s a “yes.”

I promise to try to keep the political blather to a minimum. The length of my other usual blather, however, is something for which I cannot vouch.

As practically every American with eyes and/or ears knows, Sen. John McCain is assumed to be the Republican presidential nominee for 2008, and U.S. senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are still sparring — sort of — for the Democratic nod.

Now I know, you think this election is about things like the war in Iraq, the direction of the country overall, oil prices, illegal immigration, and ... blah blah blah. You know the drill.

Sure, those little tidbits (you sense my sarcasm, right? Just checkin’ on ya.) make a few headlines. But there’s one issue that is the basis of the Democratic race. It also will be a factor this November, but it originates with Clinton versus Obama.

The primary issue in this presidential contest is whether we Americans are the most biased against any race other than Caucasian, or if we proportionately look down our noses more at women.

Are we as a country more sexist or are we more racist?

I’ve suspected from the beginning of this contest — there was a beginning, wasn’t there? Sometime, long ago? — that sexism would rule the day. It’s so far doing just that.

If Obama prevails over Clinton, that simply proves to me that voters — both men and women — would disregard a candidate’s race sooner than they would ignore a politician’s gender when casting a ballot.

Neither should be a real factor. Skin color doesn’t affect brain power or any other trait necessary to lead a nation. Chromosomes don’t provide inherent strength or weaknesses when it comes to a level head.

Oh, if only we lived in that world already. Someday, perhaps, but that day is not today.

The media has been overly harsh on Clinton. Sure, one might argue it’s because of her name — a valid suggestion, perhaps — but it’s mostly because of her gender. I read or saw somewhere something about Clinton “turning in her pantsuit,” as in, she should get out of the race already. Huh. I wonder what that cartoonist or pundit would have said if the Clinton in question was male and not female. Maybe a Mr. Clinton would be chastised to “turn in his tie”? Nope. It doesn’t have the same derision, does it?

Perhaps I don’t see how strong racism is in this country because I’m white, while obviously I do see the power of sexism since I’m a woman. That could be. But I think there are many Caucasian men who might normally look down on Obama firmly filling in an oval for him over Mrs. Clinton.

I’ve experienced and witnessed sexism in many ways at various times over the years. From the workplace to recreation to retailers and on and on, women are treated as if they are less than men far too often for this day and age.

I don’t get all “angry feminist” over it. I promise. Actually, it often just makes me chuckle.

Having been a tomboy as long as I can remember, it’s not unusual for me to “bum around” running errands or doing chores wearing a baseball cap, a sweatshirt when it’s cool enough, work boots and similar duds.

First of all, I’m not fashionable to begin with: I’m a T-shirt-and-jeans kind of gal. And second of all, who mows the yard or hauls topsoil or plants trees wearing feminine attire?

So once in a while, I’ll head out and about and, strolling into Rural King, for example, I’ll notice some guy — a stranger to me — give me a brisk nod and maybe even a “Hey” or similar greeting in passing, and it strikes me as odd. It’s his tone, his attitude. Then I realize: He thought I was a guy! I smile to myself.

I’m sure other women, especially in this kind of an agriculture-powered community, who end up looking a bit masculine when doing dirty work around the farm or yard, experience the same thing at times. It used to bother me to get called “sir,” even though that’s rare, but now I just chuckle and go on.

It does, however, illustrate the power of sexism. Even women treat me differently if they mistake me for a man. And I see women do sexist things just like many men do too. Sure, many people don’t even realize they’re sexist. I’m not talking about a guy opening a door for a lady, either. That’s chivalry, not sexism.

Oh, but some would say I’m trying to have it both ways by saying that. All righty then: I can open the door myself, okay? The point remains.

Yes, Hillary Clinton is disliked for many reasons by many people, and so is Barack Obama, but I believe more people hold Clinton’s chromosomes against her than people hold Obama’s hue against him. It’s a big reason why Obama, at least by all appearances right now, is doing better with voters overall than Clinton.

I think both are qualified; there are things I like about both Clinton and Obama and also about McCain. I really don’t know yet who I’d vote for this fall.

But a big part of me wants Clinton to win just because she is a woman. One side of me kind of wants to vote for her just because she knows what it’s like to be a girl and be a second-class citizen many times.

But I won’t do it. Not even if she starts wearing ball caps and sweatshirts.

Far be it for me to be sexist, after all.


Share:          Submit to Reddit         Add to My Yahoo!Add to My Yahoo!   



  Add your comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 

Not already registered?
Then click Here.


JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.

In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.

We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.

No comment may contain:

* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.

If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.


mulholland wrote on May 15, 2008 1:15 PM:

" I think its time for Ms. Weaver to retake her Introduction to Logic class or at least get on her next rant with some thinking.

Ms. Weaver forgets that Clinton was massively favored to win the nomination in every poll before primary season began, and that these polls surveyed men and women, and African-Americans and Anglos alike. The race has been Clinton's to lose from the beginning, and she's done a top job throwing it away.

Clearly there are individuals that dislike one candidate over the other for their own bigoted reasons; however, reducing the democratic constituency to either African-American loving misogynists, or racist philogynists is laughable, and makes it hard for Ms. Weaver to be taken seriously.

Not to suggest that the pundits and mainstream media are infallible, but Ms. Weaver's argument really isn't being made by anyone with any serious credibility. There is a general understanding that the race, as it stands today, is due to the missteps of Clinton's advisors made early on in the primary season, and perhaps an underestimation of Obama's ability to resonate with voters?

All that said, I have to wonder if Ms. Weaver honestly believes the position she's putting forth or if she is being intentionally myopic to generate controversy and page hits. "

Becky wrote on May 15, 2008 1:30 PM:

" Hey Mul....how many times have you been told you were an evil twin and that's your role in life so don't expect any respect from anyone? "

mulholland wrote on May 15, 2008 1:46 PM:

" Hey Becky...how many times have you been told to look up ad hominem attack, as that's the extent of your ability to argue. "

father bob wrote on May 15, 2008 3:54 PM:

" i have to disagree...clinton is too much "business as usual" in the eyes f the voters. she shows nothing that we haven't seen or heard before....just packaged a little differently.

"

tammer65 wrote on May 16, 2008 1:34 AM:

" I don't think that Clinton's woes can be blamed on sexism as much as her character and manner of handling her campaign. The blantant lies (such as sniperfire-gate), negative attack-dog politics, constant changing of the rules (The superdelages should decide it; no, wait, it should be the popular vote; the delegate count shouldn't be 2025 but should include Florida and Michigan) are what turn many people off Hillary, not her gender. I for one am ready, more than ready, for a woman president -- just not THAT woman. (Claire McCaskill of MO or Kathleen Sebelis of Kansas would have more appeal, I think, without the baggage that Hillary drags along with her.) I haven't heard many of Clinton's supporters being called by derogatory slurs when they canvas door-to-door, but recent articles in the Washington Post and Newsweek both acknowledged the not-so-subtle slurs that Obama's field volunteers have recently faced in Pennsylvania, Indiana, and West Virginia (including being called the n-word, or n-word lover, depending on their race; as well as racist graffiti being spray painted on Obama campaign headquarter buildings on the day of the primary in Indiana, in a couple of different towns). I think we're still more racist than sexist as a society, which makes Obama's success even more remarkable, and which is a testament, too, to the degree of highly unfavorable opinions of Hillary Clinton as an individual. "

Becky wrote on May 16, 2008 9:56 AM:

" OK Mul, you're absulutely right. Me and my silly woman brain. Of course we silly woman shouldn't be offended by the media reporting about Senator Clintons cleavage, or lack thereof. Or by their commenting on her cold, ice queen image and how her (and Pelosi's) outfits look so charming today. Sure, none of that (so called) reporting had any impact on the average American. I mean, women have always been treated fairly in this country and has always been looked upon as the pillars of strength and as the backbone of this country that we really are. Seriously, just the other day the media commented on McCains bulge (or lack thereof) and how Obama's suit wore so well and matched the backgroud perfectly. How their emotions on the stage is so telling of their strengths as leaders. Gee, you're so right. Gosh, I guess it's just my silly hormones getting the best of me again. Sexism doesn't exist anymore and we woman are just being femintistic bit$*es if we don't get it. Really, silly, silly me. Thanks for the eye opener there Mul. "

Just a Soldier wrote on May 16, 2008 1:31 PM:

" I'm personally getting a little tired of being told that anyone who doesn't support Obama is a racist and anyone who doesn't support Clinton is a sexist. Could it possibly be that I just don't agree with their policies? I guess not. Makes me a little nervous about the climate in this country if either of them is elected. Will every politician who votes against their proposals be painted a racist or sexist then too? "

mulholland wrote on May 16, 2008 3:09 PM:

" Becky, I'm not sure if you need a refill on your clozapine, or if you just like fallacious arguments. To recap, I suggested that Ms. Weaver was being myopic in her reduction of the democratic party to two groups: one racist, the other sexist. I later noted that there is pretty strong evidence that Clinton's nosedive in the polls was due to bad advice/strategy by some of her senior advisers. I also pointed out that your first comment was at best an ad hominem attack.

You, on the other hand, Becky, have shown your mastery of logical fallacy with what I'm sure you thought was a coherent ad hominem attack, followed by a indignant rant masquerading as a straw man argument. Pick up a book on logic , take a deep breath, and come back when you can post something other than stream of consciousness blather that accuses me of taking positions I've never so much as hinted at. "

tammer65 wrote on May 16, 2008 5:48 PM:

" Just a Soldier, I hope you didn't take my post to mean that I think that anyone who is opposed to Obama is racist; I certainly don't believe that. There are those who dislike his positions on rolling back the tax-cuts for upper income-bracket earners, or his desire to bring home the troops from Iraq, etc., and that's not what I'm objecting to. But in the recent primaries, a disheartening % of voters (more than 1 in 5 in W. Va.) ADMITTED that race was an important factor in their vote, and many have gone on camera to say that they wouldn't vote for a black candidate, period. So I DO think it is legitimate to say that racism is out there and that it has played a disturbing factor in the Presidential race, and will likely play a role with some voters in the general. Nowhere did I say that all those who oppose Obama are racist, and I stated unequivocably that I think there are also factors other than her gender that have turned some voters against Hillary Clinton. I understand your frustration about those using race or gender as a blanket excuse, but I think it is equally frustrating that some deny that race and gender are playing any role at all. "

Just a Soldier wrote on May 16, 2008 10:22 PM:

" Tammer, my comment wasn't necessarily directed at any single person, but I listen to a lot of talk radio, both conservative and liberal (I spend two hours a day commuting to work), and I hear an awful lot of people playing the race or sex card as though they are the only reasons someone would not vote for one of these candidates and it really disappoints me because, like many others, I would vote for someone of color or a woman any day. I served in the military with people of all races, creeds, and colors and I loved them all as brothers. As for women, I married one, so I must not hate them too much.

As far as saying that race and gender haven't played a part in this election, I don't think anyone can look at the polling numbers and make that claim when the lines seem to be clearly drawn in the Democratic Party. I don't really have the time to look up the exact numbers, but I believe that it is nearly unanimous support for Obama from African-American voters and white women almost unanimously supporting Clinton. Now, I agree that it is a momentous and historic occasion to have these two be real contenders for the presidency, but I think that somewhere we need to ask if this trend to vote for the person you look like is progressive, or regressive. "

Cognitus wrote on May 17, 2008 8:58 AM:

" Penny, let me tell you when I BITTERLy became opposed to Hillary and it doens't have a thing to do with S-E-X>**********
As you know, in Indiana one of her main political issues was the gas tax; the federal government should abate all gas taxes from Memorial Day to Loabor day.
The first silly event was to ride into a gas station as a "working woman" -- I'm surprised she wasn't wearing goggles and carrying a welding torch -- with a worker in a pickup. Turned out the worker's pickup was unsuitable and he had to borrow his boss's pickup -- so the multimillionaire rode into the station in the finest pickup in town.***********
Further, she conned the people in Indiana into believing this could really happen. Were they so dumb they were unaware this gas vacation would require the bill be passed by the House, Senate and signed by the president. NO WAY this could be done, as she promised, by Memorial Day. Particularly because her proposal contained an increase in tax on oil companies, which would bring their lobbyists onto Congress like a swarm of bees. This was the most blatant lie of the political season. "

grooverchip wrote on May 17, 2008 4:09 PM:

" Penny, I have to say that your article does ring true. I'm not sure that it is ONLY the fact that Clinton is a woman that is the reason she is on the verge of losing the democratic nomination, but I do think that it does play a bigger part than people want to admit. I have heard democrats and republicans in this town say they aren't ready for a female president. And one of the biggest criticisms of Hillary I hear is that she is the "B" word. You never hear a similar criticism of male candidates; aggressiveness and decisiveness in a male is deemed as an attractive quality.
In the past I have voted mostly republican and I may not agree with all of Clinton's policies, but I think she's got all the other candidates beat with her experience. I think she'd be a tough leader and I like the fact that she's strong.
I have to agree with you, I think we're a long ways away from being gender neutral in this country. "

InsaneWayne wrote on May 17, 2008 6:18 PM:

" Hillary has lost in a close race fair and square so now she needs to gracefully step aside.

I dont believe it had a thing to do with sex or race.

Apparently Democrats have chosen another candidate.

It has been great to see such a close race unfold.
"

what? wrote on May 17, 2008 9:48 PM:

" There's a catch 22 here. Regardless of whitch candidate one would prefer representing him or her as president,said one is guilty of either sexism or racism. Just what we don't need. I plead not guilty, with a clear consience. "

Twisted Nickel wrote on May 18, 2008 8:15 PM:

" I am a white woman, and I will probably vote for Obama. I think he's the better candidate. Does that mean I'm biased towards African-Americans, or just sexist against women? Good Heavens, I just can't keep up! "

Mama says wrote on May 19, 2008 11:42 AM:

" Hey nobody worry in another 100 years it isn't gonna matter much. I keep reading hoping to find something great for our country and good for our soldiers and families, and stop all the climbing food, gas, and utility bills and taxes on our homes. AND the price for a new car is why driving my really old one but take care of it. They are like buying a house most of the time but years ago.

I look at our politicians and shake my head. I have this picture of Bill under Hillarys table while she works,
Obama busy making some deals eiher good or bad we may not even have inkling right now, but am sure the future holds the key and we will all know in time.

All we can do is pray, if you believe in prayer we probably better be praying long prayers.

It is bad when choose between gas in tank or food on table or should I turn on a light so can see tonight?

As for Penny,,,,and her columns, she does make us all think and that is good thing. We should get all views and then make our own decisions,,,,I really like Pennys columns and she at least does think and trying to understand all the big hoopla of politics and ticians.

"

Mama says wrote on May 28, 2008 12:45 AM:

" Who will we vote,,,,,eeeenie,,,,meannnnie, minnehhh, cause ain't no mo.
Sometimes think watching the three stooges. "

 



COLUMN: Give me a ball cap and a sweatshirt and I can prove sexism any day

COLUMN: Clinton, Obama battle pales in comparison to 'Great A/C War'

COLUMN: It would be nice to blog while eating burgers at Snappy's

COLUMN: Trading guns, Corvair and cigarettes to be dad was a good deal

COLUMN: Now I know the 'secret' to losing weight, but you don't want to know

OUR VIEW: Plan to curb south side flooding makes sense

OUR VIEW: Senate hearing was good news for FutureGen

OUR VIEW: As a bully, Blagojevich excels in budget battles

LETTER: Woman spent lifetime helping those in need

LETTER: Quake sends message about FutureGen

LETTER: City should operate its own garbage system

LETTER: City was notified tree was in danger of falling

LETTER: School board's decision to sell property mistake

LETTER: Criminals have all the guns in Chicago

LETTER: Stop giving illegal immigrants benefits

©2007 Journal Gazette and Times-Courier, divisions of Lee Enterprises.    JG/T-C Do Not Call Policy    Privacy Policy    Contact Us