-They also see her as inflicting mistreatment on real-life women as much as her 'mysogynist' husband.
-There are many anti-Hillary posters, one even comparing her to Stalin.
-Videos to 'Vote Smart' - as a warning to all women against her.
-This website shows itself to be based on facts and not on gender...until the person who ran the website posted a recent blog 'I’m going to break one the cardinal rules that I set for this site, which was that we would not make gender an issue in this campaign'. If he is stating this now, surely this would have always been the case. He says how there are clear differences between men and women, because of not being able to deal with emotions. This person does not want a president who cries through all the struggles.
-Although advertised as a non-gender argument web-site, there is an advert at the bottom of the page which states 'I'm a stay at home mom, come see what i do to make thousands from home in my spare time'... suggesting a woman's place is at home, and not in the white house.
- There are many websites which try to explain why people hate Hillary, and one in particular relates to what SISII has been talking about so far:
Answers being:
-"we came to the conclusion that it is because she is smart, articulate, accomplished. She is a policy wonk. Yes, in the end, people hate Hillary for the same reason that they distrust intellectuals, writers and other thinkers. The fact that they think at all."
1 comment:
This is a very interesting group of sites which illustrate a huge range of anti-Hillary positions. Most surprising was the 'warning to women about Hillary' youtube 'mash-up' which uses feminism against her.
Also striking is the bizarre symmetry between the portrayals of Hillary as too intellectual to be elected, and the portrayals of Hillary as too emotional to be elected. Can you see any political coherence here? In other words, do the critiques of her alleged over-emotionaism come from a specific position, that's different from the position from which critiques of her alleged over-intellectualism are launched?
Or are these just all elements of patriarchal discourse which can be activated by people across the political spectrum?
Also, how might the operation of gender difference here cause us to revise the discussion of anti-intellectualism in the 'Mapping Stupidity' essay? On the face of it, whereas Gore and Kerry might have been able to deflect such criticism by being more populist, there seems nowhere for Hillary to go - she is villified either way.
Do you think that Hillary's personality is under discussion here to a greater extent than is Barack Obama's? If so, why? It would be good if you can post some reflections on these questions before our next meeting.
Post a Comment