The XX Factor: Slate women blog about politics, etc...

Gloria, Hillary, and Feminism Revisited

Dahlia (and others): I don't think your point and mine are mutually exclusive. I certainly agree that sexism/the death of feminism is not why Hillary lost Iowa; she lost Iowa, and Obama won, for the very reasons you point out: Obama represents the possiblitiy of change, a break from baby boomer preoccupations and impasses, a break from, well, the Clinton era. (Andrew Sullivan summed it up powerfully in his Atlantic Monthly piece a while back.) These are the reasons many young women I know are supporting Obama. And sure, Steinem overstates the issue and writes from a prescriptive, first-wave point of view that doesn't float my boat. And yet I really do think, as I said earlier, that Steinem captures something crucial about the challenges facing women in America right now, namely, a pervasive, subterranean unease about women and power that rears its head in surprising ways. This unease would dog, it seems to me, even the female candidate "with Obama’s innate confidence and openness" whom you call for, Dahlia. Sure, such a candidate would probably perform better than Hillary is performing. And gender wouldn't be the main factor in her candidacy -- just as it is not the really the main factor for many Democrates, including me, as they try to make up their minds about Hillary vs. Obama. But there would still be the same tiresome debates about what a female presidency meant, and in what ways a woman was or was not tough, and so on.

What I hoped to point out is that in so frequently describing how gender isn't the main factor in this presidential race, we are sometimes quick to assure ourselves that it isn't a powerful factor. I absolutely agree with Melinda that many of Hillary's negatives have little to do with her gender. Yet what so many of the debates about Hillary have reminded me is that as a nation (and as a media) we are strangely anxious about identifying any element of sexism to begin with -- and that's what I find striking. And that's why I liked Steinem's piece, even given its quite obvious limitations. Her point that today gender is harder to overcome than race may be spurious. And yet the notion that gender issues are easier to whitewash than racial ones seems right on. I'm curious: Do you really think that if some men had heckled Obama about race at a campaign stop, a national newspaper would have printed a headline referring to his response to "seemingly racist remarks"? Maybe, but I have a hard time imagining it.