Sexism vs Racism in the '08 Election

Karma

Heart Attack
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
7,430
Location
Outside of time and space
Sexism, racism: which is more taboo?
proxy.php

By DAVID CRARY, AP National Writer
Mon Jan 14, 6:40 PM ET

Expressions of sexism and racism emerging from the contest between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have been blatant, subtle and perhaps sometimes imagined, and they are renewing the national debate over what is and isn't acceptable to say in public.

Clinton's camp has perceived sexism in comments about her appearance and emotions. Supporters of Obama have complained about racial overtones in remarks about his Muslim-sounding middle name, Hussein, and his acknowledged drug use as a young man.

Beyond the back-and-forth between a white woman and a black man seeking the Democratic presidential nominaton, the situation has created a snapshot of the nation's sensitivity — or lack thereof — to certain kinds of comments. Is it more acceptable, for instance, to make a sexist remark than a racist remark?

"It's always been easier," says Marie Wilson, president of the White House Project, which encourages women's advancement in politics. "With women, you can get away with it.

"With race, you can hardly say anything."


Feminist leader Gloria Steinem, argued in a New York Times op-ed last week that gender is "probably the most restricting force in American life" — more so than race.

But others involved in politics suggest the situation is more complex and that both race and gender are used to discriminate against people.

Yvonne Scruggs-Leftwich, a board member of the Black Leadership Forum, said that as a black woman she has experienced both racism and sexism, and suggested there was little point in ranking them.

"In parts of the country, the racist terms fall just as easily off the lips as they always did," she said. "And there are also places that I can't go because I am a woman, and that bothers me just as much."

Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, said sexist and racist expressions both remain all too common in public discourse, though she said the racism often may be "somewhat coded."

"There's an awful lot of explicit sexist stuff," she said.

Certainly, Clinton's gender has been the spark for criticism, verbal and otherwise, of a sort that Obama has avoided. Available on the Internet are a Hillary nutcracker (the Clinton-like figure cracks nuts between her legs) and a Hillary toilet brush (the sales pitch: "You can have Hillary Clinton as your 'First Cleaning Lady.'")

Clinton's wardrobe, figure, hairdo — even her laugh — have generated detailed and often unflattering commentary.

Radio host Rush Limbaugh said of her: "Will this country want to actually watch a woman get older before their eyes on a daily basis?" Chris Matthews, host of "Hardball" on MSNBC, has been accused of repeated sexist remarks about Clinton and other female politicians. For example, Matthews suggested that when female politicians deliver a fiery speech, "it can grate on some men when they listen to it — fingernails on a blackboard."

Asked about the complaints, Matthews told The Associated Press he personally likes Clinton and also likes the fact that "Hardball" generates controversy.

Gandy, however, sees an injurious double-standard.

"The focus on the clothes and the figure and the hairdo — not only are they not used with male candidates, they're used to trivialize Hillary Clinton," Gandy said.

On the racial front, some of the more blatant incidents in recent years did not involve Obama.

There was sharp criticism of a TV ad run in 2006 by the Republican National Committee, in which a flirtatious blonde invited Harold Ford Jr., a black Senate candidate in Tennessee, to "call me." A white GOP candidate in Virginia, Sen. George Allen, stumbled in his campaign for re-election when he referred to one of his rival's volunteers, a man of Indian descent, as "macaca."

For Obama, the issue of racism was raised a year ago when Sen. Joe Biden described the Illinois senator as "clean" and "articulate," then sought to clarify that he meant no disrespect to other blacks.

Since then, though, there has been little overt racism directed at Obama that has percolated into the public domain. Most of the debate has been more nuanced — such as whether there was a racial context to Clinton supporters' references to Obama's acknowledged teenage use of cocaine. There was brief umbrage by some Obama backers over New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's recent use of the term "shuck and jive" but Cuomo's aides circulated a transcript indicating he was talking generally about candidates' evasions, not about Obama in particular.

Limbaugh was criticized last year for playing a parody song on his show entitled "Barack the Magic Negro." But Obama himself drew praise from Limbaugh for laughing off the song and saying he didn't mind people poking fun at him.

Charles Ellison, senior adviser to the University of Denver's Center for African-American Policy, said Obama is benefiting from a pop-culture groundswell — epitomized by the black U.S. president on the hit TV series "24" — that has made the idea of a real-life black president seem appealing.

"The concept of a black president has overtaken the concept of a woman president," Ellison said. "It's very fresh and recent. We've been talking about trying to get a woman president for some time."

However, Ellison said Obama still faces challenges in handling gender and race.

"As a black man, he must be careful not to appear too hostile toward a white woman," Ellison said. "That dynamic has always been there, and I think he is rather aware of it."

Bruce Gordon, former president of the NAACP, said any suggestion that sexism had become a more oppressive bias than racism is "a huge overstatement."

Both are alive and well, he said, "but it would be disappointing if in the course of this campaign the attention of the voting public shifts to gender and race instead of dealing with the substantive issues."
 
This may be naive idealistic youth speaking but why does any other this matter shouldn't the course of the election to the most powerful office in our union, perhaps the world be decided with reason, logic, the policies of the candidates and not whether its more acceptable to be racist or sexist. :rolleyes:
 
Both are extremely dangerous and distasteful especially considering the whole point of an election to the highest office. What their candidacies represent is that while progress has been made, we still have a ways to go.
 
Ever since the beginning of history I think there has always been a plaque of sexism and racism. Neither have really been truly accepted in society. However, working inside a law firm myself I get to see an exclusive look into the "boys club", that plenty of white chauvinistic male attorney's think they are above women whether white or black. I think that with all this controversy over someone's race and color that women themselves are slipped under the radar. The minute someone says "nappy haired ho" its broadcast all across the internet, newspapers, radio, etc. Yet, when someone such as a high-political figure can sprout venomous sexist words its okay. Its really rare to hear about that.

Therefore, in my opinion I think racism is more acceptable in this nation to a degree. The second a person whether white or black spouts off a racial remark such as nigger its causes a ruckus. I never agreed with racism to begin with. However, what about women? What about those sexist pigs who feel that a "woman should stay home and make babies." Fuck that! I'm all for a woman in power, especially a Presidential Candidate. Plenty of men will remark about a woman's personal style more than the color of skin.

For many generations women were supposed to be the housewives. While the men in this country were sought as the breadwinner. Yet, more and more women are rebelling. More and more women are managing to seek higher paying jobs and positions than their male counterparts. I think that a lot of males especially the egotistical ones have a problem with a women challenging the system, which makes it taboo. A woman President has always been a taboo subject. Men would rather prefer a black male to a white female based on the gender and not the skin tone.

Let's face it a man is a man despite his religion or his racial background.
 
I am actually hoping Hilary Clinton wins the race. As Foxfire said above "A Man is a Man despite his religion or his racial background", I think having a Woman for a President would be a nice, refreshing change of pace. We Men are usually single-track minded creatures, sure there are a small minority of us who see the Shades of Gray (like myself for instance, Order is boring. Madness is fun!) but most Men...like the Politicians are embodiements of uniformity, corruption and greed despite their shiny, ivory smiles and striped, $500 dollar ebony suits.

However in terms of Women...at least I hope this is true because if it's not then I will be sad...the majority of Women are multi-track minded beings whose imaginative and creative approaches to everything make the world move foreward in ways most Politician Males cannot comprehend. With a Woman at the helm we can restore what several others have broken and destroyed. Having another Male President (how many are we up to now? 46?) will just bring everything further and further into chaos. We need a change!

Besides...I don't trust Barack Obama, something about him just seems...wrong somehow...and I don't mean in terms of skin, the name or personality or anything physical or mental or otherwise. It's just he gives off this vibe that feels to me like he isn't what he appears to be. Like there is some sort of disconnection...a blank spot in the Universe. Well whatever it is it sends a shiver up my spine each time I see him on TV and hear him talk.

But there is one problem...how do you get the men who would rather have male presidents to switch over their track switch so that Mrs. Clinton can get more votes? Most Men in America are either stupid rich Orange County/New York/Miami Prep School Robots or idiotic Confederate/KKK/Devil-worshipping Deep Southerners (well not all of them...I think) or...Carnies...gulp! Only the Minorities of Radical Thinkers, Artists, Mad Scientists and Star Trek fans are the only ones who would be truly open to a Female Ruled America. The rest would probably rather live in a Universe where the Nazi's never went to Russia and conquered America instead! :admin:

Sigh...what I wouldn't give for the power to alter reality...or at least forcibly alter peoples minds! Anyways...I am rambling...Clinton for President and Cheese for EVERYONE!!! Wait, no, scratch that, Cheese for no one, that can be just as much of a celebration as well if you don't like cheese true? :blah:
 
This discussion is at best...sticky in that I understand that women live with sexism and hostility to a degree from men. The concern that I have is to try to compare it with racism diminishes both of them somewhat.

WE are less than one generation removed from Jim Crow. My father and both of my in-laws went to segregated schools (and they are all under 60 years of age). What is the age of many members of Congress, CEOs of many companies, or even professors at institutions of higher learning? At least that old. For many others who are as young as say 40 or so, they lived and grew up in a world that deemed Blacks to be less than whites, less than HUMAN, definitely separate.

That is what concerns me about out societal landscape today. I see Barack Obama and I am intrigued by him, hopeful of his prospects, impressed by his presentation and earnestness so far. But the truth is that Black candidates ALWAYS have a last-minute flight of white voters to the white candidate. It ALWAYS happens, as if white voters take time to prove the point that they could consider him then, inexplicably they find a reason to turn away, using excuses that sound a lot like the one the good Doctor just gave in the post above. I am making no claim of prejudice on your part or trying to defame you Doc, I am simply using what you said as an example, something that others with less innocent feelings and motivations will use in the months to come.

As for Clinton or any woman running for office, one phenomenon that has not been explored is that women tend to not vote for major women candidates in appreciative majorities. The truth is that the electorate is composed of a majority of women voters. To elect a woman president is a simple as a woman running and getting a large majority of the women's vote combined with ANY reasonable percentage of male votes to go along with it. But the truth is that women rarely support women candidates in super-majorities. Hence the real reason there has been no woman President.

I think both racism and sexism are abhorrent. But to me, racism is more insidious primarily due to the inability of the group(s) affected to do a lot about it. We depend on a majority increasingly convinced due to trifles such as the Imus situation that we have evolved a lot over time when there is an incredible amount of evidence to the contrary.

As for myself and women candidates, I tell anybody. "When in doubt, vote for the woman, especially if she has kids."
 
I personally think the fact that sexism and racism are such LARGE FACTORS in this election and prevelant in our society still, is an embarrassment more than anything else. is it REALLY that "unfathomable" to see a woman as president or a black person? around the world, women have held offices as Prime Minister, Chancellor etc, as well as black men and no one thinks anything of it. it's the 21rst century and America is acting like we're on the verge of a shocking new evolution just by ENTERTAINING the idea of a female or black president.

As a Feminist, i OF COURSE will feel a stronger sympathy to the plight of women in this country. we ARE a minority too (by definition), but I am very much aware of the racism that stares black people in the face. i have a long personal history in which many black people had prominent positions in my life. my family is very closely connected to a family of black ethnicity (Vil and Sam know who i'm talking about) and I'm far from naive. I'm not one of those people who thinks racism is dead or "not an issue"...if anything its gotten worse because its become more covert.

I dont think ANYONE should try to compare the two (sexism/racism) ...some people, such as black women experience BOTH...and would we really want to ask a black woman "which is worse"?

I am strongly leaning towards Hillary for this election, YES its in large part because she's a woman and I want to help "make history" by voting a woman into the white house, BUT i can honestly say that Barack Obama's message has appealed to me too...so I'm not TOTALLY decided on which i'll vote for. BOTH candidates are excellent choices in my opinion...the strongest we've seen in A LONG TIME. One thing is for sure...i DAMN SURE AINT VOTING FOR A REPUBLICAN LOL!
 
personally i think both Barack and Hillary were a little bit foolish. If they were to work together they would be a much stronger force in this election. only problem would be who would take second billing to the other.
 
that was the initial speculation back as early as 06' that Hillary or Obama would take each other as his/her running mate for this presidential election. i think that would definately have been the perfect 1/2 punch!
 
well the problem would be who would agree to be vice... I recall recently reading that Obama 'laughed off' remarks by the Clinton campaign about them running together... the way it sounded to me was that he's feeling himself and getting a little arrogant... but I don't know.

I'm for Hillary myself, and it's not just because she's a woman [though thats really cool]. I'm really behind her for her HEALTHCARE designs, not to mention all the OTHER good opinions she has.

Obama seems nice, don't get me wrong..... and please, don't anyone take this the wrong way, but sometimes I wonder if he would be giving Hillary SUCH a run for her money if he were white.

I know that sounds like an awful thing to say, and I'm by no means trying to insinuate that he's not a good candidate OR a worthy opponent, but I agree with this article... people are AFRAID of being racist [at least outspokenly so]... it's much less socially sanctioned than being sexist, and I think that's a big factor in this race, as shameful as that may be.

We'd all be full of SHIT if we tried to say that race or gender WASNT an issue, because everytime we turn around, people are measuring how the candidates are getting votes, be it by the gender, ethnicity, income, etc. of the voters.

No one even CARES about Mccain, he's basically a figure head for the republican party... everyone's pretty set against electing another republican, so now the question comes down to which democrat we want and inevitably, when one loses, there's going to be PLENTY of talk going on about whether it was race or gender that defeated them.

The talk is already leaning towards what are we MORE okay with, his race or 'mrs.' president?

And I'm not saying racism doesn't exist, because I still see it every day... but sexism is out there too and men are LESS afraid to say 'go make me a sandwich' to a woman than they are to say something equivalent to a black person. sexism is considered the lesser of two evils, BECAUSE of the social stigma regarding America's history with slavery and the general atmosphere of sensitivity to race in mainstream culture.... but women have been making progress for WAY LONGER [ womens suffrage in the 1920s compared to what, the 1960s for universal suffrage?].... so it's not such 'fresh' issue.
 
its interesting you say that, because that's what Geraldine Ferraro recently came under fire for saying. You'll recall that she herself made history for being the first woman on major presidential ticket (she was the vice presidential candidate and running mate to a male ) in 1984.

She was, until recently, working in Hillary's camp until she made a statement that Obama would not be doing as well as he is in contesting Hillary if he wasnt black. Suddenly she was the scum of the earth for saying it, but really...WOULD ANY OTHER man runinng against Hillary have gotten this far? Edwards was crushed and people had begun uttering "Hillary in 08" almost immediately after Bush stole..I MEAN ( :rolleyes: ) "won" the election in '04

I honestly agree with you. I think sexism IS basically considered the lesser of the two evils. A man saying something utterly chauvanistic/sexist to a woman even in this day and age (and after nearly 50 years of "Feminism") is still going to be more "Acceptable" than someone pulling a "Don Imus" or anything similar and yet, its CLEAR that race/gender ARE an issue in this election. Otherwise you wouldnt have IDIOTS like Rush Limbaugh saying SEXIST shit like "Hillary Clinton is not a viable candidate because we'd have to watch her grow old in the white house and is that really something we want to see?" like some of the president we've already h ad werent ALREADY OLDER THAN GOD when they got in? :rolleyes: Why is it that when some of these "commentators" talk about Hillary, they just HAVE to bring in "looks"? as if LOOKS are a major credential for electability? if that isnt a sexist slant I dont know what is.

I'm for Hillary myself, also because of the Healthcare platform among other things...AND YES, because she's a woman and i think its about TIME we had a WOMAN as president. other countries around the world have had or currently DO have female heads of state and yet its so "controversial" to consider in America in this day and age? its pathetic.

As for Obama, I dont find any FAULT with him, but you can see everyone in the media, especially from the right wing side is looking for whatever they can, from Jeremiah Wright to even his middle name! now how STUPID is that? On the radio when certain DJ's on certain radio stations have their segments and they have callers voicing their opinion on who they support, many times I've heard the black listeners say "I'm for Obama" and when asked why...the only reason they give is "because he's one of us, he's black" or something like that. so OBVIOUSLY race AND gender are motivating factors in this election season but if thats the ONLY reason a person is voting for one or the other...i do think that's kind of short sighted.
 
I disagree. I think that the truth is that Obama is a dynamic force, a superior speaker to any of the other candidates, has very good ideas (believes in Universal Healthcare as well), and is untainted by the Iraq war, a claim that even Hillary Clinton cannot make.

The truth about race and elections is that there are far fewer Black candidates that have held ANY office than female ones. It is not even close. Black candidates routinely see their support among whites erode, often precipitously, on REAL election day (Novermber).

I addition, I also do not find that Sexism is more tolerated in our society. While this country is quick to tear apart Don Imus (who by the way, did more to have Black voices on the radio and spoke more openly about racism in elections than any other major commentator), there was little said about the ad that played on white fears of interracial sex to destroy Harold Ford's historic candidacy in Tennessee. In addition, Harvey Gantt in North Carolina can attest to to the destructiveness of race politics in both of his failed campaigns against Jesse Helms in the 90s. There is no modern female equivalent in major elections. You will never see a man saying on television, "You would have gotten that job, but because Hillary Clinton is female it will go to a woman." But when I saw that white hand crush a pink slip in that ad, I could have cried. And Harvey Gantt went down, just like Harold Ford after that white woman winked at the camera and said, "Hey Harold, call me!"

I see what you are saying to a degree, but I would argue that the evidence is not there, especially when you consider that women make up a MAJORITY of the electorate. Blacks candidates depend on white support, women need no one. That fact alone greatly limits the effect of sexism even if one assume that is is as bad as is claimed here.
 
I will say this much, I would vote for McCain before Clinton. Especially if the fabled McCain/Rice ticket actually happens.

Having worked for the Clinton White House, there is no way on Earth I could vote for Hillary. The stories I could tell.....Between her and Tipper Gore, I can't make up my mind who I do not like more.

Ask anyone who worked for that White House, not politicians, guys like me, White House Liason Office (WHLO), WAMO, WACA, Secret Service, and I guarantee you will get the same response.

The fluff you see on TV is not what goes on when the press isn't around or no election is at stake. The Clintons in general are shrewd, but the worst part was how they especially her and Tipper treated their military and other staff.

Maybe because I am a Marine and expect a certain behavior from the CINC and First Lady, I don't know, but from my vantage, the Angels would have to come down and command me to vote for her.

On paper she has ideas, not better than Obama's such as cabinet makeup, transparency, and prison reform, but after Bosnia, Columbia, the "crying" incident, the "I don't know if he's a Muslim", etc. She is showing her cards that remind me of what I saw with my own two eyes.

As far as Bill goes, outside of his blatant disrespect of Military custom and courtesies, he's OK, Al Gore, is a great guy and very conversational, and Chelsea is nice too.

But the Republicans are right this time. It's not sexist, they know what the Democrats have been trying to hide all this time.

But don't take my word for it, ask someone else who worked with Marine/AirForce One, Secret Service, etc. And tell me how many like responses you get.

And before you ask, I came to the Obama Camp really late, I actually liked Paul, Huckabee, Kuccinich, and Biden. But out of all in both parties who ran I knew years ago the only way I would vote for a Clinton is if their name was Bill or Chelsea.
 
Oh, don't get me wrong, Garrick, I'm not saying Obama ISN'T a qualified or viable candidate... in fact, I can't really find fault in him myself, except for that thing about him not agreeing to joint ticket with Clinton, simply because it came off kind of arrogant.

In my first post I was kind of hurried, I forgot to point out that this little game goes both ways. I also hate to say THIS, but do you think Hillary would still be in this race if she were a MAN?? The other democrats dropped out early because they KNEW they couldn't compete.... they could be the greatest candidates in the WORLD.... but this country has been run by white men since 1776 and now America has a chance to show how far its come.... you think anyone will pass that up?

SCORES of people wanted Al Gore to run in this election, scores more regret NOT voting for him when Bush won the FIRST time.... but Al Gore, he's a smart one.... he KNEW he wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell, and you know WHY? Because in our society, our culture perpetuates the desire for PROGRESSIVE thinking... and if you're not open minded, then you're not displaying socially sanctioned behavior and thus, your thoughts, and therefore you, are distasteful. It's AMAZING what kind of behaviors we can train out of people by making them taboo. Of course, there are people who break social expectations, people who go against the grain, but for the most part, people want to be accepted and so they internalize inappropriate thoughts and desires.

For YEARS, America has been saying 'give us a GOOD [female or black] candidate, and we'll vote for them, but since the only good candidates are old white men, it's moot point'. But now, whoa, we've got two decent runners.... one's a woman, and one's black. NOW we have a problem.... now everyone's got to put their money where their mouth is.... and suddenly the SAME THING that is their crutch against each other becomes the thing that keeps them ALIVE against a white opponent and to a degree, even amongst the democrats. [theres plenty of people who don't really follow politics who are going to the polls to vote because they WANT a woman president, or, like the quote above, he's black, he's one of us] So then it becomes WHICH factor is more sensitive, racism or sexism.... and let me tell you, in politics, a white man would MUCH RATHER be caught saying something that could be construed sexist as opposed to racist. Being a racist will get you publicly crucified, but being a sexist will only get you a slap on the wrists. 'oh, shame on you, that was insensitive' as opposed to being COMPLETELY negatively recieved.

You only have to listen to what's being said to understand that Hillary's under WAY more fire than Obama. I'm talking about in the MEDIA, among the POLITICIONS. They have criticised Hillary for the way she dresses, the way she's aged, for christ's sake... something we don't even CARE about with the male candidates, but not a WORD is uttered about his race... because that's just not kosher-- and it SHOULDN'T BE. Just like the fact that she doesn't look like Meryl Streep SHOULDNT be the topic of discussion.

The thing is, they're both democrats, so we can't dismiss them because we don't want a republican, and they're both decent enough candidates, so we can't dismiss them that way. Inevitably, there WILL be talk that the losing candidate was discriminated against, and the question is... which jagged little pill is America more comfortable with swallowing?
 
The Obama response about not joining the ticket came off arrogant because he was responding to some calls for him to bow out of a race he was WINNING to be Hillary Clinton's Veep. So his response was pointedly sarcastic and a bit understandably caustic. I cannot blame him. As this has gone on, I like Hillary Clinton less than before. I think that she is angling for the actual primary process to be overturned by the superdelegates, and it smacks more and more to me of her using her husband's connections to take the nomination away from someone who is clearly ahead, and ahead to stay.
 
I have to say...I'm getting worried. This goes beyond personal preference, race OR gender...i think EVERYONE is getting too focused on these primaries and that's actually what the republicans want. you have supporters of Hillary who say they'd vote Mccain over Obama and Obama supports who say they'd vote Mccain over Hillary. WHY!? what would be the POINT? to get a "3rd term Bush administration" in the white house so American can get fucked without vaseline for FOUR MORE YEARS!?

I HATE to say this...i HATE it...because I'm a FEMINIST and I'm PRO WOMAN...but I AM starting to feel that Hillary is doing more harm than good at this point and i think "election fatigue" is settling over the country too. Her methods and the things she's saying are making her seem less appealing across the board, though WOMEN by and large are still standing by her...im looking at the tactics and the strategy, especially with what happened in the PA primary.

I was a supporter for Hillary BUT I'd GLADLY vote Obama (IF for NOTHING ELSE to STOP Mccain from getting the victory) and I would LOVE to see Hillary be his running mate as VP...that ticket would STILL set history in more than one way.

The Democrat party could be torn apart over this and the Republicans would walk RIGHT back into the white house.

This goes BEYOND racism/sexism...its getting to the point where someone needs to make an honorable descision for the bigger picture, the greater goal in all of this...to take the white house back from the republicans.
 
I agree. I think that the issue that is emerging is that Hillary waited 4 years too late to run and now she feels as if this is her ONLY shot, so she is saying damn it all and running on even the math and the sentiment of voters does not support it.

I will say this. If Hillary gets this nomination by a superdelegate hijacking, I will find it VERY hard to vote for her in November. I think that she is doing three things that hurt the Democrats TERRIBLY.

1) By not bowing out, she is causing the factions of the party that support each candidate to become entrenched, making many moderate Dems consider McCain.

2) By attacking Obama with increasing fervor and shrillness, she is destroying the chance for them to both be on the ticket due to bad blood and giving McCain a playbook to use to attack Obama on the lection as well as political cover since he can say that HILLARY made these very points FIRST.

3)She is allowing McCain to quietly go about his business, gaining strength when they BOTH should be killing him and his party for the state of the country in whose care they were entrusted for the last 8 years.
 
Back
Top