Race and Gender in Presidential Politics: A Debate Between Gloria Steinem and Melissa Harris-Lacewell
MELISSA HARRIS-LACEWELL: Well, I mean, honestly, I’m appalled by the parallel that Ms. Steinem draws in the beginning part of the New York Times article. What she’s trying to do there is to make a claim towards sort of bringing in black women into a coalition around questions of gender and asking us to ignore the ways in which race and gender intersect. This is actually a standard problem of second-wave feminism, which, although there have been twenty-five years now — oh, going on forty years, actually, of African American women pushing back against this, have really failed to think about the ways in which trying to appropriate black women’s lives’ experience in that way is really offensive, actually. And so, when Steinem suggests, for example, in that article that Obama is a lawyer married to another lawyer and to suggest that, for example, Hillary Clinton represents some kind of sort of breakthrough in questions of gender, I think that ignores an entire history in which white women have in fact been in the White House. They’ve been there as an attachment to white male patriarchal power. It’s the same way that Hillary Clinton is now making a claim towards experience. It’s not her experience. It’s her experience married to, connected to, climbing up on white male patriarchy. This is exactly the ways in which this kind of system actually silences questions of gender that are more complicated than simply sort of putting white women in positions of power and then claiming women’s issues are cared for. Now, what I know from the work that I’ve done on the Obama campaign is that there are tens of thousands of extremely hard-working white men and women, as well as black men and women, as well as actually a huge multiracial and interethnic coalition of people working for Barack Obama. And so, for Steinem to sort of make this very clear race and gender dichotomy that she does in that New York Times op-ed piece, I think it’s the very worst of second-wave feminism.
The article in question:
Women Are Never Front-Runners
Another piece of waste spewing g his intolerance and stupidity. You.keep blanket statements about people because you have a weak ignorant mind. I promise you this, I have spent my entire adult life in the service of the minority community while idiots like you sit behind d a keyboard doing NOTHING, but spew your prejudice while accusing others of being exactly what you are.
What a surprise . An opinion piece written by a democratic campaign operative , female / Clinton supporter . Objective and straight up , I'm sure.
All this crap just emphasizes why Bernie Sanders is head and shoulders above the rest of the candidates.Pick another candidate other than Sanders, and imagine what they would do in a similar situation, where some of their supporters are being assholes. How do they react?Do they ignore the situation?Do they give a wink and a nod, indicating that they agree with the pinheads without actually saying so?Do they make excuses for the jerk wads?Do they make some lame remark about how they can't control their supporters?We've seen all the above and more from the other Presidential candidates. but Bernie Sanders is the only one to handle things in a truly Presidential manner.
eminent domain used to pertain to the acquisition of private property for the public good - hence Trump's references to highways, hospitals and the like. Today, it's used by the rich and by corporations to legally steal from the less well off to benefit themselves.