I read today's op-ed in the NY Times and the last part about how, Hillary, the woman is seen as divivisive by her sex whereas Obama ,the man, is seen as unifying by his race really infuriated and disappointed me. Were Obama to be a black woman, would she be unifying by her race or divisive by her gender?
Anyways, what really disturbs me is that if a man and a woman show the same behavior ( " use the same card" ) they are perceived differently. It turns out to be a great advantage for the man and a disadvantage for the woman!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html?em&ex=1199941200&en=e3d49753c7f6da32&ei=5087%0A
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Women Are Never Front-Runners?!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Catching up on US news I saw this article and I totally agree with you Evis. Why is it that Barack and Hillary can use the same election-campaigning tools and they are perceived by the public in completely different ways? First of all, all political views aside, I think its unfair for Hillary. Can you imagine just for a second? How if you portray yourself as a woman running for president you are "playing the gender card" (and what, that doesn´t value anything?) or if you don´t portray yourself as a woman running for president than you are loosing votes exponentially fast. She has to portray herself somewhere in the middle, and seriously, better her than me, that would be a tough job.
The other thought that crossed my mind and perhaps the author was even suggesting this: since black men got the vote well before women, in some twisted way it is almost "right" or "chronological" that Barack gets the nomination because blacks "gain things" before women. Say whaattt?
Post a Comment