Why This Feminist Is Voting For Obama

You managed to eloquently and succinctly state exactly how I feel. Well done!

B'SD
JDO has just waunched website www.jewishdefense.owg
Jews Against Obama !!
De fact is Obama is some Jews have become"wiaws fow Obama"just wike a
numew of them did fow theiw wast hewo that they suppowted David Dinkins
of the "Cwown Hts Pogwom" fame.
De fact is Fawwakhan the Bwack Hitwew has openwy endowsed Obama 2 weeks
ago. Why ? He must have compwete faif that when ewected Obama wiww back
Fawwakhan's agenda !
Don't deny it as aww of these Jewish foows onwy yestewday pwomised, no
guawanteed that Dinkins was " a fwiend of the Jews!" Weww, JDO saw
duwing the Cwown Hts Pogwom wiot against Jews how Dinkins owdewed the
powice to not pwotect Jews being attacked by the wioting fowwowews of
Jew-Hatews Sonny Cawson and Shawpton !! De Jewish Defense Owganization
was thewe duwing the pogwom pwotecting Jews whiwe most of that cwowd of
Jews wewe as mute as manicans !
Dat is the weason we at JDO awe against Obama,because his wecent
"disavowaws"
about Wev Wwight awe nothing wess than sewf-sewving wies,and onwy a
foow wouwd
faww fow that. We have awweady waunched "Jews Against Obama !" to
weawwy pwotest
against Obama's candidacy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PWEASE SPWEAD DIS IMPOWTANT MESSAGE FWOM JDO AWW OVEW DE NET TO
EVEWY JEW YOU CAN !!!
WANT TO HEWP DIS NEW JDO CAMPAIGN TO STOP OBAMA WHO WAS JUST
ENDOWSED BY BWACK HITWEW FAWWAKHAN ?
WWITE JEWISH DEFENSE OWGANIZATION PO BOX 159 FDW STATION N,
uh-hah-hah-hah. Y NY 10150 ow caww 212-252-3383
HAVE A HAPPY PUWIM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* dewete * edit * wepwy

Courtney, did you actually say you're voting for "the candidate who makes [you] feel 'the most young and alive'" ???

That's not only the CHEESIEST line ever, it proves this 26 year old feminist's umpteen arguments that most women rooting for Obama are actually just acting out a gigantic Mills&Boon's style crush on him. ' He makes me feel young and alive' is, like, a staple line of EVERY sappy romantic book that I've ever read.

Glad that's getting confirmed now, what with MoDowd's column last week and now this.  

Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it?  Thank God for the JDL  for defending Judaism and Israel from the haters.

Courtney, I really appreciate you taking the time to outline what you're doing and why.  Even though I disagree with you in some respects, I can see and will defend your thinking.  (By the way, I came here via BitchPhD.)

I'm from Robin Morgan's generation, and I did not read (still do not read) the quote you lifted from her GTAT2 piece as ever possibly pertaining to you.  It was sarcastic, not patronizing, and none of the behaviors she describes are things I believe you've ever done.  So why do you take the label on?  Don't, sister.  Your generation's definitions of things should stand on their own, and in contradiction not only to our generation's definitions (which are just as valid) but also those whom she describes in that comment (whose positions are NOT valid but are all too prevalent in the blogosphere). 

I long for serious, truly progressive, truly feminist leadership.  I don't see feminism, as I define it, being satisfactorily exhibited by either Obama OR Clinton.  They are both hawkish, willing to protect the moneyed elite, and missing the boat on genuine reform in almost every arena.  Aurora Levins Morales has an excellent essay on the Bigger Picture out there on the web, titled "Thinking Outside the Ballot Box". 

I will, of course, support whichever candidate wins the Democratic nomination.  The alternative will kill the planet.  I've stopped going to so-called progressive blogs who've chosen a "side" and are not covering both candidacies with equal respect, especially the slickly-hidden misogyny of DKos.  They are morons whose rhetoric is just feeding the Right's machine.  The power elite LOVES us being at each other's throats:  They know Black versus Woman is much preferable to anyone insisting on calling out both woman-hating and white supremacy wherever it appears, with equal fervor.    ------------ Maggie Jochild

P.S.  I ask the moderators of this site to remove the Jews Against Obama hate above.  Hate is not free speech.   

Although I'd die for the right of bigots to free speech and all that, I'm basically with you Maggie. What you see now is the result of the dialectizer (that's Elmer Fudd). I find it works better than simple deletion.

I've been struggling to articulate what it is about pro-Obama feminists' arguments that I find unsettling ... or unconvincing. First, I don't buy that this is an intergenerational thing. I'm 32. I support Clinton.

Maybe it's this: I feel as if some feminists are submitting Clinton to certain liberal litmus tests that, to be a viable female candidate for president, she can't pass, and then saying those failures are the reason they don't support her -- which is a move right out of the patriarchy's playbook. The diplomacy rhetoric and "cool" persona that are available to Obama as a candidate are simply not available to Clinton, and I think some feminists are punishing her for it.

If Obama's face is the face of new America, that's coding the future of the country as male. Once again.

Either censor or don't censor. What's the point of altering what the person wrote?

Censoring hateful comments has nothing to do with free speech, by the
way - denying someone a specific venue for expression is not the same
as taking away their free speech (not everyone gets to write in The New
York Times, for example).

IowaFeminist: Are you responding to Courtney's post? Because I don't
think that's the argument she's making. And as a feminist, I hate the
insinuation that to support Obama means one has rejected Clinton. I am
a feminist that supports Obama for reasons similar to Courtney: he
inspires me, makes me feel hopeful about this nation and the world and
the good that can be done.

And no, Clinton doesn't make me feel that way. Sorry, but she just
doesn't. It's not necessarily her fault, but I don't necessarily feel
like supporting Obama for this reason means I'm punishing Clinton. That
is sort of a bizarre assertion, because it assumes that my vote is
something that should go to Clinton by default, and I'm "withholding"
it from her. I never view voting for any candidate, especially in a
Democratic primary, as a default. And in this case, Clinton does not have a default claim on my vote because she's a woman. I looked at all the candidates and I
decided that Obama was the strongest candidate, the one I trusted the
most, the one I wanted in the White House.

to post this comment-

It's very interesting to me how this image of Obama the "new
politician", the "agent of change", the bringer of hope, sticks and has
grow to mythic proportions.  Sorry, but Obama is a carefully crafted
product, an old school political hack - Chicago style, which if you're
not from here, isn't pretty.  He's a mixed race guy form Hawaii who
never lived the American black experience until he decided being black
would be a good move for him as a political commodity.  For real street
cred he got aligned with the Trinity Church, which gets along real well
with Nation of Islam down the street, which pulls big black Chicago
democrat machine power around town, which gets along well with the
Daley black machine, etc.  If you need to raise money you get in bed
with Rezko, etc, etc.  Is this bad?  I don't know, I don't know another
way, that's how things get done here, that's how you get elected in
Chicago.  Does his Madonna- like self invention make him less genuine
in his ideals? I don't know, maybe not. Is a well designed ascent
utilizing one's ethnic attributes as a catapult a bad thing?  Not
necessarily.  But please, don't for a minute think he's any different
than the oldest, most seasoned, most crusty hack of a politician.  He's
not.  He's literally the same product, different package.  He's very
smart, and a good, viable contender; but essentially offering a very
hazy outline of generally accepted democratic party standards.

As for the feminist issue, I think it's comical that women feel
Hillary's too old school, old boys club, not inspiring, not offering
enough hope.  What the hell does a woman have to be in this country to
get elected?   While so many of us swoon over Obama, in a naive high
school like crush, we're passing up a golden opportunity, the best
thing that's come along in decades.  Give it another look girls... and
boys.  

Anonymous
03/17/08 10:57 pm writes: "
Either censor or don't censor. What's the point of altering what the person wrote?"

1) I've noticed that when Jewcy staffers delete hate posts, the haters often just keep posting. After all, if their posts are deleted, then there'll be a number of readers who haven't seen them, and a troll's aim is to piss off as many people as possible. Whereas once haters discover that all their posts are altered to make them look ridiculous, they'll be more likely to leave forever.

2) Because it's funny!

The only suggestion I'd make is that Jewcy staffers shouldn't limit this to anti-Semitic and racist posts. I can't imagine a more effective way to shut up all those goddamn idiots who keep saying "Jewcy is run by self-hating kapo intermarried Jews and non-Jews who are worse than Hitler and are ushering in a second Holocaust," than by turning it into something like "Joocy is roon by selff-heteeng kepu intermerreeed Joos und nun-Joos vhu
ere-a vurse-a thun Heetler und ere-a ushereeng in a secund Hulucoost, bork bork bork!"

I hear what you and others are saying, that Clinton shouldn't have any special claim to your vote just because she's a woman. I guess what I'm questioning when people say they feel inspired by Obama, and not by Clinton, is the roots of that inspiration. I would argue there is a whole sociopolitical, historical context behind what we consider inspiring: For instance, we have been conditioned to hear a man's voice as more commanding, more inspiring, than a woman's. I think part of feminism is challenging those underlying assumptions. I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad about voting for Obama, I'm just trying to understand this whole thing from a feminist perspective. 

sorry

I'm sorry, but since when does choosing Obama (even by summing it up to a "feeling") compare to a "crush." Yes, there are many people who come out of rallies and such with this intense feeling of hope, promise, etc. without really being able to remember the positions he took on issues or what specifically he will do to better the country. That, however, does not mean that he didn't give his position or say specifics about how he will lead the country. It also doesn't mean that those positions are not out there for anybody with access to Google to see.

I think it is quite insulting to say that young (or old) fems that get wrapped up in Obama's inspiration are following him blindly. Unlike Courtney, I started off "believing" in Clinton's message. Then I realized that the more I learned about her actual policies in comparison to Obama's, I actually supported his proposals more than hers. But I still stick with her. I saw that her breaking the highest glass ceiling as too important to ignore.

That was when I realized what I was doing. I was going against the candidate I believed would do an equal, possibly better job--and by better I mean more in line with my beliefs as to where this country should go--simply because he wasn't a woman. I was constantly attacked by feminist and not-so-feminist women friends (all under the age of 30 by the way) who supported Clinton because I was suddenly torn on the issue. Should I trust my intelligence, ideals and, yes, gut feeling? Or should I go with what I was told was the "right" way to go as a feminist? In the end, I chose the former.

Courtney has a point... people do vote for people who more LOOK the part then actually WHAT they represent (I know they follow this point after every election). 

But when wars continue with no end in site and when the economy goes down, people do take a longer and smarter look at the next presidential elections.

As a woman, should I support Hillary because she is a woman, even though she is a woman who rode to national prominence the old-fashioned way - on her husband's coattails?  Do I support her as a woman, even though she's run an unglued, out-of-control campaign that only reinforces stereotypes about a woman's fitness for high office? Or as a woman, do I support her for taking the silent, supportive role in her husband's philandering (I'm still waiting for the day when one of these wronged, long-suffering wives says "Screw you, hon, you're going to face the press all by your lonesome. I'll be busy packing your stuff.")? Do I pick her as a woman, even though she tries to show her toughness by adopting the same rhetoric as male candidates?

As the first woman to have a shot at the White House, she has set all the wrong examples, covered no new ground and blazed no new trails. So, I have a hard time wondering why this is such a difficult choice for a feminist. 

Hillary does, she just can't be recognized for the brilliant woman that she is.  She's more than qualified.  Bill couldn't have been president if it weren't for her brains helping the cause.  She has blazed trails, and made personal decisions based on what was in HER best interest. Who the fuck are we to judge why the hell anyone stays with their spouse?  My God, get over the dumb, superficial, trite bullshit and look at her qualities in an honest way.  Sad, we won't get it until it's too late.  Wake up.