Labels: Gender Issues, Politics
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
Labels: Gender Issues, Politics
At 9/25/2006 09:41:00 PM, Don't I Know You?
surely not even Jerry Falwell is clueless enough to publicly decry Mrs. Clinton's run for the presidency on grounds of her gender.
that would be more unacceptable, even in conservative crowds, than being anti-Hilary based on who she is.
never did buy into the idea that God tells preachers who to stump for, and now, having voted with my feet, don't have to put up with it any more. YES!
Sadly, as many of you probably know, women have been "demonized" for centuries...this is just one more sad attempt to diminish our authority.
Who cares if he said it because she was a woman or someone who advocates for social justice broadly speaking...I am so tired of religious folks who think they have the fast track to God and use that to demonize anyony...(read Elaine Pagels "The Origin of Satan"...
Obviously he knows just potent she just might be as a candidate and as the president...he just has a different take on what that potency might be...
As women all we can do is continue to uphold our integrity, speak clearly (and loudly), and believe in our selves and one another.
Usually when women move into leadership positions everything changes (and often for the better: no more status quo; more emphasis on working together...)at least that has been my experience
At 9/25/2006 10:54:00 PM, Unknown
Sherri, it's funny that you mention that. My husband was just talking to me last night about how that certain high-level conservatives (okay, he named names, but I won't since this is the www and not a private conversation) will never come to the point where they support women in "high" (for lack of a better word) ministry positions because of their "can of worms" mentality. They're so concerned that if they budge on that issue, they'd have to change their stance on homosexuality somewhere not too far down the line. It's just ludicrous to base your theology in one area on how you believe about a completely random topic!
At 9/26/2006 06:44:00 AM, Don't I Know You?
somewhere along the line remains the point that restricting your vote to female candidates on the assumption that because they are female the difference they'll make is desirable is the same as refusing to vote for female candidates on the assumption that their gender will make a difference.
the argument is not over whether women are different than men. it's about determining that they are "better suited" for office by virtue of gender.
I think Falwell's comment was directly related to the fact that Hillary is a woman, a woman with a brain and the potential to bring an end to what some consider to be the "woman's place". Right-wingers are so threatened by her that they can't even hear her voice without smoke coming from their collective ears. It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic.
And yes, it is because of her ideology, however, she is just one democrat. They don’t hiss and shout when other vocal dems speak their minds. They hate her more than they hated her husband!! Just last week I heard Bill O’Reilly say he thought that Bill Clinton was a good president!! WHAT??? He had nothing good to say about Bill when he was in office, yet in the light of time Bill gives the other Bill props? Ask him about Hillary though? I wonder what O’Reilly would say? It is the conservative, evangelical, right-winger’s squinty-eyed view that everyone needs to follow their rules. “Women are not to lead men, period – end of discussion.”
I would add to that last rant ;0) that what Falwell is saying is that Hillary will cause more of a stir in his camp than if Satan himself ran. In the past many pundits have compared Hillary to Satan. The only difference in their eyes, is the fact that Satan is depicted in their lore as a man. This is all about gender and the conservatives would fight against her on that position alone. (been there, been one, understand the motivation…praising God that I can see differently now!)
Thanks for letting me fume.
"Women are not just up against a gender battle for equality in these camps but a much larger monster looms behind the door of conversation, ready to pounce, when the topic comes to the floor. When women are unaware of the linkage to the 'slippery slope' mentality, it is quickly becomes impossible for even a civil dialogue to take place and frustration reaches an all time high."
Sheri can you (or anyone else) expound on some of these linkages? I think that might be enlightening for me. Thanks
At 9/30/2006 09:19:00 PM, Julie
Sherri - you're right with the slippery slope thing. It goes that way all the time. Even with people who are generally open to women being people and all that. It always jumps to the homosexuality and abortion cards. Now I have my own opinions on homosexuality and am generally pissed that the feminist movement has been hijacked by the abortion debate, but its all apples and oranges. The people who go down the slippery slope assume that homosexuality and abortion are sins and hence are equating being a women with a call from God with sin. I usually shut them up by saying "are you saying its a sin to be a woman". I know it doesn't logically follow, but it makes them consider their words...
I didn't hear it, but honestly Falwell annoys the crap out of me, so I probably would have turned it anyway!