NOW-NY is really, really, REALLY upset that Ted Kennedy endorsed Barack Obama:
“Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard. Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few. Women have buried their anger that his support for the compromises in No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bogus drug benefit brought us the passage of these flawed bills. We have thanked him for his ardent support of many civil rights bills, BUT women are always waiting in the wings.
“And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment! He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman president, just not “this” one)
They go on like that for awhile — feel free to read the whole thing. It’ll prepare you for the press release posted earlier this month on their site:
Then there was that movie where Jodie Foster portrayed the true story of woman who was ganged raped in a bar while others looked on and encouraged the realization. Still others pretended the rape didn’t happen. In short, gang raping of women is commonplace in our culture both physically and metaphorically.
This past week, we witnessed just such a phenomenon involving men who are afraid of a powerful woman. Hillary Clinton, in her quest for her Presidential nomination, has in fact endured infantile taunting and wildly inappropriate commentary. Indeed we have witnessed almost comical attacks by John Edwards who in turn sided with Barak Obama as both snickered at Clinton’s “breakdown,” which consisted of a very short dewy-eyed moment. Now John Kerry, who should certainly know better after his own “swiftboating,” has joined the playground gang.
But here’s the news. Every woman knows how it feels! There are those who will dismiss, defend or even shame those around them into believing that we progressives are making a mountain out of a mole hill. But that’s the game plan of the patriarchal system that has persisted for millennia. Because they can’t frighten Hillary they’ve decided to control her with the time-old trick of patriarchal ridicule. Women, you know what I mean!
Ahem. Every woman knowing how it feels does not translate to “we need a woman in the White House so badly that our only requirement is a pair of X chromosomes”!!
So let’s not let young women and little girls down, whether it’s on the playground, in the workplace, or in the political arena. Young women need role models. They need to know they can be powerful and control their own lives. By putting Hillary in the Oval Office we send that message loud and clear for all to hear. Little girls everywhere need to know that to be important they don’t have to emulate Brittany Spears or other similarly-exploited women. We can do it!
Think about the legacy we’ll leave behind when we support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. Let’s put a stop to the psychological “gang banging” of women and girls. Let’s stand up and be counted by way of the hard-won votes we can now cast!
NOW’s multiple rants are a wholly offensive attempt to bully women. They’re saying “if you don’t support Hillary, you are turning your back on your gender”.
This is the worst kind of identity politics, and I resent the implications enormously. It’s this kind of crap that led to the utterly ludicrous interviews of black women last week in South Carolina, with idiotic questions about how they would choose between their race and their gender.
Have women really spent all these years working for recognition and equal status, only to be told how to think? Really?
Enough! If the highest trump in Hillary’s deck is her gender — if that’s THE reason to support her regardless of issues or positions — then she does not deserve the presidency.
Don’t you dare tell me — a free-thinking, independent, educated woman — what to do.
Gross. If we’re going to play identity politics: young women need role models, but young black people don’t?
It’s so stupid it makes my eyes bleed.
So sad… it seems that NOW was able to deal with Ted K’s involvement in the real death of a woman calmly (almost as if they ignored it), but then they freak over the “metaphorical gang-raping” of Hillary.
And, it is not as if this was unexpected. After all even I knew that the Kennedys and the Clintons weren’t exactly best buds.
One more thought: since Caroline Kennedy also endorsed Sen. Obama, does that mean she was one of metaphorical rapists? If so, does that mean that NOW is not only racist, but also homophobic?
It would be fun to watch – if only it weren’t so sad…
~EdT.
NOW has been, for years, radically pro-“anything resembling a woman’s cause”.
You see it their way or no way.
Many years ago, I was somewhat interested in joining their organization, but I saw their extreme narrow-mindedness even then. My view is that I would like to be treated as a person. As an older woman, I still enjoy & appreciate having doors opened for me. I like being called “Ma’am” in a respectful way, altho there was a time when I objected to the term. (I finally got over that bit of nonsense!)
Unfortunately, in my opinion, Ted Kennedy’s endorsement of Barack Obama might easily become a mixed blessing. Long known as a flaming philanderer, Ted Kennedy’s flagrant disregard for & dismissal of the female gender was encapsulized (-ated?) in the MJC (K?) incident, where — in his seeming drunken state — he abandoned his female companion who subsequently drowned.
I question Mr. Obama’s “embrace” of Mr. Kennedy’s endorsement. I question Mr. Obama’s integrity. Certainly the Kennedy nod of approval will carry great weight among many other, equally-bigoted in the voting public. It shouldn’t be this way, but it is!
What bothers me, equally, is the national media’s picking up on this latest “news flash”, and featuring this scoundrel on most of their broadcasts. If I’d had my way, and I didn’t, of course, Mr. Kennedy would have been relegated to page 36Z long ago.
There was never any doubt in my mind that he would not endorse a woman for President. It doesn’t have anything to do with “this woman”. BUT, what does this say about Barack Obama? That will remain to be seen, won’t it?
P.S. I think you stated, & very recently, that you were glad the candidates were finally getting back to talking about the issues. It didn’t last very long, did it? We’re back to the sameoh sameoh … personalities, prejudices and dirty politics.
We should all get out our shovels!
We should note that NOW’s national office put out a statement about the Kennedy endorsement, too: http://www.now.org/press/01-08/01-28.html
It’s rather different than the NY chapter’s.
Hi John — yes, they sound much saner than the NY bunch.
Goldenrod — I’m afraid I don’t agree that Kennedy would not have endorsed a woman. In fact, I think the endorsement has nothing at all to do with gender.
FWIW — I knew a man who was gravely injured in an accident, but was abandoned by his male friends, who left the scene of the accident because they were drunken, irresponsible jackasses. So I don’t necessarily assign sexism to Kennedy’s abandonment of Mary Jo Kopechne. IMHO, the Chappaquiddick incident was an example of the very same jackass behavior, combined with ridiculous, blatant preferential treatment.