Sorry, Gendered Criticisms Displace Substantive Ones

Quick follow-up on Sen. Clinton as the new Ralph Nader and why criticizing her, or anyone else, inside any kind of gendered framework reflects rather harshly on the critic and not really at all on her.

First of all, gendered criticism, even from progressives, is no small problem. Ann Bartow of Feminist Law Professors cites... more than a handful of sexist slurs from various, and nominally progressive, *Democrats* compiled by Erica Barnett

I’ve said it before–but because some Slog readers seem to still think I believe any attack on Clinton is a sexist attack, I’ll say it again: The misogyny from the media, from supposedly liberal blogger doodz, commenters on this blog, and just about everywhere during this campaign has been despicable. This kind of shit ought to be behind us: Hillary Clinton is a bitch. A big ol’ bitchy bitch. And a cunt. A “big fucking whore.” Fortunately, you can “call a woman anything.” She’s “Nurse Ratched.” She’ll castrate you if she gets a chance. She would like that. She’s a “She-Devil.” She’s a madam, and her daughter’s a whore. She’s frigid, and she can’t give head. She’s a “She-Devil.” A lesbian. A nag. When things get tough, she cries like a big dumb GIRL. In fact, she’s just that — a “little girl.” In FACT, she wants to “cry her way to the White House.” To be, ahem, “Crybaby-in-Chief.” That proves that she’s not tough enough. But she’s also not feminine enough. She’s “screechy.” She’s an “aging, resentful female.” She’s “Sister Frigidaire.” She really ought to quit running for President and stick to housework. She basically spent her entire times as First Lady going to tea parties. She’s a monster whojust won’t die. In fact, she really should just die. You can buy a urinal target with her face on it to express what you really think of her. OMG she’s got claws! She’s crazy. In fact, she’s a lunatic. She’s petty and vindictive and entitled. She’s a washed-up old hag. She’s “everybody’s first wifestanding outside probate court.” She’s a “scolding mother.” She’s shrill… shrill… shrill. She can’t take it when people are mean to her. She’s a “hellish housewife.” She’s Tanya Harding. She CAN’T be President, what with the mood swings and the menses.Any woman who votes for her is voting with her vagina, not her brain. Women only like Hillary because she’s a fellow Vagina-American. And because they vote with their feelings. Frankly, anyone who still thinks we need “feminine role models” should get over it and move on, already. Oh, and men who supporters are castratos in the eunuch chorus. You shouldn’t make her President because she wants it too much. She’s totally just banking on support from ugly old feminists. And she looooves to “play the victim.” She cackles! And cackles. And cackles. It’s like she’s a witch or something! She’s definitely“witchy.” And now you can buy her cackle as your ring tone. Her voice, too, is “grating”–like “fingernails on a blackboard” to “some men.” She’s hiding behind her gender. She isn’t a “convincing mom” because she’s too strident. She never did anything on her own. Her husband keeps her on a leash. She hates men. Her campaign is a “catfight.” She makes people want to kill themselves, is like a “domineering mother,” and is cold. And OMG she has boobies! All of which are reasons to hate her. (And boy, could I go on.)

Barnett said it here.

Ann Bartow adds, among other things, that gender insulting Clinton *isn't limited to Clinton!*

And hey, guess what? Not being Hillary Clinton will not protect you. If Obama secures the nomination, the same sexism will soon find exclusive focus on Michelle Obama. She too is getting the Uppity Woman smack down. SheCodes at Black Women Vote discussed this in a general way...

Read the quote in context here.

Yeah, I haven't been reading enough 'winger opposition sources to be up on this but I think I've noticed opening salvos in supermarket-style tabloid venues like the front page of the National Enquirer and Mickey Kaus's blog.

I'll just repeat that *as with all gendered aspersions* they're not just bullshit they're *distractions!* For instance aren't the almost exclusively male consultants Clinton employs and personally directs, let alone her husband, just as "castrating" as she is? Um, yeah, except men usually get called "rabid" or even just "aggressively partisan." And isn't it a bigger problem anyway that Clinton keeps picking such a pack of thumb-fingered, foot-shooting asshats and showboats to be her personal Karl Roves, John Yoos, Dick Cheneys and Charlie Blacks? Why yes, as a matter of fact it is.

The fact of the matter is that Hillary Clinton *isn't a bitch!* She's not "castrating." She's not a "cunt," or a "whore" or "shrill"** or "witchy" or anything like it. She has a Ralph Nader-sized ego, yes. She's got a divisive, Bush-doctrine-like 50%-plus-one approach to politics, yes. She's got a Bush-like obsession with one-way loyalty and secrecy, yes. She's got a (sorry Prof. Bartow) an egregiously lawyerly attitude towards what should count as evidence and what "opposing council" and "the jury" should be allowed to hear that may or may not be fine in court but kind of sucks in terms of electoral politics. But where's the gender in any of that?

In fact the closest thing to a legitimate gender issue is that Clinton has a family member she's using to blind the public, but not herself via conversation with her partner, "personal loans" derived from from unhealthily large "foundation" contributions. And that's not really a gender issue at all, Senator McCain enjoys the same benefit with his partner, as would anyone else of any gender (or combination of genders) with legally recognized family privileges.

So! You want to be a twit about Senator Clinton's gender fine but to do so is to deliberately sideline discussion of substantive issues. Conversely if you have substantive, legitimate concerns then don't be a twit.

[** In fact one serious criticism of Senator Clinton is that, based on her campaign, she's not "Order of the Shrill" at all! --fl]