Joan Smith: Medusa, bitch, witch, mad cow, DemocRAT... Why does America hate Hillary Clinton so much?
Sunday, 27 April 2008
Hillary Clinton is a witch who eats babies. She is a modern-day Medusa who turns men to stone. She is a DemocRAT, with a rodent's body and long tail. She is a mad cow, spreading disease across the country. Hey guys, life's a bitch, so why vote for one? No, I haven't taken leave of my senses: I am simply repeating some of the most vitriolic attacks on a woman who has dared to run for the White House, prompting an outpouring of misogyny on a scale that brings to mind medieval witch-hunts. The amazing thing is not that Clinton is trailing Barack Obama, but the fact that she's doing so well.
Last weekend she won Pennsylvania, despite her campaign being outspent three-to-one. She has been written off countless times since January, when commentators gleefully – and wrongly – declared that Clinton had been defeated in the New Hampshire primary; one conservative pundit confidently said: "The witch is dead, and life is going to change." Three months later, Clinton is still in the race, but I sometimes wonder how she manages to get up every morning. I'm not a natural supporter, but the degree of vilification she has been subjected to reminds me of the pathological misogyny of the notorious witch-finders' manual, Malleus Maleficarum.
Let's start with the T-shirts, mugs and stickers at the online "Hillary vilification shop" where images of her as a rat, a mad cow and Medusa are on sale. "Hillary will eat our babies," one message proclaims. "Pillory Hillary 2008," says another, next to an image of Clinton in the stocks. Most sinister of all is "Wanna See Hillary Run? ... Throw Rocks At Her", echoing the barbaric practice of stoning women to death. Take to the airwaves in America, and more bile pours out; the right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whose show has 14.5 million listeners, has identified something he called a "testicle lockbox" as an attribute of the New York senator. Is this related, I wonder, to a vagina dentata? Perhaps that's what Clifford May, a former Republican National Committee spokesman, had in mind when he called on Clinton to define herself as "a Vaginal-American".
What are they so afraid of? "There's just something about her that feels castrating, overbearing and scary," declared MSNBC host Tucker Carlson. Scary but pathetic, says Limbaugh: "Will America want to watch a woman get older before their eyes on a daily basis?" Clinton is 60, 11 years younger than the Republican candidate John McCain, but ageing "makes men look more authoritative, accomplished and distinguished", according to Limbaugh.
McCain, to his shame, has not remained aloof from the pillorying of Clinton, failing to rebuke a female supporter in South Carolina who asked: "How do we beat the bitch?" Visibly taken aback, McCain laughed and thought for a few seconds. "That's an excellent question," he said. In the following week, the "How do we beat the bitch?" incident was viewed almost a million times on YouTube.
"This is sociopathic woman-hating," the feminist author Robin Morgan. "If it were about Jews, we would recognise it instantly as anti-Semitic propaganda; if about race, as KKK poison. Where is our sense of outrage – as citizens, voters, Americans?" In fact, Clinton does have people defending her, including Elton John. The singer recently opened a fundraising concert for Clinton in New York and said he was "amazed by the misogynistic attitudes of some people in this country". So are some ordinary voters, including an Obama supporter who expressed his frustration with a Facebook group entitled "Hillary Clinton: Stop Running for President and Make Me a Sandwich". He wrote on his blog: "The last time I checked, it had over 44,000 members, and at least once a week since it was started I receive a request from a Christian asking me to join this group."
The title of the group is revealing because its equivalent – "Barack Obama: Stop Running for President and Clean My Pool"– doesn't exist. It would cause outrage. So why, when racial abuse is rightly taboo, is it acceptable to abuse a woman on the grounds of her gender? Why is it all right to use words such as "witch" and "bitch" about a female politician?
Of course, it may be that racism has gone underground, and that doubts about a black presidential candidate are emerging in voting patterns. But this year's race for the White House has undeniably exposed the previously unimaginable degree of misogyny at the heart of American culture. Whoever wins in November, the 2008 election will go down in history as the occasion when lobbyists, pundits and bloggers staged a very public mugging of Hillary Clinton.
For rolling comment on the US election visit: independent.co.uk/campaign08




Comments
93 Comments
First, Sen. Clinton supported the war that many knew was a lie to begin with to "establish her bona fides." Or what about characterizing Iranian army members as terrorists to give Mr. Bush yet another try at armed mischief?
Second, Sen. Clinton threatend in the Pennsylvania debate to nuke many innocent Iranian civilians.
Third, Sen. Clinton proposes to go along with one of Sen. McCain's most idiotic ideas to take the tax off gasoline in the US, just the worst thing to do if we want to change American's profligate energy use.
Fourth, ... well, you get the idea.
There are plenty of reasons for a thinking person to decide not to vote for Sen. Clinton that have nothing to do with her identity as a female or disdain for her personally. Why make up nonsense that a lack of enthusiasm for Sen. Clinton is all about "gender identity" and misogyny? Can Limbaugh really be as powerful at infecting people with his particular idiocy as Ms. Smith seems to suggest? Speaking for myself, I doubt it.
Posted by Gordon Aubrecht | 30.04.08, 22:36 GMT
That is just a horrible article and hateful to any women for that matter. You can bet that the majority of those remarks are made by women. The women who have gotten through the glass ceiling are the worst yet. As for men, well, they just have problems with strong, independent women and are probably abusive,battering men. They could move to Iraq.
MS HILLARY WILL BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT.
Mandy, San Jose CA
Posted by M.LL | 30.04.08, 10:45 GMT
David Gould, you are exactly the problem. You think it's funny to be able to pick on one group (women), but hey, um, it's not too cool to be racist, because we've all come to understand that's bad. But what is upsetting about that argument is that it depends on your definition of what's ok, and what's ok to you is not ok to all. If you can single out women and pick on them using a hark back to days of oppression (by telling a respected senator making a White House bid to make you a sandwich), why can't you pick on Jews, blacks, or anyone else? According to you, unless a federal case has been made out of it, it's still 'fair game' for you to target any formerly oppressed group. That argument is at its base disrespectful of the HUMAN condition, and it is to this which feminists violently object.
Posted by Sharon | 29.04.08, 18:39 GMT
I think the title of this article should have been "Why does SOME of America hate Hillary Clinton...". To state all Americans are a certain way is only ignorant. I may believe she may not make a good president based upon her political affiliation but I do not think of her as those printed negative words. I can also think for myself, thank you, and I do not believe everything that is printed and your article proves this point.
Posted by Anthony Z. | 29.04.08, 17:57 GMT
The misogyny of the Hillary Haters is troubling, but this article leaves out too much to be taken seriously: mention Clinton's dishonesty, her shady financial dealings (with her husband), her dirty politics and invocation of the race card, the obvious strategy of crippling Obama so that even if he is the nominee, he would lose to McCain leaving 2012 open to another Hillary run, and the monstrous destruction of the Democratic party on a campaign based on destruction rather than offering herself as the better alternative--mention all this and you'll see why people despise the Clintons.
The article also displays a superficial understanding, at best, of US politics and social issues. But I doubt that bothers writer or publisher very much.
Posted by Ram | 29.04.08, 15:04 GMT
Hilary is a political leach in a country without moral integrity, democracy is a farce in the US and Hilary is one of the lead players. She lies without shame to collect her votes and rides on the coat tails of cigar sucking Bill.
She is detested because she reminds America of her husband, a lying ex-president and a living disgrace.
Posted by Hank | 29.04.08, 11:09 GMT
Perception becomes reality. Those who do not like Hillary have never met her but rely upon the information they hear from political pundits, and talk show hosts. And don't forget the media. Those who do know her report her as being approachable and tenacious. Prior to the PA primary, she was only 120,000 votes behind Barack. Not too shabby. Yet the press continuously dogs her. The SNL skit about the debates was so true. Why does our liberal press adore Barack? It is evident in the pictures they select for publication, the headlines, and the tenor of the articles written. It is so sad. I've never met her but I have carefully listened to her comments about the issues and compared them to the pap expressed by Barack. That, plus I believe she is her own person, is why I intend to support her.
Posted by Linda Mae | 29.04.08, 05:23 GMT
I wonder who Americans finally reached to this conclusion that the whole anti-monarchy revolution was a big nasty mistake. From what appears the nomination of members of some previous presidents is becoming a decisive factor (norm) for choosing the next president. It is a great U-turn toward a monarchism republic state (relative similarity to Roman Republic and its dictatorial state).
Posted by Mack | 29.04.08, 05:10 GMT
Riiiiiiight. And George S. Bush is sooooo loved in this country. There was no name calling during the last election cycle. He was called the devil, assh**e, satan's spawn, etc. Apparently he still won as well as well. Cry me a river, just because she's a woman, one can't call her names? Puh-leeze, Americans are tired of the Clinton's dog and pony show and according to her Secret Service detail while she was first lady, Hillary deserves most of the monikers that have been used to describe her. I've already hedged my bets and bought property outside of the country in case she wins. She will never be my president.
Posted by calster | 28.04.08, 21:45 GMT
God bless Hillary Clinton.
Posted by Marilyn | 28.04.08, 19:48 GMT
93 Comments