An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Do You Know the Tale of Brewster Kahle?

Bush’s Role in the Middle East: ‘What a Shame’ »

When Expedience Trumps The Sisterhood

Posted by SHAUN MULLEN, TMV Columnist in At TMV.
May 15th, 2008 | Comments

The fur is again flying in the feminist sandbox over the other big endorsement that Barack Obama received on Wednesday, this one from the National Abortion Rights Action League.

NARAL’s endorsement statement called Obama:

“A strong advocate for a woman’s right to choose throughout his career in public office. He steadfastly supports and defends a woman’s right to make the most personal, private decisions regarding her reproductive health without interference from government or politicians.”

But you would have thought this leading pro-choice group had thrown in its lot with John McCain or Phyllis Schlafly. The reaction was fast and furious and sense of betrayal nearly suffocating.

The National Women’s Political Caucus was:

“[D]isappointed . . . The Caucus knows Hillary Clinton to be a clear leader and a consistent champion of the issues that NARAL and NWPC have in common. We believe that this announcement at this time will divide the choice community at a time when we need to stand united.”

Harrumphed EMILY’s List head honcho Ellen Malcolm:

“I think it is tremendously disrespectful to Sen. Clinton – who held up the nomination of a FDA commissioner in order to force approval of Plan B and who spoke so eloquently during the Supreme Court nomination about the importance of protecting Roe vs. Wade – to not give her the courtesy to finish the final three weeks of the primary process. It certainly must be disconcerting for elected leaders who stand up for reproductive rights and expect the choice community will stand with them.”

The key words here are divide and disrespectful, because for these groups the primary season has been all about getting a woman — and a particular woman — nominated. All other concerns have been secondary.

That’s okay, but as it is Obama’s position on choice is pretty much identical to Clinton’s, as NARAL recognizes. But NARAL recognizes something else very important, as well: That Obama stands a better chance of being the next president than Clinton and political expedience is paramount in the long run.

At the risk of bringing down further fire and brimstone from feminists who hew to a rigid orthodoxy and have blindered themselves to Clinton’s determined self destruction, I have a daughter and my major charitable contribution year in and year out is to Planned Parenthood, so I feel like I have a stake in this as well even though I’m some old guy.

So chill, okay?

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

GeorgeSorwell

The feminist sandbox?

Amanda

And this is how some women earn the moniker "feminazi." Nevermind that Obama has already won the nomination in every way that actually, you know, counts. Nevermind that he has essentially the same exact views as Senator Clinton when it comes to reproductive rights. He has boy parts so clearly he's not worthy to carry a pro-choice banner. Geez, my eyes would fall out if I were rolling them any more.

shaun

Yo Amanda:

'Twas you who inspired me to do this post in the first place.

Lit3Bolt

Logic doesn't really have anything to do with many feminist blogs these days. Visit them and you hear dire warnings and threats that women will sit out the general election unless Obama and his supporters stop, drop and roll in broken glass doused in hot sauce first. Nevermind that would help McCain. Nevermind that risks more conservative judges on the Supreme Court. Nevermind that could set women's rights back a generation and you tacitically support a conservative who divorced his disabled wife for a younger wealthier one, and showers her with love and affection, such as the word "cunt." No no, the REAL enemy here, and always has been, Barack Obama. Viva la self-destrucion!!

GeorgeSorwell

Yo Amanda?

shaun

Mr. Sorwell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yo

runasim

As idiotic as this spat is, this is what 'feminism' has been like from the day the term was coined: a lot of different groups, with different outlooks and different strategies., even different goals.

It's simply too broad a term. Since feminists are also people, it's ridiculous to expect any more agreement among them than among other people groups,
Think about how people behave in groups from political parties to the UN.

Women's groups have political fights just like all people do.
That's all there is to see here..

Amanda

Wow! Thanks Shaun :)

Yes George?

MaryL

And some feminist blogs, like Pandagon, are fine with NARAL's endorsement.

There’s a scent of sour grapes in the air around the Clinton campaign, and from a feminist perspective, I’m boggled. Sure, I understand that it’s disappointing if “electing a female President” was a major priority for you and that’s getting thwarted. But if you support women’s rights, you need to put your support behind the Democratic nominee, even if it’s Obama and it’s likely to be. McCain can’t even support equal pay for women! He’s going to continue the assault on reproductive rights that the Bush administration started. If you support women, have some pity on us in our fertile years living in red states who sorely need a political break in our direction right now, namely a pro-choice Democrat in the White House. Which Obama is, in case there’s a whiff of doubt created by this needlessly contentious primary season.

DLS

NARAL has aborted support for Clinton in favor of Obama because Obama is the one to keep NARAL's fringey politics more viable. Heh.

DLS

"As idiotic as this spat is, this is what 'feminism' has been like from the day the term was coined"

Of coruse, because it has gone beyond legitimate feminism -- the surprising concept that was made reality forty years ago that women, gasp, are PEOPLE -- beyind that for over forty years into extremist lunatic fringe left-wing politics (including bizarre positions held on abortion, which the lunatic groups idolize with even more craziness than the typical cultist Obama camp followers this year).

Related to that in this campaign season are the lunatic attacks on Clinton because she wasn't blindly bound even before the war ever was considered to the extreme anti-war-and-US-success-at-all-costs far left PC fad of the past several years.

DLS

"The feminist sandbox?"

No matter how loyally left-to-far-left they've been, they're expendable and lose all respect among the anti-war crowd now that there's an anti-war placeholder named Obama competing with Clinton and her feminiist support base this year for the Dem nomination. The Obama crowd is not merely pro-Obama but worse than any GOP crowd when it comes to being anti-Clinton so long as Clinton is in Obama's way.

DLS

"The feminist sandbox?"

IF YOU'RE NOT WITH US (OBAMA ANTI-WAR CROWD), YOU'RE AGAINST US.

roro80

Um...yes, like pretty much every progressive group in the country, including the entire Dem party, feminists also have disagreement about the Dem candidate. How come it's only the feminists who get told to "chill out" about it? When you say "these groups" have been trying to get "one particular woman" elected, who exactly is "these groups"? The fact is that Hillary Clinton does have a long, long history of being excellent on women's rights. Barack Obama has also been extremely solid in causes close to the feminist heart.

Again, every progressive group in the whole country has concerns and infighting about this primary, and none of the others are relegated to the "sandbox", just us uppity women-folk.

AustinRoth

George -

It isn't like he called her sweetie.

runasim

Thank heavens progressives and feminists fight. At least that shows they're still capable of individual thought,

Some others wait for a memo from HQ to find out how to vote, how to act, how to be. They might be more comfortable with robots instead of a human membership.

blog comments powered by Disqus