Hillary: A Heroine for Women, Taken Down By Male-Dominated Media
Was Hillary badly treated by America’s male dominated media elite? That debate is not only an American one. In fact, it’s apparently a debate that has been sanctioned by China’s Communist Party.
“Looking at how newspapers and TV networks commented on Hillary’s looks, her voice and her emotional life, we can see the kind of criticism and humiliation she has suffered. ‘Hating Hillary’ has even become a kind of national sport or entertainment. … The path of her struggle in seeking to make a breakthrough may not have met with the approval of all women. But in her own words, the 18 million voters who supported her have made “18 million cracks in the glass ceiling.”
By Wang Tian
Translated By Mark Klingman
July 2, 2008
People’s Republic of China – People’s Daily – Original Article (Chinese)
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has finally admitted defeat and returned to the Senate. After the battle between Obama and this “indomitable, never-give-up” woman, who was confronted with a weakening campaign, lagging poll numbers and enormous intra-party pressure for “unity,” she was finally forced to announce her withdrawal and throw her support to Obama to help him achieve his dream of becoming the first Black president.
But didn’t Hillary have a dream, too? This lady, who as a 22-year-old university graduate vowed to “make the impossible possible,” who as a gifted Yale Law School alum was twice ranked among the hundred most influential lawyers in the United States and who as First Lady was determined to promote health care reform, has long dreamed of becoming the first woman president.
This time, Hillary’s dream almost came true. A woman has never gotten closer to occupying the Oval Office. Even in the so-called “New World” of the United States, the practice of discrimination against women has always existed. Women didn’t have the right to vote until 1920; there has been only a single female vice presidential candidate (in 1984), and only 16 percent of the members of Congress are currently women.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign and her defeat have created strong repercussions and controversy. Some women cheered for her, saying that her candidacy had set off a feminist wave; other women took exception, believing that she long ago betrayed feminism to devote herself above all to achieving a “Clinton Dynasty.” Some men strongly objected to her candidacy, saying that Hillary should go home and “iron shirts.”
READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign press coverage of the U.S. election.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
10 Responses to “Hillary: A Heroine for Women, Taken Down By Male-Dominated Media”
Umm – that should be “heroine” not “heroin”. Unless you think her supporters are physically addicted to her.
Frankly, I'm really sick and tired of the victicrat mentality. I'm not talking about Clinton, who seems to finally accept reality, but the small handful of deadenders that continue to bitterly cling to her failed campaign.
Her disastrous campaign sputtered to an end a *month* ago; I personally was hoping that discussion about her would decrease dramatically. Sadly, I was wrong. But if the embittered pumas still want to harp over Her Irrelevancy, oh well.
Thanks for the heads-up, DWSUWF.
William Kern
“Hillary’s supporters (large numbers of them women)”
“a dark, angry cloud”
“this pack of doomsaying crows”
” These wraiths of primary past “
“the true dead enders in every sense of the word.”
“the sullen bunch”
“masochistic delight”
“this oppressive shadow”
“crouching”
“this poison”
“this thorn to fester”
*******
Courtesy of Jazz Shaw, writer Source: http://themoderatevoice.com/at-tmv/newsweek-blo…
Comments like these, courtesy of this website and many more dished out by mainstream media without a thought, get nary a bat of an eyelash. This rampant sexism, dished out no less by a woman, is taken for granted at every turn in the road.
I remind people again to consider not only not speaking out about these types of comments, but to examine the situation in another light. Let's suppose they were directed at (large numbers of them black).
Ah…yes…..now you see how bad they are eh?
And I said it before, flattery will get you nowhere.
Also intereseting to note that if these same comments were uttered by a responder, that responder would be either warned, admonished or even banned from further posting.
Don't look for Jazz Shaw to be banned anytime soon..long live the patriarchy.
Rampant sexism? Please show me how these comments are gender specific Silhouette. The only mention of gender is in the first comment. Is it sexism because it is negative and directed at a group that is mostly women? If that's the logic then every single person who ever referred to an Obama supporter as a wide-eyed sectarian is a racist, since many of HIS supporters are black.
Ridiculous. You can assert that the comments are unfair, certainly, but an insult doesn't become sexist just because it is levelled at a woman. Show me how those comments would never fit if levelled at a man and I'll admit that they are sexist.
If they were directed at a group that was mostly black I would consider them fair or unfair (depending on whether I agreed or not with the assessment) but certainly not racist!
Increasingly it simply looks like Hillary supporters simply don't want to let go of their anger. What's amazing is that the candidate they claim to support HAS let go and has ASKED her supporters to do the same. Apparently they love their anger more than they love their candidate. Obama is condemned, not because HE was sexist, but because he spent his time trying to win the primaries and not fighting with Chris Matthews. Even when it is conceded that there was sexism in the race it's not enough, it's NEVER enough. Especially unacceptable is the notion that someone could actually feel that the claims of sexism were exagerated and not actually be a sexist themselves.
[...] DMc wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptWomen didn’t have the right to vote until 1920; there has been only a single female vice presidential candidate (in 1984), and only 16 percent of the members of Congress are currently women. Hillary Clinton’s campaign and her defeat … Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] DMc wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptWomen didn’t have the right to vote until 1920; there has been only a single female vice presidential candidate (in 1984), and only 16 percent of the members of Congress are currently women. Hillary Clinton’s campaign and her defeat … [...]
I will “show” you how these comments are geared towards women. In the opening paragraph “Clinton supporters” were equated in parenthesis to “Large numbers of them women”.
The author did not need to include this statement at all as material to her piece unless her intent was to go on to include other qualities she intended to tie to women. To which she did.
A simple “Clinton supporters” would've sufficed as it should've long ago. But Media sexists are eager to point out that the preponderance of Clinton supporters are women, when really they are numerous, but not a preponderance. Many men, white, latino, black, asian all supported Clinton as well. In Ms.Shaw's article she makes it clear her target is women. And then she goes on to make those ten disparaging remarks aimed at her target group: women.
She makes it clear in her opening who she's targeting.
Sadly this phenomenon is not unique. Some of the most entrenched bigoted people towards females are fellow females who since birth have been subliminally deeply indoctrinated into patriarchal thinking; so much so that they even devalue themselves and accept disparaging remarks like these towards other women who “won't fall in line” (read: are different from me so I feel uncomfortable around them and want them to change so I won't have to confront my own internal oppressors.)
It's sad that these women have unwittingly jumped on board. Of course there is the possibility that Ms. Shaw is an Obama, as one poster put it “Kool Aide Cultie” and is using any method she deems necessary to force Clintonites in line to their leader. Belittling and psychological coercion are not strangers to cult modis operandi. I offer Ms. Shaw's article as a case in point.
And its net result on thinking readers is to galvanize them away from Barack Obama; the opposite of what her intent was. Sexism (bigotry) backfires again.
Obama himself stood idly by and watched this same spectacle unfold in the primaries. And since it was to his advantage to watch media equate being female-backed to being backed by lesser people, he kept a quiet vigil as the Media's campaign slowly sunk Clinton's ship by successfully linking society's negative female stereotypes. Their (GOP) “you're as stupid and silly as a woman if you support Clinton” campaign helped to promote their chosen opponent Obama. Elder and white bigotry was woven into this message “Old angry white women”
And Obama soaked it up. Which is why when this same machine turns on him in September, I will have zero empathy for him or the democrats who supported him.
So if the comment had been “Obama supporters (many of them black)” all of it would have been racist? Not buying it. Simply because an insult or criticism is directed a a group that is mostly women it is NOT sexist.
“Sadly this phenomenon is not unique. Some of the most entrenched bigoted people towards females are fellow females who since birth have been subliminally deeply indoctrinated into patriarchal thinking;”
Well you've touched on what could well be the most annoying argument of all of feminism “women who don't agree with me are just indoctrinated and enslaved mentally”.
Here's a thought, I'm a young woman. Thanks to the hard work of the older generation, I've grown up in a world where, while certainly not free of sexism, I don't feel limited everywhere I go because of my gender. That means that I don't see sexism under every rock, I don't see discrimination in every failure. That means that I'm free to support and vote for the candidate that I think is most qualified, not merely the one that shares my XX chromosome makeup. That person wasn't Clinton this time around but I'm not worried, I know that eventually a woman will come around that IS the best candidate, and I'll happily support her.
So kindly respect me and mine a little more by not assuming that our non-support of Clinton, or opposition to her, or support of Obama, is because we are mentally enslaved. That IS prejudice, and it's very offensive.
I can't stop you from voting for McCain or not supporting Obama. I can only hope that maybe, when Roe vs. Wade is overturned and equal pay rights are denied for the upenteenth time (McCain voted against them) you might feel a smidgen of regret for opposing a candidate because he didn't stand up for Clinton as much as you would have liked (while putting up with all sorts of smears about his origin and beliefs that also had to do with prejudice, though it doesn't seem to bother you as much).
Hillary Clinton cannot blame being a Victim [tm] for her loss of the nomination. That's despite the worst abuse directed at her ever by so many Obama supporters and members of the far left.