Fired Up

I have been a little bit fired up this week. A little bit busy, too. Well, more than a little. It's Thursday now, though, and I have mostly made it over the major hurdles of the week, and I wanted to take a little time to process my fired-upedness.

First things first- I guess the biggest problem is that I started talking politics, and that's not always a good idea. Combined with the regular frustrations of school and work it's enough to put anyone over the edge. When I talk to my international students about appropriate topics for small talk with Americans, of course I mention that politics and religion are usually not safe with people you don't know very well. But what about those you do know and respect? I guess that's even worse, because you end up caring more about how they feel.

I will put it out there and say I am supporting Clinton, and I was surprised to learn that among my friends and family I am in a very small minority. By writing this post I realize I am opening up another can of worms that will probably just serve to get me more fired up, but I at least want to try to make my point. I do not want to attack those who do not support her, I just want to be able to have an informed conversation with people, which seems impossible. It always gets emotional.

I support Hillary for a number of reasons; I always have. I admire her for the work she has done and for the groundbreaking career that she has had, and for her future goals and ambitions. I believe she is committed to her goals, and will do her best to accomplish them. I agree with her views on most issues, she is smart and she is ready to be president. I ALSO support her because she is a woman. Let me make it clear, though.... that's NOT the only reason. I wouldn't just be supporting any old chick who came along. And anyway, who said it was a bad thing for women to support women? I am guessing it was a man.

A lot of the attacks against Clinton are because she is female. They are hidden in other reasons, but the heart of the problem is that she is out there in uncharted ground, competing on the national stage in a very male world. We don't want to admit that we still live in a male world, but we do. She's talking about huge issues, but wait, what is she wearing? Or, she's too strategic. When a man is strategic he's smart, but when a woman is she's a witch, or cold, etc. It's such an old story, but it's still truer than ever. Doesn't this frustrate other women out there?

I remember when Geraldine Ferraro was on the democratic ticket for Vice President. I was nine years old, and my stepmother was heavily involved in local politics, navigating a Southern male world in her "in-your-face" manner that made her so popular. She got in trouble in ways that are not dissimilar to Clinton. She tried to impress upon me how important Ferraro's nomination was and how it marked a sign of change in the establishment, how lucky I was to be so young in a world where a female nomination could happen. Hmmm. How many other women have we had up for top elected positions since 1984? How many do we see around who are ready to step up to such positions in the near future? How many people even remember Ferraro?

I guess it's no surprise that I grew up and went to a women's college (like Clinton) and I believe that we need to change the nature of control in our society. I think that now is the time- this is our chance- and she can do it. So, I don't think that women should support Clinton JUST because she's a woman, but they should at least consider it. It should be a factor in the decision.... a legitimate factor.

Of course Obama would also bring significant change to the national stage (he already has!), and I will certainly support him if he is the democratic nominee. It's just that I feel more personally committed to Clinton's cause. I understand that everyone has to make up her own mind about how she feels about these issues.

We are treading on dangerous ground this year, because we have to talk about issues we don't know how to talk about- issues we typically avoid- like race and gender. Despite attempts to downplay them, we can't deny the role they will take. It is clearly problematic to support (or oppose) a candidate JUST because of gender or race. (I find it more problematic to oppose someone for those reasons, but that's just me). I was asking about the elections in my class this morning (we always warm up with a short discussion of current events, so they can be in tune with what people are talking about on campus) and one of my students said that Chinese people support Clinton because "Asians don't like blacks. Blacks are lazy." YIKES. Let me say again- YIIIIKES. I was not expecting to have to handle such a comment at 8:30 this morning, with a group of Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Thai students, but in a way I was glad it came out. Clearly a lot of people will be voting "for the other one" this election. It was a nice introduction to political correctness, and stereotypes. What does "Asian" even mean to them? To the "average" American (whatever that means), my students are all the same. As I was trying to diffuse the situation, however, I realized that even now, in 2008, we don't really have any good language to talk about these kinds of biases in a productive way. We can't deny that they exist, but at the same time we don't want to reinforce them. I hope that this year's election will help us move forward with the conversation, at the very least.