JCBoston11
05-10-2008, 11:18 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080510/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_feminists
Here's an interesting article about the division of woman feminists in the democratic party between Obama and Hillary.
I generally agree that the division is more generational and based on political issues primarily involving Hillary's support for the Iraq war. The younger generation of women have more job opportunities and better education than their mothers. In fact, many successful and career-oriented women opt-out of the workforce on their choice after having children. I think that is one of the greatest obstacles in wage discrepancy when high-earning women leave the workforce and leave their career-track. In addition, there are more opportunities for women to start businesses that have been ignored or their is a need for. The feminist movement can also support a woman being independent and successful on her own without having to marry a man; and I think many woman today can have a high-paying job and successful career in life without needing to marry.
As for having a successful female politician or president, I don't believe we need to have a woman president just because she is a woman. There is a lot of competition for the presidency from men and in some of the smaller countries, woman leaders have risen to top positions because there is less men to compete with. While in the US, there are so many factors geographically and culturally that effect the presidential election. While Hillary could easily win a governorship or senate seat in the liberal northeast, her personality may not help her connect with Southern voters the way Hutchinson or Blanche Lincoln could.
Her role as Bill Clinton's wife helped her win the Senate seat, but it is also the one negative that is hurting her in the presidential campaign. Most Americans don't want to live in the past and prefer to look to the future and she cannot divorce herself from Bill's image perhaps unless she gets an actual divorce. Her policies and positions are tied to an old Washington mentality which may suit other countries that favor dynasties and legacies, but Americans a skeptical of dynasties.
A woman has always had a say in white house politics. Most presidents have been married and their wives have or have not been vocal about their interests. Most marriages involve a partnership or team and the first lady can exert just as much influence as any cabinet member if she wanted.
But Hillary's rise is in fact due to her husband and an independent woman needs to be able to separate herself from the achievements of her husband and be her own person, but in this case I don't think that is possible.
There are many female leaders and senators that can run for President if they had enough ambition. I predict that a female governor can effectively win the presidency in the near future.
Here's an interesting article about the division of woman feminists in the democratic party between Obama and Hillary.
I generally agree that the division is more generational and based on political issues primarily involving Hillary's support for the Iraq war. The younger generation of women have more job opportunities and better education than their mothers. In fact, many successful and career-oriented women opt-out of the workforce on their choice after having children. I think that is one of the greatest obstacles in wage discrepancy when high-earning women leave the workforce and leave their career-track. In addition, there are more opportunities for women to start businesses that have been ignored or their is a need for. The feminist movement can also support a woman being independent and successful on her own without having to marry a man; and I think many woman today can have a high-paying job and successful career in life without needing to marry.
As for having a successful female politician or president, I don't believe we need to have a woman president just because she is a woman. There is a lot of competition for the presidency from men and in some of the smaller countries, woman leaders have risen to top positions because there is less men to compete with. While in the US, there are so many factors geographically and culturally that effect the presidential election. While Hillary could easily win a governorship or senate seat in the liberal northeast, her personality may not help her connect with Southern voters the way Hutchinson or Blanche Lincoln could.
Her role as Bill Clinton's wife helped her win the Senate seat, but it is also the one negative that is hurting her in the presidential campaign. Most Americans don't want to live in the past and prefer to look to the future and she cannot divorce herself from Bill's image perhaps unless she gets an actual divorce. Her policies and positions are tied to an old Washington mentality which may suit other countries that favor dynasties and legacies, but Americans a skeptical of dynasties.
A woman has always had a say in white house politics. Most presidents have been married and their wives have or have not been vocal about their interests. Most marriages involve a partnership or team and the first lady can exert just as much influence as any cabinet member if she wanted.
But Hillary's rise is in fact due to her husband and an independent woman needs to be able to separate herself from the achievements of her husband and be her own person, but in this case I don't think that is possible.
There are many female leaders and senators that can run for President if they had enough ambition. I predict that a female governor can effectively win the presidency in the near future.