Saturday, April 14, 2007

Is it so wrong to crave recognition? Interesting human interest story in the NYT about Hillary Clinton's 1969 Swells classmates' reaction to her persona and her candidacy. One classmate made a particularly interesting comment about something that has been bothering me for a while but I have been unable to address:

Some of Mrs. Clinton’s classmates say they take personally criticism that she is “shrill” or “strident.”

“I hear these anti-Hillary attacks by men, especially right-wing men, and I feel like it’s just as much an attack on me,” said Cheryl Lynn Brierton, an in-house lawyer for the California courts. “It’s an effect of intelligence that you come across as intense, that you have strong views. I’ve always felt that the way she is singled out and attacked is very indicative of how society reacts to smart women.”

I think part of the reason I have been reluctant to endorse Hillary is because she is so polarizing. Supporting Hillary is controversial simply because she does not adhere to traditional gender roles. She is a "career woman," a "feminist" and ambitious. I would never expect myself to shy away from that, to look for a more "mainstream" candidate that I felt was a more sure-fire win. As my father said during the 2004 election, I'd rather lose fighting for something than lose by playing it safe. It is time to throw my hat into Hillary's ring.

No comments: