heh, didn’t originally mean race like that, but it works that way, too.
A recent book is out, called the New Feminized Majority: How Democrats Can Change America With Women’s Values. I’d like them to have a few quotation marks in that title (”…Change American With “Women’s Values”…”), but it certainly looks interesting. Feminist Law Professors has a brief review, written by the authors (or their publicist) and it seems to make some valid points. Namely, that the “masculinized” values of the patriarchy are beginning to be devalued by Americans at large (not just liberals, although it surely started there), and that Obama is the one doing it. I’d like to read it, if only for the discussion of Hillary’s (I would argue necessary) use of “masculine” values and Obama’s use of “feminine” values. If their politics were reversed, I’m pretty sure we’d be calling the former “Mrs.”, rather than Senator (I don’t think she’d've made it as far on those values) and the latter “a republican”. I suppose it’s nice to show (even in a book) that “feminized” values are beginning to be valued rather than denigrated, but I find it telling that the only way for them to gain acceptance (since they are, still, “feminized”), is for them to be promoted by a male.
The review is worth a skim; I will see if my library has it before recommending the book.
9 responses so far ↓
1 TammyT // Mar 14, 2008 at 8:47 am
Wow.
That puts a totally new spin on the Obama/Clinton dichotomy.
I’m going to add this book to my mile-high “to read” list.
2 TammyT // Mar 14, 2008 at 8:50 am
I just went to Amazon, and it says that the book’s publication date is April 30, 2008. But it also says there are books in stock. What gives? Anyway, I put it on my PBS wishlist. Thanks for the pointer!
3 xJane // Mar 14, 2008 at 9:07 am
hehe, it’s in stock, TammyT, but they won’t send it to you. They’re just messing with your head!!!
4 M. T. MacPhee // Mar 31, 2008 at 10:21 am
Umm…. I’m wondering why you refered to them as “Hillary” and “Obama”? Wouldn’t the rules of parallel usage — not to mention non-sexist thinking — call for “Hillary” and “Barak”, or “Clinton” and “Obama”?
5 xJane // Mar 31, 2008 at 6:32 pm
MT: indeed it would. However, I am simply using the terms that they themselves have adopted: Senator Barack Hussein Obama has positioned himself as simply “Obama” or “Barack Obama” (no longer Barry he); similarly, Senator Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton has (currently) positioned herself as “Hillary” or “Hillary Clinton” (no longer Rodham-Clinton, I remember when she used the dash!). Most news outlets refer to them as last names, and I find that wholly appropriate. I make no bones about attempting to be impartial: if Barry positions himself as that, or Diane suddenly starts going by her middle name, power to each. There’ve been some interesting articles in the news about the affect of each choice, in fact: you can read or listen.
6 M. T. MacPhee // Mar 31, 2008 at 9:09 pm
@xJane
Gotcha. I’m a Canadian, so I’m not following the “race” (how can you call an election that lasts two years a race?) with sufficient ardour to have noticed that nuance. Thanks for clearing it up.
7 M. T. MacPhee // Mar 31, 2008 at 9:19 pm
I just checked out the English Prof. Colour me a skeptic, thanks.
8 xJane // Mar 31, 2008 at 9:43 pm
MT: totally with you regards “race”. It’s always much more of a “knock-down, drag-out”, but I suppose “race” makes it sound less bloody.
9 Zach Alexander » Hillary’s gender // May 12, 2008 at 3:44 pm
[…] expected someone (not necessarily xJane) to give me the third degree, but instead, she linked to a another post where she makes essentially the same point. And now we have Clinton’s former spiritual […]
Leave a Comment