Generation Gap


Nezua has this to say on his support of Barack Obama for the U.S. Presidency. The Field Negro and some of his commentators suggest that one reason Obama has so much white support, especially among young voters, is that they think that if they vote Obama they can never be accused of racism again, or that we really are living in a post-racist society, or both. But I hang out on a regular basis with white 20 year olds in one of the more conservative cities in the U.S., and they are for Obama, and I do not think it is about gender or race, I think it is about age and Extreme Establishment Fatigue (EEF), a syndrome newly identified by me.


Of course I really voted for Barack over Hillary because he is better than she is on key Professor Zero issues like Iraq and immigration. Subjectively, though, the idea of voting for Hillary feels like (a) having to sit on the porch with the slowly rocking aged when really I want to go running, jump fences and climb trees; (b1) tightening my belt and pouring myself into an outfit that is really too tight, (b2) topping that off with a hair clip that pulls my scalp back, and (c) being glued to my chair at a dinner table where strident grownups focused on the past are needling each other and lecturing.

Voting for Barack, on the other hand, is far more relaxing. I feel as though I can do it and keep on walking, as opposed to do it and condemn myself to accepting permanent physical limitation. I feel as though if he wins, we might have working meetings where everyone speaks, as opposed to receiving orders from a distance while still tied to a leaden chair. It feels like voting for a department chair one does not agree with on all issues, but who has energy and academic (not just corporate) goals, and is a good colleague. And I say that at that level of government as at work, if you can get someone like that in power you are not doing too poorly.


And since I am being as subjective as I am, I will engage in free association. Obama can profess and Clinton can only teach. And the reason I do not like teachers, and do not trust people who say they “love” teaching, is that in my experience to “love teaching” really means to insist at all times on being in control and being right.

Update: There is of course Ridwan’s post and comments thread. And it’s not that I don’t agree or haven’t considered the possibilities, it’s just that I have decided to vote as opposed to sit things out.




Filed under Movement, News

53 responses to “Generation Gap

  1. Run and play with that cute guy or sit up straight and mind your manners with mom?

    It’s no contest.

    My granddaughter would certainly prefer running around naked and shouting to taking a shower and getting dressed, but there is the practical side of life to be considered.

    Charismatic systems are drab. I guarantee that life under a charismatic leader will be drab.

  2. “Minding your manners with Mom” means voting for the war in Iraq and continued irrational oppression of immigrants.

    “Running around naked and shouting” – do I hear an association of Obama with jungle drums here?

  3. i love this post, cero. you put it so well. and poetically too. you are the teaching anti-teacher, you zen master, you.

  4. Graz Nez, you calm my nerves. I was about to modify my post for Hattie’s benefit by bolding this part:

    “I feel as though if he wins, we might have working meetings where everyone speaks, as opposed to receiving orders from a distance while still tied to a leaden chair. It feels like voting for a department chair one does not agree with on all issues, but who has energy and academic (not just corporate) goals, and is a good colleague.”

    I am extremely irritated at Hattie’s distorted reading here: voting for Obama is “playing with that cute guy” whereas voting for Clinton is “minding your manners” and being “practical.” It’s oppressive and self-serving – a bit like the Clintons themselves, I suppose (I say, wickedly).

    Or authoritarian – perhaps I should send Hattie to Reichian therapy (I say again, wickedly) … and YES I am tired of authoritarianism, and I do not think it is IMMATURE to be tired of it, to the precise contrary I think it is MATURE and that authoritarianism is IMMATURE, and I think many people get LESS not more mature as they get older, when growing older means conforming more.

    !!! And: if those two options – the cute guy vs. Mom – were the meaning of this election, you can bet I’d have been for Obama from the get-go and without reservations, and very likely to vote for a third party candidate in the general election if Hillary’s the candidate. How’d ya like them apples? Hmmm … I wouldn’t have been for Kucinich because he’s just to short for me to find really attractive … although he must have something going on since he keeps that 30 something wife … but no, I really am shallow, I am just voting on cuteness and fun, that is why I am for Obama.

    !!! I can do better. I was never serious about Gravel and Kucinich, and after they dropped out I never intended to vote for Edwards. No, I was always for Obama, because he is the youngest, tallest, most fun, cutest, and best in bed, and I know *that* because he’s Black. Yes, I really do think in those kinds of stereotypes and I really am that shallow.

  5. Also: On the now oft-repeated theory that white people are voting for Obama so that, by voting for a Black man for President they can get off the hook for racism, why does having voted for Jesse Jackson every time he ran not count? I was still too young to vote when Shirley Chisholm ran, but I would have voted for her, too, first choice.

    I am not impressed with the flak I get nowadays: it was ‘racist’ and ‘sexist’ not to be for Obama/Clinton from the get-go, it is sexist not to be for Clinton, it is racist not to be for Obama but also to be for Obama. All of this seems to me to be some weirdness dreamed up by white people who are, as has been pointed out to me, the people who most cleave to ‘identity politics’ and most benefit by protecting their own.

  6. Hmm. Pretty emotional, I’d say. And defensive, too. Well, I probably should have let it alone, since this is your blog. But no, I’m all fired up!
    Personally, I am tired of people running around making asses of themselves, and Reich has always been one of my pet hates. It’s all such juvenile bullshit! So unscientific. So irrational. We can’t afford all this B.S. We’re in trouble.
    And I really, really resent being called a racist. You hang out with white people in a conservative city. I live in a multiracial, multicultural town in Hawaii, kind of an ideal Obamaville. My attitude toward race is that there are all kinds of people, and that is as much as I think about race.
    So Pardon me for not joining in this wonderful feel-good moment. My 68 years may have something to do with that! All that new day-ism about Jack Kennedy is in my memory (Chamelot, nice clothes, redecorating the White House, The Bay of Pigs, the beginnings of the Vietman War) and now his dodgy family is all ga-ga over Obama! Oprah’s onboard too. How exciting.
    I’ll vote for the guy if he’s the candidate, but Tuesday I’m going to the caucus and voting for Hillary Clinton.
    And by the way, how do you feel about Cynthia McKinney? She’d get my vote in a minute. She’s got guts. But what did she get from the liberals? Just sneers about how she was out of control and so on and not respectable.

  7. I think if we had an alternative as a labor party, or something based on the working class, people like you wouldn’t support Democrats.

    At my blog I have an open thread about Pakistan elections. My comrades are running for office as part of the PPP, including running in Taliban areas.

  8. RE – and, people like Kucinich wouldn’t have to be Democrats, or try to get the Democrats to support them.

  9. Hey there, Prof. Zero, you know mostly I cling to your wisdom – I do! – but I don’t really know what you mean by your explanation of why you like Obama v. Clinton. I remember your earlier post when you said your young people were jazzed by him and that influenced you and you were going to support him, then you mentioned more recently you enthusiasm for him was “waxing,” but this more poetic explanation in this post doesn’t translate that easily for me.

    I mean, why is it “relaxing” to vote for Obama? Why does supporting HRC make you feel elderly (if that’s how I should understand the physicality you describe if you were to vote for her.) I don’t see this as sexism or racism, but my mind does consider ageism here (if I was choosing an -ism, and what social scientist can resist in this delicious primary?)…

    Also, does it matter to anyone that Obama’s Iraq voting record is identical to HRC’s since they both became U.S. Senators, and that his only vote against the war was when he was a state Senator???

  10. It is all very wonderful. I have long enjoyed state and local politics here. I can think of any number of our State and local office holders who I hope will eventually end up on the national scene. They score 100% on all the progressive issues.
    But this is Hawaii!

  11. Perhaps I should make it clear that I’m not a Democrat and that I think the more interesting question is why Kucinich was shut out of the debates.

    I don’t like the Clintons, never did, and I published an article IRL against the sexist attacks against Hillary before it was fashionable to notice them. Voting for Hillary does bring Bill back on the scene and he is responsible for the destruction of welfare, the expansion of the Federal death penalty, and so on.

    O. has to run as a centrist – you do to get nominated – but his earlier record is different and I like the people who like him better than I like those who like Clinton, by and large (there are exceptions).

    However he was far from my first choice. And I don’t think it’s bad, when two candidates’ positions are very similar, to vote for the one you like best, vote for the one you have the best feeling about.

    My feeling is that things can shift more leftward with Obama than with Clinton. I am not resigned enough to ascendancy of the Republican party of which she is a closet member to actually vote for her unless it is against a noticeably worse Republican.

    Or, to ask a question myself: why was nobody on my case about Kucinich, Gravel, and even Edwards – being for them is to *really* disagree with Clinton! If Clinton and Obama are basically the same, why does it matter who wins?

  12. And P.S. – I guess what I am tired of is being lectured at by conservative Democrats about how if I grow up I will join them. I have been hearing this since elementary school and I am now pushing 50.

    FYI people were horrified when I voted for Nader – I was responsible for the Democrats losing (right, you should have seen the huge margins by which the Republicans won here).

    On Obama, you could say that my choice between him and Clinton comes down to taste – which of two does one think one could better work with. And as I’ve said before, I’d also just like to see somebody besides Clinton-Bush/Repubs get in. See what they could do with the current mess.

    And I like the energy Obama generates. But once again, my RATIONAL point of view is that of RIDWAN (against Clinton AND Obama), not that of the “Obamaholics.”

  13. P.P.S. My RATIONAL point of view is that of RIDWAN, but I voted for Obama for the reasons given by NEZUA (The Unapologetic Mexican) and the CHANGESEEKER.

  14. This is the Changeseeker’s post on the matter.

    One of Nezua’s is linked in the post, as is Ridwan’s.

    Nezua also posted the MAPA statement, which reads in part:

    “We have observed with utter disgust the use of racially divisive and polarizing tactics employed by the Clintons, both Hillary and Bill, against Senator Barack Obama, not the first presidential candidate of African American origin. This is something that we would have expected from Republican candidates, but instead it surfaced from the bowels of the center-right institutional currents of the Democratic Party. The tactics are absolutely deplorable and clearly demonstrate what the Clintons think of all people of color.

    In other words, when they speak and refer to Senator Barack Obama in the racially disparaging manner in which they have, they are really referring to all of us people of color – African Americans, Latinos, Asian Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans.”

    To me this matters.

  15. I voted for Nader, but of course it did not mean anything in this Democratic state.Had I lived in a swing state I would have voted for Gore. We have a Green Party member on the County Council. Good man.

  16. Well, while I’m pasting up notes, there’s also a thoughtful, related post at WoC PhD (who endorses no candidate) that gets at what bothers me about all of this – the way the Clintons seem to feel entitled to the nomination, and the not very intelligent nastiness they are willing to engage in to try to get it.

    AND also: note that this post was not primarily an Obama vs Clinton post: my main point in it was that I disagree with the idea (and in this I disagree with Ridwan) that the reason there are whites for Obama is that it gets them off the racism hook. I think they are for him for other reasons (although it’s true, they wouldn’t be if he were not playing it so race-neutral).

  17. And also – I titled it “Generation Gap” (which is a different phenomenon from ageism) because I’m against the idea that youth is silly or immature – I think it’s often wiser and braver than age.

  18. And this is an interesting post on why Clinton would do well to step aside now:

    Then there is my Congresswoman, Barbara Lee (I reject my current congressman and revert to the congressperson of my former district), who has this to say:

    “He’s the best person at this time to unify the country and reshape America’s image in the world,” Lee said. “He has the ability to engage people at the grass-roots level. He’s a man young people look up to.”

    So, in sum: I know Clinton has had it rough, but she is far to the right of me and I don’t like her crowd. I think at this point that Obama can do more to turn the country around.

    If she becomes President and proves me wrong, I’ll be glad.

  19. And also, getting precise: I mean, rationally I agree with Ridwan, but strategically I agree with Nezua and the Changeseeker.

    These following things are more emotionally based: secretly, even though it isn’t fair and we should be into “intersectionality,” and we shouldn’t be voting on identities, I think racial oppression is worse than gender oppression in this country and that to elect someone Black and not Republican *can* shift things, not just put a Black face on the same-old-same-old, and I think Hillary is so imbricated with the male power structure that there may be no real change for women with her election.

    And I keep coming back to this: it is time for someone new. Really time. And: if Barack represents the pleasure principle and Hillary the reality principle, perhaps it is time to give some play to the former for once? I am *so* tired of accepting c*** because it is “realistic.”

  20. And – what is it that so bent me out of shape on this – the idea that we must *already* buckle under to the ‘reality’ that Clinton is the best we can do and furthermore, support it.

    I suppose that in a situation less dire it would be pleasant to see a woman, even a fairly conservative one like Hillary, become President. But at the present juncture, and since we can’t even have someone as critical of what is as Edwards, I’m happy at least at the prospect of getting someone new and who brings new energy which may *well* be more progressive than the Clinton machine.

    It’s the disappointing idea of already setting sights so low that infuriates me. Obama and the feeling thing, making you feel hope, making you feel once again that there may be possibilities, is that bad if it energizes you and the country to do something?

    If the Clintons get in, I feel, it’s business as usual and I will still be planning my move offshore. If Obama does, there’s an outside chance that something may happen, largely because of that silly “hope” he infuses people with, and I at least will feel refreshed. It’s not him I like nearly as much as the energy and the people, but I’ve already said that up thread.

  21. “Running around naked and shouting” – do I hear an association of Obama with jungle drums here?

    Professor, I think this comment is pretty bad. When I read running around naked and shouting, I read the antics of a toddler. My grandson is wanting to run around naked and shout right now. My daughter did not want to wear clothes at two, nor my second daughter, now the grandson wants to be naked. To say jungle drums, I don’t know, that is really off the mark, and kind of combative.

  22. Well, I don’t like to be infantilized and that is probably the root reason why Hattie got my goat.

    And she’s right in a way – I see the Obama vote as the (comparatively) more anti-system vote, and the Clinton-is-the-best-we-can-do arguments as the arguments of those who believe more deeply in the system as it is.

    I’ve also got a pro-Obama prejudice in that I like the amount of real time he has spent outside the country, and the *personal* international connections he has.

  23. Also: I think the Clintons are more loyal to the Republicans than to the people they seem to feel owe them their vote.

    The Obama vote is a gamble, it’s true, and I don’t normally gamble, but I’d rather take a chance than just lie down for 4-8 more years of Clintonism – on top of all this Bushism.

    And then there’s this key post from Nezua, and its good comments thread.

    I’m a third party voter and a Kucinich person. Now I’ve voted for a Democrat, and a fairly conservative one at that, which already compromises my principles very very far, and the Clintonites come down and suggest I owe *them* my vote – for what? – I resent it. I will vote for Billary as a very last resort and not before. In the meantime, their best way to get my vote for Hillary is *not* to come to my blog being mean. I don’t do it to them, and they make themselves and their candidates look really bad by doing it to me.

  24. And: the more interesting critiques of the Obama phenomenon are Ridwan’s, the Field Negro’s, and a thread involving Le Colonel Chabert, and I’ve linked to them all. I do *not* approve of the Obama vs Clinton nastiness and I do not think it does anyone any good, and … guess who started it … the Clintons as I remember.

  25. P.S. Kitty and Hattie, what I still find really bad is this:

    “Run and play with that cute guy or sit up straight and mind your manners with mom?”

    ON MY BLOG. That was what irritated me – sounded snide, superior, condescending, and I felt invaded.

  26. P.P.S. Redstar – on why I think it’s more relaxing to imagine the Obama presidency – I think he’s easier to convince not to start another war.

    And what I said right in the post:

    “I feel as though I can do it [vote Obama] and keep on walking, as opposed to do it [vote Clinton] and condemn myself to accepting permanent physical limitation. I feel as though if he wins, we might have working meetings where everyone speaks, as opposed to receiving orders from a distance while still tied to a leaden chair. It feels like voting for a department chair one does not agree with on all issues, but who has energy and academic (not just corporate) goals, and is a good colleague.”

  27. I don’t often “get” Hattie’s either/or thinking. I accept that it is a middle-class American trope.

  28. Middle-class American trope, yes.


    What I don’t like is condescension, reduction and infantilization and this, I notice, is what middle class women feeling disempowered do to people they identify as likely victims.

    I try to be kind to these women because I know they are feeling bad for good reason, but ultimately I get incredibly angry because they are so mean to me (and often, I have noticed, to their children), and because they seem to have no idea that there are people worse off than themselves.

    These are the type of “white feminists” the WoC are so tired of, and I see why the WoC get so tired. They say their first loyalty is women but actually it is white people and the privileged classes. This is patriarchal, not feminist.

    Hattie is feeling isolated as an older woman and thinks Clinton will do more for her than Obama and I see why. But she also says that people under 30 don’t realize how bad the economy is and will care when they give up the things of youth.

    I am in a much poorer state than Hattie is, and I will not have the things she has when I get to be her age. I will not have been able to retire, for example. And what things of youth, I want to know, will the 18 year olds here give up at 30: working a 12 hour shift overnight in a chemical plant before coming into my morning class? [And that’s a privileged one, if they’re actually able to enroll in classes.]

  29. servetus

    I would identify as a middle class trope, more or rather, the idea that one’s own experience is typical of everyone else’s. That because you do something others should do it as well. Just a thought.

  30. Servetus – yes, I think that’s true.

    ARRGH, this post – it was supposed to be a light post and it got heavy, because Hattie’s comment hit me in my least healed wound which involves in part having mean old people tell me I am an immature child because I am not exactly like them and not as depressed as they are.

    I keep on saying the same things and trying to summarize. Because there are several separate things tangled up here.

    I .

    Hattie is mean on my blog and I do not like it at all, and she has been subtly abusive before in her one-up, one-down way.


    What I don’t like about the Clinton camp, and this is since 1991, is that they seem to be more seriously opposed to the other Democrats than to the Republicans, and it is why I am voting for them last.

    I wish, though, that they would set their sights on the Republicans, not on their potential allies. I have already compromised a lot: from Gravel / Kucinich, to Edwards, to Obama. The Clintonites don’t move an inch and seem to think I owe them.

    Here’s a very good, hard hitting anti Obama article:
    Both he and Hillary are really that bad and that is why they were my last choices for this nomination, with Edwards coming in third as the next worst choice.

    However: the movement behind Obama is larger and better than he is, and it has momentum, and that is what I like. From the Clintonite point of view that is “immature” – but I have long noticed that so-called grownups call the truths they fear “immaturity.”

  31. Pingback: The Redstar Perspective » Reading Lists

  32. I know many folks supporting Obama because they believe in the movement behind him – and don’t particularly credit him with the energy so much as harnessing a pre-existing dynamic out there – much more so than they believe in him. I hear this in your comments too, in addition to your support for him. This for me is where my personal dissonance re: my Clinton support comes in, because I typically identify myself as someone who allies with progressive energy and initiatives (I’ve written about my own internal struggles with our two primary candidates). I personally feel my working-class risk aversion and deep cynicism (born of what I’m not sure) is part of what drives me towards Clinton (I’ve written about that also). However, I also think Clinton is a VERY strong candidate, not dissimilar from Obama, as you also say, and therefore to me not someone who is more in bed or tolerant of the GOP than he could end up being. I also think it’s been under-acknowledged that she also broke fundraising and grassroots participation records too; it’s just that Obama beat her so much in this arena, that this accomplishment on Clinton’s part has gone unnoticed.

    Finally, I find it really tiring that people won’t separate her from her husband, and realize this is partially of her own doing. But she wasn’t President, and this notion that she should be held responsible for her husband’s decisions is not fair. I know many, many couples who work in the same sectors, and most of them would be loathe to have their partners’ career choices and decisions construed as their own. Intellectually, I find this to be absolutely intriguing about her candidacy – the first spouse to run so prominently, and we’ve done a poor job of disentangling her CV from his, in part because this is not an easy thing to do.

    Anyway, in the end, as far as I can tell, this crazily emotional primary is participatory democracy in action. The shouting, the pain, the excitement, the charged, heated debates. I think it’s awesome as much as it’s disheartening.

  33. In the end I think the Clinton/Obama decision comes down to taste. What I’m concerned about is whether all the emotion associated with this primary is because there isn’t substance – in practice how much difference will there be between Clinton, Obama, and McCain? I’ll still vote against McCain, of course. And I am interested in the Obama phenomenon because it was so unexpected. I see the two Clintons as similar because of their proposed programs and records, not because they are married; they also have a long background together and he keeps speaking for her.

    But this post was not about Clinton vs. Obama; as I say he was my fourth choice among the candidates and she my fifth, and I didn’t expect to have to vote for either one in the primary, and I had to think about it. What this post meant to say was: white voters for Obama are not all for Obama because they expect to get absolved of racism by voting for him.

  34. Hattie: “And by the way, how do you feel about Cynthia McKinney? She’d get my vote in a minute. She’s got guts. But what did she get from the liberals? Just sneers about how she was out of control and so on and not respectable.”

    I like her. I don’t like the Democrats, and I am not a liberal. What did the Clintons say about her / would they work with her?

  35. “in practice how much difference will there be between Clinton, Obama, and McCain?” Plenty.
    On one level I might agree with Ridwan’s sweeping analysis, or share the suspicions and cynicism of many. I don’t trust any politician to have my best interests at heart unless I join with a very large group of people to put intense pressure on the process. But on another level I have to totally disagree: there are significant and important differences between the two Democratic frontrunners’ positions, but neither of them is equivalent to McCain. Please! Obama come out against the war from the beginning, McCain has said that we should bomb Iran; Obama and Clinton will not gut the few protections we have left for reproductive rights, while McCain will. Need I go on? On some level of righteousness, we can reject the impure politician for being too compromised, but when it comes down to it, I see a refusal to vote, as Ridwan suggests, in this particular election as consenting to the continued empowerment of the worst elements of this society. Be righteous, critique like hell, complain about the weaknesses of our candidates, but those who don’t vote do not get to pretend that they are not affecting the outcome, or that there will be no difference if McCain beats either Obama or Clinton. Even Bush’s base is fed up with Bush. Let’s not let them bring in someone who could potentially be worse, as I think either McCain or Huckabee would.

  36. Correct. And the 2 main reasons I voted for Obama now are a. that he came out against the war from the beginning and b. that he seems to be able to bring out of the woodwork essentially progressive people who might otherwise be passive.

  37. So I was looking in the Nation to find the recent anti Obama (anti any Democrat, he doesn’t even like Kucinich) Cockburn article, with which I disagree, since my view is that whatever the failings of the liberals they help move the national discourse leftward.

    But I found this: on Cuba, McCain’s to the left of Bush, Clinton is for the status quo, and Obama would loosen things up somewhat. Interesting in light of Fidel’s resignation yesterday.

  38. Pingback: On Reading for Pleasure and Writing What You Think « Professor Zero

  39. Cellar Dweller

    Wow, what are doing picking a fight with Hattie? That old bag has a barrel of ink the size of Utah and doesn’t like to lose arguments. I think dementia has gotten the better of her, as most of what she writes these days tends to make no sense whatsoever. You might also watch out for that whacko sidekick of hers Jennifer Something. She might be more disturbed than HatBag is.

    If you are up for it, ask Hattie about the Costco incident and how she got herself out of that one. (Hint, it involves her favourite condiment, mayonnaise.)

    All told, I think you handled the old coot well. She always tries to get in the last world and is a heavily repressed individual that had largely been ignored most of her life. And she ain’t too pretty either. Good work Profacero.

  40. CD I am publishing this because I favor the non-pious and because I am mad at Hattie and tired of Billary. But it is a little meaner than things I’ll normally print, so be nicer next time, even about Hattie, OK? There are *way* worse people, e.g. the Republican presidential candidates (note that even McCain is for “waterboarding” now).

    I appreciate a lot of what Hattie has to say, actually, although I don’t always appreciate the tone she takes here. I don’t think Jennifer is her sidekick or a “whacko.” I find her ideas and comments quite interesting, and she seems to me to be a person of good will.

    I still haven’t really read Hattie’s comments since the first one, but it got on my last nerve and I do not have the energy to get that angry *again.* However it is my impression that she says some milder things in this thread and that what I experience as venom isn’t really meant as such (although I *still* object to the condescension and the attitude of superiority).

    [By the way: on teaching: as I keep saying in this blog, it’s the condescension and the attitude of superiority that I dislike in teachers, and THAT IS WHY THIS IS THE PAULO FREIRE BLOG.]

  41. Wow, what are doing picking a fight with Hattie? That old bag [women are no longer valued when they are old]… I think dementia has gotten the better of her, [crazy bitch]… You might also watch out for that whacko sidekick of hers Jennifer Something. She might be more disturbed than HatBag is. [another crazy bitch who has the nerve to think deeply, can’t have that in a woman]

    If you are up for it, ask Hattie about the Costco incident and how she got herself out of that one. (Hint, it involves her favourite condiment, mayonnaise.)[sounds racist, there is always a racist jab with white people and mayonnaise]

    All told, I think you handled the old coot [no value once old] well. She always tries to get in the last world and is a heavily repressed [need some dick and all will be right] individual that had largely been ignored most of her life. And she ain’t too pretty either [only pretty women are worth listening to].

    How sad. Sexism lives.

    Two smart women fight over a man (Obamakaa).

    What is happening. It’s awful.

  42. Oh, looks like you got a visit from the troll that used to frequent Hattie and my sites. He has a petty vendetta against those whom he perceives to be strong women. He’s not an intellectual, though, and fails to understand most things apart from strength in women. That is what he is objecting to.

  43. Z

    Kitty – I repeat: Obama was my fourth choice Democratic Presidential candidate and Hillary my fifth. Why: Hillary voted for the war, and Obama came out against it from the beginning. I refuse to put the war aside just because she is a woman.

    What I objected to is the tone Hattie has been taking with me for some time. I *do not* care who she votes for and she is the one who came over here to get on my case about Obama/Hillary, not the other way around. Having chafed under her tone before, I had had it. One could say it was an argument about a woman as easily as about a man.

    Jennifer – aha, that explains this troll!

  44. I’m not trying to give you a hard time about your choice. My point is this, Hattie is a smart woman, you are a smart woman, and an instigator, a woody woodpecker (Cellar Dweller) comes along, instigates, and got what he/she wanted. I am hard pressed to believe Cellar Dweller is anything other than a misogynist, if he/she is a woman, then he/she has some major internalised misogyny to work through. I’m will not opine on Hattie. I don’t read her enough. If you feel like she condescended then I respect that. I also respect that Hattie is older and deserves some respect. I also respect that both you and Hattie are women and deserve some respect. I will also note that I don’t appreciate a man [Cellar Dweller] coming in and having a platform to expose his contempt for women. Two women, who incidentally first fell out over a man (Obama), a man, that neither women particularly cared for from the beginning. So what I see is two men win and two women lose. Two women are fighting over Obama, making him even more of a man’s man regardless of politics. He moved from a male politician to a male two women are fighting over when Cellar Dweller came in and showcased it like he was reviewing a woman mud wrestling contest. That is all I’m saying. It’s your blog of course, but in this hostile time, I don’t think men should be allowed to benefit over women disagreeing or disputing. One can pretend everyone has a collective say, a collective benefit, but the truth is the man (Cellar Dweller) gets his jollies at the expense of women.

  45. I’m not sure that the troll received any benefits from the exchange. That troll has been around for what seems like a couple of years now. He’s a kind of potty-mouth, much of the time, but can occasionally clean himself up a bit to create some credibility for himself on blogs he hasn’t taken to frequenting. He’s from Ontario, Canada, it seems. His viewpoints might be specifically Canadian, but I often take his attitudes as revealing to me the lowest common denominator of thinking in terms of Western misogynist attitudes and what is wrong with society in general.

    His ravings usually give me a boost in terms of thinking that I’m right in so many ways about what is wrong with contemporary culture. He pinpoints the misogynist reactions that occur very commonly in society but are taken to extremes by himself. The way he caricatures misogynist attitudes — through his own words — enhances my sense of contempt for all much subtler forms of misogyny, which we all face.

  46. So Jennifer, this is *the* troll who has been around your site and Hattie’s – I get it!

    Kitty, I suppose so but I think you’re over-solving. CD is inconsequential. I was already irritated at Hattie, and you could say we fell out over Hillary as easily as that we did over Barack, and once again, from my perspective it was over her tone not over whom to vote for.

  47. Cellar Dweller

    Anyone who doesn’t agree with either of these two superior minded woman is automatically labelled a troll.

    I’ve deleted the rest of your comment, CD, it was too false and too rude. That, not disagreement, is trolling behavior.

    Also, your URL is fake. Trolls, by the way, tend to fake URLs and e-mail addresses. –Z

  48. Pingback: Random observations and questions before the weekend « (Almost) Without Footnotes

  49. P.S. My big disagreement with Ridwan – and the Field Negro, on some days – is that I *don’t* think that what is behind all the Obama support is the idea that we won’t have to think about race ever again. I heard two white guy Obama supporters saying that on YouTube today, feeling relieved because voting for him sort of absolves them (they felt) from historical guilt, but that wasn’t their only reason … and I think the BIG reason (for me at least) is the idea that WE CAN do something.

    I liked the CESAR CHAVEZ slogan in its time, when I was a child, for that reason, and since then I have come to need this slogan more than ever.

  50. feeling relieved because voting for him sort of absolves them (they felt) from historical guilt,

    Aiming to be absolved of historical guilt is very unprofound. It’s wrong on all sorts of levels.

    On the most obvious level, giving your small token of support to someone who REPRESENTS those who were oppressed by the people who represented you in the past (or indeed, who represents those actually oppressed by you in the present) is too small a concession.

    On a deeper level, such an approach to life, which makes formal reparations and thinks that this notion of justice somehow serves to affirm one’s humanity, reveals a lack of thought about what humanity actually is.

    I’m not going to be able to fully explain what I mean here, but let me suggest that there is such a thing as belonging to the human race and actually SEEING the deep injustice of it all, which goes way beyond the formal mechanism of making reparations in order to improve one’s self image.

    But this is just a comment about those two white guy Obama supporters…..

  51. Yeah … it’s “I want to do this easy thing and then not have to do anything else, ever again.”

  52. Well if it means something to those people then they should do the easy thing. But in my view their souls must be very small.

  53. Funny I haven’t heard anyone say a vote for Hillary will solve the gender gap.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s