Letter To My White Sisters: That Hurts My Feelings

Two: she would be the first woman president. We need more women in office, generally, and I do not believe this will happen without someone big to lead the way. And I was glad that on Saturday night Hillary said “But I think I am an agent of change. I embody change. I think 
having the first woman president is a huge change...”***

Then all those women and young people the Hillary camp took for granted -- all those WOMEN LIKE ME who have been waiting their ENTIRE LIVES for this just might consider making it happen.*

Lately (especially post Iowa) I am seeing more and more of my white sisters saying that one of the reasons Hillary Clinton should be elected is because of the powerful, world changing, patriarchy smashing, awesome and beautiful message it would send.  And I agree it would.  But when you imply or flat out say that having a white woman in the White House is more important than having a black man there, that hurts my feelings as Hillary Clinton might say.

I have no problem with those who support Clinton because they believe she is the best candidate. I support Obama because I think his approach to policy is the strongest and most pragmatic and because I think he has assembled an incredible team of advisers, especially on foreign policy.

That Obama is black is just fantastic, awesome, pinch-me-I'm-dreaming icing on the cake. If Obama were not in the race, I would be supporting John Edwards and not Hillary Clinton. I have never been excited about the prospect of Hillary Clinton returning to the White House.  I am fairly certain I would not have teared up in joy had she won in Iowa. I supported her when she ran for Senate. I lived in New York at the time and voted for her. But it's been clear to me that, although she may not have been running for president since Kindergarten, she certainly has been running since about the time Bill told her that Monica was not a fiction of the vast right wing conspiracy. And, in those ten years or so, the only thing that has briefly excited me about her potential presidency was the prospect of a Bill Clinton Vice-Presidency. Although seeing him on the campaign trail has only brought up memories of the less fabulous aspects of his presidency, not warm fuzzies and actually has become cringe-inducing. 

A couple of years ago I decided that I hoped she would not run and rather would stay in the Senate and become the Majority Leader. I think the Senate is a good place for her to use her wonky talents. The role the president plays is not drafting legislation. The primary power of the office is in the bully pulpit, in the ability to lead and persuade and in the ability to be the psychological parent who heads our dysfunctional national family.

Senator Clinton's friends all say that she's warm, friendly and funny in person once you get to know her. But a president doesn't have the luxury of getting to know everybody individually and winning them over. Senator Obama moves and inspires masses and it matters. He's had my vote to lose since the Democratic convention in 2004. Not only hasn't he lost it but he has earned it as he has campaigned.

I love, adore and respect my white sisters but I am disappointed in some of them. A few have said that the power of seeing the first woman in the White House has put Clinton over the top as their candidate. I always point out that they can only say that because they are not black women.  That the face of racial equality is male and the face of gender equality is white is nothing new. But to see the promise of Hillary Clinton in the White House without even acknowledging the promise of Barack Obama in the White House is a matter of privilege.

By privilege I do not mean racism. All whites are privileged just as men are privileged, as are able bodied people, as are heterosexuals and as are many others in our society. Privilege means the luxury of not having to think about your race, gender or other status because it is treated as the norm and not as deviant or other or in any way as less than fully human. As a woman you are constantly aware of all the ways in which the patriarchy limits you, discriminates against you, dehumanizes you and in ways big and small just beats you down.  Unless you choose to, if you are a man you do not have to think about all the ways in which you benefit from being male.  And if you are white, unless you choose to, you do not see the ways in which racism is just as much a cancer as the patriarchy because you are not forced to think about your race and the benefits that flow from it every single day.  So my white sisters, even if you are aware of sexism every day, I seriously doubt that when you speak only of the power of a woman in office that you are aware of racism every day.

I know this because I benefit from white privilege even though I'm black.  I'm made aware of my privilege every time I go to dinner with friends and I am the only person at the table the waitress will speak to.  I'm made aware of my privilege when I go into shops with family and they are followed and I am not.  I'm made aware of my privilege when white people assume I share their racist thoughts and they spill their secrets to me unaware that I'm working undercover.  I'm made aware of my privilege and thus the corresponding depth of racism every day.  So just as I know that patriarchy is an evil cancer, I know quite viscerally that white women and black men are both privileged and deemed unworthy by the same forces of power that rule by fear.

One argument that has been made to me is that patriarchy is the bigger problem.  Patriarchy doesn't just harm women, it harms men as well by forcing them into molds of hyper-masculinity and requiring behavior and desires of them that robs them of a bit of their souls.  But for every evil patriarchy inflicts on both men and women, racism inflicts evil equally on the souls of all Americans (and I'm limiting myself to Americans simply because I am discussing it is in the context of our presidential election).

But what finally got me is the fact that Hillary will represent change for over half the population. It's more changy. If Obama is elected I will be very pleased, but a part of me will still think that the power structure (which the media is a part of) is continuing to tell more than half our young people that they should not shoot as high and they will not get as far. Because of who they are.**

A similar argument is that since women are half the country, it's a bigger change if Clinton is elected. But again I'll argue that sexism is bad for men and women just as racism is bad for people of every color. Eliminating either is good for everybody not just the target of the oppression.

But just to spar with myself a bit, arguably, black men are in possibly the toughest state of any group in our country.  I'd also argue that the future in the United States is more promising for the average white girl than it is for the average black boy.

To that point, the boogeymen of this election are not women.  We are asked by candidates, including Clinton, to fear brown-skinned men.  We are told that men from the south and the east are coming to steal our jobs and to kill our children and we must pick the president who will be the toughest or most ready to beat them back.  What better message to send to ourselves and the world than that we choose a brown-skinned man offering a message of hope, not fear, to lead us?

Another argument I've heard is that Barack isn't as much a role model for people of color as Hillary is for women.  Barack is too privileged, too bougie. Heh, maybe that's why I like him as my family is bougie as hell (Links, Jack and Jill, AKA).  And, yes, Obama is privileged but let's compare and contrast with Clinton:  Both are millionaire authors of best-selling autobiographies who went to Ivy League law schools.  Both of them are worlds apart from the lives of 99% of those whom they hope to represent.  Sorry, dear white sister who made this argument, but with love I'm telling you that I'm not buying that Hillary makes a better role model because Barack is not enough of a real Negro and little black children need better.

I do not begrudge you, my white sisters, of the awesome feelings of pride you felt when watching Hillary in the 90's.  I respect deeply the message you want her election to send to your daughters.  But I ask that you respect and at least acknowledge the feelings Barack inspires in me and the message I want my nephews to receive.  And, please, please, please stop telling me that your dream is more important than mine.

*Erin has previously posted about why Obama's election would be important as well.

**Please click to read Elisa's entire comment and see her comment below.  I did not mean to imply that she did not acknowledge the importance of Obama's candidacy.

***Ditto for Morra. 

Sorry for all the editing to anyone who might have me in their feed reader and is getting multiple updates.  I completely understand if you unsubscribe after tonight.

The quotes that I included are just a small sampling of things I've read and interviews I've seen.  They stuck in my mind because they are friends and I respect them enough to not just read what they write but remember and know where to find quotes.  It just feels like post Iowa all of a sudden there's a resurgence of  commentary that we have to elect Clinton for our daughters as a woman on CNN said today and that it's coming because Obama might win.  I have my lenses and biases as I (hope) I've pointed out above.

And, to be fair and balanced, I'll point out that if you read the rash of articles after Obama's win in Iowa about how happy black folks are about that, you'll also see little mention of the symbolic importance of Clinton.  I'd argue though that it's because Clinton's power was acknowledged when she was the front runner and Obama's wasn't really believed until he won.

Edited to include: I encourage you check out Rita Arens post on BlogHer about why she is voting for Clinton which adds an excellent counter-perspective to this discussion.

Comments

[Virginia]

All along I've argued that I would be happy with either Clinton, Obama, Edwards, or Richardson. They all embody the Democratic party's best ideals. Only when Obama took Iowa did I realize that I actually believe Clinton has the best qualifications. She has consistently and constantly worked for progress in ways that I support. And she's taken the knocks and learned the hard lessons in the process. She's ready to lead.

Obama does represent hope and change, but I don't think he's seasoned enough yet. If Clinton wins, I hope he'll stay involved, continue to learn, and try again. Nevertheless, if Obama, or Edwards, or even Richardson, manage to win the country will still be better off than we have been for the last 8 years.

[Maria Niles]

Thank you so much for commenting, Virginia. I really appreciate and respect your perspective.

"Only when Obama took Iowa did I realize that I actually believe Clinton has the best qualifications. She has consistently and constantly worked for progress in ways that I support."

I just wish that it had been your voice I was hearing after Iowa - I wouldn't have gotten so agitated! ;-)

[Suzanne]

Incredibly done. I couldn't agree more. Thank you.

[Maria Niles]

Thank you, Suzanne. I appreciate your kind words.

[liza]

WOW!

Just fucking out of the park WOW!

[Maria Niles]

Liza - as someone who very much appreciates and respects your perspectives on these issues, I am humbled by your response. Thank you.

[lainad]

Hey Maria;

I'm real late coming to the party, but just wanted to say thank you for your thought-provking piece. If you don't mind, I'd like to refer to it for a blogher post next week.

[fabooj]

I like this:

Sorry, dear white sister who made this argument, but with love I'm telling you that I'm not buying that Hillary makes a better role model because Barack is not enough of a real Negro and little black children need better.

OMG, I've been trying to get this point across and coulndn't quite find the words. On paper, Clinton and Obama could be twins. And I think this is what has been bugging me the most about the Clinton campaign's racist slams. They know that Obama isn't all that different from Clinton, so they're signalling to (racist) white America, "He's still BLACK!!!"

[Maria Niles]

fabooj,

Glad I could help! And, yes, the signals are coming faster and louder, aren't they?

Thanks so much for your comment.

[Jill]

Maria, thanks so much for pointing me to this post and your blog.

After reading the post and all the comment, what I honestly think of? Name-calling. I just, hate, name-calling. And bullying. I don't care what the premise is. And what so much of this amounts to is taunting and name-calling. To what end? To gain a step by putting someone else down.

We have got to stop that. It is literally killing us because of how distracted we get by it. We justify the distraction because we should point it out and fight it. But in the meantime, precious time to figure out who can really get done what we want to get done is slipping away.

Sorry to get kind of abstract. I know I've contributed to and contribute to the conversation about the abysmal treatment we see on the debate stages and in the press. I don't mean to degrade the indignities, but there has got to be a way to move ahead.

Am I being too Pollyannish? lol Wouldn't be the first time.

Thanks again.