I saw this recently on CNN.
CNN/Time: "Where are the Women?", a half hour 'special' of some kind. Poor CNN, they're looking for women ready to rip Clinton apart and not finding them amongst many feminists. Oh, woe. What, pray tell, does this imply about the importance we Americans are attaching to The Presidential Blowjob? And, perhaps, the attendant Media Circus(tm)?
Video clips from 60/70s, typical 'women's movement' stuff, marches on the Capitol and all. B+W stills. Some shots in color from the 80s maybe, but not much.
Best quote so far (she got PISSED at the interviewer, blamed the media for all this crap in NO uncertain terms) "So what. So. What."
Well, I'm not seeing much of a rift here.
In bringing this up as a 'women's issue', CNN/TIME asked variations on one and only one theme.
"Feminists were against Clarence Thomas, but are still backing Clinton. Isn't that hypocritical?" ---- Hey, Friedan answered that one by pointing out VEHEMENTLY that unlike Thomas, this is not about sexual harrassment. Period.
Basically, CNN/TIME is arguing that feminists should be anti-Clinton because he's an adulterer. [I.e., we women are good and virtuous, sexually, and our dainty sensibilities should be offended. Nope.]
But, does adultery mean he's a bad president? No. Does it mean he should be impeached? No. The general response of every woman interviewed (excepting Paglia, I can't recall if they really asked her a version of this question, it was all 'feminist schism' stuff), was that adultery was an insufficent reason to turn against the President, and that the media should take a flying leap.
I can understand why they feel so frustrated by my 'slacker feminist generation', because we're 'failing' to organize on the national level, but it just hasn't occurred to so many of them that we're a different generation, so of COURSE we're going to go about our politics, and our feminism, and our lives, in a different way than they did and do. You could argue that they changed the world, but don't want to recognize it. Because if they have, then they don't know what to do next.
I liked the general gist of this, I suspect CNN/TIME didn't, and I think the longer this gets dragged out, the people who are going to get hurt the most are going to be the media and partisans who kept Ken Starr in business. I'd like to think the mood of the country is shifting to match mine, frankly, in anger not at the President, but at Starr, the politicos who kept him investigating when he found Jack Diddly Squat in Whitewater, and the media who have done their level best to make his 'findings' a bona fide crisis, when, it is, simply put, not.
02/10/07 at 1:41