As a hard-core feminist, and a feminist that champions other feminists and feminist causes. (Quick aside, how many "feminists" can you fit into a sentence?). I adore strong women--Oprah, Christiane Amanpour, Angela Davis, the Williams sisters--you name me a strong principled woman, and I'm bound to love her, which is why the media-anointed trail-blazing, glass-ceiling breaking, "pioneers" Hillary Clinton and Katie Couric are absolutely no friend to the feminist movement, nor are they worthy of the pedastals they've been placed on.
I'll heat up just below the fold.
The media tells us Hillary Clinton is likely to be the presidential nominee of our party in two years. Why? Why do they lend credence to this myth? Why make Hillary the poster girl for powerful women politicians? Barbara Boxer is far more courageous and true to the feminist cause. She's out here in California campaigning against Draconian legislation that will further make safe, legal abortion available to women in our state. What's the last truly feminist thing Hillary Clinton has done? When was the last time she took an unpopular position or led the charge against the enemies of feminist principles? When?
Yet the media slobbers allllll over her, as though she's the only woman pol strong enough or polished enough to become the first female president. I could name ten other women in politics with tougher chops than she who would make excellent presidents.
I'm all for a woman president. Hell, I almost wrote in Oprah for 2000. Yes, I did. I happen to think she would be great at it. I also happen to think she's more electable than Clinton, but I digress. I'm for women taking power everywhere, but shouldn't they be the right women? Shouldn't they be tough but fair, saavy but principled, intelligent but practical? Shouldn't they be the best? Not the prettiest, or the sweetest, or have the best wardrobe, or even the most money, but the best, brightest, most capable of women?
Which brings me to Katie. Oh boy. Did anyone watch her first night on the CBS Evening News? She couldn't think of anything better to end her lackluster first night with other than "I hope you'll join us tomorrow." I hope? Why don't you just get down on your friggin' knees and beg people to watch you. She was wooden and completely out of her league. I desperately want to turn on the T.V. and see a competent, compelling woman-anchor on any cable or network newscast, but Katie-freakin'-Couric? Why oh why does she have to be the first woman anchor? Who can take her seriously after years of watching her banal banter with her idiot side kick Matt Lauer and the jovial but never serious Al Roker? Why not Jane Paulie, Christiane Amanpour, Ashleigh Banfield? All of these women have serious news experience. But no.
Women today are stuck having to look up to the likes of Hillary the appeaser and Katie the pleader. Were it not for Oprah, I simply don't know who I could point my young students to as an example of an inspiring woman.
We need our heroes, just like everyone else, and those being offered up to us just don't cut it. Some of you may say I'm too harsh, that my standards are too high, that we should be glad the country is accepting women in powerful positions at all. Well, whatever. I'm cranky, and I'm tired of the uber-hype out there about both of these women. Neither deserves it.