Rebecca Traister has a nice post up at Salon.com about why Clinton supporters are still kicking and screaming, despite all the wonderful demands that they just suck it up and join the party.
Exactly. These angry people have nowhere else to go. So the safe expectation is that they will fall in line without much kicking and screaming. And that, ultimately, is why many of them are kicking and screaming. Yes, they’re going to vote for Obama. Of course they’ll vote for him. The truth is, they’ll probably love voting for him. But after what they feel has been done to them — the way in which they were written off, marginalized and resented, their hopes mocked and their history-making ambitions dismissed as retrograde identity politicking — damned if they’re going to be nice girls about it.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/06/23/pumas/index.html
Exactly!
Such women find rational methods of resolution which could be anything from not voting to voting for McCain to reluctantly voting for Obama.
Nothing is guaranteed, and no premise is reliable for women are and can be fickle, as men already know, and are subject to whims when push comes to shove.
If men insist on shoving as they have by the latest example, they deserve the unpredictability of women, all they can muster. It is their only defence to unwarranted control.
Pat,
I think you’re conflating feminine stereotypes with totally valid discontent with the democratic party and process. This has nothing to do with women being prone to fickleness or subject to whims. It has everything to do with them being sick and fucking tired of being called “low-hanging fruit” and having their reproductive rights held over their heads as some kind of carrot while watching the so-called defenders of those rights not do a damn thing as the right takes more and more little bites out of that carrot. I appreciate that you want to support what I, and a lot of other women, are saying, but the stereotypes aren’t welcome.