To find Hillary Clinton likable, we must learn to view women complexly


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/09/15/to-find-hillary-clinton-likabl.html


Trump campaign chief: it's not lying if he didn't know whether it was true or not when he said it
#2

we must learn to view women complexly

That’s a real long shot for American men, they have to do a lot of deprogramming that is efficiently
[and sadly] shoved at them 24/7 from birth that a Woman is a second class citizen, etc. etc.

In fact little in our society today portrays a Woman & a Man as equal to each other. You don’t have to search far for the evidence.


#3

I’ll keep it short: We don’t have to like women. Women can be assholes too.


#4

I don’t understand why so many find her so “unlikeable”. I find very, very few politicians likeable in general. In fact, I don’t think of politicians as people I should like at all. Whether I like them or not has nothing to do with my choices, which are based not on my feelings about them as a person, but my personal judgment on their ability to govern and lead effectively.

Politician is a little bit of an epithet to start with, so I’m confused about this likeability matrix concept.

I’d say a not-insignificant part of Trump’s… er… appeal… is that he isn’t a politician.


#5

Women can be fully-realized actors on the world stage. This means they can have, as one or more of their characteristics, certain behaviors that could be classified under the general heading “asshole”. You know, just like…men!


#6

Because she’s a woman. Seriously. Women are classified by likeability and fuckability. Yes, even professional women, and even publicly and in the media.


#7

@CarolineSiede Hey! How come you tend to post full length articles on the main page, rather than a short excerpt followed by a jump? Just curious.


#8

Let me be more blunt: I don’t like any politicians. For me personally, gender doesn’t factor into that dislike. It’s also not personal – to me, “politician” is a job where you mostly take opinions based on what will get you into office or get you elected, rather than what’s good or right or just. Or even what you actually believe in!

And that’s… kind of a shitty job :wink:


#9

The author hit the nail on the head that men who hold public office are more easily forgiven on / empathized for their faults, while women less so.

Even Drumpf is a sort of a likable goof, which makes him all the more terrifying.


#10

I totally understand what you’re saying. My point is that being a woman trumps (hah) job title. Presidential candidate, astronaut (you think I’m kidding? sadly, no), CEO, etc…if it’s a woman, discussion about her likeability and/or fuckability is guaranteed.


#11

I will admit that politicians who are not good / inspirational / motivating public speakers, I don’t respect as much (John Kerry comes to mind, Gore to some extent). I view that as an essential job skill for being a politician. Be good at your job!


#12

I also don’t care if politicians are likeable or not. I don’t care what a politician is like as a person, as long as they govern effectively and care about their constituents’ needs.

I think Hillary Clinton can govern effectively, but doesn’t care about her constituents. She will do whatever her donors want, but does not seem to care about the electorate at all. I don’t trust her, although I think she’s better than Trump. Her gender or personality factor not at all into my mistrust of her.


#13

That was the point.


#14

That’s probably more than a small exaggeration: she probably cares and panders to donors.


#15

Is it really a fact that Hillary Clinton is one of the most qualified human being to ever run for president of the United States? Or is that just party spin. By what metric is this being measured?
I’m not voting for Drumpf that’s for sure but I’m not convinced that Clinton is the most qualified candidate to have run for the office.
Qualified… well she is over 35 and a citizen. But as Mr Sanders pointed out, her vote for the Iraq war and her taking super PAC money demonstrates her lack of qualification in many peoples view.
If the question is does she have more experience than any candidate, well that’s easy. Martin Van Buren was a senator, a secretary of state, a governor, an ambassador and a vice president. Even George H. W. Bush was a veteran who was a member of the House, U.N. ambassador, director of the CIA and vice president. Hmmm perhaps experience doesn’t make you a good leader.
Then again, Obama who said she was the most qualified was one of the least experienced candidates to actually be elected. So is experience all it’s cracked up to be? Reagan was very experienced and qualified as the 2 term governor of the nations most populous state and one of the 10 largest economies in the world but many think he did a terrible job while others give him god like status.


#16

There is your problem. The people probably the best at running the government, aren’t necessarily likable. Charisma goes a long way to get you elected, and while this might help in direct diplomacy, it does nothing to help you actually govern or chart the best course for the government.

Successful CEOs don’t always have to be likable, as long as they produce the desired results. I bet someone analytical with low social skills probably has a better shot at making what is overall the best policy decisions, but they would never get elected.


#17

If people are viewed with complexity, does it really matter if they are likeable?

Whether you realize it or not, you’ve spent your entire life being trained to empathize with white men.

Doesn’t that depend entirely upon what culture you have been raised in? I agree that it is certainly true for many people, but it is far from universal. It suggests a Eurocentric bias.

Voting is more like hiring an employee than looking for a friend, they need meet my criteria for competence rather than likeability.


#18

[quote]Donald Trump is the only candidate who is more disliked than Clinton. And he’s not only overtly racist, sexist, and Islamophobic, but also unfit and unprepared for office.[/quote]But what if we just have to learn to view Trump complexly?


#19

I am a feminist. I fully accept that women are human beings, with all that entails.

I find Hillary more professional and more likeable than Trump, Johnson or Stein. None of the four are people I’d really want to hang out with but we’re electing a president here, not a buddy.

What I don’t like about her is POLICY, which overrides other concerns.

Barring catastrophe, she’s going to win… and almost nothing that is wrong now is going to get better. (This still puts her way ahead of Trump.)

I haven’t switched; I’m still voting for Stein, despite a new collection of nervous tics from her pandering to the kook caucus.


Post-election Post-mortem Prior Prognostication Thread
#20

To find Hillary Clinton likable

Right now, she’s the best person for the job in a position to take it. I don’t have to like her or want to drink a beer with her, or any other politician. I think this peculiar aspect of out politics needs to die, and I’m doing my part to kill it by not trying to like anyone. Anyone who’s the president or in a position of power isn’t my friend, I don’t want to like them. I want to make heavy the crown that rests on their head. I can like her if I meet her, but otherwise I think that whether or not a candidate is “likable” is an unfortunate part of the political calculus that we shouldn’t encourage.

Though I do agree that we need to view women more complexly and that a lot of Hillary’s critics dislike her because we do not. That sexism is there, and is a reality to be contended with. I just think the politics of “likability” are unfortunate to begin with.