The commander-in-chief of the UK is the Queen. India and Israel were not nuclear powers when they had female PMs. The commander-in-chief in Pakistan is the President, moreover Bhutto clearly didn’t have much authority over the army.
Isn’t that moving the goalposts? Besides, Indira Gandhi was responsible for turning India into a nuclear power.
7 Likes
Well, not really; there is a difference between having your finger on the button and not.
Honestly, I think in many ways Ghandi and Bhutto and even Thatcher were bigger breakthroughs than Clinton, I just don’t think the comparisons really work. For better or worse the POTUS has an absurd amount of power, and it is the degree of that power, especially the military power, that has been used to scare Americans into not voting for a woman. (When Bill ran his lack of military service was one of the strongest arguments people raised against him, and it triggered discussions at the time over whether this de facto requirement produced a structural block to a female presidency). Because of this the Clinton election - assuming she wins - really will be something genuinely new, and not just a matter of the US catching up to the rest of the world.
1 Like
Boudica wasn’t from Ireland. The Iceni came from what is now Norfolk.
3 Likes
she wll do for women what obama did for afro-americans !!
I’ve always liked “The Atlantic Archipelago” as a politically neutral name for “these islands”. I suppose that it might have to be “The East Atlantic Archipelago” technically, to avoid annoying all the Atlantic archipelagos in the Americas (Bermuda Islands etc.). Then again, I suppose the Canary Islands count as an East Atlantic archipelago as well, so it might have to be “North-East Atlantic Archipelago”. Or maybe “The European Atlantic Archipelago” to annoy Brexiters…
1 Like
Objectively I know the xenophobia and Islamophobic racism have been brewing in Britain for a long time. Orwell didn’t write 1984 without a reason. But subjectively I feel a little bad that we produce a viable Trump candidacy and the next month Britain bails on the EU. I sort of feel like shouting, No, don’t jump of the bridge with us!
3 Likes
The UK always jumps off the bridge with America.
2 Likes
I am a woman and I don’t get this either. My mother was/is an incredibly strong woman, an activist who had to fight for equal rights as a woman in the 70s. It never occurred to me that there was anything women couldn’t do.
Yes there is a lot of sexism and women are still held back and treated like sex objects. You know which women are allowed in the club? The ones who capitulate, who play the game, who don’t threaten those who are in power. That’s Clinton. It’s terrible, but’s that’s how it is right now. She’s actually an insider and she is playing insider politics.
I just read a heartbreaking article in the Guardian about rural poverty leading to pervasive drug use and increasing HIV. Will Clinton’s economic policies alleviate the grinding poverty in these communities? Probably not. To stay in the game she has to keep the money people happy, even more than a man would have. The poor would have been better served with Bernie Sanders.
If we’re looking out preferentially for our own kind, I don’t think that’s ever going to work. It creates division and backlash and the powers that be know very well how to exploit that, I would rather see a movement to lift everyone up economically and break the stranglehold if money on politics. Clinton and the DNC colluded to squash just such a campaign.
5 Likes
I agree with this, overall. From my perspective, it appears that having a person of color in the White House has not improved the situation for persons of color outside the White House.
I dunno, I’m a white guy.
Only the US and its doomed empire matter. And I have to add, it’s terribly sad that the first woman over the that particular parapet in this backward realm is a war criminal and a plutocrat, but I guess that’s the best we can do.
I would not count on her being elected, although the chance that her opponent will finally self-destruct seems large.
1 Like
I truly believe it changed the perception of what is possible in the United States. I had young students of color in 2008 who flat out refused to believe a black man even had a chance of winning until it happened.
6 Likes
I wish I had a reason to support HRC, but with her support of Wall Street, the Big Banks, and Big Oil and with her VP pick, the self-described “pro-life conservative” Christian who is anti abortion, anti gay marriage, and for deregulation of the financial industry, I don’t see any reason to.
Fear of the boogyman, Drumpf, is just not enough. Besides, I always thought of Fear as a Republican strategy.
2 Likes
Evidently the Clinton nomination emasculated the creator of Dilbert.
“Let me say this again, so you know I’m not kidding. Based on what I know about the human body, and the way our thoughts regulate our hormones, the Democratic National Convention is probably lowering testosterone levels all over the country. Literally, not figuratively. And since testosterone is a feel-good chemical for men, I think the Democratic convention is making men feel less happy. They might not know why they feel less happy, but they will start to associate the low feeling with whatever they are looking at when it happens, i.e. Clinton.”
7 Likes
Me too. I hope Obama’s election made a huge difference. It just looks really bad right now. But maybe the problems we’re seeing are a response to Obama’s election, and are somehow a sign of progress? I would like to think that he’s surfaced these problems, and now we can address them and move past them.
1 Like
You’re seeing a celebration that your role in society is permanently diminished. And it’s happening in an impressive venue that was, in all likelihood, designed and built mostly by men. Men get to watch it all at home, in homes designed and built mostly by men, thanks to the technology that was designed and built mostly by men.
Seriously?
On the 2D playing field – where policies and facts matter – the Democratic National Convention is doing great. And when it comes to exciting women, it might be the best ever. But on an emotional level – where hormones rule – men have left the building…that they built.
SERIOUSLY?!
For the record, I endorse Hillary Clinton for president, for my personal safety, because I live in California where it is dangerous for people to think you are a Trump supporter. My political views don’t align with either candidate and I don’t vote, in order to protect my objectivity.
http://img.pandawhale.com/post-15478-Nathan-Fillion-speechless-gif-QTlX.gif
Okay, Scott, to use an Olympic metaphor:
Life is like a mixed-gender relay race. The fact that one of the women on your team can now run as fast as the men does not diminish the roles of the men; it means that your team now has a better chance to win.
And, while I don’t want to mock your feelings of “If I speak my mind honestly, I’ll get hurt,” because there are people in that situation around the world… “Objectivity” does not “not voting.” “Objectivity” means that you do what will get you the best result. And, if you think that not voting is how to do that, then fine — a lot of people agree with you. But that doesn’t mean that you’re any more objective than the people who do vote, or than the people who have already chosen who they’re voting for.
12 Likes
I am equal parts laughing at him and profoundly sad that kind of thinking even exists.
7 Likes
Israel was already a nuclear power by the time Golda Meir was PM. They just didn’t tell anyone at the time. The “Samson Option” was being seriously considered at one point during the Yom Kippur War of 1973.
3 Likes
You mean her?
Honestly, every time I hear Meir’s name mentioned I think of Paulina Porizkova’s portrayal of her on SNL.
1 Like
