Lawyer Mama

Sexism: This is What Hillary Clinton is up Against

Sometimes I live in a little bubble. A comfortable little bubble with no overt racism, sexism, or even social conservatism. I'm surrounded by people who think like me. I read blogs of mostly people who think like me politically. (With a few awesomely wonderful exceptions. You know who you are!) I may make forays into the non-like minded blogging world, but it's usually just to keep abreast of what anti-Liberal propaganda is floating around out there.

I like to think there is a little more air in my bubble than, say, George W. Bush's. But sometimes I wonder if I'm just as out of touch with reality. In this case, a woman's reality.

My parents taught me, like so many other girls of my generation, that I could do anything or be anything. My gender was never an issue.

As a little girl, I played soccer on a team full of boys. I played tee ball and baseball on a team full of boys. I joined a swim team, with girls and boys. I climbed trees; I played flag football; I mowed the lawn. I took advanced math classes; I started out college majoring in Computer Science; I took the hard science classes; I went to law school.

It never mattered that I was a girl and then, a woman.

There were a couple of incidents here and there, but I chalked them up as isolated happenings and not a symptom of the larger world. I clearly recall an argument I had in my college black studies class with a fellow class mate and Male Chauvinist Pig. In our class, our discussions generally started out with race and then moved to our sheltered little college world. Or, we started out talking about our lives and then moved onto race. It was an effective teaching tool and I looked forward to our twice weekly discussions.

On this particular occasion I can't recall how the argument started, but I remember the MCP raising his hand and stating that, of course, a man was far more important to the stability and health of a relationship than a woman was because of the male earning power. He went on to say that a woman wasn't without value but that if he or his future wife wanted someone to stay home with their children, it would be her. Because, of course, Mr. MCP would be making more money.

That was like waiving a red flag in front of a bull.

I raised my hand and retorted that his argument was based on antiquated gender stereotypes, that in my future career I would undoubtedly make more money than my husband (sorry, T.) and that if one of us stayed home it would be him. Did that make *me* more important in our marriage? Then I told the class that if Mr. MCP didn't change his attitude, his importance to a marriage would become a moot point because no one would marry such a blatant misogynist.

I got a standing ovation.

So I assumed that encounters I had with future MCP's were similar and that the rest of the world was cheering me on.

Then I entered the professional world.

Before I headed off to law school, I worked for an insurance company I've mentioned here in the past. I began to notice that most of the lowest level employees were women: the claims processors, the administrative assistants, the clerks. Men who started out in the lower ranking jobs moved up more quickly, with the same experience and education. The vast majority of the upper level supervisors were men.

About this time I also started to deal with something that had happened to me in college and began actually paying attention to the world around me. What I saw was frightening. Girls and women were starving themselves to meet some strange physical ideal. I had friends and co-workers who twisted themselves up inside and completely changed their lives, interests and personalities to make their men happy.

I had begun doing volunteer work in college and, as I became more and more involved with the Violence Against Women program, I began to see what was happening outside of my little bubble. While clearly not everyone was suffering as much as the women I counseled, I saw how our society was hurting all women.

Women had lower salaries, lower expectations and more difficulties in the professional and non-professional world. We live in a "girl poisoning" culture. Sexism is rampant and deeply ingrained into our culture. It may be overt, such as sexual harassment, or it may be as subtle as the magazine covers in the grocery store.

It's there.

Now that I am a lawyer, I work in an area of the law that is dominated by men. I specialize in construction litigation. I have to admit that I enjoy being underestimated by opposing counsel or opposing experts. I've always assumed that it's not because I'm a woman, but because I'm a 5'2" cute woman. I also love that there is never much of a line for the ladies' restroom at the conferences I attend.

I've gone back to pretending that gender doesn't matter because it hasn't overtly affected me.

One of the professional organizations that I belong to is the National Association of Women in Construction (NAWIC). It's purpose is to promote women in the construction field and to break down barriers and eliminate stereotypes. I've been proud to be a member of a professional organization with such an important goal.

Then I received our NAWIC magazine for the month.

In case you can't read it, that headline says "What's hot in Residential Construction." That is Extreme Makeover: Home Edition's Paige Hemmis on the cover in a hardhat, shorts, pink tool belt, a light pink tank top, and hot pink sports bra.

This is what Ms. Hemmis generally wears on her show. I'm sure it is comfortable and, let's face it, the show is on TV for entertainment. I'm sure ABC thinks that Ms. Hemmis is far more entertaining in that get up than in usual construction attire. Although I hope to GOD that none of my clients allow someone dressed like that onto a construction site. Jeans and steel toed boots are safer and more appropriate.

It doesn't annoy me to have Ms. Hemmis on the cover. After all, she is an accomplished woman. She was a certified EMT. She has college degrees in theology and psychology. She is a self-taught carpenter and co-founded Rent to Own Investments, a company that renovates houses and helps develop rent-to-own arrangements for people who can't afford down payments. In her spare time, she races cars.

This is one woman who has it all.

The interview with Ms. Hemmis was nice, as were the additional photos inside the magazine. However, the NAWIC IMAGE editor chose to put the most provocative photo of all on the cover, along with the headline What's hot in Residential Construction. What does that cover say to you?

It doesn't say, "I'm a confident, intelligent, ambitious, ans successful woman in construction." It says, "I'm a pin-up girl who happens to work in construction. Don't I look sexy in my tool belt?" At least that's what it says to me and every other woman in my firm who has seen the cover. In fact, our NAWIC chapter wrote a letter of protest to the editor.

I don't blame Ms. Hemmis. I don't even necessarily blame the magazine editor, who claims that she didn't view the cover in this manner at all. Instead I blame all of us. I blame society. It is second nature to all of us to use sexy instead of competent as a marketing tool. Those of us who accept it are just as guilty. An accomplished woman like Ms. Hemmis is viewed as hot rather than intelligent and capable. And this is from an organization dedicated to eliminating stereotypes and breaking down gender barriers.

With sexism so firmly entrenched in our society, I ask all of you: Does Hillary even stand a chance?

Maybe I'll go back to my bubble now.

**********
The D.C. Metro Moms are discussing Parenting Guilt today. Pop on over to read all of our posts about guilt and the chance to win Devra Renner and Aviva Pflock's book, Mommy Guilt.

Sexism: This is What Hillary Clinton is up Against

Sometimes I live in a little bubble. A comfortable little bubble with no overt racism, sexism, or even social conservatism. I'm surrounded by people who think like me. I read blogs of mostly people who think like me politically. (With a few awesomely wonderful exceptions. You know who you are!) I may make forays into the non-like minded blogging world, but it's usually just to keep abreast of what anti-Liberal propaganda is floating around out there.

I like to think there is a little more air in my bubble than, say, George W. Bush's. But sometimes I wonder if I'm just as out of touch with reality. In this case, a woman's reality.

My parents taught me, like so many other girls of my generation, that I could do anything or be anything. My gender was never an issue.

As a little girl, I played soccer on a team full of boys. I played tee ball and baseball on a team full of boys. I joined a swim team, with girls and boys. I climbed trees; I played flag football; I mowed the lawn. I took advanced math classes; I started out college majoring in Computer Science; I took the hard science classes; I went to law school.

It never mattered that I was a girl and then, a woman.

There were a couple of incidents here and there, but I chalked them up as isolated happenings and not a symptom of the larger world. I clearly recall an argument I had in my college black studies class with a fellow class mate and Male Chauvinist Pig. In our class, our discussions generally started out with race and then moved to our sheltered little college world. Or, we started out talking about our lives and then moved onto race. It was an effective teaching tool and I looked forward to our twice weekly discussions.

On this particular occasion I can't recall how the argument started, but I remember the MCP raising his hand and stating that, of course, a man was far more important to the stability and health of a relationship than a woman was because of the male earning power. He went on to say that a woman wasn't without value but that if he or his future wife wanted someone to stay home with their children, it would be her. Because, of course, Mr. MCP would be making more money.

That was like waiving a red flag in front of a bull.

I raised my hand and retorted that his argument was based on antiquated gender stereotypes, that in my future career I would undoubtedly make more money than my husband (sorry, T.) and that if one of us stayed home it would be him. Did that make *me* more important in our marriage? Then I told the class that if Mr. MCP didn't change his attitude, his importance to a marriage would become a moot point because no one would marry such a blatant misogynist.

I got a standing ovation.

So I assumed that encounters I had with future MCP's were similar and that the rest of the world was cheering me on.

Then I entered the professional world.

Before I headed off to law school, I worked for an insurance company I've mentioned here in the past. I began to notice that most of the lowest level employees were women: the claims processors, the administrative assistants, the clerks. Men who started out in the lower ranking jobs moved up more quickly, with the same experience and education. The vast majority of the upper level supervisors were men.

About this time I also started to deal with something that had happened to me in college and began actually paying attention to the world around me. What I saw was frightening. Girls and women were starving themselves to meet some strange physical ideal. I had friends and co-workers who twisted themselves up inside and completely changed their lives, interests and personalities to make their men happy.

I had begun doing volunteer work in college and, as I became more and more involved with the Violence Against Women program, I began to see what was happening outside of my little bubble. While clearly not everyone was suffering as much as the women I counseled, I saw how our society was hurting all women.

Women had lower salaries, lower expectations and more difficulties in the professional and non-professional world. We live in a "girl poisoning" culture. Sexism is rampant and deeply ingrained into our culture. It may be overt, such as sexual harassment, or it may be as subtle as the magazine covers in the grocery store.

It's there.

Now that I am a lawyer, I work in an area of the law that is dominated by men. I specialize in construction litigation. I have to admit that I enjoy being underestimated by opposing counsel or opposing experts. I've always assumed that it's not because I'm a woman, but because I'm a 5'2" cute woman. I also love that there is never much of a line for the ladies' restroom at the conferences I attend.

I've gone back to pretending that gender doesn't matter because it hasn't overtly affected me.

One of the professional organizations that I belong to is the National Association of Women in Construction (NAWIC). It's purpose is to promote women in the construction field and to break down barriers and eliminate stereotypes. I've been proud to be a member of a professional organization with such an important goal.

Then I received our NAWIC magazine for the month.

In case you can't read it, that headline says "What's hot in Residential Construction." That is Extreme Makeover: Home Edition's Paige Hemmis on the cover in a hardhat, shorts, pink tool belt, a light pink tank top, and hot pink sports bra.

This is what Ms. Hemmis generally wears on her show. I'm sure it is comfortable and, let's face it, the show is on TV for entertainment. I'm sure ABC thinks that Ms. Hemmis is far more entertaining in that get up than in usual construction attire. Although I hope to GOD that none of my clients allow someone dressed like that onto a construction site. Jeans and steel toed boots are safer and more appropriate.

It doesn't annoy me to have Ms. Hemmis on the cover. After all, she is an accomplished woman. She was a certified EMT. She has college degrees in theology and psychology. She is a self-taught carpenter and co-founded Rent to Own Investments, a company that renovates houses and helps develop rent-to-own arrangements for people who can't afford down payments. In her spare time, she races cars.

This is one woman who has it all.

The interview with Ms. Hemmis was nice, as were the additional photos inside the magazine. However, the NAWIC IMAGE editor chose to put the most provocative photo of all on the cover, along with the headline What's hot in Residential Construction. What does that cover say to you?

It doesn't say, "I'm a confident, intelligent, ambitious, ans successful woman in construction." It says, "I'm a pin-up girl who happens to work in construction. Don't I look sexy in my tool belt?" At least that's what it says to me and every other woman in my firm who has seen the cover. In fact, our NAWIC chapter wrote a letter of protest to the editor.

I don't blame Ms. Hemmis. I don't even necessarily blame the magazine editor, who claims that she didn't view the cover in this manner at all. Instead I blame all of us. I blame society. It is second nature to all of us to use sexy instead of competent as a marketing tool. Those of us who accept it are just as guilty. An accomplished woman like Ms. Hemmis is viewed as hot rather than intelligent and capable. And this is from an organization dedicated to eliminating stereotypes and breaking down gender barriers.

With sexism so firmly entrenched in our society, I ask all of you: Does Hillary even stand a chance?

Maybe I'll go back to my bubble now.

**********
The D.C. Metro Moms are discussing Parenting Guilt today. Pop on over to read all of our posts about guilt and the chance to win Devra Renner and Aviva Pflock's book, Mommy Guilt.

Why I'm Not Voting for Hillary

So I suppose I should just suck it up and tell y'all who I'm voting for on Tuesday. Now that Edwards is out of the race, Barack Obama has my vote.

I wish I could say that it was a clear choice between Obama and HRC, but it wasn't. Honestly, the only viable progressive candidate in the race was Edwards. HRC, however, is one of the most polarizing figures of our time. As much as I would love to vote for a woman and have a woman as our Commander in Chief, I don't think it will happen with Senator Clinton. In fact, there's nothing that will motivate the Religious Right more on election day than the chance to vote against HRC.

McCain is clearly going to be the Republican nominee. While he's playing to his base right now, he's not nearly conservative enough for many Republicans. I'm not talking about the majority of Republicans here, but Republicans who make the most noise and preach from the pulpit. Some of those Republicans may very well stay home on election day. Unless HRC is the Democratic candidate.

Don't get me wrong, I like and respect Senator Clinton. I will forgive her a host of political missteps simply because I think she gets a raw deal from the mainstream media and mainstream America. Why? Because she's a tough, smart, involved, and politically aware woman. When HRC got involved in the universal health care debacle at the beginning of her husband's first term, people weren't enraged because of her policies. They were enraged because a wife was stepping into traditional male territory.

I, and many of the people I know well, tend to forget that while much of the country has taken giant leaps with respect to women, there are many out there stuck in 1958. I tend to forget because I don't often hear those antiquated voices. I'm a woman, yes, but I'm also a lawyer surrounded by progressive men and very well educated women. But every now and then I hear a whisper of times gone by and it stops me short.

Many might call me a sell out. Many would say I should support HRC for all the reasons I just stated. After all, things will never change if we don't actively work to change them. But what I'm trying to say with this post is that, while I think we're ready for the next step, a woman in charge, I don't think that HRC is the woman who can make that happen.

I'm afraid that if Clinton's candidacy fails, we'll be stuck with another 8 years of Republicans running roughshod over our civil rights. And based on statements McCain made today in Norfolk, Virginia, I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up with a nice war in Iran to go with our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That can't happen.

I've just said an awful lot about why I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton, but not a whole lot about why I'm voting for Barack Obama. I promise, that's next....

This post was originally written for a "Why Not Billary" post day on MOMocrats. Then Edwards dropped out and I had to rethink some things.

Why I'm Not Voting for Hillary

So I suppose I should just suck it up and tell y'all who I'm voting for on Tuesday. Now that Edwards is out of the race, Barack Obama has my vote.

I wish I could say that it was a clear choice between Obama and HRC, but it wasn't. Honestly, the only viable progressive candidate in the race was Edwards. HRC, however, is one of the most polarizing figures of our time. As much as I would love to vote for a woman and have a woman as our Commander in Chief, I don't think it will happen with Senator Clinton. In fact, there's nothing that will motivate the Religious Right more on election day than the chance to vote against HRC.

McCain is clearly going to be the Republican nominee. While he's playing to his base right now, he's not nearly conservative enough for many Republicans. I'm not talking about the majority of Republicans here, but Republicans who make the most noise and preach from the pulpit. Some of those Republicans may very well stay home on election day. Unless HRC is the Democratic candidate.

Don't get me wrong, I like and respect Senator Clinton. I will forgive her a host of political missteps simply because I think she gets a raw deal from the mainstream media and mainstream America. Why? Because she's a tough, smart, involved, and politically aware woman. When HRC got involved in the universal health care debacle at the beginning of her husband's first term, people weren't enraged because of her policies. They were enraged because a wife was stepping into traditional male territory.

I, and many of the people I know well, tend to forget that while much of the country has taken giant leaps with respect to women, there are many out there stuck in 1958. I tend to forget because I don't often hear those antiquated voices. I'm a woman, yes, but I'm also a lawyer surrounded by progressive men and very well educated women. But every now and then I hear a whisper of times gone by and it stops me short.

Many might call me a sell out. Many would say I should support HRC for all the reasons I just stated. After all, things will never change if we don't actively work to change them. But what I'm trying to say with this post is that, while I think we're ready for the next step, a woman in charge, I don't think that HRC is the woman who can make that happen.

I'm afraid that if Clinton's candidacy fails, we'll be stuck with another 8 years of Republicans running roughshod over our civil rights. And based on statements McCain made today in Norfolk, Virginia, I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up with a nice war in Iran to go with our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That can't happen.

I've just said an awful lot about why I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton, but not a whole lot about why I'm voting for Barack Obama. I promise, that's next....

This post was originally written for a "Why Not Billary" post day on MOMocrats. Then Edwards dropped out and I had to rethink some things.

Driving Public Policy

Edited: Well, it seems that the AP is reporting that John Edwards is dropping out of the race. So much for my steadfast loyalty. I still think that he's played an important role in this campaign. I know he says he won't be the vice-presidential nominee, but a girl can hope, right?

I know you want to know who I'm supporting now. I don't think I'm going to decide yet. Virginia's primary is a week after Super Tuesday, so I don't have to decide until then. I know which way I'm leaning, but I want to see where HRC and Obama's policies lead me.

One of the bloggers over at Chicago Mom's Blog drafted an open letter to the Democratic Presidential candidates. You can see it on all of the sister sites, including the D.C. Metro Moms Blog that I contribute to. Veronica's letter is a wonderful idea. Several of the D.C. Metro Moms have been trying to get through to the presidential candidates for awhile. We even started topic days on all the sister sites to increase awareness of the political motivations of parent bloggers.

To a certain extent, it worked a bit. We had a wonderful meeting/teleconference with Elizabeth Edwards. We had some feelers from Senator Dodd's campaign. The Obamas basically told us, "thanks but no thanks," and I don't think we ever even heard from the HRC camp or anyone else. As for the Republican candidates? Bubkus. (Granted, I could really care less, but I do understand that not every mom who blogs is a Democrat.)

The problem I have with Veronica's letter is that it ignores my candidate, John Edwards. People can say whatever they want about his campaign being essentially over, but he is still in the game. CNN can pull him from their polls, but that doesn't change the fact that John Edwards has been driving policy in the Democratic primaries.

Even if Senator Edwards doesn't have a chance at the nomination any more, he's staying in the race to hold the nominee's feet to the fire. To make sure that Senators Obama and Clinton don't kill each other in a toddler temper tantrum, to make sure they don't forget about poverty, and health insurance, and economic reform, and environmental policy, and all those other things that we care about.

So let's not leave John Edwards out because, based on past experience, he's the candidate most likely to listen to us. Edwards does still have a role in this election. If I didn't truly believe that, I wouldn't still be beating the John Edwards drum over at MOMocrats.

For all we've heard about the presidential candidates *cough*OBAMA*cough* being socially media savvy, moms who blog have been pretty much ignored, except by the Edwards campaign. While companies and PR people can't wait to market to us or hear what we think about the latest mop or kid video on the market, nobody besides Edwards seems to give a flying fart what we think about public policy.

And it's not that no one cares what bloggers think. Hop on over the Daily Kos or the Huffington Post. Oh, the politicians care. They just don't care unless they can directly see a result in terms of political support or money. It's not so clear cut with us, the mothers who blog about anything and everything. But make no mistake, we vote, we're well educated, and we talk and write about politics in a personal way. People read our blogs. Some people actually do care what we think.

So, here's what I say:

Take heed, politicians. The internet is viral. If one of our fellow mom bloggers can get thousands of women across the country heading to the gym in an attempt to replicate her Big O on the treadmill, just think what we could do for your ideas and your campaign.

Ignore us at your peril.

Sincerely,

One Pissed Off Mommy Blogger

***********

As usual, I have new photos up at Lawyer Mama Dabbles. Is anyone other than my mother even reading that site? Give a gal some love, would you? Mwah!

Edited to add: Nancy, babe. I added an O link just for you! I meant to link it, so thanks for reminding me.

Driving Public Policy

Edited: Well, it seems that the AP is reporting that John Edwards is dropping out of the race. So much for my steadfast loyalty. I still think that he's played an important role in this campaign. I know he says he won't be the vice-presidential nominee, but a girl can hope, right?

I know you want to know who I'm supporting now. I don't think I'm going to decide yet. Virginia's primary is a week after Super Tuesday, so I don't have to decide until then. I know which way I'm leaning, but I want to see where HRC and Obama's policies lead me.

One of the bloggers over at Chicago Mom's Blog drafted an open letter to the Democratic Presidential candidates. You can see it on all of the sister sites, including the D.C. Metro Moms Blog that I contribute to. Veronica's letter is a wonderful idea. Several of the D.C. Metro Moms have been trying to get through to the presidential candidates for awhile. We even started topic days on all the sister sites to increase awareness of the political motivations of parent bloggers.

To a certain extent, it worked a bit. We had a wonderful meeting/teleconference with Elizabeth Edwards. We had some feelers from Senator Dodd's campaign. The Obamas basically told us, "thanks but no thanks," and I don't think we ever even heard from the HRC camp or anyone else. As for the Republican candidates? Bubkus. (Granted, I could really care less, but I do understand that not every mom who blogs is a Democrat.)

The problem I have with Veronica's letter is that it ignores my candidate, John Edwards. People can say whatever they want about his campaign being essentially over, but he is still in the game. CNN can pull him from their polls, but that doesn't change the fact that John Edwards has been driving policy in the Democratic primaries.

Even if Senator Edwards doesn't have a chance at the nomination any more, he's staying in the race to hold the nominee's feet to the fire. To make sure that Senators Obama and Clinton don't kill each other in a toddler temper tantrum, to make sure they don't forget about poverty, and health insurance, and economic reform, and environmental policy, and all those other things that we care about.

So let's not leave John Edwards out because, based on past experience, he's the candidate most likely to listen to us. Edwards does still have a role in this election. If I didn't truly believe that, I wouldn't still be beating the John Edwards drum over at MOMocrats.

For all we've heard about the presidential candidates *cough*OBAMA*cough* being socially media savvy, moms who blog have been pretty much ignored, except by the Edwards campaign. While companies and PR people can't wait to market to us or hear what we think about the latest mop or kid video on the market, nobody besides Edwards seems to give a flying fart what we think about public policy.

And it's not that no one cares what bloggers think. Hop on over the Daily Kos or the Huffington Post. Oh, the politicians care. They just don't care unless they can directly see a result in terms of political support or money. It's not so clear cut with us, the mothers who blog about anything and everything. But make no mistake, we vote, we're well educated, and we talk and write about politics in a personal way. People read our blogs. Some people actually do care what we think.

So, here's what I say:

Take heed, politicians. The internet is viral. If one of our fellow mom bloggers can get thousands of women across the country heading to the gym in an attempt to replicate her Big O on the treadmill, just think what we could do for your ideas and your campaign.

Ignore us at your peril.

Sincerely,

One Pissed Off Mommy Blogger

***********

As usual, I have new photos up at Lawyer Mama Dabbles. Is anyone other than my mother even reading that site? Give a gal some love, would you? Mwah!

Edited to add: Nancy, babe. I added an O link just for you! I meant to link it, so thanks for reminding me.

The Wisdom of Prose or the Passion of Poetry?

In light of all the toy recalls and chemical scares lately, I'm concerned about what I buy. I'm not a freak about it, but if there is a safer alternative and it's not outrageously expensive, I'll give it a try.

But I have to admit that I'm skeptical. Vinegar just doesn't clean my floors as well as my usual cleaner, although it works great on windows. So when PBN gave me the chance to review Clean Well's new All-Natural Antibacterial Foaming Hand Wash, I came into it with an open, but cautious mind. Read More....

Now on to my post for the day:
*******************
I can't be the only one annoyed by all the press about Hillary Rodham Clinton's "break down" in New Hampshire on Monday, can I?

It's no secret that Senator Clinton is not my candidate of choice. I'm all about Edwards. But it angers me that a show of emotion is automatically seen as a weakness in a woman. And HRC didn't exactly break down. She got a bit emotional and welled up in response to a question about how she does what she does day after day. In response, HRC said,

This is very personal for me. It’s not just political. It’s not just public. I see what’s happening and we have to reverse it. Some people think that elections are a game, it’s about who’s up or who’s down. It’s about our country and it’s about our kids’ future.

Perhaps I have a different perspective because I heard the segment on NPR on Monday afternoon in the car. I didn't actually see the segment until later. But, people! She didn't "break down." Here's the segment. Judge for yourself.

Frankly, I think Senator Clinton sounded passionate and authentic when she spoke about how important this election is for the future of our country. I completely agree with her. I've never doubted that HRC cares strongly about this country and its people, but that normally doesn't come across in her public speaking.

In Nashua, New Hampshire this weekend HRC quoted Mario Cuomo, "You campaign with poetry, but you govern in prose." While I don't believe that Senator Clinton is the right candidate to bring about the changes we need in the U.S., I have no doubt that Senator Clinton is well versed in prose. Her weakness is in the poetry. Unfortunately for her, the draw of poetry is usually more alluring to voters.

Monday's question and answer session was actually pretty much the first time I've listened to her speak and heard Clinton's passion. She's normally so self possessed that she comes across as too scripted. It was nice to see that a human heart does beat beneath her breast.

Clearly Senator Clinton's show of emotion didn't hurt her with New Hampshire voters, so maybe it's time for the press to give her a break. Even if she can't help reverting the emotional female stereotype.* I can't help wondering if the press would have reacted in the same way if a male candidate had showed the same emotion. I doubt it.

*I say this with sarcasm, just to be clear.

Cross posted at DC Metro Moms Blog.

The Wisdom of Prose or the Passion of Poetry?

In light of all the toy recalls and chemical scares lately, I'm concerned about what I buy. I'm not a freak about it, but if there is a safer alternative and it's not outrageously expensive, I'll give it a try.

But I have to admit that I'm skeptical. Vinegar just doesn't clean my floors as well as my usual cleaner, although it works great on windows. So when PBN gave me the chance to review Clean Well's new All-Natural Antibacterial Foaming Hand Wash, I came into it with an open, but cautious mind. Read More....

Now on to my post for the day:
*******************
I can't be the only one annoyed by all the press about Hillary Rodham Clinton's "break down" in New Hampshire on Monday, can I?

It's no secret that Senator Clinton is not my candidate of choice. I'm all about Edwards. But it angers me that a show of emotion is automatically seen as a weakness in a woman. And HRC didn't exactly break down. She got a bit emotional and welled up in response to a question about how she does what she does day after day. In response, HRC said,

This is very personal for me. It’s not just political. It’s not just public. I see what’s happening and we have to reverse it. Some people think that elections are a game, it’s about who’s up or who’s down. It’s about our country and it’s about our kids’ future.

Perhaps I have a different perspective because I heard the segment on NPR on Monday afternoon in the car. I didn't actually see the segment until later. But, people! She didn't "break down." Here's the segment. Judge for yourself.

Frankly, I think Senator Clinton sounded passionate and authentic when she spoke about how important this election is for the future of our country. I completely agree with her. I've never doubted that HRC cares strongly about this country and its people, but that normally doesn't come across in her public speaking.

In Nashua, New Hampshire this weekend HRC quoted Mario Cuomo, "You campaign with poetry, but you govern in prose." While I don't believe that Senator Clinton is the right candidate to bring about the changes we need in the U.S., I have no doubt that Senator Clinton is well versed in prose. Her weakness is in the poetry. Unfortunately for her, the draw of poetry is usually more alluring to voters.

Monday's question and answer session was actually pretty much the first time I've listened to her speak and heard Clinton's passion. She's normally so self possessed that she comes across as too scripted. It was nice to see that a human heart does beat beneath her breast.

Clearly Senator Clinton's show of emotion didn't hurt her with New Hampshire voters, so maybe it's time for the press to give her a break. Even if she can't help reverting the emotional female stereotype.* I can't help wondering if the press would have reacted in the same way if a male candidate had showed the same emotion. I doubt it.

*I say this with sarcasm, just to be clear.

Cross posted at DC Metro Moms Blog.