by Jessica Reed
If this is the level of debating we are going to be exposed to during the '08 US presidential race, then may I suggest that we all brace ourselves, for it is not going to be pretty: here are some gems NBC showman Chris Matthews has recently uttered about Hillary Clinton while questioning her ability to be commander in chief because - you guessed it- she happens to be a woman:
"[Matthews claimed that] some men" say Clinton's voice sounds like "fingernails on a blackboard," and wondered if Clinton is "a convincing mom." Matthews also claimed men "are afraid" to criticize Clinton and that "men don't knock Hillary," and he previously invoked John Wayne to suggest that Americans -- and specifically Republicans -- "want a strong, tough, sometimes a pushy, offensive leader." [via]
This is not to mention her brilliant analysis of the US political field when it comes to handling the military: "That's why [Clinton] has to be so strict about the war, because it's like Nixon can go to China, the woman has to seem like she's more militaristic even than the men".
Speculations aside - and even if one has to wonder if the last comment is indeed true in Clinton's case, as she voted in support for the war in Iraq back in 2002 before recently changing her mind- it is still unfortunate to systematically imply that a female candidate chooses to back a war not because she followed her convictions, but because of political (man)-made gender diktacts are to blame.
It is quite disheartening to witness the role of such old clichés about gender roles, especially when all they do is reinforce this illusion of need when it comes to displaying force. Even more saddening is the fact the voices of women worldwide - such as the Nobel Women's Initiative- who are actively promoting peace rather than an escalation in tactics of aggression spiralling into violence are usually silenced, or gently pushed into oblivion.
