Publisher's Message
The Ugly Gender Thing

by Sue Gillis, Publisher

Hold your nose and let's take a trip down Gender Lane.

Let's start by acknowledging that we really do have different perceptions of, and expectations for, women than we do for men.

Just acknowledging that fact is a gigantic step in the right direction.

For example, words like calculating and ambitious are acceptable for men; not women. Anger and confrontation are acceptable for men; not women. (Of course, the words "strategic" and "highly motivated" and "passionate" and "fearlessness" are more likely used as the correlating descriptors for men.)

Showing some tears is, paradoxically, acceptable at times for men, such as both Presidents Bush, and some of the current presidential contenders, such as Mitt Romney. But when a woman does, it's proof that she's not up to the job, liable to crack under pressure. Or that she's manipulative. Or any of the myriad verdicts handed down on "the crying" Hillary Clinton when her eyes welled up in New Hampshire for a moment.

Weaknesses and strengths are simply not perceived the same for both genders.

Power is manly.

Power is not for women to have or to hold.

Therefore, it could be a deeply entrenched fear on the parts of both men and women, that a woman seeking power may imply that she is not a woman at all but some kind of alien inauthentic "other".

The vulgar implications that have risen to the surface in this primary election season (exaggerated and driven by the media) have raised gender bias issues that affect every American woman no matter her age, education, job, race, marital or financial status.

The gendered constructs of society reach deeply into our lives. Gender is personal; gender is inside our homes; gender is in our families; gender defines the cultural structures of how we experience life.

How women are responding in this election is being closely observed by our children and grandchildren, and most likely by women all over the world.

The gender gauze that has served to protect all of us from our own demons has been torn away, and in many cases making a lot of women damned uncomfortable.

Everyone has grown up with gender and racial stereotypes - they are insidious. No matter how many of us genuinely believe we have moved far beyond those stereotypes, some have a nasty way of lurking in a secret place we rarely visit.

This primary season started out on the high road. However, it was inevitable that gender and racial bias would raise their ugly heads. The candidates did their best for some time to keep bias out of the debates. For anyone who is media savvy, it became clear in the last few weeks that gender and race were to be fair game.

MSNBC news pundit Chris Matthews was so stunned by the NH vote for Hillary Clinton that he began a drumbeat ranting that those polled in N.H. must have lied that they would be voting for Barack Obama, to avoid the appearance of being racist. Matthews has been downright absurd in many of his pontifications, and blatantly sexist. Matthews' incessant barbs are mild, though, compared to many bloggers (with their estimated 90 million readers), or Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

You can no longer hide from your own gender bias.

You cannot hide from yourself.

I believe that is a good thing.

Vermonters have essentially no influence in electing presidential nominees; and Vermont has only three electoral votes and a few thousand popular votes.

However, Vermont as a state matters because Vermont enjoys a certain progressive and unique reputation in the country.

You are most likely going to be given the choice of voting in the March 4 Vermont primary for a "qualified" woman for president of the United States for the first time in our country's long and difficult history, and quite possibly in the November 5 general election.

Think of the women who came before us: Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, and thousands of others who tirelessly fought so hard for so long just for women to get the vote
(attained at long last in 1920). (For a thorough history of American women's fight for suffrage, refer to our March 2004 issue http://www.vermontwoman.com/articles/0304/tea-at-janes.html.)

No woman has ever been a serious candidate for the presidency. No woman has made it this far; been so qualified; able to raise the millions of dollars it takes to participate; been under such gender bias attack, criticism and scrutiny; certainly her opponents have not been held to the same standards. And you need to ask yourself, why not?

Being the first at anything is daunting. Running and winning as the first woman president takes an extraordinary woman with unimaginable stamina and sense of balance and judgment.

The purpose of this message is not to try to psychoanalyze gender bias. Nor is this message in any way a suggestion that women vote in lockstep (hardly) or that women should vote for a woman no matter what. Rather, it is to encourage each of us to examine why we might not choose a woman for the most powerful job on planet earth…. no matter who she is.

Everyone knows gender bias exists. Evidence is sometimes glaring; more often subtle and insidious.

If you are not talking about it; my guess is that you sure are thinking about it.

So let's just talk about the big elephant in the living room.

And then open the door and kick it out.

Sue Gillis is publisher of Vermont Woman.