A Telling Statement
During their most recent debate, Clinton and Obama each politely tried to look like the more pragmatic-but-revolutionary future leader. One interesting thing that Clinton said was that having a woman win this presidential election would mean a lot for the world. I had to laugh at that because she said it as if she was going to be blazing some kind of new path if she won, as if electing a woman would be a progressive message for the US to send to the world! This to me is a real window into the strong limitations of Clinton's vision and worldview. Because it has to be either that she hasn't realized that it is now 20 to 30 years since the first set of countries were brave enough to democratically elect women as their heads of state (including Muslim Pakistan!) or it is that Clinton is so US-centric that she really doesn't think that a thing is important until the US does it. An example of someone else doing this is when Reagan got excited about sending a woman into space in the 1980s not realizing that the Soviets had sent a woman on a solo space flight as early as 1963. Speaking of which, what of "Iron Lady" Thatcher? Is Clinton unaware of the fact that not only has there been an influential female head of state before her, but there has even been a CONSERVATIVE influential female head of state! How lame is that? Neither liberal America nor Labour Britain nor any Canadians or Aussies have given us a moderate-to-left leader that is female. Luckily the world doesn't wait for America to come around before blazing new trails for governance and gender equality nor are the world's women looking to Clinton for much of anything except perhaps to not bomb them.
Labels: Clinton, gender, woman leader