Feminists defend Hillary, but not Michele Obama. Why?

Attorney Michele Obama is a Princeton University and Harvard Law School graduate, a lawyer, mother, wife, and has a high possibility of becoming a "working" First Lady, as former first lady Senator Hillary Clinton was for President Bill Clinton, which adds to an already impressive resume'. Yet Michelle Obama fails to gain the boastful support from the leaders of feminist organizations and feminists (i.e. the National Organization of Women, well-renowned individual feminists Gloria Steinem, Geraldine Ferraro, or Hillary Clinton) during the time when she is outright attacked by the media. Attorney Michelle Obama continues to be ruthlessly attacked from all sides. We all recall during the 2008 Democratic Primaries, the slightest attacks directed at Hillary Clinton from anyone, in the media especially, would outrage these same feminists to call for attackers jobs. But when publication like CNN negatively stereotypes Michelle Obama as "an angry black woman" absolutely nothing comes from the popular feminist groups or individuals. Read this link from CNN writer Jonathon Mann: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/23/mann.michelle.obama/.

And when the New Yorker characterizes Michelle Obama as a Black Militant with a machine gun (Patty Hearst/S.L.A. style), large afro, army boots, angry eyebrows, and overblown lips we must all ask questions, especially feminists. But again, we do not hear popular feminists groups or individuals asking for the chief editor's job at the New Yorker (note: picture of Michelle to the left has none of the caricatures pictured on the New Yorker's front cover). Also pictured on the New Yorker cover is an American Flag burning in Michelle Obama's fireplace, and Osama Bin Laden pictured on her mantel.

Following the release of the New Yorker's Obamas cover picture, the New Yorker's chief editor was paraded around the daily and weekend political TV news and talk programs to explain his position. The Chief Editor stated, "the image was an exagageration to illustrate the false stereotypes about the Obamas". Yet the enclosed article said nothing of the chief editor's stated vision.

We again hear nothing from the feminists on behalf of Michelle Obama about the ridiculous statements by the New Yorkers chief editor. And we all know that the feminists would have jumped all over the New Yorker's "powers that be" demanding for the chief editor's job if he would have negatively stereotyped Hilary Clinton in the same manner. Now on the Presidential campaign trail, feminists are in the aggressive mode for a statement Republican Candidate John McCain made about his wife entering a Buffalo beauty contest. It was clear that McCain knew nothing about the contest requiring candidates to compete in a topless segment of the contest. But here feminists are up in arms over his statement at the highest level, including democrats.org http://www.democrats.org/page/community/post/rjsnj/CVlh. Comparing the two incidents (New Yorker cover and a misstatement by McCain), the New Yorker cover picture is far more damaging to women, than a mis-comment by Cindy McCain's husband.

I could go into why African-American Woman should support Black issues instead of these suddenly silent Feminists groups, but I choose not to. Instead please read a more informative, well-researched article on the same subject by an African-American woman whom also is a self-proclaimed Feminist and colomnist for the Charlotte Observer newspaper. The Charlotte Observer Columnist Mary C. Curtis's article appeared in the Washington Post on June 21st, 2008. Ms. Curtis article (in bold) below is titled, "The Loud Silence of Feminists". Here is Mary C. Curtis's article:

The Loud Silence of Feminists

By Mary C. Curtis

Saturday, June 21, 2008; Page A17


Michelle Obama has become an issue in the presidential campaign even though she isn't running for anything. An educated, successful lawyer, devoted wife and caring mother has been labeled "angry" and unpatriotic and snidely referred to as Barack Obama's "baby mama."

Democrats, Republicans, independents, everyone should be offended.

And this black woman is wondering: Where are Obama's feminist defenders?

It's not as though they're out of practice. In 1992, Hillary Clinton was deemed too assertive and not first lady material. Similar, and worse, claims were made this year. But just as you didn't have to be for Clinton to decry the sexism in the coverage of her campaign, you don't have to be an Obama supporter to defend Michelle Obama against similar treatment.

So I want to know: What does Gloria Steinem think? She was out front with her support of Clinton, promoting the importance of a female president. She has even endorsed Barack Obama. What's her reaction now that the knives are out for another strong woman?

How about Geraldine Ferraro, the former vice presidential nominee whose racially tinged denunciations of Barack Obama sparked a media firestorm?

Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, has said: "We're going to keep watching because we think Michelle Obama will be the recipient of the same kind of attacks that Hillary was."

A feminist ray of hope.

The campaign against Michelle Obama -- who went on "The View" this week to prove her everywoman bona fides -- has not caused a rift between black and white women so much as it has exposed it.

I've long been frustrated, as a black woman and a feminist, with our national conversation. I didn't hear the cause speaking up for women of color or for women who have always worked in blue-collar or service jobs. Choice was not their issue.

The woman who employed my educated mother to clean her house never quite saw her as a sister in the struggle for equality.

Still, I cheered Steinem when she spoke at my college. Her message could have been more inclusive, but it was a start.

I'd like a little of that solidarity back now, not suspicion because someone of my race defeated someone of our sex.

Michelle Obama is being demonized for things she allegedly said on tapes that are rumored to exist. She is a victim of sexism and racial stereotypes.

Just as the Rutgers women's basketball team was miscast by Don Imus, Obama is being labeled something she clearly is not. Her achievements are being dismissed.

But in America, there's seldom a cost for disrespecting black women.

I'm waiting for feminists who speak of second-class citizenship and being pushed to the back of the bus to remember the civil rights movement that gave birth to those words. After all, it was a black woman, Rosa Parks, who took her seat up front and pulled others there, too. I'm not holding my breath, though.

As a journalist, I have stayed neutral about political candidates. But as an American, I would have been excited about the historic first had Hillary Clinton emerged victorious from the Democratic primary battle. Yet when an African American made a different kind of history, it seems that feminists can't share in the triumph.

They don't have to vote for the husband to defend the wife.

Okay, I get it: Your candidate lost. You're angry.

But frankly, I'm getting a little peeved myself.

Mary C. Curtis is a columnist at the Charlotte (N.C.) Observer.



In the wake of the New Yorker cover, Black radio hosts and journalist should be calling Mary C. Curtis right now for interviews. Ms. Curtis's article is passionate, insightful, and a well-researched piece of work. Thank you Ms. Mary C. Curtis.

Lastly, to make the point about nationally acclaimed Feminist groups and feminists not respecting African-American women, comes an interview by broadcaster Amy Goodman on the top-rated webcast program "Democracy Now". Amy Goodman interviews both popular Feminist Gloria Steinem and Princeton Professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell. Ms. Harris-Lacewell also noticed the lack of support for African-American women by popular feminist groups. In the below video-link Professor Harris-Lacewell took offense to comments made by Gloria Steinem in a New York Times Op-Ed piece titled: "State of Today's Women's Movement". Prof. Harris-Lacewell was somewhat disenchantment about Gloria Steinem's 'consistent silence' to African-American women's needs, though requesting Black Women to support the needs important to White Women-led Feminists groups. Professor Harris-Lacewell also questions Steinem about perceived negative comments about her candidate of choice, Senator Barack Obama, that was stated in the aforementioned Gloria Steinem's New York Times op-ed piece. The Goodman interview with Gloria Steinem and Professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell, aired on "Democracy Now" earlier this year, is below in the video-link: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/14/race_and_gender_in_presidential_politics