Home | About | Donate

Hillary Clinton Is No Feminist: Just Look at Her Stance on Palestine


#1

Hillary Clinton Is No Feminist: Just Look at Her Stance on Palestine

Nada Elia

With Hillary Clinton now running as the Democratic Party's official nominee, there has been much discussion about the glass ceiling finally shattering now that a woman is running for president on a major party ticket for the first time in US history.


#2

Every time I hear the qualifier that Clinton is the first female nominee of a MAJOR POLITICAL PARTY it reminds me that part of the problem is the US' ongoing suppression of third parties who have already been running female candidates.

Any female who hopes to be nominated by either of the two MAJOR parties needs to prove she is more militaristic than the male candidates against whom she is competing. Latin American nations would characterize it as "more huevos".


#3

I really wish we could just get over HRC's being female. The US is so far behind on that curve that it shouldn't matter. And it doesn't seem to matter that much in her case. And then we wouldn't have to stretch to consider whether her policies are feminist.

I realize that this was first written for a Middle East publication, and much as I share the concern about Palestinians and the Israeli occupation, it's a bit of a stretch to make that the test of feminism.


#4

There is nothing about gender which assures us of either purity or corruption. There is nothing about being in a repressed category which assures us or either purity or corruption. Indeed, I think corruption itself is very diverse. It hides in those who are being minimized and it shows in those in power.


#6

Huh? Did you read the article? And the best way to make the articles that make you sick stop is to stop reading here.


#7

Another case of women quarrelling over what feminism supposedly REALLY IS, with both claiming some sort of personal authority in that respect.


#8

You write that the author cites HRC's lack of concern for the plight of Palestinians as "the" test of feminism. I think she makes very clear that that isn't the case. From the article:

"Feminism is concerned not only with women and children, but also seeks to eliminate various systems of structural violence. And while the examples above are from Palestine, we can look elsewhere, around the globe to see how detrimental her hawkish political interventions have proven, from Pakistan to Libya, Honduras and beyond."

Including the elimination of systems of structural violence caught my attention. I don't know how to italicize on the keyboard, so I've written it again here. A most important point, which bears repeating, imo.

-


#9

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#10

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#11

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#13

My big problem with Clinton here is that she seems to latch onto and purposely do things which are unacceptable, not because the people who claim unacceptability so are too rigid in their understanding of the situation, but because she can claim sexism in the subsequent attacks in order to neutralize would-be future critics.

We've seen it happen as the critics of her rigged campaign became "Bernie Bros," but also in her attitudes towards regime change, provocations towards other powers, sense of liberty in handling sensitive information, just to name a few.


#14

If I were to question this,

Clinton, she is fiercely intelligent, as well as highly qualified for this particular position

it would be on the grounds that

She did not stop to consider why a few young Palestinians, including a 12-year-old girl, would wield knives; nor did she acknowledge that 70 percent of the attacks happened within the West Bank, meaning in occupied territory, against the occupier.

and other similar factors. She doesn't stop to consider how an unquestionable imperial power will eventually unite and turn the rest of the world against itself. She didn't realize that without a sound humanitarian vision, her wars for oil and dominance in the Middle East would fail in the humanitarian sense, and create failed states and breeding grounds for terrorism. She doesn't seem to factor that a strategy composed solely of provocation could eventually bring a conflict that nobody will win. She doesn't throw much weight behind the idea that undermining democracy and encouraging legal double-standards makes it more difficult to govern effectively and honestly, because it destroys the trust of the people. She doesn't seem to have caught on that liberal interventionism is a failing strategy, which only seems to have succeeded in the Kosovo "clean war" because Serbia was among the good guys to begin with.

Granted, a reckless mindlessness is not an uncommon condition in the leaders of an imperialistic power. Bush was frequently (and rightly, IMO) called an idiot for those reasons. Why would Clinton deserve better?


#15

Who do you think would have more authority? And which women do you see quarreling?


#16

I was talking mostly about the headline. I think I qualified my comment pretty clearly.

To do italics, either click on the "I" in the top menu where you're typing your reply, or hold cmd and I. You can do that while typing or by highlighting what you want to italicize later.

And that's how women converse. We don't need to quarrel.


#17

Oh dear. You're making it harder and harder for me to hold my nose tight enough.

I think her time as First Lady was her finest hour. You helped me realize that, and why she's relying so heavily on that record in her campaign, especially in playing the woman card and presenting as a feminist.


#18

post deleted.Can't seem to get the hang of your italicizing instruction, but I'm working on it. Thanks for the reply.


#19

Please inform Gloria, Meryl, et al!


#20

"In 2014, Clinton again expressed full support for Israel as it was engaging in a massive military assault on Gaza. During that operation, even the mainstream US media, while otherwise supportive of Israel, repeatedly commented on the disproportionate number of women and children killed by Israeli fire."

During that attack, dubbed 'Operation Protective Edge' Israel killed an average of 10 Palestinian children a day for each of the 50 days it was active.

Over 500 children.

And Clinton had nothing but praise for them.


#21

And it should be noted, not one Israeli child died. We heard about them, in just one town, having to run to shelters, but the "Iron dome" held and only (if I recall) 2 incoming rockets even landed. I heard a touching story in which an Israeli mom related her child saying s/he was frightened to have to go to the shelter, and asking whether the children in Gaza were running to their shelters too. The mom acknowledged that she didn't think the Gaza children had shelters to run to, that "our" rockets land and explode. The Israeli child reportedly cried and said that wasn't fair. One little mind opened.


#22

One of my biggest problems with Hillary Clinton is just how much of a warmonger she is ~ I can't name a single war that our nation has entered into which she actively campaigned against ... Feminism is not only concerned with women and children, but also seeks to eliminate various systems of structural violence. And while the examples above are from Palestine, we can look elsewhere, around the globe to see how detrimental her hawkish political interventions have proven, from Pakistan to Libya, Honduras and beyond.