This Race is indeed about Sex and Race...

I'm deeply frustrated and angered about what I feel is an incredible amount of disingenuousness (sp??) going on in the media as one pundit after another pound Geraldine Ferraro for her remarks this past week.

First, let me say I do not know Ms. Ferraro, and I do not know what her intent was, or what was in her heart when she made the remarks in question. I can only speak to my perceptions, and my observations.

However when anyone says this race is not about sex or race, or even that it shouldn't be, I think they are lying. What is so very extraordinary about this race is the fact that we are breaking a massive barrier, in that for the very first time a woman, and an African American man are serious contenders for the democratic presidential nominee. We will breach an even bigger barrier (assuming we don't f**k it up by continuing to eat our own.) when one of them is elected the first woman, or African American President.

As one whose entire life has been about civil rights, and breaking barriers the prospect of either is thrilling to me, but of course only if the person in question is the right one... Never in a million years would I celebrate such a prospect if the candidate in question was, for instance Condaleeza Rice. The fact that she is a woman or an African American, would be wholly irrelevant, she stands for everything I abhor, and I would never support her candidacy regardless of the barriers it would be breaking.

We must be absolutely honest, Barack Obama has a lot to offer, and many many things going for him. He is charismatic, and smart, and accomplished. His team have organized a wonderful, and ground breaking campaign. That said, if he had all of his attributes, but was a young white man, his standing in this race absolutely would not be the same as it is. He lies, and we all lie when we say differently. There are absolutely a profound number of people who will vote for Obama (or already have...) because he is the first credible black candidate for president. Many care about his positions, and points of view coupled with this historic fact, others will vote on the merits of him being a democrat African American running for President. I think it is absolutely fair to say that an equally charismatic, and similarly principled young white man in this race would not be creating the same stir, and to be fair, under the circumstances, I can't say it's a bad thing, but I do say we are disingenuine when we pretend it's not the case.

Similarly, there are people who will (or won't) vote for Hillary because she is a woman. Again, I am thrilled at the prospect of the first woman President, but if the candidate was Condaleeza, or Kay Bailey Hutchinson, or frankly even Olympia Snowe, I wouldn't vote for them. But some would.

Some might posit that this factor would balance out, or even tip in Hillary's favor (as there are many more women than African Americans), but it does not. Women are less of a monolith than any other group (although all generalizations are dangerous...) Sadly, Sisterhood is not always powerful. Women, in spite of feminism do not always have the best track record of standing by, and up for one another. We also don't always put ourselves first. Our votes are spread across the other communities we belong to, and those interests. Much like the democrats right now, we tend to compete with one another, and fight rather than rally and support.

Regardless, I am not saying it is fair , or unfair, but simply reality. This race would not be the race is it were Hillary not a woman, and Barack not African American. Are we all so afraid of being called racist (and to a lesser extent sexist, since yes, it's still okay today to be sexist.) that we can't tell the truth?

John Edwards had a powerful message to offer, and it might be said that he fit right between Hillary and Barack, but he's gone. I assert it's not because he had less to offer than the other two, but because while they, the 3 of them stand so very very close on most of the important issues, he's a white man, and they aren't. They represent a change the country is deeply hungry for, and an idea whose time has come. Let's celebrate it, and not play coy while denying it. It's insulting.

It would be good to end on that note, but I can't leave it at that. (I wouldn't be me otherwise, would I?) The moral grandstanding by all this past week, but in particular by Keith Olbermann, has been really gross, and to me a case of ...thou dost protest too much... I refuse to believe all of these pundits are so offended and outraged by the suggestion that some might be voting for Obama because he is black, while simultaneously handicapping the races, by what? yes, race... , chief amongst other criteria...

If we want to have an intellectual discussion about what racism is (in my opinion, the use of race as determinate factor, good or bad, neither is acceptable, as race is determinate of one thing and one thing only, race, it does not connote good or bad, right or wrong, bright or dull, or any other quality.) well, we can have that conversation, it's an interesting one. I am against using race as a criteria for judgement, yet I passionately support affirmative action. I will applaud every barrier we break, for the sake of having broken the barrier, and I genuinely understand why many people (of all colors, shapes and sizes) will support Obama because he is African American. I just hope we don't stop there, and that we don't pretend otherwise.

While this race is affirmation of how far we have come, with regard to race, I am sad to see it also reaffirms how far with have to go with regard to sex, and sexism. The fact that Hillary has been treated so abysmally by the media (yes, by man and woman alike) shows us just how far we have to go. the fact that is goes uncommented on by most also further serves to show just how acceptable it is. Bitter pill for this daughter of the feminist revolution. Worse still for my Mother.