Carol, the war is over. We've laid down our arms. Its ok to stop shooting.

These are good points. I think we've seen a lot of manipulation and twisting of both feminism and sexism in this campaign, both by supporters and by the media. The twisting and conflation is a reminder to us that we still have much work to do.

Part of the extra consideration is about how so many Hillary supporters identify with her personally in ways that supporters for Edwards and others really didn't. I liked Edwards, and I was sad when he left the race, but I didn't personally identify with him. I didn't see parallels between my life and his. Whereas with Hillary, many of these women personally identify with the career struggles, the marriage betrayals and all the shit that's been thrown at her through the years. There are personal bonds, shared injustices. I understand that.

The important thing for feminism going forward is how will this be framed? If it is framed as Hillary breaking down barriers, proving that women can be tough and tenacious on the campaign trail, that's good for feminism.

If, however, it is framed through the lens of victimhood, that is very bad for feminism. If the victim theme is pushed, then it opens the door for every misogynist out there to say, see, women can't take it and women demand special consideration, yadda yadda yadda. If that's how it's framed, that sets us all back.

A lot depends on Hillary, on how she deals with the aftermath. She can either encourage her supporters to move on and celebrate the good while letting go of the bad, or she can encourage them to stay bitter and resentful. I hope she will do the former.

i am no longer angry but resolved to vote for mccain. there is a big difference. and i agree with the posters above carol is a vicous and always has been. parsonally most of the obama people in gerneral turn me the heck off as their are worst than freepers.

for many of you you would do better to keep your olive branches as they ring wayy to hollow.

Thanks Carol, I enjoyed your article.

I think the key point is to do the postmodern thing and pluralize the term. It should really be "feminisms" because that idea means so many different things to so many different women. Maybe that idea makes the reactions of Hillary supporters easier to understand. Maybe for them, feminism is about embracing the supposedly female qualities like being emotional, etc etc... and the focus is less on being defined by those qualities than on embracing the idea that "being emotional is good".

What bothered me about Hillary's approach was the assumption that she spoke for a "WOMEN" monolithe that may in the minds of her supporters but doesn't exist for many other women. This idea has been perpetuated by the media's coverage - "only hillary has the support of women" type nonsense. Anyways, I think Hill needs to read some Bell Hooks or something.

Tuesday: please don't reference bell hooks anymore. You're hurting me.

Is it because she's a woman that we have to treat her (and her supporters) with kid gloves?

Well, no, and yes. It's not because she's a woman per se that we should be more sensitive than usual, but because of what it represents. I know you probably got a little teary eyed when you read what Obama's victory means to a few people around here. I might've myself. Now, extend that empathy over to the other side and imagine the corresponding sorrow. To many Clinton supporters, this is a death of a symbol as well as a candidate.

That is why they deserve even more respect during this difficult time. (Of course, IMO, we should treat each other with respect regardless, even when it's not necessarily returned in kind. I'm just talking about why it's even more important than usual.)

Here's an interesting footnote to my post - A Yahoo article entitled "Obama's next task: Heal rift with female voters":

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080604/ap_on_el_pr/obama_angry_women;_ylt=Ao6rCCbF8_ztV8eXjqHE7FqyFz4D

Here's an interesting quote from the article:

Gloria Steinem, a pioneering feminist, disagrees. "For 35 years people have been asking me if there will be a female president, and I have always said, 'not in my lifetime,'" she said. "I still feel that way. The patterns of history are that, at the upper levels, we see different varieties of men first. The female comes later."

Steinem said disgruntled Democratic-leaning women ultimately will back Obama. Besides, she suggested, much of their ire should be aimed at the news media, not the candidates.

"The media was in love with Obama," Steinem said, "and in hate with Hillary, hands down."

I don't understand their willingness to abandon their Democratic and feminist principles and either sit out the election or vote for McCain.

You're making an assumption that all of Hillary's supporters are Democrats.

Could it be that she pulled in some Independents and former Republicans because they preferred her to the other candidates?

I think John Cole's post is relevant here. He hypothesizes that Clinton supporters see Hillary as representing them personally, compared with Obama supporters who see themsleves as part of a community (or movement). It's a great read.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10545

I read that Yahoo article and see this is what I think is problematic and antithetical to feminism as I have come to understand it.

"I know that women are very worked up right now," she said. Obama "has never apologized for the way Hillary has been treated."

It's perplexing and troubling. I know this has been discussed before, but if it was a different woman, perhaps we would have had a different ending. As a woman, I am disappointed that we didn't have a less encumbered choice in a female candidate--someone with less baggage.

I'm going to add more fuel to the fire (probably), but in reading over all the comments it's probably safe to say this is not so much a pure gender thing but a generational gender thing - the women on this thread that reaped the rewards of the feminist movement but weren't active in the early days (and I put myself in that category because I came to age in the 70's) have a different view of this issue than women who were on the front lines of the battle. If I'm being presumptuous please let me know, but there's an ideological difference among women as was borne out in the primary - older women identifying with and supporting Clinton in great numbers, and younger women not feeling the same sense of loyalty and commitment to Clinton.

I have to say that I seem to have touched a nerve here and I'm glad - the more dialog we have in this country about issues like this the better, in my opinion.

Carol, Do you have any friends that are Clinton supporters? Just a question.

Interesting and, I think, insightful post, Carol. If I may, I'd like to comment without venturing into areas where I'm unqualified. That includes the larger issues you raise about how the reactions of Hillary's most enthusiastic followers fit into feminist attitudes and thought.

Your post brought two thoughts to mind. First, I'm an enthusiastic Obama supporter (though I was for Hillary until her campaign took what I considered a startling and unfortunate turn). If Obama had lost, I would be grieving. Why? Because I think Obama offers a kind of hope we haven't seen for many years - the hope of less divisive politics based on forming coalitions not to force an ideological platform on the country, but to win majority support for solving important problems. I think he's the best hope we're likely to see for enacting a progressive agenda with the consent, support and ultimately strong support of the governed. Never mind whether I'm right in thinking Obama offers such hope. Never mind whether he has any chance of success. The point is that I'm sick of the politics we've been living through and I see him as the only hope of living in a more functional civil society. I would be absolutely crushed if I thought that hope was gone. I don't want to live through a future run by Karl Roves on the Republican side and Karl Rove wannabes on the Democratic side. That's my idea of hell and, rightly or wrongly, I think it would guarantee a miserable future for my children. If Obama had lost, I would have to get my bearings before deciding what, if anything, I should do next week or this fall. I'd need time and space.

For some of Hillary's supporters, I think they felt something comparably huge was at stake in this election that could only be realized through Hillary's victory, whether it was the triumph of feminism, a real chance at universal healthcare, or whatever. They really seemed to believe, with Hillary, that her victory was so important, such a high moral cause, that anything would be justified to bring it about. While I don't think an Obama victory is a catastrophe for anybody, feminists included, some Hillary supporters, especially women, as you say, obviously do. I think Obama has bent over backward to avoid offending Hillary or her followers, but these ardent supporters see slights and conspiracies against her behind every Obama button, sign and post. The power of their feelings is independent of whether they are correct in their assessment of the situation. For that reason, I'm inclined to give them space and hope we can somehow get back to a sense of sharing an interest in important causes.

My second thought is probably going to infuriate some of Hillary's supporters but I think it's true and it plays an important role in their current situation. In my view, Hillary has worked very hard and skillfully to instill a sense of victimhood in her followers. She and her "surrogates" have made sure Obama is blamed for every idiotic slight by every idiotic TV commentator, Obama supporter or tangential Obama semi-acquaintance. When the talk about "respect" comes from Hillary and her campaign, I think it's about making sure Obama takes the blame - and that he is forced to acknowledge guilt by apologizing publicly. Hillary is demanding an all-encompassing apology from Obama for anything done by Republicans, media talking heads, or invaders from other solar systems. I don't think he's done anything wrong. I saw him pull out her chair but I thought he was trying to show respect when he did that - it was obviously a miscalculation, but he knew it would be rude not to extend a common courtesy, and that wouldn't look good either. He called a reporter "sweetie" and apologized. He was clearly up to no good. Beside these high crimes, it doesn't matter that he's tried to stop people from booing Hillary, he's praised her for months even when she made pretty disgusting attacks on him, he's held her up as a role model for his own daughters, etc. No, she continues to act as though Obama is twisting 18 million imaginary knives in her back and the backs of her followers - she claims every vote she got, even when running unopposed, as a bargaining chip she can use any way she wants. The more offended she can make her followers feel, the more Obama will have to beg her to call them off, and the less likely he will be to win this election. Truth be told, I'm one of those who can't interpret her behavior as anything other than an attempt to ensure that Obama loses so she can run again in 2012. Forget whether that's accurate. Maybe I'm wrong and it doesn't really matter for the purposes of this discussion whether I am or not.

What matters is that Hillary's followers, unlike John Edwards' followers or Chris Dodd's or Joe Biden's, have been told by Hillary that they are owed an apology bigger than a thousand galaxies for the heinous treatment they have received from a totally unqualified upstart who has stolen this election, an election she claims she actually won. And yes, every single heinous Obama voter owes 18 million apologies too, made in person, on bended knee, to each and every Hillary supporter. In short, one reason Hillary's ardent supporters feel as they do is that Hillary has worked tirelessly to make them feel that way. When someone at her rally screamed, "Don't vote for Obama" the other night, Hillary said absolutely nothing to discourage that kind of talk. In this respect, then, one reason we should give Hillary's supporters space is that she, unlike the other candidates, has made them feel betrayed and abused because another candidate dared to get more delegates. It's a big problem not only for the Democratic Party and the country, but for Hillary's followers. According to Hillary, they have a lot to get over - so much that it may not be humanly possible to recover in less than four years.

You had it easy as an Edwards supporter. He didn't burden you with every grievance he could recall, imagine or create against the people who defeated him in the election. He didn't work to get his followers to hate Obama and hate Hillary. He didn't build up John McCain as a more experienced and qualified alternative. He didn't point out that McCain is a strong, military male and Hillary is a weak-kneed woman, or that Obama is an effete black latte-sipper and can never connect with whites who were born to love John McCain. If John Edwards had stooped to any such tactics, I feel sure you would have told him to go to hell and moved faster to support somebody else.

Edwards didn't and probably couldn't have done what Hillary has succeeded in doing - taking advantage of feminist aspirations, worries about family and healthcare, and every other form of emotional tinder to stoke the fires of grievance against the leading Democratic candidate and his followers. Hillary not only did it, she did it with astonishing success. That is the thanks Hillary's supporters get for supporting her - a sense of being wronged by people who actually agree with them on practically every important issue, and a damn good shot at getting to see John McCain, who shouldn't have a chance, and who opposes just about every cause most feminists and Democrats care about, elected president.

Let me apologize in advance for daring to speak such unspeakable thoughts in mixed company. I apologize, Obama apologizes, Obama's wife apologizes, Obama's grandmother apologizes, and Obama's daughters apologize. Obama would not have approved this message and is in no way responsible for it. Nevertheless, it's his fault, so he'll just have to add a few more apologies to his long, long list.