Please read the article written about Hillary Clinton on Vox.com first:
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/20/8458001/hillary-clinton-women
Hillary Clinton seems to be the front-runner for the democratic presidential nomination and will be the first woman to do so. While her potential presidency paves the way for many women to attain higher positions of power and gain another step towards equality, it also sheds light on some of the great hardship faced by women in positions of authority in today’s society:
“The problem, of course, is that women face a dilemma: being ambitious and successful are not characteristics that are traditionally associated with femininity, but challenging those traditional gender roles often provokes a backlash. Either way, there’s a risk that it will be a barrier to success.”
Hillary Clinton’s campaign will change this way that women in power are viewed, according to the article. This campaign will not be the shining example of the perfect female leader or the “golden child” of feminism, but rather a display of how ridiculous the pressures placed on women are. Clinton will inevitably face massive amounts of criticism, verbal abuse and standards set to inhuman levels. If she makes it to office and quite obviously can’t live up to these standards, will she break the mold and show the world that the standards are unreasonable, or will she give anti-feminists more fodder in the argument that women can’t do what they’re expected to?
What do you think is going to be the benefit of Hillary’s campaign and what would be the harm?
Would it be better for the feminist movement if Hillary made it to office, or is Hillary not the woman that should be the first to this position?
What implications does her campaign hold for feminism and society in general?
Feminism and Women's Bodies 
*NOTE*:THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL DISCUSSION. KINDLY KEEP YOUR POLITICAL VIEWS OUT OF THIS CONVERSATION. IT IS STRICTLY A FEMINIST CONVERSATION.*
The fact that Hilary Clinton is the front runner of the Democratic Party is an amazing benefit for the feminist movement. Even if you do not support her it is still remarkable that she is even in the position where she should be the first female president is remarkable. If Hillary wins then boom just like that one of the largest glass ceilings in the entire country has just been broken. If she loses then it is still significant because she came that close and because it sets eh stage to let other women run in the future. Yes this campaign is going to be brutal and it is going and already has brought up so deep sexist and offensive backlash but she is handling this campaign with grace. As long as she stays string determined and focused on the issue even a loss it doesn’t matter if she wins or loses she’s a huge support to feminism. Of course it would be better for the movement if she won but losing as long as it’s a fair and graceful loss isn’t going to kill the movement.
I agree just her being a serious contender for the nomination is doing great things for the feminist movement. She is definitely setting the stage for future women who could win the White House. Imagine a little girl learning about all of the men who have led this country in her history class, thinking she has no chance of ever being in that spot. But then she sees Hilary having a serious run at the White House and this could change her perception of what women are capable of.
I agree as well. Just think of there no longer be a “first woman president.” That’s huge for the feminist cause both domestically and internationally.
I think Hilary Clinton being in the running for the 2016 democratic nomination is a great leap for feminism. It looks like she actually has a shot at the nomination. I think if any news source or any other candidate uses sexist remarks they are the ones getting backlash. In today’s society I hope everyone knows enough not to base their political support on gender, race, or sexual orientation, but some do. No doubt in the beginning some ridiculous voters were deterred by Barack Obama’s race, but seven years later here we are with the first black president and race is rarely a topic of discussion in politics. I hope Hilary can do the same for gender as Obama has done for race in politics and no one will question if anyone but white men can be the leader of the free world.
I agree that Hilary’s campaign itself is a big step. She is showing how strong and capable she is by running again and not giving up. She is an icon for the feminist movement because she is accomplishing so much on her own and is running on her own merits and qualifications. While having a woman president in the US may just be symbolic, it is still something that needs to happen soon so that in the future, gender will hopefully not be of concern when looking at presidential candidates. Just as Obama has helped move the conversation away from the topic of the race of the candidates, hopefully soon gender will also be in the background and the focus can instead be placed on the issues at hand and who is the most qualified for the position. I hope that if Clinton does win, she will not become the token woman in the white house or be disrespected by the media or other politicians. Her gender should not be her defining feature, it is just a part of the whole package that she would bring to the office.
I agree completely. I think that we’ve broken this stigma that all presidents must be white males once so we should be able to do it again in this election! I do worry, though, that as pointed out many times in the article, she will likely receive a lot of criticism as she did in 2008. I also think that this criticism won’t be out right because she is female but it will probably be originating from this defining detail. Many who criticize her more than the other candidates will most likely claim it has nothing to do with gender, but I do think that it will have everything to do with gender. Also, there is potential that people will and will not vote for her simply because she is a female. Many voters don’t pay attention to all the debates and just vote for who they like best. This could possibly result in some feminists voting for her without knowing her campaign as well as anti-feminists not voting for her just because she is female. It is upsetting to think about, but it is definitely a possibility.
I think that Hillary’s campaign is a huge step in the right direction for feminism and politics in general. We all know that politics is “a game for men” historically and the fact that Hillary is a front runner for the Democratic party is an amazing feat. I personally believe the person in office should be the best person to do so, and if Hillary turns out to be that person then that is wonderful. I do not, however, want her to be in office because she is a woman. I want people to focus on her merit and ability and if she gets into office solely on that motive, then I think that will be a wonderful thing for this country and pave the way for many other women. Her campaign holds implications for feminism in that she is one of the first women, besides Sarah Palin, to gain recognition in the main political sphere since the 2008 elections. I think there should always be a female presence in large political elections as well as other minorities, or else it is not truly representative of our country.
I completely agree with your personal belief and I fear that it is inevitable and not realistic to expect the population to be gender blind because its just as offensive as claiming to be color blind. It is apart of who she is but not all that she is which should be an aspect of her campaign if I were working for it lol.
I agree that Hillary Clinton during the upcoming election will be placed under a microscope that no male candidate has ever been placed under. I don’t think people have unattainable expectations for Hillary but many people want to point out her faults and failures as much as possible in order to prove that a women candidate is not fit to be president of the United States. I do not think Hillary running for presidency could hurt the feminist movement but it will definitely be telling on how women and men are viewed different because the presidential race hasn’t even officially begun and Hillary had already been ridiculed a number of times. The way the media portrays Hillary in the next year will be ver interesting and i think it will give us some good insight onto how far we have really come to reaching equality of the sexes.
@rj2406 gives many great points about what I anticipate will happen to Clinton during her campaign. Many candidates are highly examined during their campaigns: what they wear, the things they say, any small mistakes they make. With Clinton’s campaign gaining publicity and her status as a woman, she will definitely experience questions and criticisms that will attempt to paint her in a light that shows she isn’t fit to be president only because of her gender.
I believe with her campaign comes a larger discussion about feminism, such as this one, and a discussion about how women in power or who are famous are treated by the media because of their gender. I think that misogyny in media will be amplified during the election because people tend to also criticize what the media says.
I think the benefit of Hillary’s campaign is that it will bring the fact that women are moving up in the world. 20 years ago no one would of ever imagined that a woman would be in charge of a nation that is so powerful. But now, many US citizens are realizing that the ideas they give are as good as men’s and women should not be discriminated because of their gender. It’s a powerful movement that is gaining speed as it goes and doesn’t seem to have an end date near.
I think that Hillary Clinton’s gender is a defining feature. I say this not with animosity or because I don’t like her, because I do really like her. But when you ask “What implications does her campaign hold for feminism and society in general” it automatically separates and distinguishes her as a kind of spokeswoman or poster child for feminism. And that is exactly the point, everyone will read into her actions from a gendered lens. When a male politician cries, he’s sensitive and cares about his constituents, when a woman does it she is emotional and unfit for office. When a man yells, he’s defending his point of view and being strong, and when a woman does it she is PMSing and overreacting. Everything will be seen so much harsher, and so Hillary Clinton is not only tasked with being the perfect president but the perfect woman. Since there has never been a US president who is a woman, for years to come Clinton could be the only example. This is not at all to say that I don’t want to see her elected. I think that in today’s day and age it is inexcusable that we have not yet had a female president. Practically every developed country in the world has had women in the equivalent to this position. And though I see your point, @obamapuppy, I think it will make it harder for whichever women decide to run in the future because people will say, “wait remember the last time we elected a woman etc etc.” My immediate rebuttal to this is, remember the last time we elected a stupid man? I mean hello Andrew Johnson or Herbert Hoover. The media currently sees Hillary as her gender, and judges us all based on her actions. But should we let this stop us? No. The only way to combat this ignorance is to get a variety of women in the oval office of different viewpoints and temperaments, and show people that a woman is not a cookie cutter description, but rather, a label to wear proudly in addition to all of our other responsibilities. Short run: Hillary is going to be given hell and women are going to be blamed for voting her in. Long run: we are making history and this needs to happen.
I think it’s really wonderful that Hillary Clinton is running for president. We definitely need more role models in our society like her–women and minorities who are capable, intelligent, and able to hold positions of power. However, one thing I’ve noticed is that Clinton is held to very peculiar standards. She is criticized as a woman for how she looks/dresses/expressed her emotions, which is very inappropriate, but at the same time there is a large faction of people who treat Hillary Clinton as though she is invincible and somehow deserves support because of who she is and what she symbolizes. Clinton’s political opinions and ideas should be scrutinized just as much as any other candidate, and it would be perfectly legitimate for someone to want to endorse a different candidate for the Democratic nomination based on political opinions, even if that candidate was a man. It is important that we elect the right candidate–this may or may not be HRC.
I agree completely. In our time in this course I have constantly come back to our chosen definition of feminism as working towards the equality of genders. In order for us to achieve true equality I agree that we should not be examining her appearance just because she’s a woman, but you’re right that we also shouldn’t treat her as if she’s above scrutiny because she’s a woman either.
The fact that Hillary Clinton is running for president is great in my opinion. I think it is a great move on her part. It shows her courage to run to become the first woman president and it also encourages other women to run, either for this campaign or others in the future. I do think that her running will inevitably affect the feminist movement, but I do hope that during the campaign she is not recognized for the fact that she is female but rather for her platform and beliefs. As Taub says in her article, Hillary is being way over criticized. First she was being too manly in 2008 and now she’s too feminine?? That is ridiculous! I do hope that the people of the US will notice that this is simply over criticizing rather than legitimate arguments that should be considered.
It is indeed great and can be viewed as courageous to an extent but remember that she does already possess the same credentials that her possible contenders would if not more. So she is one of the best suited and I find it somewhat unfortunate that her sex will inevitable affect how she is viewed
Regardless of one’s political views, any feminist should (and probably does) support Hillary Clinton’s decision to run for president. They may not support her, but they support her candidacy as it is a step forward for feminism every time a woman challenges standards. The overwhelming support for her campaign shows that she is really being taken seriously, which is huge. I agree with @obamapuppy and @crockpot11 that she will be over criticized as a woman in a historically male competition, but if we really want to take strides toward gender equality we as a country need to not focus on the fact that she is a woman. We all want a “first woman president,” but we have to elect someone based on their platform and leadership ability. This very well may be Hillary, but emphasizing her gender takes the focus off of the job itself.
I think it’s worth noting that although there aren’t many female presidential candidates, there have been a few. Laura clay for example was nominated at the 1920 DNC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Clay. The fact that Hillary is running doesn’t seem to me to be a huge leap forward for feminism; Hillary winning would be a huge leap forward for feminism. Don’t get me wrong, Hillary probably has the most real chance of being chosen at the DNC and winning the election of any female candidates so far but there is still a very real possibility that traditional gender roles will hold her back.
Just the other day I heard someone remark that Hilary seemed to “want to win too much.” I really doubt anyone would ever make that remark about a male candidate. If such doubts deny Hilary the presidency then I have a hard time seeing how her mere nomination is a great success. Maybe public perceptions of womens’ roles have changed a little, I mean Hilary has made it pretty far, but if they haven’t changed enough for her to get elected that says a lot too.
It’s worth noting there are plenty of other reasons for Hilary to lose an election such as real disagreement with her views and policies. I think the Democratic primary will be a telling election though because since the voters’ views will be closer we will be able to see bias more clearly.
As much as I’d like to argue that every woman has a responsibility to fight for her own and other women’s rights, I recognize that is just another unfair standard to hold women to. Hilary Clinton, of course, is not exempt from this. As much as we like to hold public figures/politicians to higher standards of masculinity/femininity/morality/other, it’s only doing ourselves a disservice, I think.
That said, I think Americans have a hard time seeing our presidents as people. So I’m not sure that people will have the appreciation for Clinton’s humanity to recognize that she couldn’t possibly satisfy all of our expectations of the first female president. I do think that, if she becomes president, one of the largest criticisms of her succession/term will be that she wasn’t doing women/feminists justice, which I think is inequitable in itself, because, of course, it would mean there is one form of acceptable feminism and one way for women to satisfy it.
I do think, however, that Clinton’s election would be beneficial for the feminist movement. I think this would be the case no matter who the woman was, so long as it was, in fact, a woman. I don’t know Clinton’s platform, or any of the candidates’, for that matter, well, but I do know that I will vote for her, and I will vote for her because she is a woman. I know that’s kind of gauche and certainly not very politically savvy of me, but I think, on some very fundamental levels, that the election of any woman to the US presidency will be beneficial, no matter their politics. I think the election of a woman to this position, though it will not be without what I predict is the most criticism any US leader has ever received, is VITAL.
From a feminist perspective, Hillary Clinton’s running is great. As mentioned above, even if she doesn’t end up winning, it’s still a progressive way to get more women in politics and open doors for women in general. She will encourage other women to run and speak up for certain things. My biggest concern for her in particular is the fact that Bill Clinton was president before her. I think this has huge implications for her role as a feminist according to how others view it. Although I personally don’t think Bill’s presidency has anything to do with Hillary’s potential presidency, I do think that the overall public will become skeptical if she wins which might jeopardize women in politics and her own feminist success.
I agree with you about your point about Bill. I hadn’t thought like that before but you’re right it could make women think that they need have been married to a president or have some sort of “in” before she can run or win.
@scoutus, it is interesting that you bring up her husband’s presidency. Now that you mention it, I am concerned with the fact that his presidency does somehow contribute to her viability as a candidate. What’s really interesting, however, is that I didn’t think about it until you mentioned it. I wonder if others in our generation might also somehow forget all about Bill’s presidency and be able to think of Hilary as her own person and candidate?
I believe that Hilary Clinton is a blessing. I think that she is showing with great grace that standards for successful women are set at impossible standards. I think that reasonable people will observes that. I do not think we should necessarily elect Hilary merely to break an anti-feminist mold, but because she is capable for the job. I believe that her being a women should not have anything to do with it. Unfortunately though if she fails or is elected and then fails it will provide a lot of fodder for anti-feminists to say that women are not capable for that job. She really is setting a precedent there which in a way is another impossible mold. I think that she is capable for the job and would be a good president, but feminism and her being a women should not be the only reasons we elect her.
One of the primary hardships faced by women in power is the scrutiny they face from other women. The unfortunate pattern of women trashing other women is present in every field, whether it is anything from entertainment to politics. In America we have created a culture of competition in which it is believed that there can be only one winner and any one else is somehow inferior to that person. However, in the wise words of one of GW’s own, Kerry Washington, “If I succeed, I create the opportunity for more people to succeed.” This is precisely what I believe Hilary Clinton’s campaign will do for women in leadership. Clinton has faced some of her most serious criticism from fellow women, and for the most part these are women trying to climb the political latter themselves. In order to create a political climate in which trashing does not occur, we must recreate a culture in which women feel like one another’s success is a step forward for the gender rather than a threat to their own success. Her campaign will be harmful for those who cannot perceive it as anything more than a threat, but it will serve as a benefit for those who can accept it as the opening of a brand new opportunity.
I believe that Hilary Clinton as a contender will be both a blessing and a curse. It would give some the opportunity to use it to claim that she might have only been as successful because she was a women and the opposing argument could also be made which is that the scrutiny that she will no doubt face is due to her sex. I think that the core of the issue and what some may fail to realize is that regardless of the campaign’s outcome she will always be looked upon as an outlier and as a controversial as she is because of her sex. This is both unfortunate in the sense that she is much more than her sex and beneficial because it puts the spotlight on female excellence and inspires on the basis of its attainability in our society. Its attainability is debatable but for the sake of the feminist movement and female empowerment it would be an inspirational feat if she were to win and her contention for the presidency itself should signify the changing times. Personally, regardless of the stereotypical belief that all women should support Hilary Clinton because we need a women in office for the first time, I prefer to focus on the actual issues and hearing about what can be done. I am somewhat hoping that it doesn’t only become known as “the feminist campaign”. She does have credibility which should be the focus and not how credible and successful she is for a women. There is a highly prevalent stigma of women being successful and accomplished for their sex akin to the saying of “Oh, you run fast for a girl”. Women are typically held to high acclaim if they are successful because the belief and the reality is that women are the underdogs. My ideal campaign for Hilary Clinton’s presidency would be her running on her credibility alone compared to all other contenders and not looked upon with bias or negativity simply on the basis of her sex. Unlike @gwugossipgirl I don’t agree that women or feminists should simply be in support because of her sex. It would be ideal but it just isn’t fair and I think there would be a larger sense of gratification and legitimacy if she were to win not just because every woman wanted another woman in office.