Page 187 - Microaggressions in Everyday Live Race, Gender, and Sexual Orientation

Gender Microaggressions and Sexism 161

That ’ s why the Iowa primary was following our historical pattern of making
change. Black men were given the vote a half - century before women of any
race were allowed to mark a ballot, and generally have ascended to positions of
power, from the military to the boardroom, before any women (with the possible
exception of obedient family members in the latter).

If the lawyer described above had been just as charismatic but named, say,
Achola Obama instead of Barack Obama, her goose would have been cooked
long ago. Indeed, neither she nor Hillary Clinton could have used Mr. Obama ’ s
public style — or Bill Clinton ’ s either — without being considered too emotional
by Washington pundits.

So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are
as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as
racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than
anything that affects “ only ” the female half of the human race; because children
are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel
they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because
racism stereotyped black men as more “ masculine ” for so long that some white

men find their presence to be masculinity - affirming (as long as there aren ’ t too

many of them); and because there is still no “ right ” way to be a woman in public
power without being considered a you - know - what.
I ’ m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of
sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That ’ s why
Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn
into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of
outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements pro-
gressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that.

I ’ m supporting Senator Clinton because like Senator Obama she has community
organizing experience, but she also has more years in the Senate, an unprec-
edented eight years of on - the - job training in the White House, no masculinity
to prove, the potential to tap a huge reservoir of this country ’ s talent by her
example, and now even the courage to break the no - tears rule. I ’ m not opposing
Mr. Obama; if he ’ s the nominee, I ’ ll volunteer. Indeed, if you look at votes during
their two - year overlap in the Senate, they were the same more than 90 percent
of the time. Besides, to clean up the mess left by President Bush, we may need
two terms of President Clinton and two of President Obama.
But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as
divisive by her sex.
What worries me is that she is accused of “ playing the gender card ” when citing the
old boys ’ club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.

1/20/10 2:42:07 PM
c08.indd 161 1/20/10 2:42:07 PM
c08.indd 161