ifeminists.com: A central gathering place and information center for individualist feminists.   -- explore the new feminism --
introduction | interaction | information

ifeminists.com > introduction > editorials

Hillary Plays the Female Supremacist Card
March 23, 2005
by Carey Roberts

If you're looking for a paragon of female virtue, don't waste your time in Chappaqua, New York. Of all American politicians, there is no one who is more ethically-challenged or morally-tainted than Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Do a Google search on "Hillary Clinton" and "scandal," and your computer's memory chip will choke, gag, and cough. Here's just a partial list to wet your whistle:

  • 1978: Parlayed a $1,000 investment in cattle futures into a sizzling $100,000 profit.
  • 1985: Accepted a $2,000 a month retainer from Madison Guaranty, a fact she later tried to deny.
  • 1993: Ousted the White House travel office and replaced it with World Wide Travel, Clinton's source of $1 million in fly-now-pay-later campaign trips.
  • 1996: Attempted to conceal the fact that she had received $120,000 worth of free ghost-writing services for her Writing History book.

And just three months ago, Senator Clinton's former finance director David Rosen was indicted on charges that he had lied to the Federal Election Commission about HRC's campaign expenses.

Whatever else Mrs. Clinton may claim to be, she is first and foremost a fem-socialist. Mao's Little Red Book instructs revolutionary-wannabees to vilify and malign their opponents. To Saint Hillary, the enemy is that vast penile conspiracy called the Patriarchy. Which means men are all considered fair game.

So at a recent address to the Vital Voices' Women's Global Leadership Summit, Hillary attempted to deflect attention away from her besmirched ethical resumé. Here she goes again:

"Research shows the presence of women raises the standards of ethical behavior and lowers corruption."

Note Hillary's effort to prop up a dubious claim by using the word "research" without bothering to mention the source of her information.

Hillary, supreme mistress of irony that she is, made those remarks about the impeccable ethical standards of women just two days after Martha Stewart wrapped up her five month stint in the slammer. Maybe Hillary forgot that Stewart had lied to federal investigators about her use of insider information to dump her biotechnology stocks.

One of the dogmas of radical feminism is that a woman can do anything a man can do. The logical extension of that belief is that women should represent 50% (or more) of all politicians, CEOs, scientists, and so on.

But in January, Harvard president Larry Summers committed a capital heresy. He suggested that innate biological differences might be part of the reason for the predominance of men in elite science departments.

That remark triggered a firestorm of protest. But the venomous denunciations backfired when persons around the country came to view Summers as yet another victim of Leftist intolerance.

A few weeks later Charlotte Allen wrote a column in the Los Angeles Times that commented on the dire shortage of female intellectuals. Allen blamed the problem not on sex discrimination, but rather because "Ideological feminism has ghettoized and trivialized the subject matter of women's writing."

Predictably, that statement provoked another raging-hormones debate that is beginning to resemble catfight.

Then last week a 5-foot tall female police officer - a grandmother at that -- was assigned to accompany accused rapist Brian Nichols into an Atlanta courtroom. Nichols proceeded to wrest away her gun and went on a murderous rampage.

Now we are beginning to get an idea why there is a shortage of female scientists, intellectuals, and police officers.

Perhaps it's time to expand the discussion. Why, 85 years after women were granted the right to vote, do we have only 14 females serving in the U.S. Senate?

To answer that question, consider a bill recently proposed by Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine. They introduced the "Pregnancy Recovery Education Program for Women in the Military" act to help military moms during the 12 months following delivery.

And why should we spend $2 million for this latest example of feminist pork? According to the two senators, these downtrodden women "continue to serve actively while still physically recovering from pregnancy and the physical trauma of giving birth."

So much for those lean, mean, fightin' machine G.I. Janes.

Last week female attorney Devvy Kidd reached the point of exasperation with this you-can-never-do-enough-to-please-a-woman mentality. "Throw out all female members of Congress!" she demanded.

No doubt taking aim at Her Royal Highness, Kidd charged, "these hormone-driven legislators are breeding generations of women who are not being 'empowered;' they are being turned into whining, gimmee-gimmee females."

With utter disregard for the truth and common decency, female supremacist Hillary Clinton continues to stereotype and malign men, thinking this will somehow shore up her support with the female electorate.

ifeminists.com > home | introduction | interaction | information | about

ifeminists.com is edited by Wendy McElroy; it is made possible by support from The Independent Institute and members like you.