While pundits hiss, working women applaud the First Lady
By PAULA KAMEN
CHICAGO -
In the past four years, the media has never hesitated to report on how many people hate Hillary Rodham Clinton. We've heard a nearly uniform litany of negative criticism: "congenital liar" (William Safire, 1996), "bitch" (Kathleen Gingrich, quoting son Newt, 1995), "Lady MacBeth of Little Rock" (American Spectator, 1993), "radical feminist" (Rich Bond, Republican National Convention, 1992) -- not to mention the steady tide of barbs and bruises received from the usual suspects -- Jesse Helms, Rush Limbaugh, et al.
But last night, in a refreshing change of pace, the media reported almost incredulously another side of the story: Gee, it seems that a lot of other folks -- namely working women -- really like her after all!
As illustrated this Tuesday, when gauging public opinion, it all depends on who you ask. Once working women had a platform and enough time to speak, they painted a different picture -- in contrast to the usual image portrayed almost exclusively by the establishment-entrenched conservative older white males who dominate the business of opinion-making in America today. While these pundits do reflect a segment of the population that truly despises Mrs. Clinton, it's also time we heard from the many who support her and resent seeing her trashed.
The pundits' portraits are one-sided because they fail to acknowledge the complexity of American opinion about Mrs. Clinton, which in turn reflects the complexity of opinion about feminism and working women in general. The truth is that she is both popular and fiercely disliked by different populations, as is the case with any activist challenging the balance of power. Most often the media paints such subjects in black and white -- "Do they love her, or do they hate her?" -- without any room for subtleties. They view Mrs. Clinton through a retrograde traditional lens of womanhood, a false dichotomy of either single-minded, bitchy careerist or lovably docile cookie-baking Kool-Aid mom.
However, this week, the climate has been unusually ripe to express the long-overlooked views of working women. On Monday and Tuesday, preparing the biggest speech of her life for prime-time television, Mrs. Clinton was in the limelight as never before, and her story commanded more thorough coverage. The reporters had to spend an obligatory 20 minutes getting reactions from the crowd; the groups of women coming to see her could not be ignored. Her speech also gave her a chance to present herself undiluted and unprocessed, not through the Cuisinart of commentators.
While the women interviewed were attending pro-Clinton events and were predictably pro-First Lady, they still reflect a strong current of women's opinion rarely voiced in the media.
The day began with The New York Times reporting the "boisterous, rock-star reaction" greeting Mrs. Clinton during her whirlwind schedule of seven speeches in eight hours on Monday. The article quoted women who "admired her intelligence and determination" and felt solidarity after seeing her under fire. "What the Republicans have to understand," said Geraldine A. Ferraro, the 1984 vice-presidential nominee, "is that when they're beating up on Hillary they're beating up on all of us."
Just before Mrs. Clinton's speech, on PBS's "Online News" television panel, female members of Congress expressed appreciation for the First Lady's work. One made the sharp observation that for women between the ages of 19 and 25, Hillary Clinton represents someone at the Democratic National Convention they can actually identify with. The commentator asked if Mrs. Clinton's failed attempts at health-care reform might have ruined her image, and a male Congressman answered that he isn't worried if the worst thing she is known for is trying to get health care to poor children -- a fresh opinion, indeed.
After the speech, CBS's Ed Bradley seemed surprised at Mrs. Clinton's extremely warm reception at the United Center (even considering that much of it was, of course, staged). But it did not come as news to me. Finally I'm hearing in the media what I've been observing personally for the past four years. I speak often at colleges and universities about young women's perceptions of feminism, and in every speech, I discuss Mrs. Clinton to a receptive audience. She is the ultimate example of how the negative label of "feminist" is used to keep strong women down. Young women see right through the criticism that she has received from the Right. They know that she is not a castrating harpy, but someone unjustly targeted for achieving goals very much like their own.
This voicing in the media of working women's opinions marks a long overdue acknowledgment of a politically powerful group. Working mothers, who have been treated as a fringe special-interest group, are now the mainstream. Former Texas Governor Ann Richards observed that this group represents underutilized political muscle that could make a dramatic difference for Democrats. She pointed out that working women "are the most turned off in this country" to politics and do not show up at the polls when disgruntled and alienated -- as in 1994 when the Republicans swept Congress. Speeches like Mrs. Clinton's can help nudge them back into the fold.
Paula Kamen, a Chicago-based writer, is the author of "Feminist Fatale: Voices from the 'twentysomething' generation explore the future of the women's movement" and is a frequent lecturer at college campuses. She is working on a book for W.W. Norton about young women's sexual attitudes. She is on the advisory board to the Women & Media Project of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.