A Post-Feminist Race?
What it means to be a woman in power in 2016
The 2016 Election is a race like none other.
This is clear on the political level, obviously. We have a Democratic Socialist on the left, a reality TV star on the right. We have Jews, Latinos, whites, African Americans, and women. We are talking political revolutions and billionaires who can afford everything but a filter. With the presence of outrageous Donald J. Trump and vibrant Senator Bernie Sanders, it is easy to forget that the presence of women in this race is, in a way, revolutionary. Yes, Hillary Clinton ran in 2008, but as Time reporter Jay Newton Small accurately said, “She ran as women running as a man then. This is the first time a woman is running as a woman.”
This is 2016. In many ways, the female presence in the election is far from noteworthy. We are post gay marriage, post first African American president, even post first woman running for president. Females throwing their hat in the ring for Commander in Chief in an amazing way, is kind of not a big deal.
Clinton is doing her best to make it a big deal this time, though. She is not only running as a women's rights candidate, she is running as a candidate who is not afraid to embrace her womanhood. She beams about her unique combination of “head and heart” and former President Bill Clinton happily describes her using adjectives like “compassionate,” “kind,” and “understanding.” While these are not exclusively female adjectives, they are adjectives that certainly are not being used to describe Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Donald Trump, or even Bernie Sanders.
And don’t forget about Carly Fiorina. Yes, she’s still here. She might’ve descended a bit since her shining moment in a prior Republican debate, but even having a strong female running on the Republican side indicates a massive change.
These women are walking a precarious line. A line that in this wave of feminism is far from figured out. Does being a woman in power mean embracing your womanhood — proudly wearing pink and vehemently expressing emotions — or does it mean that womanhood and gender fade to the background of their lives?
This tension is certainly a major player in the story of the 2016 election, but it is equally as pertinent to those telling the story.
In the past 48 hours, traveling with press credentials around New Hampshire, I have met countless people working for the media. And the two most high ranking I have met? Both women.
I met New York Times Senior Political Editor Carolyn Ryan last night. Her voice was soft but clear, and she was confident in both her answers and her questions. To describe her in a word, she is a powerhouse. She did not hesitate to tell us when information was off the record. She never stuttered. She knew her info like none other. When her time was running short, she didn’t hesitate to tell us. She struck me as a strong woman, a strong person, to say the least.
What surprised me about her, though, was that not once did she bring up her gender when discussing her career. In the midst of all the important work she does, her gender is clearly not a barrier or defining quality worth discussing. When interviewing managing editor of Time Magazine Nancy Gibbs, I decided to inquire about her experience as a woman in charge. Maybe Ryan just didn’t bring it up because no one asked.
Gibbs was the first female graduate student at New College, Oxford, and she, like the barrier breaking female political icons Clinton, Fiorina, and Albright, faced challenges. She dealt with teachers who refused to acknowledge her existence and predominately male classrooms. Despite this, Gibbs did not express any self-pity: “Early on in my career being a woman actually helped me rise.” She went onto explain how Time Magazine was eager to incorporate women, and how through the course of her career she has faced both those willing to bend over backwards and those who were excited to “shut the doors” on her due to her gender.
Gibbs certainly seemed proud to be a woman in power when asked about it, but, similarly to Ryan, she didn’t give off the “look how impressive it is that I am a woman doing what I do” vibe, she simply gave off the “I’m strong and I know what I’m doing” vibe, as she should.
The fact is that these women have more to talk about than just “being a woman in power.” They are not defined by their gender, and their careers certainly don’t center around that basis. This indicates progress. Feminism exists to coax progress, and the movements subtle fading to the background here portrays the progress the movement has already made.
This is great, and something our country should be proud of. But, young women are left in a mess of confusion. We see and hear all these women in power, yet we are stunned by the troubling statistics regarding female CEO’s and female in Congress.
Clinton has not been polling as well with young women as the campaign had hoped. This was clear even through my three second fangirl interaction with Clinton. As I shook her hand, shaking, she looked me in the eye and said, “We need young women like you out here. Thank you so much.” I won’t flatter myself too much — I know she says similar lines to everyone. But still, the message is clear: Clinton needs young girls to rally support for her. Gibbs commented on this puzzle, explaining that young women don’t necessarily feel that a female president is all so necessary at the moment. “It is possible that these girls feel there are more important social issues to address than women’s rights, and that’s why they are drawn to Bernie who is more towards the left on every other issue.”
We discussed how the Clinton campaign is retaliating against this, with surrogates like Madeline Albright explaining that “the fight for women is not over. Republicans are trying to take back our rights, and we need Hillary to defend them.” Whether or not this retaliation will be enough to regain the voter base she needs is unclear.
The feminist movement is at a complicated moment, and it has a predominant spot in this election, despite being hidden behind the disarray of Donald Trump and Democratic Socialism. Influential women possess the ability to forge the path of what it means to be a woman in power. And all women are capable of being an influential one if they get out there and vote. Young women have the power to choose the fate of feminism. As we do, let’s make sure we are taking into account the right factors.
Who cares if Hillary is wearing a pantsuit or a dress? This election is about her record and her stances. The whole point of the feminist movement is not to tell woman how to be in power, it is just to get deserving women in power. Clinton, Fiorina, Ryan, and Gibbs are entitled to choose how to be a feminist, how to be a woman in power. Clinton should not be under scrutiny for “playing up” her womanhood just like Ryan and Gibbs should not face criticism for their lack of emphasis on their gender.
What matters now is that women are finally major players in the story. They are writing the story, they are telling the story, but the important part is that these women have something to offer and they are finally being heard.
