Tuesday, June 10, 2008 - Posts
-
sponsorship
Why is the New York Times still flummoxed by the idea that women might embrace technology? The paper's Technology section today ran a "trend" story marveling at how women are expected to buy the new iPhone in record numbers (sample quote: "'Companies need to be careful to not think that to sell smartphones they just need to be pink," she said. ‘There are other things women want.' " Gosh, really?) It's not even been a year since the paper wrote another color-schemed piece on the breaking news that women had really gotten behind improvements in technology, with the headline "To Appeal to Women, Too, Gadgets Go Beyond ‘Cute' and ‘Pink.' " In February, it delved into the world of girls who create Internet content (quoting an expert as saying that to these girls, hotlinking is "the digital equivalent of arriving at a party wearing the same dress as another girl).
To affect surprise that women are using technology and the Internet in an era when it's nearly impossible to be engaged with the world and ignore either one is a rich bit of condescension for the paper that endorsed Hillary in the Democratic primary. Was the editorial board expecting her to receive those 3 a.m. phone calls on a hot pink Swarovski-studded BlackBerry Pearl? This feels a little like hearing someone express surprise that women might want to play sports or enjoy sex. The notion that using technology would make you a geek is also a straw man argument that's years out of date—can't remember thinking that way since perhaps middle school, which was right around when IMing became cool, not just the late-night pastime of pimpled anime enthusiasts. (And besides, haven't pimpled anime enthusiasts become cool since then?)
Despite the price scale-back and functionality improvements, the iPhone is still at least as much status symbol as useful tool. The Times is clearly no stranger to the commodity fetishization beat, especially when it comes to women, so you'd think they'd be all over the digital desideratum angle. But I guess the paper thinks this recent story sheds some light on how technology is changing the way women live.
-
sponsorship
Our lively debates on XX Factor are inspiring our contributors to write some longer pieces, especially at news-filled moments. In response, we've created a new department for these standalone articles, called XX Factor XXtra. Don't worry-you won't miss anything. We'll be sure to highlight these pieces on the blog, and our contributors are sure to respond to them and debate just as they would a blog post.
For starters, read Dahlia Lithwick's piece from the weekend on how to heal the rift between the older and younger feminists created by the campaign, Emily Bazelon's article on why it's important to focus on issues that will improve the lives of women, regardless of who is the Democratic candidate, and Melinda Henneberger's essay on how feminism will survive.
-
sponsorship
In editing a piece about the election this morning, for the first time this season, I didn't replace "them" in a sentence referring back to the president with "him or her." We've only got XYs in contention now, and so "him" will do. It's a small thing, but it made me sad. Though not enough to sympathize much with your McCain-flirting friend, Melinda. The idea that Obama is an empty suit makes absolutely no sense to me now that I've finished reading his first book, Dreams From My Father. Anyone else have thoughts about it? Mine, for starters, is whew, lots going on in that man's brain, and the wonder is that after giving voice to all that anger-laced identity-searching he is actually a candidate for president. That book was a feast of complexity, which meant that I ate it up. Of course, that's not a direct response to your friend's concerns, which were about his mastery of policy. But in the context of worrying about Obama's relative lack of experience, it matters to me that this guy is really really smart.
-
sponsorship
Just received this e-mail from a friend, a Washington lawyer who is a lifelong Democrat and a generous donor to the party. She supported Hillary in the primary and is undecided about what she'll do in November:
I just read your XX column, and I wanted to share a couple thoughts. Even though Hillary characterized her campaign as a big feminist movement in her exit speech, I'm not sure all her supporters saw it that way. I also think the risk of defection to McCain is very real, and not limited to uneducated, working class types. Just in my office, I know 6-7 women, all lifelong Democrats from VA who are now planning to vote for McCain. They are all highly educated people who follow politics closely, and a couple even worked for Dems on the Hill at one point or another. The decision to defect to McCain has nothing to do with Hillary as a woman or Obama's personality. They like Obama enough as a person, but they think he's an empty suit—rhetoric with little record behind it. Even if they agree more with Obama's positions, it seems risky to put such an inexperienced person in the White House—especially after what happened last time. I think the media misses this. It is not all about feminism.
Having said that, I know there is a bit of truth to the feminist argument. I also know a strong, pro-choice Democrat from Maryland—someone who regularly hosts NARAL dinners—who is defecting to McCain, even though she understands his views on abortion. I doubt if this woman ever even voted for any Republican before in her whole life, and she just contributed to McCain's campaign. Truly amazing! I think Obama will have a real problem in the Electoral College if he does not find a way to reach out to the people who voted against him—for whatever reason. For now, I'm undecided and I'm planning on staying that way for a while. My big issue is the economy and both Obama and McCain are weak in that area, so it probably doesn't matter much.
I answered her that the experience issue doesn't resonate with me, especially as Cheney and Rummy had been around since the last ice age, and where did that get us? Hillary has been in the Senate only four years longer than Obama: big whoop. If you count his time in the Illinois Senate, he's actually had more experience as an elected official. (And while of course her experience as first lady counts for something, would we give Laura Bush full credit for those years—even though, as she belatedly tells us, she, too, had a big policy role all along?) The whole experience question just feels like a stand-in for race, or maybe something else I'm missing. Because when someone says they would slit their wrist before voting for Obama, that is NOT about Clinton having been in the Senate longer.
And here's my friend's response, which shows that hurt feelings cut both ways during the primary season, and opened some wounds that Obama must now work hard to help heal:
I think her years as first lady count for something, but regardless, she has a much better command of the issues. He was a back-bencher in the state senate, not committee chair, etc. ... He improved during the debates, but even at the end he was flubbing basic tax, economic, and foreign policy issues. Maybe I've been dealing with those issues for too long, but honestly, he is constantly struggling for answers and contradicting himself. I think it would help if he gave voters a sense of who he would appoint to his Cabinet. If he is just going to be an inspirational figurehead, I'd like to know who's going to be advising him. ... Bottom line—the divisions here are very, very deep for all sorts of reasons, and Obama has got to find a way to reach out. Many people are hurt by all the name calling in the campaign. [My son] was repeatedly called a racist at school for supporting Hillary, and I know they have had to address similar issues in [a private school in Washington]. I've heard that some African-American women who supported Hillary were subjected to threats and taunting. Of course, it's not Obama making those comments, and people need to realize that there is a downside to all that young voter passion, but it does not make you want to switch to the other team. Five years ago, I would have voted for McCain in a heartbeat because I've always liked him. He's definitely sold out to the right in those five years, though, and that's what gives me pause.'
That she's even thinking McCain should give her party pause, too.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?