Sorry, I read your reply too late to include it in my other mail. Yeah, makes sense. But since this alluding to sexual relationships in a primary is by now as American as apple pie, it would have been A LOT better if the NYT had disclosed his relations to lobbiyists without ever getting near the notion of sex and romance. You can see for yourself how the real message was completely drowned by the sexual connotation!

SHE RESPONDS, but not this run-on way, that’s my fault.

Your are right. And: I know all that as well. Do you honestly think our society would look the way it does if all women – we are the majority in the US and worldwide, after all – were feminists? No, of course not. I know it and every feminist knows it. Not every black liked to be subjected to manumission either. And psychologists can tell you a lot about how people dislike someone who shows them that they could have done better by doing something else. Hillary must be a sore in the eye of any traditional woman who had been obsessing about getting married and “taken care of” from age 13. And who by now when by herself is be wondering whether this really has been all there is to life, although the corny romantic novels and movies she has devoured throughout most of her life had told her that this was IT. Having been the target of the wrath of my unliberated sisters for decades who didn’t want to know that another world is possible: By now, I don’t care that much any more. Contrary to the 60s and 70s, information has been around for decades, if they want to learn, they’ve had all the chances in the world to do so. If they don’t want to get out of their stereotypical roles, tough shit. Islamic women are a particular creed, though. The educated ones among them are often pretty feminist these days, far more than the mainstream in the West nowadays and A LOT more than eastern European women who to a shocking extent have the attitude of whores (no nasty generalisation, I live among them, and so do we all here in Europe) and who see men primarily as a way to get things or get things done, if you act the way that pleases them, emotions normally don’t enter the equation, it’s a business. They are very popular with men (no, no envy, the men get exactly what they’ve asked for in these deals). Islamic women’s take on headscarf et al does resemble many feminists’ take on “do we have to look like hookers?” and the often discussed question of female dignity, which makes it intellectually interesting. They are more challenging discussion partners than the eastern European women, I have to admit. Because they do touch on an old problem. Margaret Atwood summed up this dilemma in her sci-fi “The Handmaid’s Tale” (Story: a part of America has become a theocracy ruled by Christian fundamentalists, most women are barren, only some are still fertile and used as birth machines, attitudes about sex and female attire make Saudi Arabia look like Las Vegas) and she cleverly draws parallels between what some radical feminists and fundamental religions expect of how women are supposed to dress, for example). And, sure, billions of women around the world are oppressed and accept it, or at least they buy into the whole patriarchial society and definitely would burn women like me on the stake. But OTOH, whenever I hear or read women whining about finding the perfect man or what to do to prevent looking old and where to find the next guru or esoteric therapy or ultimate outfit and all that crap in order to window-dress the commodity nicely for men, I just lean back and shake my head. Their problem. That’s the bonus I get from having realised early on how ridiculous all this is. Liberation endowed me with a huge reward for the rest of my life. BTW: We had originally hoped that men would walk away from their sterotypical role models and expectations, too! Our Hillary might be a closet feminist, who knows. I don’t know who she really is. “It Takes a Village” centered on the effort of a collective to raise children, though, which is a feminist thought, would be a nice attitude for a prez – contrary to the “I need a personal saviour”-creed of American society at large. But of course she wouldn’t have won half a primary on that ticket. Kucinich would have looked good compared to her in that case.The Zeitgeist would have been against it. The Zeitgeist will turn around again one day, I know, though, once women wake up again and realize that having relied on the achievements of some activists way back when while not doing a fucking thing themselves (except shrieking “oh no, I am no feminist!”), they have been losing out again slowly. Tough shit for them. But it will turn around too late for Hillary. Still: I can only hope that Obama isn’t the rhetorically exquisite flake who I fear he deep down is. I fear that he’ll become the puppet of many advisers for lack of experience who will ruin his message and him as well. But I’d be utterly delighted if he can prove me wrong and if he really can pull it off. Because I don’t think that you need dynasties in that country, and someone not called Clinton or Bush would be a welcome change. But McCain isn’t beaten yet. It’s just worrying that Americans keep voting for people on looks, speeches written by speech writers, money collected in a campaign (don’t you find it odd that you keep being ruled by millionaires and billionaires? – what do they know about the average American?? – who needed 1776 if that’s all it boiled down to, i.e. the same ruling class as was British aristocracy?) and likability. That’s not really enough of a test for the task at hand, I find. B