A piece by Judith Timson in the February 26 Globe and Mail claims that Hillary Clinton is the victim of sexism, suggesting that: “For every ‘presidential’ and ‘charismatic’ bestowed on Barack Obama, there are 10 adjectives commentators have used to put down the way Hillary Clinton dresses, talks and emotes.”
The piece has generated 124 online comments so far, or, if you’d rather, you can find a more succinct summary of the reaction in two letters the Globe published in its February 27 edition:
From Kim Solga:
“I applaud Judith Timson’s smart, timely and necessary analysis of the misogyny that has broken the back of Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination (From The Mouths Of Critics: A Glaring Double Standard – Feb. 26). But what’s it doing in your Life section? It should be on your front page. History will eventually show this to have been one of the most important stories of our decade.”
From David Cherniack:
“The feminist rampage about Hillary Clinton’s unfair treatment by the media is getting tiring. To claim that it exists and that it’s because she’s a woman is simply inverse sexism. The reality is, she is mistrusted because of concerns about her character, not about her gender. To claim otherwise just reveals an ideological dogmatism that demeans the cause of feminism.”
Clinton herself supports the theory, criticizing the media at a February 26 Ohio debate for their bias. She pointed to a recent Saturday Night Live spoof of how the media fawns over Obama as evidence she’s not alone in her thinking.
Is she right?