Skip to content

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and you will receive our stories in your inbox.

Moving on

Posted in Life & Love, and Women's issues

susan b anthonyIt’s official: Hillary Clinton is now the first female candidate to the US Presidency. After 44 men, a woman has a concrete shot at entering the Oval Office.

Now, it would be nice if we could stop questioning her competency, her choices in pantsuits and whether she can be trusted. I can’t let go of the nagging suspicion that many of the faults Mrs. Clinton is accused of embodying would not have been dug up had she been born with a different set of chromosomes.

As a woman in my mid-50s, I am clearly a prime target voter for Hillary Clinton. It’s still too clear to me that my modest accomplishments in life rest, partly, on the shoulders of women who fought on my behalf for the right to be treated equally. Younger women in the United States of America might take their equality for granted and view Mrs. Clinton as old guard, stale, and have been heeding the call of Bernie Sanders. Who knows? Were I 25 today, I might have been more enamored with a movement that had revolution as its crying call. Now, I am more prone to view a revolution as a series of steps methodically taken along a set path, rather than a sprint. I look at my life and see that the most pivotal changes did not happen overnight, and I apply the same view to the choices our country is facing.

But, when I look at Hillary Clinton now, what I also see is not the past but my future: here is a 68-year-old woman at the top of her game, with enough energy to be on the campaign trail day in and day out for months, and enough mental clarity to tackle complex issues. I see ambition and determination. I see a woman who has come completely into her own, whether you like or not what she stands for.

And I have to ask: if she can, why shouldn’t I?

Share on Facebook

18 Comments

  1. Reading this (especially that last part), I just realised that I kind of look at you in a similar way to how you describe looking at Hillary Clinton. Too many people around my age (still in their 20s or some just early 30s) complain about being “too old” (sometimes jokingly, sometimes not so much). It’s quite ridiculous; there’s still so much more we can experience and achieve.
    And regarding your thoughts on younger women taking equality for granted: People used to question why I chose to study Modern History in high school (as opposed to a more “interesting” subject), but I always felt like it was very relevant (and also interesting). Knowing the past gives good perspective in the present.

    July 29, 2016
    |Reply
    • camparigirl
      camparigirl

      This is such a nice comment! And yes, the study of history is underrated.

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
  2. Whether or not people criticize Hillary R Clinton for her pantsuits her hairstyles her feminine gender etc … is not something as a nation we can be proud of however it is almost irrelevant at this point .
    Criticism for her lack of being trustworthy and the entire lack of accountability of the Clinton Culture is valid – in fact quite valid and to the very point. It is no small accomplishment getting to where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is today – however her record in politics speaks for itself and does not allow a reasonable person of honor to support someone like her. Her reckless self indulgent negligence of the management (albeit not entirely on her own ) of the Clinton Foundation is just one of the issues on her – not based on some gender biased rhetoric
    The young and former Hillary that former President Clinton spoke of at the DNC the other night was impressive – seriously impressive. Yes, she has had to compete in unequal territory and she has achieved greatly – but her choices that illustrate and provide a window into her soul and lack of integrity are hers to own. There are many great people in our country who have either not been allowed into or chose not to enter politics – as a result of their gender, their color their ethnicity etc… While it is an historical moment in history today and tonight at the DNC that we as a nation could enjoy – have entered the possibility of having a female head of state for the first time in our history – it is a shame we cannot be proud of the nominee – as their are so many others more worthy.

    July 29, 2016
    |Reply
    • Meri Mastro
      Meri Mastro

      This type of comment is distressing . . . as if any of the previous 44 presidents were trustworthy, faultless, without sin shall we say . . . Please, read your history of the US. read some of the excellent biographies of past presidents . . . they are all the same. They are politicians and have done what they had to do to succeed. Are we looking for a saint? Look elsewhere, for such a being won’t be found in the political arena. I want an intelligent, competent, politically savvy, experienced person in the White House and am pleased to have found all of that in a terrific woman, Go Hillary!

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
      • camparigirl
        camparigirl

        I agree. If you are in politics, you got your hands dirty at some point. I suppose it’s about deciding what degree of dirt is too much.

        July 29, 2016
        |Reply
      • I appreciate your point of view and have taken a bit of time to respond…
        What I find distressing is an acceptance of …’they are all the same’. I am fairly well read and familiar with biographies of our leaders, past and present. I do not confuse ‘politics’ with religion and have no expectations for ‘saints’ in ‘public service’. (I recommend my recent read David Brooks’ “The Road to Character” for further reference on this.) However our ‘democracy’ and Constitution is well over 225 years old and the amount of money and influence that permeates the system now vs even 35 years ago is more than 200 fold. That in and of itself is enormously significant – and undermines a relatively simplistic notion that – all politicians can and should be subject to the same judgment – based on shared vulnerability as humans/politicians.
        The amount of corruption, self deception etc only increases exponentially with the billions of dollars introduced into the political system. Other developed countries’ governments have successfully placed limitations on private sector monetary influences. Just for example – Angela Merkel – would not only not boast of her ability to raise $2.5 billion in individual campaign funds ( as Hillary’s claim) she would be prevented from doing so by German regulations and likely embarrassed by and shamed by the obvious conflicts of interest therein.
        I stand by what I originally stated … we as the concerned, involved, participating public of the U.S. have a reasonable right to expect from our presidential nominees a standard of integrity to be admired.

        August 1, 2016
        |Reply
    • camparigirl
      camparigirl

      I really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts and present a different perspective.

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
  3. I think the distinction is that Hillary is the first woman to actually be nominated as a presidential candidate by a major US political party. Chisholm and Ferraro were candidates for their party’s nomination for president, which most sources seem to consider not the same as being a candidate for president. There are also several women who have run as the presidential candidate for smaller parties (e.g. Green Party and Communists).

    July 28, 2016
    |Reply
    • camparigirl
      camparigirl

      Thank you Fiona, for saving me the time….

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
  4. I’ll only add that over 50 countries have already had female leaders, including little old Ireland. This election can be all-encompassing and the US tends to seclude itself from the rest of the world so that it can almost sound like she’s the only significant female who’s reached the top EVER! Although I hear your point: it’s the U.S. so it shouldn’t be so behind on this, and her age is important to celebrate. And I’m trying. I’m really trying. Bear with me…trying… 🙂

    July 28, 2016
    |Reply
    • camparigirl
      camparigirl

      I know you are trying. Not that you have much of a choice at this point, do you?

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
  5. Actually, Hillary is only one of three women to become candidates for President, and one of four to run for the honor. History relegates two to footnotes, mainly because Shirley Chisholm was both the first African american and only the second woman to run for the presidency. The first ran in the 1800’s, before it was “proper” for a woman to run for office. Chisholm ran in the seventies, before it was “proper” for women or blacks to run for the office. The third woman to attempt, and almost win, the presidency, was Geraldine Ferrarro in the early 1990’s. While Clinton has finally clinched the full nomination, and is the first to be this close to the presidency, she is definitely not the first woman to be a candidate or to run the race. Sorry to burst your bubble on this. Just thought you needed to know (by the way, there is actually two female presidents in this country’s history that the world of politics would rather you not know about, but that is a story for another time…clue: both women are before the country was fully out from under English rule and was still fighting for its freedom, so you’ll have to really do some digging to find the information.)

    July 28, 2016
    |Reply
    • Actually Geraldine Ferrarro was the first Vice Presidential candidate by a major party. She was Walter Mondale’s running mate in 1984. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Ferraro] 🙂

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
      • camparigirl
        camparigirl

        I thought so…and never much of a shot at the presidency. Although I certainly admire what she did to elevate the profile of women in politics.

        July 29, 2016
        |Reply
    • winstonmoreton
      winstonmoreton

      Distracting comments. The message is; after 44 men, a woman has a concrete shot at entering the Oval Office!

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
      • camparigirl
        camparigirl

        Celebrations over. Now it’s to hoping she doesn’t screw it up! Thank you W.

        July 29, 2016
        |Reply
    • camparigirl
      camparigirl

      I should have been more precise, and written that Hillary is the first woman to accept the nomination and lead one of the two major parties into a presidential election.

      July 29, 2016
      |Reply
      • Winston Moreton
        Winston Moreton

        Nah. Don’t let men with political agendas cramp your style of writing

        July 29, 2016
        |Reply

Got some thoughts? We would love to hear what you think

%d bloggers like this: