In a recent article for Salon Magazine, Democrat social critic Camille Paglia suggests that Hillary Clinton’s inability to gain popularity with the male electorate may be the result of her particular brand of feminism:
“As a career woman, Hillary is rooted in second-wave feminism, which began with Betty Friedan’s co-founding of the National Organization for Women in 1967, while Hillary was in college. Friedan sought to draw men into the women’s movement and to ally with mainstream wives and mothers. But after a series of ideological struggles, she lost her leadership role and was eventually eclipsed in media attention by the more telegenic Gloria Steinem, who famously said, ‘A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.’
Hillary has unfortunately adopted the Steinem brand of blame-men-first feminism, which defines women as perpetual victims requiring government protections. Hillary’s sometimes impatient or patronizing tone about men, which can perhaps be traced to key aspects of her personal history, may prove costly to her current campaign.”
Paglia suggests that Ms. Clinton has tried to hide her tendency toward “blame-men-first feminism” by externally embracing a softer brand of femininity in looks and actions. As Paglia implies, such a portrayal has apparently been to no avail, for such a “persona [was] so foreign to her nature that it sometimes seemed like drag.”
Paglia’s comments should provide some interesting food for thought to modern feminists. Common sense dictates that hardly anyone is going to like or embrace the ideas of those by whom they are continually maligned. And as the maligning of men seems to be one of the core principles which feminists like Hillary regularly practice, can one really blame men for not jumping on board with her ideas or campaign?
Image Credit: Brett Weinstein via Flickr