DANGEROUS LABELES

Leslie Bennetts wrote an editorial in the Sunday Times: "Go Away? Why should she?" I wrote this letter to the Times in response.


Ms. Bennetts misses the mark by a country mile with her wild claims of conspiratorial misogyny in the Democratic primary. As is often the case with sweeping lies, there is an element of truth in her comments: American women do have a reduced public presence as they age, and that is unfair. But invisible, rarely heard from? Hardly. Ask anyone with a mother, an aunt, or a grandmother. And for all her invisibility and lack of power, Sen. Clinton did manage to get herself elected and re-elected to the U. S. Senate. No small accomplishment for either gender.

Labeling all of Clinton’s problems as misogyny is an admission of tunnel vision. Perhaps she stumbled because of bad planning, poor execution, lack of a coherent theme, in-fighting among staff members, or her constant reference to “35 years of experience.” Being close to the man in the Oval Office simply does not qualify as experience. If it did, we could vote for Monica Lewinsky. Or maybe people just don’t want another Clinton in the White House. Think that’s unfair? Imagine how Jeb Bush feels.

Ms. Bennetts notes the complaint of a Hollywood mogul’s wife that “women became invisible after they pass the age of 25.” Lew Wasserman’s wife, Edie, was widely acknowledged as one of the most powerful people in town. Perhaps this female invisibility is not a universal truth.

Should American women, as Ms. Bennetts suggests, rise up as one, recognize their timeless sisterhood, and sweep Sen. Clinton into the White House? Maybe. But I think women are smarter than that, less selfish, more inclined to vote for whichever candidate they feel is best for the whole country, not just best for women. And by the way, there is no guarantee that HIllary would be the best candidate for women. In the end, however, I suspect Ms. Bennetts' real motivation is to boost sales of her book, The Feminine Mistake. But hey, I could be wrong.