O happy day! At last, an article on Hillary that focuses on our problem, not hers. Well, actually, their problem -- "them" being older, affluent, highly educated women. Younger women seem to be supporting Hillary in droves.
The October issue of More magazine has a great dialogue between veteran political analyst extraordinaire Donna Brazile and Deborah Tannen, linguistics prof and author most recently of You're Wearing THAT? Understanding Mothers and Daughters in Conversation. The two pundits speculate on the age gap that's emerged among Hillary's female supporters (hint: younger women, women with no more than a high school education, working class women, and women of color support her in droves) and ask an important question: Just what is it that ambivalent, older women -- women who say they want to want Hillary but don't -- want to hear?
I remember the comment from a panelist at a political session during BlogHer -- that women Hillary's age feel lesser because Hillary "has it all." (I repeat my reaction: with all due respect, barf.) Brazile says that the older contingent are less excited than the younger gals are about the mere fact that a woman is running. Tannen adds that we always expect more of Mom than we do of Dad. Is that why W has gotten away with what he has? But I digress. Age gap aside, Brazile and Tannen very smartly sound off on the ridiculous double standards imposed on female leaders by men and women alike. This is indeed my own answer whenever I get the question during my readings about what I've come to casually refer to as "Hillary Hate." There is only one of her, and we expect her to be so much.
I'd love to hear others' thoughts, though, about Hill and the age gap. Do tell. Why are younger women seemingly more prone to support her so far, while older affluents are hedging their bets? (And for more, check out TAP's recent article on it all, here.)