I've been thinking so much about Hillary these days. And lately, I've been thinking about how media coverage of an "intergenerational divide" in women's support of her may be fueling, and not just documenting, discord among women across generations. I'm very eager to see some analysis of the age divide after primary season is over and we've all had a chance to chill.
My feelings about Hillary keep evolving. But no matter what you think of her, it's still hard not to be intrigued by the prospect of a woman in the White House.
As I mentioned here recently, the February issue of More, my new favorite magazine (hey, I'm almost 40!), includes a forum in which I asked women who have themselves accomplished many firsts to weigh in on what a Hillary presidency might look like. I'm pleased to announce that the much extended, online version is now live. Check out the very different perspectives of Margaret Cho, Daphne Merkin, Lynn Harris, Dee Dee Myers, Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Suzanne Braun Levine, Mary Catherine Bateson, Marie Wilson, Gloria Feldt, Pat Schroeder, Pepper Schwartz, Jane Swift, Nell Merlino, Blanche Wiesen Cook, Linda Hirshman, Kellyanne Conway, and Seema Gahlaut--and please feel free to share the link! The forum is rich--far richer than the squabbles we keep hearing about in the news--and I feel it's so very important to infuse substance, even if speculative, as is the case of this forum, into the public conversation. So, have at it. Please join the conversation and share your comments over at More's site.
And for an interesting More article on Hillary and the age divide, don't miss "Our Hillary Problem". Here, Katherine Lanpher interviews Donna Brazille and asks why some older, elite women voters are ambivalent on Hillary Clinton's candidacy. I don't need to refer you to articles on younger women's ambivalence, because you've probably all read them by now.