"Women like McKinli and Melania are not voting against their self-interest, because white patriarchy is a white woman’s interest. They are beneficiaries of the powers of wealth, class, and whiteness. That is what they wish to uphold." This a thousand times. In her book "Caste", Isabel Wilkerson shares a conversation she had with someone that states exactly this about white people generally voting for white supremacy over democracy and social services, because white supremacy serves them and that is absolutely in their interest.
Melania is the ultimate depiction of the cult of white womanhood. I'm not surprised her book is so terrible. I think people felt the same way about Ivanka - she was the reasonable one. But this is a woman who signed on to her father's horrible policies and gave him a veneer of ... something. It's very calculated to have these women who, like Sara Palin, represent patriarchy in such odious ways.
This is beautiful, hot fire, Liz! Fuck yes. "White women largely aren’t voting for Trump because they are victims of Trump or their Trumpy husbands, but because they want to. Because patriarchy benefits them. Because the gilded oblivion is nice if you can get it, if you can hide yourself away in a world where you can believe whatever you want." As a white woman, thank you for talking about this. It's so real.
Lyz, you are sharply and painfully correct in this piece. I wish you weren’t, so that I could have nice little fantasies about all the well-meaning people I wish existed in our country. Of course, millions do but narrow self interest is the only value for so many others. We all operate out of some degree of self-interest, but why should it be so hard to think about others at the same time?
I woke up in the middle of the night worried about the election. This was a very good article but I made up my mind when I saw a clip of her on The View defending birtherism that she is no better than he is and just as shallow. People are always looking for some kind of justification for others who exhibit poor behavior. As my son said to me when he was a teen and I was trying to defend someone’s poor behavior, “Mom, Sometimes people are just assholes. It is as simple as that.”
The amount of contortion people do to make excuses for Melania is always baffling. She made her choices. She was miserable in those photos because she never thought he'd win and she realized her life was about to get a lot more complicated. She wore the jacket because she knew it would make news and she knew it would be another way she can make herself the victim.
One of my acquaintances, who previously told me she loathed Trump, has announced she's voting for him because he's better on national security. She's a white, upper middle class lady who doesn't have any queer (that she knows of) or POC children. She and her family have always been conservative. But voting for him is a choice she gets to make because the patriarchy benefits her and her family. She got hers and everyone else can rot.
The belief that Trump is better on national security, seemingly widespread, is completely without factual basis. He's terrible on national security! He wants a civil war. He wants to surrender to Russia. He arranged the surrender in Afghanistan, making no provisions at all for the women there, or the men who'd cast their lot with us.
I think this is just straight up sexism again. Many Americans do not see women as protectors/defenders. Even though the President is just a figurehead in this regard.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by figurehead here. Presidents have a number of powers they can exercise, especially in the national security area. E.g., I haven't researched it, but istm that a president has the power to order (or direct a cabinet secretary to order) sanctions against a foreign military he/she thinks has violated international law. And the power to rely on his friend Vlad's account of what has taken place in making the determination.
We're 125 years into thinking that Presidents can unilaterally terminate treaties. The North Atlantic Treaty requires a one year notice to withdraw, but obviously, during that year, a withdrawing party could ignore the thing with impunity.
I was being a bit literal. I think many people in this country do not think a woman is strong enough to face down threats. But obviously no president actually handles threats directly. Reagan did not personally free the hostages back in the day. But he got the credit. He was just a figurehead for all the work. Just like Biden doing his phone call diplomacy to get hostages out of Russia. I am sure he made calls but there was a huge team. For some reason there are people who cannot imagine a woman leading that team. I would call that bias or sexism.
If you're referring to the hostages taken at the US embassy in Iran, Reagan didn't even do that. The entire deal was made by Carter: Iran was so pissed off at him, though, that they didn't release the hostages until Reagan was inaugurated.
If you're referring to the Hezbollah hostages in Beirut in the mid-1980s, yes Reagan did authorize secretly selling weaponry to Iran to get a couple of hostages released. Which worked until it became public. Remaining hostages were release after GHWB had been in office for a bit.
Melania is entirely opaque and you can project whatever you want to on that blank screen. She likes it that way. Most women who vote for Trump do it to preserve their own gilded asses.
Money is the strongest driving force for waaay too many people. If Trump will help them economically, who cares wtf else he wants to do? Yes, women will vote for Trump just to keep their MONEY. I know women who 'sold' themselves to the highest bidder, their love of luxury outweighing their love for romance. Some find both in a husband, they hope? Some give up ever having passion in their love life, enjoy the wealth and find passions acceptable to their husband/keeper. Some opt for the opulence, sneak around, and find the latter on the side...
As for why poor me, I'm the victim, Melania chose to sell herself - I really don't care, do you?
This reminds me of Allison Williams saying that people would ask her about her character in Get Out and insist that she must have been hypnotized or coerced by her family. To which she’d say, “No, she’s just evil! How hard is that to understand?”
This piece is so interesting. And as a POC, it explains why I feel that so many (white) people I know aren’t as political as me- because for so many, it doesn’t really matter who wins. Everyone wants to support the nuclear white heterosexual family. They’ll always be considered and protected, regardless of who’s in office.
Bingo. One of the benefits of privilege is that one can afford to maintain ignorance and indifference because the consequences always fall on the 'other.'
Capitalism is a system of individualism, and there's no reason to think that white women are immune because nurturing and caring for others are considered female characteristics. I think it's more about the legacy of colonialism than the patriarchy which has white women voting "against their own interests". I just think they value the privilege that comes from being white in an economic system built on the free labor of slavery more than they value their rights, or lack thereof, as women. It's not so different from the suffragist movement that advocated for women's right to vote - white women's rights.
I think it is really hard to fathom people who genuinely do not care about anyone but themselves. They go about the day and don’t worry about the world at large or the injustices everywhere. But I think about Bernie Moreno sometimes. That off-handed comment he made, that little “joke” about how women over fifty seem strangely concerned about abortion rights when it really isn’t something they need to worry about. I think it is such a tell. That’s the way people like this think, men and women alike. If it doesn’t affect me directly, why should I care? I cannot imagine living that way. But I do think a large segment of white conservative women and men are living exactly that way. And it’s sad and terrifying.
This makes me feel sick. I want to feel a bond to all women because there is a way we are all in this together. But I don't understand them. I literally don't. It's like being submerged in water, needing air but choosing to drown. How can you not come up for air??? Most humans (please, I know not ALL) are given more choice and freedom than we have the courage to take - and I do mean take (it is not given). It must be taken. We live with the consequences of the freedom we take or leave on the table. A fucking gilded cage. Have any of these women noticed, most of these cages are suffering from rot - they are not gilded - and still they hand over the keys? It is so disheartening that this is still where we are.
Prior to the 2008 election, there was a lot of polling and research that showed that married women voted like their husbands voted, and that single women voted much higher in favor of Dems. There was a considerable amount of targeted messages aimed at single women as a result: if only enough of them would turn out, Obama would capture the young people's vote (under 30) and it was credited as one of the key demographics that led to Obama's victory.
Why was it that married women followed their husbands? To the extent that their marriage involved more traditional gender roles, a SAHM was more likely to rely on her husband for political information, less likely to have an advanced degree, and to believe that her economic future depends on her husband's success, so she was taking her husband's word that his political candidate (R) was better for the economy writ large and their family's personal economy. Even if the wife worked, she was more likely to live in a community and go to a church that matched her husband's political views than a single woman who chose where to live and who she would surround herself with. If they had children, they were more likely to live near where one or both of them were raised, so it became harder to stray from the husband's and community's values.
I think there's much to like about Lyz's gilded cage theory, but I also think for those who married non-wealthy men, it is just easier to go along and not make waves within your family and community. If you're religious, you probably have a fair dose of internalized misogyny that leads you to believe your husband should be obeyed and respected, even if his political views don't quite square with how you feel -- that it's a betrayal of your marriage if you don't go along.
I got out from where I was raised (rural Missouri) while I was a single person. And even though I've been married and divorced, both my ex-husband and my current long-term partner share my blue political values, as I couldn't have been involved with someone who doesn't. But also because I got out and had access to lefty men in an urban setting that I wouldn't have had I stayed.
To me it always seems like she doesn't really like her husband but not for the reasons the rest of us don't like him, which she is mostly indifferent to.
Yes, yes, a million times yes. In 2017, I tweeted (Facebooked?) something to the effect of “Melania built her gold toilet; she can now shit in it.”
"Women like McKinli and Melania are not voting against their self-interest, because white patriarchy is a white woman’s interest. They are beneficiaries of the powers of wealth, class, and whiteness. That is what they wish to uphold." This a thousand times. In her book "Caste", Isabel Wilkerson shares a conversation she had with someone that states exactly this about white people generally voting for white supremacy over democracy and social services, because white supremacy serves them and that is absolutely in their interest.
Melania is the ultimate depiction of the cult of white womanhood. I'm not surprised her book is so terrible. I think people felt the same way about Ivanka - she was the reasonable one. But this is a woman who signed on to her father's horrible policies and gave him a veneer of ... something. It's very calculated to have these women who, like Sara Palin, represent patriarchy in such odious ways.
Ivanka has so many issues… she’s surgically altered her entire face.
She’s not the reasonable one at all. Plus she willing married a man who is/whose family is arguably more corrupt than Trump.
This is beautiful, hot fire, Liz! Fuck yes. "White women largely aren’t voting for Trump because they are victims of Trump or their Trumpy husbands, but because they want to. Because patriarchy benefits them. Because the gilded oblivion is nice if you can get it, if you can hide yourself away in a world where you can believe whatever you want." As a white woman, thank you for talking about this. It's so real.
Thank you!
yep.
Lyz, you are sharply and painfully correct in this piece. I wish you weren’t, so that I could have nice little fantasies about all the well-meaning people I wish existed in our country. Of course, millions do but narrow self interest is the only value for so many others. We all operate out of some degree of self-interest, but why should it be so hard to think about others at the same time?
I woke up in the middle of the night worried about the election. This was a very good article but I made up my mind when I saw a clip of her on The View defending birtherism that she is no better than he is and just as shallow. People are always looking for some kind of justification for others who exhibit poor behavior. As my son said to me when he was a teen and I was trying to defend someone’s poor behavior, “Mom, Sometimes people are just assholes. It is as simple as that.”
The amount of contortion people do to make excuses for Melania is always baffling. She made her choices. She was miserable in those photos because she never thought he'd win and she realized her life was about to get a lot more complicated. She wore the jacket because she knew it would make news and she knew it would be another way she can make herself the victim.
One of my acquaintances, who previously told me she loathed Trump, has announced she's voting for him because he's better on national security. She's a white, upper middle class lady who doesn't have any queer (that she knows of) or POC children. She and her family have always been conservative. But voting for him is a choice she gets to make because the patriarchy benefits her and her family. She got hers and everyone else can rot.
The belief that Trump is better on national security, seemingly widespread, is completely without factual basis. He's terrible on national security! He wants a civil war. He wants to surrender to Russia. He arranged the surrender in Afghanistan, making no provisions at all for the women there, or the men who'd cast their lot with us.
I think this is just straight up sexism again. Many Americans do not see women as protectors/defenders. Even though the President is just a figurehead in this regard.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by figurehead here. Presidents have a number of powers they can exercise, especially in the national security area. E.g., I haven't researched it, but istm that a president has the power to order (or direct a cabinet secretary to order) sanctions against a foreign military he/she thinks has violated international law. And the power to rely on his friend Vlad's account of what has taken place in making the determination.
We're 125 years into thinking that Presidents can unilaterally terminate treaties. The North Atlantic Treaty requires a one year notice to withdraw, but obviously, during that year, a withdrawing party could ignore the thing with impunity.
I was being a bit literal. I think many people in this country do not think a woman is strong enough to face down threats. But obviously no president actually handles threats directly. Reagan did not personally free the hostages back in the day. But he got the credit. He was just a figurehead for all the work. Just like Biden doing his phone call diplomacy to get hostages out of Russia. I am sure he made calls but there was a huge team. For some reason there are people who cannot imagine a woman leading that team. I would call that bias or sexism.
If you're referring to the hostages taken at the US embassy in Iran, Reagan didn't even do that. The entire deal was made by Carter: Iran was so pissed off at him, though, that they didn't release the hostages until Reagan was inaugurated.
There's been a persistent theory that Reagan's people begged Iran *not* to release the hostages in the fall of 1980. Here's a recent review of the evidence on that: https://newrepublic.com/article/172324/its-settled-reagan-campaign-delayed-release-iranian-hostages
If you're referring to the Hezbollah hostages in Beirut in the mid-1980s, yes Reagan did authorize secretly selling weaponry to Iran to get a couple of hostages released. Which worked until it became public. Remaining hostages were release after GHWB had been in office for a bit.
It is literally the most absurd thing. The border something something something racist.
Melania is entirely opaque and you can project whatever you want to on that blank screen. She likes it that way. Most women who vote for Trump do it to preserve their own gilded asses.
Money is the strongest driving force for waaay too many people. If Trump will help them economically, who cares wtf else he wants to do? Yes, women will vote for Trump just to keep their MONEY. I know women who 'sold' themselves to the highest bidder, their love of luxury outweighing their love for romance. Some find both in a husband, they hope? Some give up ever having passion in their love life, enjoy the wealth and find passions acceptable to their husband/keeper. Some opt for the opulence, sneak around, and find the latter on the side...
As for why poor me, I'm the victim, Melania chose to sell herself - I really don't care, do you?
She has already sold out our country.
This reminds me of Allison Williams saying that people would ask her about her character in Get Out and insist that she must have been hypnotized or coerced by her family. To which she’d say, “No, she’s just evil! How hard is that to understand?”
Too hard, apparently.
This piece is so interesting. And as a POC, it explains why I feel that so many (white) people I know aren’t as political as me- because for so many, it doesn’t really matter who wins. Everyone wants to support the nuclear white heterosexual family. They’ll always be considered and protected, regardless of who’s in office.
Bingo. One of the benefits of privilege is that one can afford to maintain ignorance and indifference because the consequences always fall on the 'other.'
Capitalism is a system of individualism, and there's no reason to think that white women are immune because nurturing and caring for others are considered female characteristics. I think it's more about the legacy of colonialism than the patriarchy which has white women voting "against their own interests". I just think they value the privilege that comes from being white in an economic system built on the free labor of slavery more than they value their rights, or lack thereof, as women. It's not so different from the suffragist movement that advocated for women's right to vote - white women's rights.
I think it is really hard to fathom people who genuinely do not care about anyone but themselves. They go about the day and don’t worry about the world at large or the injustices everywhere. But I think about Bernie Moreno sometimes. That off-handed comment he made, that little “joke” about how women over fifty seem strangely concerned about abortion rights when it really isn’t something they need to worry about. I think it is such a tell. That’s the way people like this think, men and women alike. If it doesn’t affect me directly, why should I care? I cannot imagine living that way. But I do think a large segment of white conservative women and men are living exactly that way. And it’s sad and terrifying.
This makes me feel sick. I want to feel a bond to all women because there is a way we are all in this together. But I don't understand them. I literally don't. It's like being submerged in water, needing air but choosing to drown. How can you not come up for air??? Most humans (please, I know not ALL) are given more choice and freedom than we have the courage to take - and I do mean take (it is not given). It must be taken. We live with the consequences of the freedom we take or leave on the table. A fucking gilded cage. Have any of these women noticed, most of these cages are suffering from rot - they are not gilded - and still they hand over the keys? It is so disheartening that this is still where we are.
Prior to the 2008 election, there was a lot of polling and research that showed that married women voted like their husbands voted, and that single women voted much higher in favor of Dems. There was a considerable amount of targeted messages aimed at single women as a result: if only enough of them would turn out, Obama would capture the young people's vote (under 30) and it was credited as one of the key demographics that led to Obama's victory.
Why was it that married women followed their husbands? To the extent that their marriage involved more traditional gender roles, a SAHM was more likely to rely on her husband for political information, less likely to have an advanced degree, and to believe that her economic future depends on her husband's success, so she was taking her husband's word that his political candidate (R) was better for the economy writ large and their family's personal economy. Even if the wife worked, she was more likely to live in a community and go to a church that matched her husband's political views than a single woman who chose where to live and who she would surround herself with. If they had children, they were more likely to live near where one or both of them were raised, so it became harder to stray from the husband's and community's values.
I think there's much to like about Lyz's gilded cage theory, but I also think for those who married non-wealthy men, it is just easier to go along and not make waves within your family and community. If you're religious, you probably have a fair dose of internalized misogyny that leads you to believe your husband should be obeyed and respected, even if his political views don't quite square with how you feel -- that it's a betrayal of your marriage if you don't go along.
I got out from where I was raised (rural Missouri) while I was a single person. And even though I've been married and divorced, both my ex-husband and my current long-term partner share my blue political values, as I couldn't have been involved with someone who doesn't. But also because I got out and had access to lefty men in an urban setting that I wouldn't have had I stayed.
To me it always seems like she doesn't really like her husband but not for the reasons the rest of us don't like him, which she is mostly indifferent to.