An extension of her "yes-man" role
 |
Laura Wood author of The Thinking Housewife has a photo of Hillary Clinton dressed in a dowdy gray suit, which Laura titles "The latest in Maoist Chic." I have made some comments on this photo. I also made points about women in general, and how being attractive is more important to women (even in hard-driving jobs like Secretary of State) than to men. But, is Hillary's image specific to Hillary's character?
I have written about her previously, describing her as Obama's yes-man. I started to get this image of a people-pleasing Hillary when she ceded her very popular position during the presidential campaign. I thought that even Sarah Palin, another female contender, would have never given up the fight, and would have gone on to the end. I thought that perhaps Hillary's exit was a tactical move, in order to work more closely with Obama. But, it wasn't even that. She left to return to her old post as Senator, with no intention of returing to national politics. The clever Obama had to woo her into the Secretary of State position. She left, I think, not having any fight left in her. Fighting is hard and grueling work, liable to bring on new enemies, and often with battle scars as trophies. Fighting can make one unpopular.
What is Hillary's psychology? I don't puroport to be an expert, but I think that deep down, she is a people-pleaser, a do-gooder. Despite enduring years of her husband's infidelities, she never left her him. In this age of rapid divorces, I'm not advocating divorce as a solution to marital problems, but these people had problems. Clearly she married the wrong man - but that is for another post. I think she simply wanted to be seen as the good guy (or the good girl), sticking with an impossible position, and garnenring the support of the public, and surely her friends and family too (and Bill Clinton, in a way).
She went into the Senate, and her work, although not ground-breaking, was received with admiration. She was someone who did her work, and her homework. This is how writers are describing her input as Secretary of State. She doesn't waste time, puts in long hours of grinding work, and is the perfect global ambassador for Obama's foreign policies. She aims to please.
Yet, there is a strange contradiction in her as well. She marches on as though she is a lone soldier, with no auxiliary guards at her side. "I can do this," seems to be her motto, or better yet "I can do this alone." She is the ultimate feminist at heart. Notice her livid reaction in Kenya when a poor audience member dared to ask her about her husband's opinions.
Many successful female politicians admit, and search for, strong male support. I would even call it patriarchal support. Margaret Thatcher had a supportive husband. I remember reading how her husband went looking for her at a meeting that had run for too long, and slowly convinced her to end the meeting and to go home and rest. Even Sarah Palin always talks about her husband's support. Reading a biography on Queen Elizabeth I, what I was struck with is that she ruled absolutely under the premises of the male system: she may be Queen, but she had to concede to the patriarchy. Even the liberal Nancy Pelosi (whose make-up consists of being "remade") seems happily married with a supportive husband. Support of men seems to be essential for successful women leaders.
That is where Hillary's weakness is revealed. She thinks she is one of those "strong" females, but when the chips fall down, she seems unable to handle things. The photo at The Thinking Housewife looks like Hillary in a moment of overwhelming stress, when she has even given up on looking good. It's as though she's saying, "Come and take care of me. Look how tired and overwhelmed I am." Perhaps Bill could have helped, but her feminist ideology has already alienated him. So, now, all she has is to please the President, running around the globe advocating his policies.
