2.07.2008
Who Would The Goddess Vote For?
As Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama continue to compete for their party's nomination, endorsements from all corners and walks of life have been emerging in hopes of swaying like-minded voters to back their preferred candidate. Recently, two figures who loom large within the Women's Spirituality/Goddess movement have made endorsements that draw stark lines in the sand.
Carol P. Christ and Robin Morgan
The first comes from poet, author, and activist Robin Morgan. Morgan, one of the founding members of W.I.T.C.H., and an extremely Pagan-friendly writer of works like "The Burning Time", and "The Network of the Imaginary Mother", has released an updated version of her classic feminist essay "Goodbye to All That". The new version, "Goodbye to All That (#2)", decries the double-standards applied to Hillary Clinton, and ends with a passionate rallying cry on her behalf.
"So goodbye to Hillary's second-guessing herself. The real question is deeper than her re-finding her voice. Can we women find ours? Can we do this for ourselves? "Our President, Ourselves!" Time is short and the contest tightening. We need to rise in furious energy - as we did when Anita Hill was so vilely treated in the U.S. Senate, as we did when Rosie Jiminez was butchered by an illegal abortion, as we did and do for women globally who are condemned for trying to break through. We need to win, this time. Goodbye to supporting HRC tepidly, with ambivalent caveats and apologetic smiles. Time to volunteer, make phone calls, send emails, donate money, argue, rally, march, shout, vote."
The second endorsement comes from Carol P. Christ, who first made waves back in 1978 with her essay "Why Women Need the Goddess", and has since become a noted author on women's spirituality and feminist theology. Christ, on the Women and Spirituality blog, explains why she voted for Barack Obama, and why she didn't vote for Hillary Clinton.
"I did not vote for Hillary Clinton because she voted for the second Iraq War (and did not repudiate the first one). When Hillary tells us that she was mislead by President Bush and that if she had known then what she knows now she might have voted differently, I ask: Why didn't she know then? I had listened to the news and I knew that the IAEA had not found evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and was asking for more time to carry out its inspections. I knew that war is almost never a solution and that its victims are overwhelmingly women, children and old people. I knew that rape is an ordinary tool of war. I knew that military training is based upon the idea of rooting out the empathy that ordinary people feel for one another. I had marched against other wars, and I marched against the impending Iraq war in Mytiline, Greece-- along with millions of others around the world. Barack spoke out against the Iraq war when he was waging an uphill battle for the Senate and after he had been advised to keep his mouth shut. Apparently we knew something that Hillary Clinton didn't. The fact that she didn't know suggests to me that she will be quite capable of leading the nation into other ill-advised and unnecessary wars if she is elected."
This split over Clinton and Obama isn't just happening with feminists important to the Goddess movement's development, prominent feminists from all walks of life are split over who to back this primary season. Which brings us to the question: who would The Goddess vote for? Perhaps, considering that the divine feminine has many faces, there is room for both opinions?
Labels: Carol Christ, politics, Presidential election, Religion, Robin Morgan, The Goddess
Comments:
Personally, I find the argument that women should vote for Hillary because she's a woman to be very weak and unconvincing (along the same lines as people voting for George W. because he's a folksy cowboy-type). It's easy to sell oneself as a character or personality, but the proof is in the policy, as Christ points out. Plus, I think Morgan is a bit melodramatic in comparing one woman's tragic death and the sexual harassment of another to Hillary Clinton losing the election. Surely every woman--every person--has the right to dignity and life. But there are plenty of ordinary women and men out there who will never be president, without this being a grave injustice. I'll be as happy as the next feminist to finally see a woman in the Whitehouse--I just don't happen to think Hilary is the right person for the job.
Well, as Tanya Higgins pointed out recently, voting for a woman just because she's a woman is as sexist as the reverse. (Link not entirely SFW, depending on where you work.)
In a polytheistic Neo-Pagan meta-pantheon, some Goddesses might prefer Hilary Clinton, others might prefer Barak Obama. Diversity of divine opinion concerning US political races.
My own suspicion is that most Goddesses wouldn't vote in a US election. Better things to do. Better ways for Goddesses to do them. All that.
Since I prefer that religiously-driven outlooks on immediate political questions, like nominating candidates for high office in US politics, be held to a minimum, I'm happy that Goddesses not take sides over Clinton or Obama.
Now, I don't really understand why the Goddess has to be a Democrat, let alone most pagans...
Redistribution of property, welfare, and a perpetuation of the nanny/big-brother state? Chalk me and my gods up to the pre-diluted conservative movement!
"Now, I don't really understand why the Goddess has to be a Democrat, let alone most pagans..."
Personally, I doubt the Goddess belongs to any political party. I focused solely on the Democrats in this post, because the split here was between two key figures in the Women's Spirituality movement over which Democrat they supported in the primaries.
As for why the Democrats are so popular among Pagans? I think the large role conservative Christians play in the Republican party may have something to do with it.
I guess I should apologize, sarcasm shows very poorly in blog comments.
I, personally, find the current Democratic race interesting... Should I feel guilty about doubting a minority, or a woman more? If we have to suffer through a Democratic President/Congress, will we need to worry more about our criticisms of the president since civil-rights activists will be watching us as well as the secret service?
And yes, it was strange to finally realize that all of my personal beliefs and opinions on how the federal government should be run aligned me with fiscal, constitutionalist conservatives. I mean, I supported John Edwards in 2004, but I was just a feel-good democrat. I wasn't interested in policies at the time, since my initial concern in 2000 was Bush's Faith Based Initiatives and his past remarks about "witchcraft", and it only got worse from there.
Does my hard-core conservative streak make me feel like I should blindly support a political party now? No way, I learned better after the democrats, but politics sometimes make strange bedfellows right? But I do know that strict fiscal conservatism can best be served with limited federal government, that a limited gov't is inline with the Constitution, and that the less of "them" there is in our lives, the more freedom "we" have over ourselves and our futures.
And that, my friend, is what I think the gods (and goddesses) want for me to pursue. =)
Post a Comment
Personally, I find the argument that women should vote for Hillary because she's a woman to be very weak and unconvincing (along the same lines as people voting for George W. because he's a folksy cowboy-type). It's easy to sell oneself as a character or personality, but the proof is in the policy, as Christ points out. Plus, I think Morgan is a bit melodramatic in comparing one woman's tragic death and the sexual harassment of another to Hillary Clinton losing the election. Surely every woman--every person--has the right to dignity and life. But there are plenty of ordinary women and men out there who will never be president, without this being a grave injustice. I'll be as happy as the next feminist to finally see a woman in the Whitehouse--I just don't happen to think Hilary is the right person for the job.
Well, as Tanya Higgins pointed out recently, voting for a woman just because she's a woman is as sexist as the reverse. (Link not entirely SFW, depending on where you work.)
In a polytheistic Neo-Pagan meta-pantheon, some Goddesses might prefer Hilary Clinton, others might prefer Barak Obama. Diversity of divine opinion concerning US political races.
My own suspicion is that most Goddesses wouldn't vote in a US election. Better things to do. Better ways for Goddesses to do them. All that.
Since I prefer that religiously-driven outlooks on immediate political questions, like nominating candidates for high office in US politics, be held to a minimum, I'm happy that Goddesses not take sides over Clinton or Obama.
Now, I don't really understand why the Goddess has to be a Democrat, let alone most pagans...
Redistribution of property, welfare, and a perpetuation of the nanny/big-brother state? Chalk me and my gods up to the pre-diluted conservative movement!
"Now, I don't really understand why the Goddess has to be a Democrat, let alone most pagans..."
Personally, I doubt the Goddess belongs to any political party. I focused solely on the Democrats in this post, because the split here was between two key figures in the Women's Spirituality movement over which Democrat they supported in the primaries.
As for why the Democrats are so popular among Pagans? I think the large role conservative Christians play in the Republican party may have something to do with it.
I guess I should apologize, sarcasm shows very poorly in blog comments.
I, personally, find the current Democratic race interesting... Should I feel guilty about doubting a minority, or a woman more? If we have to suffer through a Democratic President/Congress, will we need to worry more about our criticisms of the president since civil-rights activists will be watching us as well as the secret service?
And yes, it was strange to finally realize that all of my personal beliefs and opinions on how the federal government should be run aligned me with fiscal, constitutionalist conservatives. I mean, I supported John Edwards in 2004, but I was just a feel-good democrat. I wasn't interested in policies at the time, since my initial concern in 2000 was Bush's Faith Based Initiatives and his past remarks about "witchcraft", and it only got worse from there.
Does my hard-core conservative streak make me feel like I should blindly support a political party now? No way, I learned better after the democrats, but politics sometimes make strange bedfellows right? But I do know that strict fiscal conservatism can best be served with limited federal government, that a limited gov't is inline with the Constitution, and that the less of "them" there is in our lives, the more freedom "we" have over ourselves and our futures.
And that, my friend, is what I think the gods (and goddesses) want for me to pursue. =)
Links to this post:
