By Maria Tulli
There has been a lot of discussion
about Hillary Clinton’s gender. A lot. Calls by supporters asking people to
vote for her because she is a woman.
Outrage by others admonishing those who do so for some “reverse” sexism. There
have been comparisons between Hillary Clinton and Margaret Thatcher, based
exclusively on gender, while there is a lack of comparisons between Clinton and
men politicians – comparisons which would make more sense based on policies,
experience and ideology.[i] We
could say gender is featuring as a core factor in these Democratic primaries.
However, it is not truly at the core, but rather spotlighted on one side. While
Secretary Clinton’s gender may be a locus of attention, her opponent’s is not.
In an arena of gender scrutiny Bernie Sanders remains the unmarked, the
un-gendered. This un-gendering has enabled Sanders to act both progressively
and radically.
To be clear, I am not arguing that
Clinton is secretly socialist or pursues moderate policies only reluctantly.
Hillary Clinton is substantially
right of Bernie Sanders and has made conscious choices to get there. However, I
am arguing that whether or not she
desired to pursue more radical political action or rhetoric, she is unable to
do so because she is a woman. The
flipside of this, of course, is that Bernie Sanders is enabled to do so because
he is a man.
There is no doubt that it is important
that Hillary Clinton is a woman. Even if it does not truly matter to her
politics or capabilities, her presentation as a politician is built around her
gender.
But it also matters that Bernie Sanders
is a man.