If she's such a feminist, and independent woman, why not run as Hillary Rodham?

[Armstead]

I'm not being sexist. Just the opposite.

If she were really running as a strong independent woman, why didn't ever use the convention of a married woman keeping her own last name?

Obviously, everyone would still know who she is. But she'd be standing her own more than using the subliminal Restoration message of returning to Bill that is inherent in "Clinton for President in 08" ?

[MaineDem]

1. Oh please!

Of course this is sexist.

[havocmom]

4. Nope, it is a damn fair and honest question

[WileEcoyote]

75. Silly thread.

Whole topic a way to get attention for and not provide even an ounce of helpful debate.

[terisan]

86. My spouse kept his birth name when we married. Do you want to ask him why?

He had some experience in politics but he'd probably tell you to mind your own business about his choice in surname upon marrying.

[havocmom]

2. I dibs-y the popcorn concession on this corner

:popcorn:

[Armstead]

7. No the popcorn concession is mine

I know what's going to be tossed by this.

[havocmom]

12. You are a brave & honest man, Armstead. And I admire your fortitude.

When I get home this evening, I'll pour you a drink. You'll probably need one by then ;)

[Armstead]

23. All that popcorn will make me thirsty

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. ummm....

cause that is not her name.

[William769]

5. Maybe because it's not her name anymore.

:eyes:

[havocmom]

8. And THAT is by HER CHOICE

no law says a woman has to take her spouse's surname. Many feminists don't. Many professionals don't.

[William769]

11. Stop smoking the Christmas tree,

[havocmom]

15. Ah, once again, the foolishness of thinking personal attacks are real arguments

Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you.

[William769]

18. If you think this is a real argument, then you have my pity.

I always love to play with fools.

[havocmom]

22. This fool happens to know a woman can keep her name

if she wants to. Period.

By the way, noticed you used yet another personal attack instead of offering any real substance to the discussion. Go to the corner.

[ElizabethDC]

66. Hillary didn't take her husband's name until they had been married for 5 or 6 years

she wanted to keep it as Rodham, but it created some political problems and some confusion in Arkansas (where keeping one's maiden name was just not done in those days - Bill's mother cried when she found out that Hillary wasn't changing her name), so she added the Clinton so as not to offend people and to make things easier for Bill.

[polichick]

73. Yep, that's the story I heard...

What a pain in the ass mother-in-law!

Too bad she caved ~ I'll bet she'd like to be President Rodham.

[havocmom]

85. Yes, I know that

And she pretty much dropped her 'maiden name' (how I HATE that term!) in public use just recently. Hmmm....

In a culture with SO much divorce, it is risky for a professional woman to take her husband's name then try to build a career identifying with it. If the marriage goes bad, she is either stuck professionally with a name she may not particularly like anymore, or lose all the professional history she built with that name. Lots of drawbacks.

And if a professional woman has a husband who likes to keep playing the field, it would seem very risky indeed ;)

My sister kept getting married and divorced. She finally picked well with husband #4 but kept the name of #3 cuz it just worked better professionally. #4 is bright enough not to mind.

[Perry Logan]

6. Because the media would have a field day if she did that, you silly-billy.

[Armstead]

10. Well you've got a good point there...

But she could have done it earlier...Like when she was running for Senate for the first time, to make clear her political career was her own.

[Bobbieo]

19. This is a free country - at least it used to be - so

she can run under any name she wants to. BTW - she is not my choice - none of them are, yet!

[demnan]

9. Seriously, if you had the Clinton name to run on

would you throw it away?

[Armstead]

16. If I were female and trying to establish my own identity I would

As I said in the original post, obviously using her own name would not make people forget who she is married to.

But if she had wanted to stand on her own, as her own person, it would have seemed more of a way to at least diminish the nepotism and dynasty perceptions.

[cali]

27. LOL!

You aren't a woman, so sorry, you really can't understand what it's ilke to face sexism. That's as arrogant as saying "if I were a black man, I'd...." It's not like she changed her name from Rodham to Clinton to run. Most importantly, you don't have a clue as to what you'd do, and it's just baloney to claim that you do.

[Armstead]

28. I know...You've made it abundently clear that....

..you think I'm a sexist old dog who hasn't a clue.

[cali]

35. no. I've said you use sexist language and you can't possibly understand

what it's like to face sexism. But you seem determined to prove yourself clueless and insensitive about it, time after time. What you don't get is that this is about way more than Clinton.

[havocmom]

48. Seems like telling a man he can't possibly understand what he may not experience

is pretty sexist in and of its self. Most of us can understand much without first hand experience AND being male does not make one immune to sexist treatment or misconceptions.

[cali]

bullshit. I can't fully understand what it's like to be a person of color

that's not racism, that's reality and respect, and racism is no better than sexism. And being male and white in this culture is absolutely a big advantage. Sorry, men can be respectful of what women have and do endure when it comes to sexism, but the OP has shown time after time, he isn't.

[Armstead]

53. ..In your opinion

I have seen what women have had to experienced up close and personal many times over the years.

No I don't have direct first-hand experience, but almost every person alive (or at least 85 percent) have had to deal with some form of discrimination about somethinbg in their own make-up and/or background.

But because I don;t conform to your own rhetorical dogma, you refuse to look beyond the surface.

That's okay.

[cali]

57. it's not about rhetoric or dogma. It's about a double standard

and it's about the ugly strand of sexism that runs through DU, that Clinton's candidacy has made so sadly apparent. No man would ever get this kind of crap. As someone downthread said, no one ever suggested that Bobby Kennedy change his name to something else or george w. I'm a feminist. I'm divorced. I still use my ex-husband's name. I was used to it, and I didn't want to change it for several reasons. Women can choose, and they shouldn't get shit because of it.

[Armstead]

60. I don't like Hillary as a presidential candidate

I don't believe she is qualified on her own merits, and I don't agree with many of her policies, and I don't believe the Corporate Democrat faction of the Democratic Party that is backing her should maintain their grip on power.

I also don't like the nepotism involved in trading in on her husband's popularity.

If she were a male in the same situation, I'd feel the same way.

If you want to call that sexist, so be it.

[havocmom]

55. So, you can understand different conditions

but Armstead can't?

That's mighty thin ice.

Where did I EVER say being male & white doesn't have advantages? Straw much?

I said people are able to understand the conditions others have to deal with without actually being in the same condition. Where's the beef with what I actually said?

As a woman who does not use her husband's name, I think the OP raises a valid question. So far, I have not seen a valid rebuttal to what he stated in the OP. Sorry, I deal with the OP, not a grudge match with what I have disagreed with the poster in the past, and there have been plenty of times he and I clashed.

edited for typo

[cali]

58. He demonstrates repeatedly that he doesn't understand at all.

It's about choice. And there have been plenty of good responses in this thread.

[havocmom]

77. Not agreeing with some people is not the same as not understanding

One might allow for differences without branding those who have them. THAT would be tolerant of choice.

[LakeSamish706]

13. The truth is, she wouldn't even be in any kind of running for President if...

her name were Rodam instead of Clinton.....

[havocmom]

17. And we have our winner!

:applause:

[Armstead]

21. I wasn't going to say that....but....

[maddiejoan]

26. really?

Why would that be?

Does she have less experience with the name Rodham?

This is a ridiculous non-issue.

[LakeSamish706]

30. It's not ridiculous at all, the only reason she is in the running is name recognition.. nothing else

[maddiejoan]

34. sorry

that's just idiotic.

she's a two term Senator.

[Armstead]

38. She's a 1 1/2 term Senator

What are perfectly capable and accomplished multi-term Senators like Dodd and Biden being so overshadowed by Hillary as the candidate of "experience"?

Why were very capable female Senators like Boxer and (ugh) Finestein never automatically touted as presidential material simply because of their last names?

[maddiejoan]

41. But you have no problems with Edwards or Obama?

One term Senators?

or is because she's a woman?

[Armstead]

51. It's not because she's a woman

If Rep. Schakowsky were running, for example, I'd support her in a heartbeat:
http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/welcome.shtml


"A longtime consumer advocate, who in 1969 led the fight that put freshness dates on products sold in the supermarket, Schakowsky carries on that tradition in Congress with efforts to safeguard the rights of victims of identity theft and to protect consumers from predatory lenders. A champion for the nation's seniors, Schakowsky is actively engaged in the campaign for seniors and persons with disabilities to access affordable prescription drugs. Schakowsky is also working to ensure that seniors receive quality home, hospice, and nursing care.

Prior to her election to Congress, Schakowsky represented the 18th District in the Illinois General Assembly for eight years. She served as a Democratic Floor Leader and as Secretary of the Conference of Women Legislators.

For twenty years prior to her election to the State House, Schakowsky fought for the public interest and rights of Illinois citizens. As Program Director of Illinois Public Action (1976-1985), the state's largest public interest organization, she fought for energy reform and stronger protection from toxic chemicals. As Director of the Illinois State Council of Senior Citizens from 1985-1990, she organized across the state for lower cost prescription drugs and tax relief for seniors, financial protection for the spouses of nursing home residents and other benefits for the elderly. She has been deeply involved in the fight to protect women's reproductive freedom.

Schakowsky resides in Evanston, Illinois with her husband Robert Creamer. She has three children, Ian, Mary, and stepdaughter Lauren Creamer, and four grandchildren, Isabel, Eve, Lucy, and William. She graduated from the University of Illinois in 1965 with a B.S. in Elementary Education. "

[cali]

59. no. you have no problem with Edwards brief and less than illustrious

Senate tenure. Nah, couldn't be that she's a woman.

[Armstead]

61. Did you even bother to read the post you responded to?

[maddiejoan]

63. doesn't answer my question

why do apply a different yardstick for Hillary than for Edwards and Obama?

[Armstead]

65. I'm not thrilled at the length of their Senmate careers either

But they are no less "experienced" than Hillary, if you count their prior life experiences.

And Obama was serving as a state legislature in the tought world of Illinois politics, so in terms of service as an elected official he trumps Hillary.

Plus, if I'm choosing between three Senators with roughly the same experience, I'll go for the one(s) I agree with over the one I disagree with.

[maddiejoan]

82. so then basically

your contention that Hillary wouldn't be a contender if she weren't Bill's wife is horseshit.

thank you.

[unapatriciated]

83. I'd vote for Boxer

but Clinton does not have my vote in the primaries. She has changed her stance on many policies that are important to me. Her Health Care Plan keeps corrupt Pharmaceutical and Insurance Companies in Charge, both Clinton and Obama support expanding Nafta to Peru. I'm not sure who has my vote in the primaries just know who doesn't. I do know what it is like to be discriminated against because of my gender. I have been in the work place since the late 60's a lot of that as a divorced single mother.

[LakeSamish706]

39. Yeah, on name recognition again... I'm talking about her Senate run...

as well. I highly doubt she would have won a Senate seat if her name had been Rodam...

[maddiejoan]

43. I don't see why.

She's just as likely to have won NY State with any name.

[DURHAM D]

98. If she had not married Bill Clinton she would have run

for the Presidency before now. He has been a drag on her career.

[msongs]

14. faulty premise - you are stating YOUR view, not hers and blaming her for it nt

[Armstead]

20. We all state our views here

My view is that she is not really running as an independent woman. She's running as Bill 2 The Sequal.

[LakeSamish706]

24. And that is the exact truth, even if her supporters do not like to admit it. n/t

[William769]

25. Wheres the person that argued Hillary can't be President because of the 22 Amendment?

:rofl:

[Armstead]

29. It's too bad it doesn't apply to married couples or sons

Then we might be able to move beyond the ABABAB nepotism in modern politics

[William769]

31. Man do I see a split personality in this thread!

:rofl:

[Armstead]

42. "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds"

(And yes I said that ironically)

[ElboRuum]

45. Funny...

Is there anything that ISN'T the hobgoblin of little minds?

[ElboRuum]

44. Yep...

Whatever personality this thread had split some time ago. I think it made it all the way to Albuquerque.

(Bah-dum-dum, pssh!)

[ElizabethDC]

67. A tombstone has been erected in his honor. n/t

[classof56]

32. I recall the criticism heaped on Geraldine Ferraro for not taking her husband's name

This was when she ran for VP with Walter Mondale. She said she kept her maiden name to honor her father, who died when she was eight. I think it's one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't things, and we married females can't seem to suit everybody. I considered it a personal decision and took my spouse's name for one thing because I liked it and for another because it would be the same as our children's. Can't speak for Hillary of course, but I suspect there are those who won't find anything she does to be acceptable, including her choice of names. Just the kinda world we live in, I guess.

Tired Old Cynic

[Benhurst]

33. Perhaps they thought her last name was too similar to that of a Japanese cult hero.

Silly season is in full swing.

[Lucinda]

36. She isn't running as "Clinton for President in '08" - It's "Hillary". So she made her choice.

You, however, seem unable to accept it. And that's not her problem, it's yours.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

37. Maybe Bobby Kennedy should have taken his wife's name... shown he was his own man and all that.

[ElboRuum]

40. Maybe you aren't...

However, isn't the choice to take her husband's name just that? A personal choice? Funny, I'd always interpreted the goal of feminism to be the equivalent of any other civil rights movement, that being equal treatment under the law and the defense of the full breadth of personal choices and rights due that individual.

I don't see what her choice to take her husband's name has to do with either of the concepts of strength or independence.

[Armstead]

46. Not a big deal but it would indicate a willingness to...

...not trade on the built in popularity of her husband, and run totally on her own merits.

I'm sure she and her campaign team have not overlooked the not-so-hidden connection whenever peopel say "Clinton" in news articles and campaign materials.

[ElboRuum]

50. Well, that's a bit on the side of practical impossibility...

...if by "trading in" you mean staying married to him, as if there was a soul in this country who DOESN'T know who she's married to by now. I believe that she IS trying to run on her own merits, and that it is WE who are drawing that connection. It may help her or it may hurt her, but in what realistic sense can she avoid it? If anything, changing her name to Hillary Rodham would draw attention to the fact that she's trying to distance herself from her husband, and in so doing, only serves to encourage the practice of drawing this connection further into relief.

On one hand you can draw attention by the association, on the other hand you can draw attention by the disassociation. Either way, there is attention. You can't escape it if you are in her position. So why try? The only thing you can do is try to look upon it in a positive light and hope others see it that way as well.

[Armstead]

56. You make a good point

She is in a "damned if she does and damned if she doesn't" position on it. If she had gone back to her own name at some point, I realize she'd be slammed for that too.

But given that, I believe the flack she would have gotten for using her own name would have made a more positive impact in terms of establishing her own identity, even with the flack.

[terisan]

47. FEMINISM is about CHOICE, Not Your Opinion about what a Woman or Man should name her or himself !

Break your own mental chains (or keep them) and be free to be who you want to be ! Stop telling other people to meet your personal expectations re names and aspirations. In any case we are busy creating our own lives and will call ourselves as we will-mother's name, father's name, spouse's name, or new name. It is our choice and not subject to the expectations of others.

[cali]

52. good post. thanks. n/t

[Cameron27]

54. Amen

[ElizabethDC]

69. Exactly. That's always been my view about feminism, too.

It's about freedom to make one's own choices, and not be subjected to the gender-based stereotypes of others.

[Armstead]

74. Duh, I know it's a choice

Just asking why she made that particular choice.

[Sparkly]

79. Just what I was going to write.

But better.

:thumbsup:

[JohnnyLib2]

49. She made a choice.

There has been some discussion about that in the past 40 or so years....

[Catherine Vincent]

62. I thought you haters would take a break from all your Hillary bitching.

It is Christmas week. :eyes:

[Bitwit1234]

64. Golly lets put Obama down as Oprah then

[chascarrillo]

68. Because THAT'S NOT HER NAME!

Jesus effin' Christ.

[CyberPieHole]

70. Is Obama running as Barack Hussein Obama Jr.?

Or does he prefer not to use his middle name for some reason?

[SOS]

99. Since middle names are so popular with the Clinton campaign

perhaps she could run as Hillary Diane Clinton?
HDC for short.

[mtnsnake]

71. She isn't running as a feminist or as an independent woman. She's running as a Democrat.

The fact that she's an independent woman, a brilliant one, is just a bonus.

[Orangepeel]

72. Yeah. And why doesn't she stop wearing mascara? that's just bowing to patriarchy.

:eyes:

Ya know, I'm supporting Edwards, but all these stupid/ignorant posts about Hillary Clinton's name are driving me crazy. There are plenty of reasons to support other candidates without resorting to this shit.

She's not stupid and she wants to win, so of course she is going to use the version of her name that helps her do that, regardless of whether or not she had some personal desire to return to Rodham (which she probably doesn't). There is nothing wrong, weak or dependent about doing so. I didn't change my name when I got married, but it's none of my business if other women do (Elizabeth Edwards is a strong, independent woman, too). Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hillary! -- she's made all of the names hers and she's welcome to use them.

[Sparkly]

88. Skirts, too.

If she's equal to men, she should wear pants just like men, right? :sarcasm:

(Edited to make clear: I'm agreeing with you!)

[Nailzberg]

76. She should run as "Mrs. Bill Clinton"

:hide:

[William769]

78. Yea.

She would be a showin then. :applause:

[LittleClarkie]

80. Why should she change her name?

It's her name. Why should she be forced to change it to show how independent she is?

[Armstead]

90. She's done it before

[noamnety]

81. So every woman who got married and changed her name

is now unqualified to run for office? That's a mighty convenient rule for a guy to come up with.

I guess the overwhelming 16% of congress that's female is too threatening for some dudes ... clearly we need to be more selective. :eyes:

Next up: women who have ever worn panty hose, heels, or makeup are unfit to run as president.

Nothing sexist in that, mind you ... just making sure the women who run act enough like men to be suited for the office.

[Armstead]

89. Bullshit -- Normally it wouldn't matter

The only reason it does now is that the last name happens to be Clinton, and she has tended to change her name to fit whatever circumstances she sees the most opportunity.

[noamnety]

104. This sort of "feminism" is bullshit.

... the sort where men decide that feminism should restrict women's access to jobs and opportunities for not meeting some man's definition of feminism. The ultimate is when rules are created and applied in arbitrary ways based on the men's changing interpretations.

Women who don't play by men's rules aren't good enough feminists.
Women who do play by men's rules aren't good enough feminists.
Women who play by men's rules sometimes but not always aren't doing it right - and thus aren't good enough feminists.

Did you think this was some new brilliant insight you were bringing to us?
"What she did was okay for other women, but I've decided for her, because of who she is married to, this is not appropriate feminism for her - she is excluded from the rules all other women are required to follow."

Here's a clue - there is not anything in that play book we haven't seen, lived, breathed for our whole damned lives. And we are excruciatingly aware that this is a game men don't even need to play, the whole "you changed your name/didn't change your name/didn't change your name according to my rules" bullshit.

Because it's a game you don't need to play, my opinion is you should shut the hell up rather than explain to us women why you are all for equality, but we need to realize some of us aren't good enough feminists to deserve equality in the workforce.

Misogynistic bullshit excuses about why we don't deserve to be treated like you reflect poorly on you.

[MonkeyFunk]

84. so YOU get to decide

what name independent women have to use?

[Armstead]

87. I don't get to decide nuthin'

If it were up to me the whole field would look a lot different this year.

I was just askin'

[SaveElmer]

91. That's not her name...nt

[TriMetFan]

92. This one of the reasons why I will vote for Hillary.

As a women, I will vote with Hillary. And If she doesn't end up being The Democratic nominee, then I will support and vote for the male nominee.

[wyldwolf]

93. If he's such a tolerant "progressive,"* why not run as Barack HUSSEIN Obama?

[Armstead]

94. Because most candidates don't run on their middle name

Do you even know Edwards middle name? Or Bidens? Or Clinton's maiden middle name?

[wyldwolf]

97. true, and Rodham is Hillary's middle name

[Honeycombe8]

95. Silly question. What difference does her last name make? Come on.

We have more serious issues in the country, don't you think?

I'm not a Hillary supporter, but I don't care one bit what name she uses.

[slackmaster]

96. Maybe because Hillary Clinton is her legal name?

:shrug:

[ronnykmarshall]

100. Do get up in the morning and say

"what stupid ass shit should I gripe about Hillary today?".

[wishlist]

101. As a married woman, the marriage is what's relevant, not what name you use

Whatever name a woman or man chooses to use is a personal decision that is basically irrelevant to the amount of independence or separate identity they retain after marriage. Once you are married, you don't have a totally separate identity anyway regardless of the name. The act of marriage causes legal ramifications that are much more relevant than a superficial name change. I guess some people put more importance on names than I do, but to me one's actions and behavior and attitudes are what is important.

[ArkySue]

102. In Arkansas in 1978

When Bill was first elected Governor, Hillary was going by Hillary Rodham. It caused a huge uproar to the delicate sensibilities of many voters here. Bill lost in 1980, mostly due to a license plate fee increase, but a little bit because Hillary was "uppity."
When Bill was re-elected in 1982, Hillary started going by Hillary Clinton, and has been ever since.
Arkansas was not a very progressive state in 1978 (it's a little better now).

[MethuenProgressive]

103. Sexist flame bait OP

From the kind of person who'll post "why doesn't Obama use his full name?" next.

[LanternWaste]

105. Is keeping one's maiden name...

Is keeping one's maiden name after marriage a litmus test for Feminism?

Seems to me that if she is indeed a strong woman as you postulated, she'd be strong enough to maintain her own identity regardless of her name, and strong enough to make that decision on her own terms.