I meant to take today off from blogging but I really can’t help myself with this Spitzer scandal. There are so many things to discuss. We could delve into what this means for Spitzer’s three teenage daughters and what life lesson he just taught them in how he views women, despite being the father of daughters. We could delve into the harm of prostitution and how it degrades women and takes advantage of women who have most likely suffered some kind of sexual abuse in their lifetime. Hell, considering DC’s hookers aren’t good enough for Spitzer, we could also talk about human trafficking and how it apparently is happening in the US, not just in under-developed Asian and African countries.
We could do all of that. But instead, I’m most in the mood to continue talking about the scorned political wife and why she stands up there during that initial press conference. After spending much of yesterday thinking about what sort of message Mrs. Spitzer might have sent her daughters by standing there, I’ve concluded that frankly, I think she’s telling them that it’s OK to be a doormat and let your husband humiliate you and treat you like crap and throw his entire career away and disrespect you and your marriage. Even if he does all of that, you will still stand there.
As a mother of only one daughter, I feel confident in saying that I wouldn’t stand there. I asked my dad what he thought my mom would have done, as the mother of four daughters, and he retorted that my mother would have stood over his dead bloody body asking how to reload the shot gun.
So maybe violence isn’t the answer but neither is being a doormat.
And all of this brings me to Hillary. I think that this is one core reason why I just cannot support her and do not believe she is the right candidate for president as much as I would like to see a female president in my lifetime. Hillary was publicly humiliated by her husband not just once, but two very public times, and those are the only two we know about – and she kept standing there. She publicly defended him, she believed in his innocence, she stood by her man, he did it again, she was clearly pissed but she stood by him again.
And never for one minute did I believe she was standing there for him because she had only Chelsea in mind. I don’t believe there is anything authentic about Hillary Clinton and it seems to me that she kept standing by her man because she was personally invested in her own professional advantage from his position and his power.
Is that wrong?
Well, in and of itself, no. It is not wrong for a spouse to set aside their own career to help support the other spouse’s career and to help them succeed and achieve their professional goals. That is admirable. That is true sacrifice. I take no issue with that.
But what I take issue with is what I view to be her values. She was willing to let her husband walk all over her to get ahead. She was willing to be publicly humiliated more than once and still stand up there and support him. So what I wonder is this – how many people has she walked all over to get ahead – because she clearly views that as a way to survive in this world. And how many strong personalities are going to walk all over her should she become President – and will she consciously let them walk all over her because she believes she stands to gain from it? Where does that leave us? Who’s good is she looking out for?
Look, maybe I’m being harsh on her but I would hold a man to the same standard. And is anyone else wondering if a husband would stand up next to a powerful politician wife as she announced to the world her infidelities? Think Bill would stand there? Think Pelosi’s husband would stand there? I’m waiting for that day.
My other issue is this – I wonder if the inclination for the political wives to stand next to their husbands is partly driven by the money and power they gain by sticking with their husbands. History shows that even a disgraced politician still stands to make gobs of money when he heads into private business and lobbying.
And again, I really am not in support of women being dishrags because their husbands provide for them in a way they are accustomed too. Especially not the first ladies we are talking about who have the means and education to do it on their own.
So there you have it, my claws are out again today. I’m still refraining from judging Mrs. Spitzer because it’s too early….but it’s just another reason why I’m an Obama Mamma.
ABC has an interesting piece on this topic, if you’re so inclined: