The saying "never discuss religion and politics" exists for a reason. These two fields are filled with such strong opinions and emotions, and it's very rare to find two people who completely agree on every aspect of these subjects. Too bad I’m a Political Science major who loves to talk about the difficult stuff. I recently read an article titled "Why Hillary Clinton Should Not Be The First Woman President" and, while I agree with some of the points made, I would like to provide an alternative approach to the woman who may potentially become the first female President of the United States of America.
It is true that women have made great advancements from the time when Abigail Adams wrote to her husband, then President John Adams, asking him to "remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than [his] ancestors," only to have him laugh it off, calling it "despotism of the petticoat." First, second, and third-wave feminists have fought with incredible amounts of tenacity and commitment in order to attempt to gain even the most basic rights for females. The 2016 election is the next major milestone in this fight as it provides the opportunity for Hillary Clinton to potentially become the first female leader of the free world, and it is truly a beautiful thing to watch.
via graytvinc.com
Like the author before me, I wholeheartedly agree that no President should be elected solely based on the fact that we would like to see a woman in the Oval Office. A President should be qualified, dedicated, intelligent, tenacious, innovative, and probably about a hundred more things. A female president should be held to no different standard. Hillary Rodham Clinton has proven herself time and time again in her dedication to serving the American people as First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State.
In regards to her character, it is true that Hillary Clinton has been subject to a fair amount of scandals and controversies. It is also true that as a young person, she used to be a Republican. In 2000, Hillary stated that she believed marriage should be between a man and a woman. She has also now very clearly advocated the rights of the LGBT community, even listing LGBT equality as one of her major areas of focus. President Obama's stance on marriage has also changed throughout the years, but we all still rejoiced when the White House was lit up with rainbow lights. To those who call them hypocrites, I reply that people have changes of heart all of the time. It is true that we do not want politicians to have these major policy changes while in office, and that we want a representative who is true to their word, but who are we to judge a person on who they once were? If we have tangible proof that what they are saying now has been reflected in their actions and their proposals for the future, can we truly hold something that is no longer true against them? I used to hate Brussels sprouts, but now I love them. Could you throw my hating them 10 years ago back in my face today, calling me a liar because I used to not like them? I understand that politics and policies are a much bigger deal than my affinity for green vegetables, but we can't always throw the past back in someone's face and call them a liar, especially when they have done everything in their power to prove otherwise.
The picture is often used to illustrate stories surrounding the email controversy. // via beforeitsnews.com
Hillary has also gone into detail responding to the Benghazi, Whitewater, and email controversies, explaining her position and even accepting responsibility for her role in the lapse of security in Benghazi. She dedicated an entire chapter of her book "Hard Choices" to explaining the tragedy from her perspective, and shaming anyone who tries to use the loss of American lives for political gains. Her use of a separate email during her time in office was completely legal and she did turn over massive amounts of emails following the story's outbreak, not out of necessity, but rather out of willingness to prove that she had done nothing wrong. Her emails to anyone in the state department still went through the proper channels, and were documented by the government.
Additionally, Hillary has had to endure obstacles that very few others have experienced. As a female in politics, she has had to deal with a barrage of media biases that male candidates were never subject to. Multiple studies have shown that coverage of female candidates historically has been more focused on physical appearance, has emphasized feminine personality traits, has generally been more negative (describing them as losing races when they are in second place, talking about fundraising difficulties, etc.), and has generally emphasized their gender. The media was more likely to use words like shrill, nagging, bitter, bossy, etc. to describe her voice. The ability of female candidates to overcome these unique obstacles and still prevail as successful individuals in the political arena definitely says something about their character.
via nydailynews.com
When discussing Hillary's notoriety, the previous article discusses how Hillary's claim to fame is based on her marriage to former President Bill Clinton. Did we discredit Robert Kennedy's campaign, saying that he was only famous because of his brother? He too was a lawyer who worked in politics before, during, and after his brother's term, and served as Senator for New York. No, we listened to his policies and his commitment to changing this country for the better and, although tragedy very unfortunately struck, Bobby Kennedy could have very well been President. I am not trying to liken Hillary Clinton to the late Kennedy, but I am merely pointing out that there are many instances where notoriety may potentially have come from a family member. Ahem, Jeb Bush, anyone? While she may have been married to a President, Hillary has earned the right to be considered a formidable candidate all on her own.
What the article fails to mention is Hillary's long career in law and public service, independent of her husband's political aspirations. Her first experience in politics was in 1971, serving on Senator Walter Mondale's subcommittee for migrant workers. She also served on the impeachment inquiry staff that ultimately resulted in the resignation of Richard Nixon. After practicing law in Arkansas and becoming the first female partner of the Rose Law Firm, the third oldest firm in the US, she was listed twice in "The National Law Journal" as one of the top 100 most influential lawyers in America. All of this occurred prior to her husband being elected governor. After her husband was elected, she continued to work on projects including reforming Arkansas's education system. Her time as First Lady of the United States did not lead to a cease in her political activity as she worked to create and adopt several acts having to do with healthcare, adoption, and foster care, continuing her long time specialty of child advocacy. In 2000 she was elected the first female Senator from New York, and was re-elected in 2006, the only First Lady to run for and hold public office. After unsuccessfully running for the presidency in 2008, Hillary Clinton was appointed Secretary of State and served from 2009-2013. It is evident that although some of her public recognition stems from her time as First Lady, Hillary has proven through her own hard work and dedication that girls can overcome any barriers.
While we should not elect a president based on gender alone, we should not disregard a candidate based on gender either. Perhaps Hillary Clinton isn't perfect. No one is. In fact, if we wait for this wonder woman that will manage to unify all of America in support and have unquestionable character, won’t we be discriminating against females? The question in this election is not whether or not Hillary Clinton is the perfect first female President of the United States; the question is whether or not she is the best person for the job. With her experience, her platform, her stance on the issues at hand, and her clear ability to lead, it is this writer’s opinion that she is.
Ultimately, it is up to you to decide who to vote for come 2016. I hope that each voter takes into consideration each candidate’s policies, their experience, their expertise, and their character. As much as I personally believe that it is high time to have a female in the White House, I hope each voter is able to make informed decisions about who is right to lead this country for the next four years. I, for one, know that my vote will be for Hillary.
