Here's the real reason Clinton won't give up: she's a baby boomer woman. We Democrats may have stepped in it for good this time.

Baby boomer women are the most accomplished women of any generation in history (American or otherwise). On the other hand, they are also the generation that experienced the most sexism on the way up--there was probably more sexism before them, but bb's knew how to call it out and were more actively affected by it. This has left many women of a certain age, especially women who have reached a certain status or power, very sensitive to sexism everywhere, whether it's perceived or actual. Sadly, in most cases it's not actual, *at least not the way they think it is*. Times change, and cultural mechanisms (including power structures and their manipulations) change as well. This is hard for any person to accept as he or she ages, but it's made worse by Generation Y's seeming indifference to the whole question.

You could draw a parallel to Generation X's gunshy attitude toward marriage. That generation was the generation sent to charge over the minefields of widespread divorce, and the awkwardness, ugliness, and pain of "working out" how divorce was supposed to go have left many of us a lot less enthusiastic about the marriage institution. (Again, Generation Y treats all of this as normal: their parents had practice and reference points.)

So I think that a huge issue with the election is that women like Clinton feel they've been robbed...that the patriarchal conspiracy has been at it again. There is no patriarchal conspiracy anymore. (Admittedly, that's because baby boomer women dealt it a mortal injury.) And in twenty years of work experience the only overt sexism I've ever encountered has been from baby boomer women. It's not sexual or quid pro quo, just cartoonishly crude preferential treatment based on gender (unless the older woman feels sexually threatened by a young woman, in which case the young woman learns just how bad work can get).

But we can't talk about any of this as a society, can we? It makes race look as controversial as weather. (No one gave a Woman speech like Obama's Race speech. Think about that if you will. A politician telling women to look past a long record of injustice and keep going, since the good of the country demands it. You think race is really the shocking issue in America until you envision that scenario.) So I think we as a society may have uncovered a huge fault line that no one suspected, and it may have some serious effects on what happens in November. Are they mad enough to elect a Republican instead of letting Clinton go?

Maybe. There are a lot of them and it's a hot button issue for them, the kind that is encountered early on and can shape a life. I love my girlfriend to death. We've been together four years and I'm Committed. But after my childhood, we're not getting married.

You wrote: "(No one gave a Woman speech like Obama's Race speech. Think about that if you will. "

A very good point. It would have made for a very interesting scenario if Hillary had done so. With some reflection and some honest appraisal of the actual issues.

You've made some good points here - and I think especially regarding baby boomers. They are a huge mass of people and do seem to be fairly cohesive for a cohort.

Not being one (I am just after) that may be why I've always felt just slightly out of step, off the mark and unseen by that group.

Hmmmm....very interesting things to think about.

I've found it very disappointing that Hillary never made a "gender"/"sexism" speech, and actually turned down NYTimes' request to interview her on a story about the role of gender in a political campaign.

What is her compass? Why does she want to be president?

While we know from Obama's book that he has faced his own demons and has come to terms with the role of racism in his life, what do we know of Hillary Clinton? I have her book, and mostly it reads like a long list of proud accomplishments. There is no transparency, and it does not lend us insight into who she is as a person. Many women are curious about why she's still with Bill after all these years of him cheating. The Clinton camp will not answer questions from reporters and they also avoid questions about it from ordinary citizens on the campaign trail. Why? Isn't it a basic principle of feminism that women should be treated with respect? And especially from their own spouses? It does not make me think well of her that she's still with him. Why? For political expediency? That's not feminism. That's offering herself, her life and happiness up on the altar of success and power.

To Hillary and her supporters: As 20-something woman and technically a member of Gen Y, it's not the generation gap that keeps me from wanting to vote for her. It's that I want to vote for someone who is comfortable in their own skin. We need a great leader now who is stable, grounded in their own principles and know who they are. Based on how hungrily she's pursuing the Florida/Michigan delegates (I'm watching it on CNN right now. Harold Ickes should be ashamed of himself), I think she cares more about winning than anything else.

The Sunset Blvd. spoof was not too far off the mark. What do you stand for, Hillary?

Dear Pleroma;

Thoughtful post, but let's not be too tough on women who are deeply disappointed at Hillary's loss. The "first woman president" is a long held desire for millions of women, who, in my view, have allowed themselves to overlook her flaws.

I have also been disappointed by otherwise brilliant women of my age (many dear friends) who see a general sexism in many incidents where I see isolated examples of stupid statements by a few commentators. I also think it has allowed them to overlook far more serious racial slights aimed at Obama, even though many of these women have worked for civil rights for decades.

It is indeed curious, but I am not a woman any more than I am black. I have always deferred to prespectives I can only intellectually discuss and never personally experience.

We really need to put a good ticket together that heals.

Peace

strawberrylover-- You make some good points, too. I've read that she did not want much focus on her gender so as not to run as The Woman Candidate. But, you're right, we haven't heard her articulate that.

I have a lot of problems with Hillary as a presidential candidate, but actually admired her for keeping her family together through those scandals and considering the implications for Chelsea. I seem to be in the minority, though, especially among women. I just wonder why feminism should mean breaking up families, as a matter of principle. There are many factors that a woman in her position would have considered. Anyway, that's another issue, beside the point of the post.............

It's not that I blame women for being upset with the loss. It's just that they need to move past that, quickly, the instant Obama locks up enough delegates to get the nomination. He's going to, very soon.

I became politically aware right as Carter was struggling to lift this country out of stagflation and general malaise. Reagan and Bush shaped my political adolescence, and the Clintons seemed literally like a gift from the heavens. I actually teared up in 2002, watching Bill give a cable-access speech in some college in Arkansas. He was about fifty times the president who'd just been "elected."

But now Hillary is doing her damndest to be a Nader for 2008. We have to let this go or McCain is going to be elected. I can't take another four years of Republican mismanagement, greed, and evil. Please.