They just didn’t LIKE her

It’s hard to unpick the deep layers of misogyny that are involved when a woman decides she won’t vote for a woman because she simply doesn’t like her.

Oprah Winfrey saw it coming. In her wisdom, she understood how much women hate and despise don’t like each other.

She pleaded. “You don’t have to LIKE her. She’s not coming round to your house for tea. But you gotta VOTE for her.”

Anyone’s better than a woman though, right? A racist, bigoted, sexually predatory loose cannon is more LIKEABLE than any woman. That’s because power and status– and belonging to the dominant sex class– makes you likeable, in the way that belonging to the downtrodden, weary, scapegoated sissy class makes you dis-likable.

And that’s one reason why women put up with men in the ways they do. Men are often likeable rogues, bearing charm and charisma. Being likeable comes easy when you don’t have a boot on your neck.

Trump, however, wasn’t even likeable. But that didn’t matter, because to most, neither was Hillary.

I am appalled to learn that most white women voted for Trump. But I’d hazard a guess and say they did it for misogynistic reasons, rather than racist ones. Though I could be wrong and it could be both.

White men voted for Trump because they want white male supremacy to continue. No surprises there. But white women should have voted for Hilary, even racist white women.

So why didn’t they?

I bet the main reason was that they “just didn’t like her.”

I’d also say this: white women didn’t want an “atmosphere” in their living room, or in their bedrooms, or in their beds. It’s very hard to be secretive about who you’re voting for in front of family members. You can’t just sneak off and vote for Hillary– even though the polling booths are private– because you want to chat and ruminate about your decision with the people living with you. If you’ve got a white male Trump supporter living with you– then it’s going to be a lot harder to just vote for Hillary. You might as well not bother. Fuck it, you might as well just nod along and agree, and vote for Trump so you can come home that night and cook dinner and not have him breathing down your neck or getting pissed off that you voted for the wrong person and upsetting the children.

Even Trump wasn’t sure that Melania would vote for him, so he took a sneaky peek to make sure. The photo of him checking out her ballot paper went viral. She was lucky she did vote for him or there would have been hell to pay. Imagine if she hadn’t! Imagine what repercussions there would have been for her if she’d flipped because the humiliation was all too much and she’d voted for Hilary in a spur of the moment decision. And he saw.

And then there’s the bots. The women who hated Hillary, liked Trump, and are so brainwashed that they think a man like Trump is a better option than any woman, because they believe inherently in male superiority. If these women represent the majority of white women, then God help us really.

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “They just didn’t LIKE her

  1. When the white women in Trump’s crowds chanted “Lock her up!” I’m sure we all heard, “Burn her!” This really shows us that we are failing by continuing to subdivide as feminists.There is no sisterhood, or even a sense that there should be one. Some women do not even seem to understand that they are oppressed as a class, ffs. White women are identifying with the alpha-patriarchy against the various beta-patriarchies, cuz that means potential financial security for them. My female Republican neighbor who patrols her and her dick’s property open-carry, has stopped talking to me because I am not hating on our Mexican male neighbor the way she is. My God, I’m a Separatist who does not interact with men, I am totally blissfully post-man, and I currently like him way more as a neighbor than her. Thank you for this post, Cherry. We cannot underestimate the layer upon layer of internalized misogyny women have. We never talk about it. And we need to start. Excellent post.

    • Yes, the internalized misogyny can’t be underestimated, and I’m not sure what can be done.
      The image of “woman” has been so devastatingly degraded–beginning with Christianity and with what they did to Mary, and with the witch-craze, and with porn. Who in their right mind would like these weird people who smile and grin while they’re being hurt, degraded and tortured? These “shuffling fools” who scuttle after their work bosses and husbands. We all see it in each other.
      Better throw our lot in with the real people, women think, that is, the men.

  2. Andrea Dworkin’s analysis of how and why so many women of whatever race/ethnicity continue to pander to the boys continues to be spot-on today as when it was first published.

    Right Wing Women by Andrea Dworkin explains how and why men for centuries have maintained their male sex right to define females as ‘innately inferior compared to the default human who is a man!’

    So in essence the boys’ strategy of keeping women divided from each other and ensuring women waste their time on hating other women because hating other subordinated women is much easier than facing the harsh reality that it is men who are the ones maintaining their pseudo male sex right to oppress us women!

    Plus men continue to view themselves as the default human and hence men collectively and individually must not be subjected to female critique. This is why that male carpetbagger/male sexual predator Trump was viewed by so many right wing women as ‘a better candidate’ than the hugely politically experienced woman named Hilary Clinton. Women chose to enact their three wise monkey stance again – ‘see no male sexual predation; hear of no male hatred for women and speak of no male hatred/male contempt for women’ because even considering this fact means womens’ worlds are not what the boys claim they are!

    • And the careful lies they’ve woven about their lives come crashing down upon them if they admit it even to themselves. What an insurmountable mountain for feminism.

      And I’m not surprised if black women turn out to be rather pissed off at all of this, because even though most of them don’t live with white males ( who are arguably the most dangerous species in all of humankind) they still fear men and patriarchy just as much as white women do, and are subject to the same images and narratives of the degradation of women– and yet they overcame their misogyny enough to vote for Hillary.

      As you and Trust are saying, this debacle has done nothing but divide women even further.

  3. This idea about women being able to like other women. Virginia Woolf wrote about it in “A Room of One’s Own”.

    She wrote about how when women first began writing in England, once they were allowed to write, that they wrote about all types of topics. Many of the female authors weren’t very good writers, but they still wrote and got published and it was all good. She picked up a random book called ‘Life’s Adventure’ by an unknown author called Mary Carmichael and decided to take a look through it. It was badly written, but what Woolf noticed was that we were getting the female perspective for the first time in literary history. Mary Carmichael was lacking in imagination and plot but she was female identified, and here it was, for the first time, in print.
    She read about the the characters –Roger, Chloe, Olivia, Tony and Mr Bigham.
    This is what Virginia Woolf observed:

    ‘Chloe liked Olivia,’ I read, And then it struck me how immense a change was there. Chloe liked Olivia perhaps for the first time in literature. Cleopatra did not like Octavia. And how completely Antony and Cleopatra would have been altered if she had done so! As it is, I thought, letting my mind, I’m afraid, wander a little from ‘Life’s Adventure’, the whole thing is simplified, conventionalized, if one dared say it, absurdly. Cleopatra’s only feeling about Octavia is one of jealousy. Is she taller than I am? How does she do her hair? The play, perhaps, required no more. But how interesting it would have been if the relationship between the two women had been more complicated. All these relationships between women, I thought, rapidly recalling the splendid gallery of fictitious women, are too simple. So much has been left out, unattempted. And I tried to remember in the course of my reading where two women are represented as friends. There is an attempt at it in ‘Diana of the Crossways’, They are confidantes, of course, in Racine and the Greek tragedies. They are now and then mothers and daughters. But almost without exception they are shown in their relation to men. It was strange to think that all the great women of fiction were, until Jane Austen’s day, not only seen by the other sex, but seen only in relation to the other sex. And how small a part of a woman’s life is that; and how little can a man know even of what he observes it through the black or rosy spectacles which sex puts on his nose. Hence, perhaps, the peculiar nature of women in fiction….”

    Things are better now, but still not many movies pass the Bechdel test, do they? Women still don’t very much like each other– and it’s very much structural and designed to keep us oppressed.

  4. Let us never forget the WHY Secretary Clinton is seen in such a negative light. The republicans have had her being guilty of killing her husbands enemies when he was president to stealing little Johnny’s lunch money. For the past 30 years, they have demonized her. When she was the first lady of Arkansas, they made fun of her hair, her clothes, they vilified her when she said she was not going to stay home and bake cookies. Eeeegads!!! The Horrors! She is an attorney for fucks sake.

    The reich, via the bloviating mouth pieces like rush limbaugh over the years made her look like the devil incarnate at every opportunity. Once again for over 30 years they have planted the seeds of distrust about Hillary. That is over a generation of false attacks on this woman.

    They voted for a black MAN twice and voted for a sexual deviant, lying, cheating, bankrupting WHITE MAN who has little idea of what his job is, would fail a high school history test, wants to know why we don’t use nuclear weapons more so he can “Bomb the shit out of them!” over the most qualified presidential candidate we have ever had. A WOMAN.

    Let us hope the damage he will cause will not set us back decades. Come on filibusters!

    Quoting someone on Twitter.

    “When I went to bed, it was 2016, when I awoke, it was 1935.”

    • Thanks for that history Chonky. Outside the US we don’t get to really hear quite exactly what she’s had to deal with over the course of her career.
      That accusation of her killing her husbands’ enemies is unbelievable- that ties in with the “burn the witch” sentiments that Trust pointed out in her comment.

  5. Yes on all these insightful comments. If I can use my Republican neighbor as an example: We bonded immediately cuz she was a battered and stalked woman in marriage #1 (she is now in marriage #4) who got out; and I have worked in shelters. She is a gun nut, probably due to the life-threatening danger she faced. We’ve gone target shooting together. In her world, the most important thing is her ability to defend herself with lethal force (against MEN — but she believes she would be defending herself against a subset of men called “criminals)”. Before the election, she told me she thinks the US government “staged” all the mass murders of this memorable year “to take our guns away from us.” I couldn’t let that sit. But when I said, “No. I think the mass murders are just men,” she visibly ground her teeth in frustration with me, because I wasn’t “getting it.” I said: “It’s all male violence. All of it. The front pages are what men do to other men and the inside pages are what men do to women. It’s indisputable.” At which point she literally and figuratively stepped away from me. Obviously, I scared her. Later, when the rooster of our Mexican male neighbor crossed onto her property and I asked her permission for him to go get it, she panicked. — As if he was coming over to rape her, and I was in on it. (Dude just wanted his rapey bird back). When her husband came home, I’m sure she reported events, because ever since then, whenever I call her, she puts me on speaker phone so ex-military husband can hear me and join in on our conversation uninvited. When I asked her not to do this, she (LOL) called me paranoid. This woman voted for Trump because she is shaken to her core from male violence and it’s looming omni-present threat. She voted against Clinton, ironically, because she wants to be safe from male violence. She can’t put it together. White men played the men of color shell-game on her, and she bought it. Her racism is just her confused fear of male violence. She is terrified of Isis, as we should all be, though doesn’t see them as men, but as a “foreign religion.” She has made a career of being fucked by white men (there’s half-naked pictures of her all around their house), and so with no education and no other real means to support herself, it’s the easiest thing in the world to betray women, to vote against Hillary because you are terrified that voting for Hillary would somehow result in you being physically victimized — either by Mexican men or Isis men. She’s still a battered wife of course, though she is convinced, sitting with her buzzcut husband in their house full of guns, that she has finally found her “prince,” and is the safest she can possibly be.

    • That’s what Dworkin pointed out in her book, wasn’t it. That Right Wing Women are not wrong about the danger they’re in. They’re not wrong for seeing that there’s no way out and they’re locked in.
      But they ARE wrong for not admitting the root cause of the violence.

      But how many women have the time and energy to worry about a far off future for their daughters when you have to survive right now- and for your neighbour that means keeping her gun, and aligning herself with power.

      This is a pretty interesting article.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-president-women-voted-for-white-college-educated-working-class-reasons-terrifying-a7409596.html?cmpid=facebook-post

      It posits that Trump’s female voters are of low-education and low socio economic background. This we know. She says that they see Trump as protecting motherhood and wifelihood, which is the only source of power they’re ever going to manage in this world. Clinton’s glittering life of career and “having it all” for women is never going to be a reality for the uneducated woman under capitalist patriarchy. They will protect the small bit of power they know they can obtain.

      The problem is, they’re wrong about Trump protecting them at all. We know that mothers are not protected in family courts– that fathers can, and do, enact their property rights over their progeny and many women lose their children- even the Christian ones, even the dick-pleasing ones. They ALL lose to men in the family courts- if the father wants it. The mothers that do keep their children are the ones whose kids that the father wasn’t interested in. The ones he didn’t care to fight for.

      RWW are lied to, basically. Lied about marriage being protection.

    • Thanks for your description of your neighbor. It’s so vivid.
      Describing these personal interactions with women is really helpful to radical feminism to further our understanding of what is going on and how to strategize. Our own experiences, helping us work out what makes women tick.

      “Buzzcut husband in their house full of guns”
      Jesus

      • All true, CBL. (I am gut-sick and bottom-of-the-well depressed from Trump’s “win” by white women; just slam-dunked). We understand the psychological anatomy of handmaidens, but I wonder what our role is. We aren’t reaching them. While it’s true a few rare women may understand patriarchy right off, most of us experience radical feminism as a total unveiling; a brain-splitting event; we vividly remember when we were struck by consciousness, and knew – knew – that now, for us, everything would change. We can diagram the handmaiden brain, sadly observe Handmaiden Nation, but it’s just that these women have not been struck. Of course the problem for us when considering our role here is that males are dangerous. If Andrea Dworkin, perhaps the most courageous woman ever, a woman, who, because no one would publish her work, took to the streets on her own national speaking campaign, were to pursue the same road today, what do you think would happen to her? Of course she said she feared for her life every time she gave a speech. But Andrea Dworkin was willing to Maybe Die. Unbelievable, this situation we are in. We have the most right-on and brilliant political/philosophical/biological analysis of “the world” ever, and yet “the world” acts as if we don’t exist. This, the daily pain. Of course it is also we who pretend we don’t exist, not really, not more than a couple handfulls of us anyways, or else we also may maybe die. Underlying all this, I think, is our problem with bonding. Men split us from each other, literally, by making us make them. In parthenogenisis, the entire species is one linked family. Grandmothers, mothers, daughters. When females start making males and investing energy in them, females are in a new fragmented dynamic, radically split from other females. This all became startlingly clear to me when I read Herland, where the females’ life-focus was to constantly improve their parthenogenic species – ie, themselves. It was in their genetic best interest because they were all genetically-linked. Even in plants it’s been shown that when genetic kin are competing for the same resources, they are surprisingly cooperative. I’m going to research and write on this, and will also do another piece comparing bonding/trashing in female chimps, bonobos, and H. sapiens. (Unfortunately, these will take years to research and write). I think our inability to bond with each other, to celebrate each other the way men constantly celebrate each other, may be our biggest and most perplexing problem. Anyway, CBL: Any thoughts you have on how to reach the masses of women would be appreciated. Because radical feminism has never focused on that, and yet it seems our responsibility. Especially after this. Doesn’t it? Or what do you think?

  6. Hi Trust,
    Yes, Dworkin said that women won’t embrace the brain-splitting event of coming to consciousness, because it is agony to live each day and moment with this knowledge. “The Daily pain”, as you say. There also the argument that radical feminist consciousness is harmful to our health. Dworkin likely died early from all the writing and speaking.
    If you want a long and healthy life, don’t become a radical feminist.

    But to be honest, I’d rather die young, and die with the knowing. Because there’s humanity and dignity in that. Like a woman committing suicide is making the world know that she exists. It’s her big “I am” right there at the end; it’s her declaration that she matters.
    It’s hard to commit suicide though, I guess. So many women just live on and on and on under inhumane circumstances that would long ago have broken any man. That’s part of the brainwashing– grooming us to our subordinate role bit by bit, and from birth, and men have gotten very sophisticated about it.

    RWW know the world is fucked, maybe more than most women. They’re realists, if nothing else. But they don’t “know” it’s all down to men.

    Anyway, on a lighter note, and regarding reaching more women. I noticed that one of the key features of the Soviet regime was not to allow “freedom of the press”. It struck me as being such a simple tactic, and yet it’s important to any political regime not to allow information to be spread.
    This is where the internet is useful, and this is my personal opinion, but I think it’s an effective tool to mobilize women.
    Unfortunately, It’s also an effective tool of spreading patriarchal propaganda, namely pornography. Most of the internet is in fact dedicated to this.
    But women can communicate with each other like never before, and I find it phenomenal, to be honest.

    I think women should use this platform, while we’ve got it, before it’s taken from us. And it might be. I’m literally amazed that women are allowed to contact each other through this medium. Knowing the intrinsic value of being able to have a platform is what drove me to write. And I recently made a few videos, because I thought to myself, I’m going to speak too. Even though it’s totally forbidden for women to speak, and I’m just waiting for the moment where I get the sign that I have to take the videos down. I’ve been on the net long enough now to recognize the signs– when you know the men are onto you.

    I think women need to make more global connections, as best they can– and that energy would be best spent creating a global GRASSROOTS feminism, rather than focusing on educating RWW. The idea is that the momentum of global grassroots feminism across a wide geographical space should eventually sweep other women along with it… but the clock is ticking of course. Will men blow us all up first? Hard to tell.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s