Elena Kagan & The Obama Effect
May 13, 2010
by Anna Belle Pfau
|The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda. This article has been cross-posted.
I haven’t been able to get too worked up about much politically these days. It’s all going so fast, tumbling end over end over end, and half of it is just a bunch of noise. I’m tired of not knowing who to trust, and of entertaining that sneaking suspicion that no one who will do anything helpful is in a position to do so. I am struggling against the great apathy that the noise machine is designed in part to instill. Nevertheless I am keeping up and occasionally I’ll follow a story in the media until I finally have something worked up to say, or find a cause worthy of commentary.
Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan
Such is the case with Elena Kagan, whose media trajectory I’ve been following for some time now. Put down the coffee for a sec, because what I’m about to say may surprise you. In the continually twirling roller coaster ride that is politics in the modern age, I find myself siding with Obama on his selection of Elena Kagan. And her story has been causing me to think again about the complexity of my opinions on Obama. Looked at from a distance, away from the magnifying influence of political sharks and news peddlers, Obama’s presidency will in some ways be a net gain for America.
The attacks against Kagan began early, starting in mid-April with Glenn Greenwald, who I am now convinced is not only sexist*, but also a purity troll. He has very precise requirements of Supreme Court candidates, and they apparently include absolute agreement with him on everything, and, if you’re a woman, more experience. More! More! More! Whoever she is, she’s never the right woman for Greenwald.
In the wake of Greenwald’s obsessive attacks on Kagan, others piled on. Just before Obama made the announcement, after a weekend whispering campaign that she would be the chosen one, several of her colleagues in the legal education field attacked her based on her record of diversity in hiring, never even pausing to consider what it meant to attack a candidate who would herself be a diversity candidate (Kagan is Jewish and female). Reading the article I understood the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face in totality.
Here’s something for those trying to filter through the political noise machine to consider: If Elena Kagan is confirmed, the Supreme Court will be the only government institution in the land to reflect the goal of the 30% solution. Recall the 30% solution was included in Carolyn Maloney’s book that electrified political readers in 2008, Rumors of Our Progress Have Been Greatly Exaggerated.
A lot of us woke up to the fact that we needed new strategies to achieve progress for women. Some of us, and I count myself here, decided that more women, no matter the women, would eventually make a difference. I still think this is right, and I believe it even more now. How could I not in the wake of Obama? He has managed to change what it means to be black in America, and it really has nothing to do with the content of his character, which is as questionable as ever; it has everything to do with the color of his skin.
It’s not that Obama is like the hagiographic assessment of him coming from some quarters. He’s not particularly special, and in fact his presidency has thus far played out predictably considering his inexperience. Even his signature legislation, health care, has been a massive failure before it’s even gotten off the ground. In the end, it didn’t matter which black man made it to the presidency. What mattered was that a ceiling was shattered, and that almost magically manifest gains began to accrue to African Americans.
Just three years ago, for example, commercials looked decidedly different. Almost all household cleaning products and grocery food commercials featured white, properly matronly (but still attractive) white women, and often their intact, nuclear white families. Black actors in commercials were usually limited to the token friend in a beer commercial, or props for black athletes. Nowadays there are so many commercials featuring nameless black actors and their families that one can’t help noticing the difference if one is paying attention.
The benefits have accrued in many areas, including journalism, politics, education, and online media. This is really happening and it’s really a good thing, maybe the only good thing about Obama’s presidency. While the cynical, demoralized left continues to exploit race as a wedge issue because they have found it so effective, decrying that racism is still alive in America (which it is, but not to the degree and not necessarily from the people they claim), they are missing some of the most exciting aspects of racism dying in America.
They’re missing the effect of doors being thrown open. They’re missing the fact that racial sensitivity among white Americans for African Americans has increased dramatically, that many people think consciously, instead of subconsciously, about race and what’s fair now. That thinking is becoming habitual, and it will continue to have beneficial effects. Conversations about race are had that could not have been had before, despite the hurtful and incendiary false charges of racism lobbed at anyone who resists the left’s arrogant rhetoric. And this is a fantastic thing, and why I wrote a congratulatory post on election night, even though Obama was not my candidate. I saw this coming.
Progress is happening, and they’re missing it.
And they’ll miss it again with Elena Kagan. I truly fear they will “Harriet Miers” her. They’ll miss all that progress and what that can do to a little girl’s heart and mind as she watches fully 1/3 of the Supreme Court looking like her. Jewish girls and boys would have a role model and an example; they would be able to see that it can happen. Progressives who argue against Elena Kagan are arguing against progress. It’s dizzying to watch. It doesn’t matter who the woman is, though Kagan is by most accounts a fine choice of a candidate with a long legal career. She is not the blank slate Greenwald and others have framed her as being, nor is she some stealth conservative candidate as the paranoid gay activists itching to out her have suggested.
She’s not the perfect woman for some, nor can she be perfect for all, but she is a woman. Let the next woman be perfect; the same standard we have for men. It’s the Supreme Court we’re talking about, not the presidency, so it won’t have the same effect Obama had (or Palin will 
) but it will have an effect. Every woman selected for or elected to a position of power has a net effect, and the benefits accrue to all women.
*Invariably someone will ask how Greenwald can be sexist if he was supporting Diane Wood over Kagan, but I’ve maintained since 2008 that Greenwald is sexist. The proof is in the pudding, and three months of reading him will show anyone not practicing that tribalism he keeps bitching about while he promotes it that he is. He always reserves his biggest attacks for individual females and rarely picks on individual men like he does women. He’s also obsessive in his focus when he targets a woman.
The most telling piece of evidence of all, however, is his argument that Kagan is a “blank slate” (the single most ridiculous charge coming from a bunch of morons who voted into office a bigger blank slate in 2008.). Greenwald himself supported Obama in 2008, even after he expressed reservations in the wake of Obama’s FISA vote. Why was it okay for Obama to be a blank slate in his quest for the presidency, the single most powerful office in America, but not for Elena Kagan, who will be one of nine voices on the Supreme Court? Why does Kagan have to measure up in every way with Greenwald, but Obama didn’t?
Great that the Supreme Court will have three female judges and come closer to reflecting the population and will have a greater chance of reflecting female wisdom. But remember Ginsburg has cancer and this will only last for a few months most likely. We still need more women appointees to this court.
I see many from the left making stupid claims about Palin “not representing ALL women” and it is a likely cry from them regarding Kagan. SO?! Why does every woman have to represent ALL women? Is it because in their mind tokenism in government is the ultimate state women can hope for? Frankly NOW and Obama’s commission on Women and Girls doesn’t represent me and representing women and their issues is their supposed reason for being. But sadly like so many things in life these two institutions have become not about women’s experience but about making men look like they care.
Anna Belle, Good article! You bring up some thoughts that mirror my own. I like Obama’s selection of Kagan, her experience matches those of many of the most respected supreme court justices. But I find myself wondering if Obama has heard the grumblings of his largest group of supporters and chose her to quiet us for a while.
I also wonder if it is good that we think of race “concsiously” instead of “subconcsiously”. I never used to think of race at all in my world until Obama became president. I first saw Oprah, a person who I saw as a voice for all women, throw her support for a man. Despite the fact that her career and fame was built of mainly female fans and despite the fact that most of her hardships (at least the ones I heard her speak about) were the result of men, she supported a man. I didn’t realize until then that she was black. I didn’t realize until then that the school for girls that she created in Africa was for black girls, not all girls. After many years of loving her, I felt a disconnect. After many years of looking at her like she united and supported all women of the world, I suddenly saw her as a black person. It was so easy to swallow the Kennedys’ support of Obama because their many years of treating women badly were well documented, and poor Caroline didn’t even recognize her own oppression. But up until Oprah supported Obama, I looked at her as if I were looking in the mirror.
Now, when I hear about Obama speaking to the nation about a black professor who was “wrongfully” arrested in Cambridge, I wonder why he doesn’t speak out against the white boy (Michael Shelton) whose black friends poured alcohol on him and lit him on fire over a $40 dispute. Is it healthy for this country to call out every crime where the victim’s race differs from the offender? I look at Obama and think that he isn’t black. He is a white person who got all the benefits of being black and white without any of the hardships so many black people in America experience. I come from a mixed race family. I am white, have two white sisters and three black brothers. Do I wonder if my brothers are treated better because they are male, or because they are black? Or maybe it’s just that my father had them much later in life when he was a little better financially established and a lot more mature. So while Obama and the rest of the world are happy about the open dialogue on race (and gender), I hope and pray for the day when all that matters is a person’s heart and actions. We have so far to go.
Bes,
The ad nauseum male argument that this woman or that woman “doesn’t represent all women” is the irrational thinking that keeps women down and gives men a false sense of superiority. As Anna Belle so eloquently stated, Greenwald gave obama a pass on being a “blank slate” for the most powerful position in the world, but he won’t do the same for Kagan as a supreme court justice. Same thing was true with Hillary and Sarah, when it came to “defining” them. DOUBLE STANDARD, plain and simple. How else could men maintain the lion’s share of power? A level playing field would break that fraternity of perpetual power for good!!
I think it’s a matter of men’s fear of women and our ability to redefine their sense of entitlement and superiority, which is what they must have in order to feel “secure”. The overwhelming fear that all the male myths created about women’s inferiority will be shattered and scattered to the winds forever, if they don’t find ways to stop women from gaining more and more positions of power that affect all of our lives through laws and the enforcement of those laws. What they fear is what I wish more than anything — a world where women have parity with men in how we choose to govern our lives. I think it would be a much, much better place, but it would require that men not be in control of EVERYTHING, which, in itself, is insane when you think about it. I believe with the advent of more women in power, it would also bring about a change in how men define themselves and their roles in society. In fact, a redefinition of what it is to be a “man” along the lines of learning what it means to share with and respect the other half of the human race would not only free us women but would free them from the self-imposed chains of a 2-dimentional view of the world that has been the core cause for war and destruction of the entire planet!
Yes, if women truly want to stop the self-destructive path the world is now on, we must first stop enabling men from this path (thinking somehow that we will benefit from such actions) and start enabling each other to these positions of power that can actually bring about change we can believe in. With only men in power, the world will remain out of balance and will never be able to “right” itself.
Kathleen: I agree that with only men in power the world will remain out of balance. Men have had nearly total power over Governments, Religion, the Financial world, Media and the Business world and all they have proven is they corrupt everything they touch. As I see it when you look at the F’ed up mess men have created you can’t argue that women shouldn’t fully participate in the world or we will lower standards or screw everything up. Men have left us a very, very low level of achievement that we need to reach in order to surpass them. But I don’t advocate repeating their humongous mistake of excluding half the population from participation in world affairs, I think we really need to find some way to let them participate when we take over and clean up their mess (as we always do).
Wow, glad this spurred such an amazing discussion!
The way I interpreted Kathleen’s statement was that we needed to stop enabling men in destructive politics, Bes, not politics in general. No one that I know is earnestly looking to exchange matriarchy for patriarchy.
That said, I’m glad I’m not the only one who sees the double standard here. And I’m also glad I’m not the only one seeing the manifest change for the good for African Americans as a result of Obama’s election to office. We can do the same for women by supporting all women who are up for positions of power.
Good article. Funny observations about the commericals, and you are right. After a couple of hundred years, Madison Avenue has discovered that there are black folks in America. Apparently, Madison Avenue expects to be patted on the back for this groundbreaking discovery. I have visions of innocent people going to work all over the country,being tackled and being pressed into service as commercial actors. Wonder how long it will before Madison Avenue discovers women?
Apparently, it will take a woman president, Anne, before Madison Avenue discovers women. So let’s make it happen in 2012!
Thanks to all for the comments.
Anna Belle,
You interpreted what I was trying to say exactly. I have no desire to do to men what they have done to women, by excluding and preventing them from living to their full potential. I meant that, based on the condition of the world, it’s evident that women are desperately needed.
It’s not about women vs. men, but showing men that no one is superior and why should anyone need to be?! We are ALL individuals, with varying degrees of intellegence, talent and ambition. We are multi-faceted, and anything but “black and white.”
In order for us to be able to clean up the mess brought upon the world due to the patriarchy’s need to take power and money “by any means necessary” in order to maintain control over the rest of us is so very wrong on so many levels, that it’s virtually impossible to explain such an insane view of the world!
The hardest thing for women to be able to do will be our convincing men that we are not the enemy, but rather, that we have an “equal” need for each other and that life shared equally with women not only can work, but it will prove that there is more than enough for everyone to live happy, full, purposeful lives and no need for the “survival of the fittest” (and most corrupt) for life to be experienced at the highest level.
I happen to believe that the primary reason we were put on this earth is to discover this very simple, important and necessary truth. The big question is, can we convince men of this before we run out of time? It stands to reason that one cannot allow unmitigated, unbridled greed, war and destruction of the earth to run amok in the world without having to face the dire consequences at some point.
Great article- we need to acheive female parity in Congress- but you are wrong about the nominee- that little girl’s role model’s already
the Court and the presidency( go sarah)there Justic Ginsburg/ By the way she wil be third jewish person, the remainder are ctholics, no protestants on the bench. By the way so would have Justice Meir but women did not rally around her as they should have-were you a Meirs supporter? To get parity doesnt only mean liberal justices, women need to support conservative nominees too
bruce,
I agree. However, don’t forget that millions of Hillary supporters have defended and/or voted for the McCain/Palin ticket primarily because of Sarah Palin, and we have defended other conservative women as well. On the other hand, I’ve found that although my conservative women and men friends love that we did, they aren’t as quick to stand up and defend Hillary either as a candidate or against the misogyny that she endured during the primary.
I think it’s pretty telling that the only criticism you can level at Greenwald is “sexism”. No legal opinions, no thoughts on his interpretations of the Constitution. Are you a lawyer? Do you study Constitutional law the way he does? Of course not. So you throw a unprovable claim of sexism at him, because you and he do not agree. Pathetic. You are aware Greenwald is gay, right? That makes perfect sense: Glenn Greenwald, the gay sexist. Give me a break. Give me some substantial criticism of Greenwald that moves beyond name calling.
Chris, I am not a lawyer, and that’s of course why I don’t comment on the legal issues. I am, however, a woman, and as such I recognize sexism when I see it, especially when I see it repeated, which I have at Greenwld’s blog over the years.
I’m also a gay rights activist and fag hag from waaaaaaay back, and I can tell you that some of the MOST sexist people I know happen to also be gay and male, a point I covered in another post on my own blog. Click the cross-post link at the top of the article to find my blog. Your assertion that being gay means a person can’t be bigoted is, of course, utterly ridiculous.
isn’t it amazing when sexism is discussed, there will always be somebody who has to belittle the claim. oh why are we little women worrying ourselves up about sexism and not about the important stuff namely constitutional law.
I am so happy that TNA is giving up the space to call sexism out. I also agree with Alison that being gay and even openly gay is in no way linked to be open minded, non sexist or compassionate for women’s human’s rights. gays like all other groups are not a homogenous group.
sorry for the typo, TNA is giving us and not giving up..
marille,
Because if you actually have a discussion about sexism and even have video and documentation backing up the claims that it not only exists, but is an integral, accepted part of our society, then you may have to “do something about stopping it!”
Men (and the women who have been conditioned to enable this kind of response) don’t like to talk about sexism because then they would have to adjust their behavior and no longer view women as objects put on this earth to serve them and their needs and stay at the back of the bus while doing it. They’d much rather women do all the adjusting in how they must live their lives under “psychological burkas” and be forced to accept the BS excuse that “boys will be boys” whenever we see society taking 3 steps back for every 1 step forward under their patriarchial control. They want us to forever accept that there is nothing we can do to change their sexist attitudes towards women because that’s the way God intended it to be.
If sexism is eradicated, men will find out just how much women do to make their lives easier and freer to do what they want to do and be successful in their work, and are fearful that they may not be able to keep up if they share the work load with the women “equally”. They might be concerned that they will be expected to help out with the many and various things they’ve become accustomed to women doing for them (cooking, cleaning, taking care of the kids, doctor visits, vet visits, food shopping, dry cleaners, attending to a sick child, paying the bills, etc., as well as help bring home the bacon! Recognizing that sexism exists and should be eradicated just like racism will mean women may finally have a level playing field, which will make it possible for BOTH genders to work for and realize their full potential, with no free passes or entitlement handed out exclusively to men any longer. Achievements will have to be “earned”. God forbid that should happen!
These may be some of the reasons why someone always has to complain about sexism being discussed, but ironically, never has a problem expressing outrage and concern when the subject is about racism. Now why is that?
Kagan is a race baiting, Islam supporting, never-done-a-real-thing-for-women democrap. I don’t care if she was the last woman on the face of the planet she is a danger to this country and an embarassment to me as an American Jewish woman.
She is also woefully under-prepared for the job such that her clerks, if she is allowed to sit, will do all the work. Happened with Clarence…..
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am
February 17, 2012 at 2:39 pm
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...