Dear Gloria Steinem,
For a long time, you have been my hero, my role model, my dictionary definition of the word “feminist” and my perfected image of everything that I want to grow to be. I have spent hours reading your books, essays, articles, and social media posts, trying to become more like the woman who has topped countless lists of influential 20th century feminists. Basically, I’m a big fan.
A few days ago you told Bill Maher and the rest of the country that my political views are informed solely by my assumed heterosexual sex drive.
“When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’” you said. Bill Maher was right to say that you’d “swat” him if he’d said the same thing. I hope to God you’d swat him; that statement was not only offensive to me personally, but deeply antifeminist, heteronormative, and misogynistic.
Implying that young women only do such-and-such action for male attention is nothing new; the patriarchy has been doing that to us for decades. Might I remind you, Ms. Steinem, that in 1972 you wrote a beautifully written and eye-opening piece called “Sisterhood.” In it can be found these words:
“In fact, there seems to be no punishment of white males that quite equals the ridicule and personal viciousness reserved for women who rebel. Attractive or young women who act forcefully are assumed to be either unnatural or male-controlled. If they succeed, it could only have been sexually, through men…. Any woman who chooses to behave like a full human being should be warned that the armies of the status quo will treat her as something of a dirty joke. Ridicule is their natural and first weapon, with more serious opposition to follow.”
It seems to me that you have utilized this same weapon against young women in recent weeks. Is it not the “status quo” that tells young women that it is their duty to vote for a female candidate simply because she is a woman? Is it not at least a little bit “rebellious” to support the most liberal member of the Senate, a self-described Jewish socialist advocating a political revolution? Is it not “behaving like a full human being” to be a feminist who campaigns against someone who happens to be a woman, because she sees a more progressive and feminist platform being put forward by someone who happens to be a man? And, I must ask, is it not “ridicule,” “personal viciousness,” and “something of a dirty joke” to imply that women support a political candidate solely to attract male attention?
Young women such as myself support Bernie Sanders for a multitude of reasons. Some of us want to go to college without spending the rest of their lives in debt; some want to be able to afford healthcare for themselves and their families; some want a guaranteed 12 weeks of paid family leave; some want to get money out of politics; some want to reform the criminal justice system; some want to see the US take action on climate change; some want the rapidly-widening gap between the rich and poor to decrease. And you’ve reduced all these reasons to “the boys are with Bernie.” I shouldn’t have to tell you, of all people, how disempowering that is.
This is not to say that we don’t want a woman in the Oval Office, nor that we don’t see the significance that such an inauguration would take on; it is merely to say that there is a candidate whose platform many of us view as more progressive, more radical, and more feminist than that of Hillary Clinton.
I am aware that you recently published an apology for your statements. With all due respect, this apology was inadequate and incomplete. You failed to own up to what you said and instead apologized for a far less offensive statement you made. As Chelsea Donaldson commented, “This statement doesn’t really confront the problem, nor how much damage your statement did. You chalked up an entire generation of women as brainless who vote for a man’s approval.” I would add that you had a wonderful opportunity to engage young women in a political, intellectual way, and you failed to do so. Instead of putting forth reasons to support Clinton, you implied that our reasons for supporting Sanders are inadequate or, worse, founded on a desire to attract male attention.
I’m not the first person to call you out on your comments. I know you’ve received countless messages since your appearance on Bill Maher’s show, and there is probably nothing in this letter that hasn’t already been pointed out by someone far smarter and more influential than I. Still, I felt compelled to write to you today not out of anger but from a place of confusion and hurt. As I said, I’m a big fan of yours and have been for quite some time. Other, more critical, feminists have delighted in your misstep; Camille Paglia wrote for Salon that your “polished humanitarian mask had slipped, revealing the mummified fascist within.” Needless to say, I disagree with this characterization. I know that your intentions are good and that you don’t mean to alienate young women. I only ask that you recognize the harm that your statements have made and that you are more sensitive when addressing my demographic in the future.
Respectfully,
Sophia Cunningham
Comments are closed.