If the Shoe Fits, I Don't Care if It's a High Heel

My co-workers and I sat around the cafeteria last week and as CNN rolled in the background, the talk turned to next year’s election. I munched on my eggs over medium and potatoes and just listened. This out-of-the-box MGF Gal learned a long time ago that politics and people’s feelings just don’t mix. People just HAVE to take sides and can’t fathom why I don’t and will pretty much argue both sides.

And for those of you not in the know about my mindset: I argue all sides because I hate ill-informed people. Opinions are only valid if you know the whole story in my book. You can’t go foaming at the mouth without facts in my presence. I will go Devil’s Advocate on your ass…

Anyway…

They’re chatting, I’m eating. They get on the topic of Democratic hopeful, Hillary Clinton. On my 1 to 10 scale of polarizing figures, she rates a healthy 7 to 7.5 in my books. You can’t be married to a man who had one of the most sensational and successful presidential tenures in recent history as well as move to another state so you can be their junior senator right after hubby’s term is up, without ruffling some feathers! They discuss the merits (or demerits) of her candidacy when someone announces, “I don’t know why…she doesn’t have a chance! We’re never going to elect a woman president because they’ll just screw everything up!”

Oh man…wrong thing to say to me when I haven’t had my coffee! GAME. ON. I looked up across the table and said, “Now, why do you think that?”

It was explained to me that women are petty and jealous by nature. So how can we trust them with the welfare of the country? My first thought: Way to set us back a few decades there, my sistah! Without really calculating the risks, I offered, “Well, the Philippines thought it was a good idea twice to have a woman president. Margaret Thatcher was a pretty ballsy when she ran Great Britain. And Benazir Bhuto is making a third run at leadership in Pakistan…”

That stopped the topic and we moved on, my reputation as a “know it all” undoubtedly strengthened. Now, my point wasn’t to embarrass my co-worker. That would be too easy. However, I was taken aback by the bluntness of her statement. It was pure shock. First, that’s a pretty broad generalization with ZERO evidence to support it. Second, the fact that it was another female spitting this out probably shook me out of my political dead zone.

If history and current society HAS shown us something, it is that women are capable of handling power and running countries and/or political machines. Women in power is nothing new. Queen Elizabeth I helmed the largest empire after Rome. Some people would call Indira Ghandi a ball-breaker…but not a coward. And so afraid Egyptian men were of Queen Hatshepsut’s success, they actually erased her from certain parts of their history.

With a historic track record like this – I still get blown away by people who say that women can’t handle the top job in the U.S. I’m not exactly sure what the problem is. As advanced and “forward-thinking” as we claim to be, we still struggle with issues of gender roles where our less than prosperous counterparts seem to have gotten over it. Something about the prospect of our president having a matching set of chromosomes sets us on edge!

So what’s our issue? Some would question the fact that women are unproven in political power. But as the October 15, 2007 edition of Newsweek pointed out, women leaders in the U.S. are proving they are a force to be reckoned with. There are currently 9 female state governors, the most ever in U.S. history serving simultaneously. The House leadership in Congress falls to Lisa Pelosi. But yet with all this popularity and success, we’re STILL worried that a woman will end up blowing us all sky high as the President!

That’s what the rest of the world seems to be okay with it. And it’s not like these women have a different set of problems to deal with. Nope, their country’s problems are usually BIGGER. Poverty, illness, bad economies, war…they do it all while ensuring an entire nation of people feels cared for. We have all the money in the world and we freak out because we think our leaders shouldn’t wear skirts?

It all just goes to show you how screwed up we are with our priorities. Why can’t we just vote for the best person? As it stands, you not only have to worry being a Red or Blue state person, but now you have to think about if you’re a Blue or Pink elector. Like we don’t have any other things to worry about in the voting booth!

There are a lot of factors to consider. I don’t KNOW if Hillary Clinton will win the presidency in 2008. I know right now, my personal opinion is that she isn’t the best woman OR man for the job. But it’s a long time until November ’08 and that can change. And that’s the thing – there’s another THIRTEEN MONTHS of campaigning to do. So why am I going to waste time worrying about GENDER when I need to know about ISSUES?

I’m going to vote for the person that gives me the best answers to my concerns about the things that matter to me. I want to know alternatives to the disaster that is No Child Left Behind. I want to know what the exit strategy is out of Iraq and how do we protect ourselves from Iran. I want to know how a candidate intends to fix our PROBLEMS AT HOME, before we go out and fix everyone else’s problems.

Answer these questions and it won’t matter if you’re doing it wearing a Bill Blass coat and tie or a Chanel skirt suit.