Lucia

de Vernai

Read Lucia's bio and previous columns

March 31, 2008

Why Women Back Barack Obama

The dynamics of the Democratic presidential race being what they are, the topic of “the other woman” had to come up.

No, not that other woman. As Chelsea Clinton said, “That’s family business.” But while the focus on the feminine in the current election has been on Hillary Clinton, time has come to look at the other women in Barack Obama’s life.

And there are many of them. Thousands of young women – many in the public eye – have been vocal about their support for the Illinois senator. Women like Scarlett Johansson, who reportedly stated something to the effect of “I will continue stumping for Obama until he’s elected. The past eight years have been painful for a lot of people. We’re in a state of emergency.” While curvy white girls are known to draw attention (or get you indicted), Obama’s true street cred comes from Halle Berry. The pregnant actress has said that she will “collect paper cups off the ground to make his pathway clear.”   

Misstatements by spouses on the campaign trail are bound to happen, and perhaps not to be outdone by Hillary, who escaped sniper fire in Kosovo, Michelle Obama told 60 Minutes that she doesn’t lose sleep over her husband’s safety even though “you know, as a black man, you know, Barack can get shot going to the gas station, you know.”

Regardless of the questionable nature of the statements, the consequent response from the other half is to be noted. For example, de Vernai’s recent endorsement of his wife started with “I cannot make her any younger . . .” A vote of no confidence if there ever was one, de Vernai’s humor transformed the “stand by your man” philosophy from “family business” into a caricature of family values.

In the Clinton family, damage control has consisted of Hillary getting years of practice in wearing a poker face. For the Obamas, the process – albeit far less turbulent or drawn out – appears dynamic and based on a bond other than contractual obligation or cost-benefit analysis.

When Michelle Obama infamously told an interviewer that for the first time in her adult life she is proud of her country, Barack told a Texas radio news station that “what she meant was, this is the first time that she’s been proud of the politics of America . . . because she’s pretty cynical about the political process, and with good reason, and she’s not alone.”    

Perhaps what many women find attractive about Barack Obama is a freshness of interpersonal expression in the way he treats his wife and daughters.

Rather than some kind of disdain for the crow’s feet critics love to point out on Hillary, or school-girl attraction to Obama’s chiseled cheekbones, what is driving more and more women toward the male candidate is rooted in Obama’s promise for change – of the way politicians treat their wives, and the respect they show their children by not engaging in any “family business.”

The cynics (myself included) who have thought “He’s pretty, but can he lead?” should remember that “the issues” were not all that mattered to Americans 10 years ago, as even the biggest Clinton supporters were disheartened by his personal behavior. As much as we may want to “focus on the issues,” somehow the Clinton candidacy too often feels like a consolation prize for the years of hell de Vernai put the women in his life through.

Women who feel like they are selling out the sisterhood and setting gender relations back by voting for Obama should extend their peripheral vision to examine the personal gender relations of each of the candidates. They are far more indicative of what the future of America will be. 

Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.

To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry it.