A Woman in Full?

Well looks like everyone who is elected is busy hitting it - save Hillary. And poor Donna Shalala pines away for her.

Seriously, it is a tad disconcerting when the American people (via the media) are transfixed in yet another of the sex eruptions that periodically occur. Although this fissure is more Mauna Loa, that is to say the spewing a steady stream of hot lava, rather than a Vesuvian burst. Seems that Bill Clinton, in his move to NYC, has unleashed the baser instincts of the state leadership. The Republicans cannot seem to find a straight guy to save them from their own man-loving sect (i.e. Foley, Craig, Miss Lindsey Graham, Empress Crist, Miss Greater Kentucky at large (McConnell) etc). The best they have right now is Vinter (a relative non-event by Clintonian standards) or McCain's over-friendliness with a young woman - pretty limp offerings compared with the Dems.

When is the last time that you would have predicted that the Democrats would be the studs about town and the Republicans trolling the netherworld of bathrooms and chat rooms? This should be vice versa according to conventional wisdom. But that is the problem with stereotypical ideas embodied by conventional wisdom- they stubbornly provide counterpoints on a regular basis.

Poor Hillary has no one talking about her sex life. While the chattering classes steer clear of Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell, Crist, et al and their "secrets" (but it is clear that everyone knows the gay subtext), Hillary presents, comparatively, a much more complex situation in her sterility. She is married to a true man-whore, yet no one seems able to fathom her as a sexual being. I'd be tempted to say that the media is presenting some sort of passive statement on the sexuality of post-menopausal women, but then I walk by a rack of magazines and see that everyone, unless on life support, is having AMAZING sex. I think this goes a few levels deeper than simple feminine ageism. Hillary does not wrap herself in matronly gear and pearls like Barbara Bush, she doesn't have the vacuous deer-in-the-headlights look of Laura Bush, she has none of the superficial plasticity of Nancy Reagan, and certainly none of the plucked-to-within-an-inch-of-her-life of Nancy Pelosi (she seriously looks like a droid). Hillary dresses, when looking at her in total, like a woman in her 40s who is professional and serious without being sterile. Her hair is carefully done and regularly updated. Her make-up is present, and subtly flattering, without being garish or vain. She has one ass, not two. She picks festive colors and flattering cuts. The construction of her uniform, i.e. pants-suits, is impeccable and fails to register as even vaguely lesbian. Her suits (by my estimation) tend to be ready-to-wear intepretations of Christian's winning collection on Project Runway. Her speaking/presentation style is not winning, to be sure. The smile is clearly plastered on her well-done, and well-preserved face. Her annoying head nodding affect is almost bobble-headed. Side note: Her nods distract almost as much as Bill's penchant for shaking his hands as if he were playing a Wii. Her voice, having an unattractive gravel-like feeling, seldom has any warmth. But Americans forgive such superficiality in favor of the content presented.

So what gives? Hillary is firmly in the older MILF category. Insiders note her for being warm, responsive and funny - which seems almost as odd as Al Gore's insider reputation as a deft mimic. When one tries to conjure a mental image of what Hillary would be like in person and behind closed doors, based upon those "in the know", most of us come up short.

And I don't think this is the by-product of the wars fought during the Clinton years. It wasn't like all that drama hardened her. Even when she was initially installed as First Lady - she had no sexual presence. I find it odd that she currently presents herself on the campaign trail in moderately feminine drag, and lacking any frivolity associated with that loaded term, that no one really thinks of her embodiment as a woman any more than they do her hair color. I surmise that many people look at Hillary as a man in a woman's body.

This may just be the by-product of our era where women have moved up the ladder, and in the process, become sterile. Sexy is just not an option - that I can fathom to some degree. But men ascend the ladder and still exude sexuality and vitality. I wonder if Hillary, allowing herself to be boxed into a corner of asexuality, is what unnerves many of us.

No one, outside those who are rabidly partisan, would doubt her ability to lead. She has shown herself a very competent Senator who can convey her seriousness and determination without a heavy dose of ego. She is a serious candidate (compare her to the shrill Ferraro) with mature ideas and thoughtful insight regarding the political machine. However, where Obama seems alive and vital and, in many areas, naive - Hillary comes across as oddly lifeless. I wonder if Hillary needs to have a consequential speech on her "femininity" the way that Obama laid out his views on race in a recent, and generally brilliant, speech. Were Hillary to present herself as a woman, and more accurately a person who embodies a woman, running for president and not the presidential candidate who happens to be a woman - would the perception of her candidacy not undergo a renaissance?

I have ruminated over the idea that Hillary's problems are, in actuality, not about Bill. Yes she stayed with him even though there was one bimbo eruption after another. Yes she appears to have ridden his coattails to the Senate (appears is the operative word). I would submit that she has subordinated herself in some ways to acheive her longer term goals. But this is the stuff of character and drive. Who, male or female, has not stood by a flawed spouse (Jackie O or Laura Bush)? Who has not used certain openings for their own longer term gain (John Kerry anyone)? Who, in politics, has not used their own battle scars for their ultimate advancement (John McCain)?

Hillary has been using the First Lady stint to explain how she has participated in substantial aspects of government. And, as it should, this facade rings hollow. I'd posit that Hillary has not taken on the Bill problem vis a vis her own story - this is the gold mine. She has been defined by Bill (and this is not solely the fault of the media - Hillary is saavy) without explaining why she was so passive in allowing herself to be "boxed" into this supposed role of calculated gain through her public humiliation.

I feel that Hillary's inability to articulate who she is has led her to where she is - in second place to an articulate upstart. Her stiff upper lip treatment of Bill allows others define her - and in many ways this definition becomes a virtual truth. Make no mistake - she is not running for PTA and, thus, her private life is not just fodder for the gossips in the room. She is running as a viable candidate for the leader of the free world. And her story, that being the narrative of her life, is largely a void in the personal sense. She has accomplishments, she has victories, she has battle scars, she has mistakes, she has strengths and flaws - in short, she has all the makings of a very interesting human being. But I think that the collective unease stems from the fact that we want to know our leader in some way. Bill couldn't avoid telling you his story - people just love him. Reagan exuded his fortunate life - his lust for life and optimism just spilled out of him. Obama interests many because we see his vision, we feel it when we close our eyes and listen to his visceral power through speech.

Hillary's tears in New Hampshire threw the media into a frenzy, somewhat belatedly, as the chink in her armor. But what resonated across that state was not weakness - it was humanity, it was her visceral response where none was expected. Hillary actually let us see (calculated or not) something beyond the rather thick veneer of polish and presentation. Hillary could blow Obama out of the water by not even speaking of her opponent, she doesn't need to - rather she could tell her narrative and seal her victory, in the primary and the general election.

In a nutshell, I think of her asexuality as the embodiment of who she projects - and not who she is. Obama has his narrative and McCain is a fucking novel. Both exude, in very different ways, a view of themselves, however circumscribed, beyond the political animal. Hillary is a political animal - no one in their right mind would think otherwise. But that is the role of the politician - to tell us the lies we want to hear. We all know that backroom deals have to be made - proverbially, it is the making of the sausage.

Hillary has shown that she has the grit and stamina - her marriage to Bill, her superb raising of Chelsea, her strong presence in the Senate (John Edwards would be happy to have done a tenth of what Hillary has done), her wit, her intelligence, and so on. But we have had to play the waiting game to see the results without being reminded, by her, of her battles, her fortitude, her drive - not in a political sense but also in a personal sense. And that is what we yearn to see. A compelling vision, dictated forcefully, by Hillary of why she should be president both from a political and personal standpont. She needs to separate herself from Bill - but she can only do that by explaining her relationship to Bill. This optin is not conventional - this is probabably not even advised by those around her - but this is where she needs to go. Boldly proclaiming that, she, Hillary has made her choices and why those choices did not determine her fate, rather she made her path in spite of those obstacles presented to her. Its very Horatio Alger. I feel until Hillary allows us to see her struggles and her flaws, we will remain indignant of the projection she offers us.

The number one rule of high end politics is not about locality - its about quid pro quo. Hillary seems to be projecting an ideal that she is the best candidate, ergo, we should vote for her. But I would state that she ought to force us to vote for her, explain why she is a leader, give us the rough and tumble story - we all know it is there - just level with us. Show us who you are Hillary, and we will hold up our end of the bargain. Continue to show us the sterile resume and bland platitudes, and we will vote for the alternative with a soul. Obama gives us a story - you are giving us a resume.

Hillary, make yourself real, flaws and all, and we will love you in your totality.