Posted in: Gender, Psychology & Law, Jihad & Terrorism
Published on Feb 22, 2008 by Phyllis Chesler
What The Candidates Did Not Talk About
A Psychologist Analyzes One Night in Texas
Yes, I watched the last hour of the debate in Texas last night. I noted that neither candidate addressed the key issues which face our nation and which will determine our destiny. How will our next President deal with the potential Islamification of America? What are his or her views about fundamentalist Islam, jihad, terrorism, Muslim (not Hispanic) immmigration as well as the way in which some Muslim-Americans are using American civil rights and liberties in order to safeguard Islamic gender and religious apartheid on American soil?
Will we keep funding the Saudi Wahabi war against America and the West? Will we continue to buy their oil and continue to allow their Princes to buy up American real estate, universities, and mass communication outlets? Will President Obama launch friendly United Nations-style "talking" sessions with Saudi Arabia and Iran that will outlast even this never-ending Presidential election? Will President Clinton focus on mandatory, universal health care coverage even as we are being bombed back into the seventh century?
Of course, both candidates "scored" debating points and the audience cheered as if the debate was merely an extention of American Idol–which I fear it is. This is not a football game and such applause should have no place in so serious a discussion. I am so Old School –actually, I'm not, this is precisely how our old Mother Country, Britain, conducts the public airing of issues.
Psychologically speaking: I also noted that in general, Barack either looked down, or away, or into the middle distance when Hillary spoke. Or, he glared at her. In turn, Hillary often "gazed" at Barack as he spoke in a "girlish" or political wifely fashion. And, several times, Barack came too close to Hillary's personal space in a way that suggested that if he could, he might have meant to touch her arm. Such "touching" is a male-to-female statement of power over and containment of the woman. Endless research about body language over the last thirty five years has confirmed that this is true.
My conclusions? That Barack was raised as a man and Hillary was raised as a woman and that both will have to wrestle with certain features of their gender-conditioning if they are to deliver on their various promises to the nation.
Folks: I am very worried. Are people voting for Obama because they were hooked on the television series 24 in which America had a black President? Are "angry white men" voting against a woman, any woman–or merely against this woman? Are women incapable of voting for another woman–someone who is not themself? Do young people merely want someone young and new, like themselves, in the White House? Are all Americans , including African-Americans, thrilled to finally be able to vote for a black candidate? Is everyone voting narcissistically?
Will people vote for Senator McCain because he "looks" like the kind of authority figure we once revered–or because of his track and voting record and because of his position on Islam? Will the battle to come be that between a traditional and no longer young military hero and that of a new kind of candidate with Kennedy-style glamor? And by the way, I hope that the Kennedy annointing of Obama does not condemn him to their tragic history of assasinated sons.
I am worried on all counts.
We are not accepting comments at this time, please go to the Facebook page to generate discussion!