Look, when I
criticize Hillary, I give reasons. I feel obligated to cite specific actions, statements and policies. That's what writers do.
But that's not what Camille Paglia does
Hillary has unfortunately adopted the Steinem brand of blame-men-first feminism, which defines women as perpetual victims requiring government protections. Hillary’s sometimes impatient or patronizing tone about men, which can perhaps be traced to key aspects of her personal history, may prove costly to her current campaign.
Come off it. Do you really think that a woman running for president
would ever embrace a "blame-men-first" worldview? Seriously, is that
the way to get ahead politically?
Anti-Hill haters usually argue (with greater plausibility) that she will say anything to get elected, that she will bend principle for the sake of advancement. Well, there's one thing you can say in favor of truly hard-core feminists: They do
have principles. Even when I do not agree with a feminist of that sort, I must admire the depth of conviction.
So which is it -- is Hillary a firebrand zealot, or is she a weathervane who will spin with the political winds? You can't have it both ways.
Here's my main point. If you click on the link and read Paglia's article, you'll notice that it lacks one important thing: EXAMPLES.
Paglia refuses to back up her bullshit. She does not favor us with a single example demonstrating the existence of Hillary's alleged "blame men first" policy.
Instead, Paglia indulges in psycho-history. She gives us an exercise in surmise and fantasy -- mudslinging disguised by psychobabble. Anyone
can play that game. Give me a few facts about Camille Paglia's girlhood and I can concoct all sorts of implausible narratives.
Off the top of my head, here's a first draft:
"When she was five, young Camille broke her mom's favorite vase and said 'damn.' As time went on, she did even worse things and said even worse words. In childhood, she blew up a latrine; during her college years, she physically assaulted a fellow student. What more evidence do we need? It is quite obvious that Camille Paglia -- her mind now a roiling thunderstorm of psychopathology -- became the accomplice of Wayne Williams in the Atlanta Child Murder spree of 1979-81."
Hey, this is fun! The magic of psycho-history allows me to "prove" any
idea, however ludicrous. Wheee!
(The latrine thing and the college assault are true, by the way.)
The real question is this: Why the hell would Salon
publish a piece which falsely accuses Hillary Clinton of defining women "as perpetual victims requiring government protections"? That hysterical view of Big Gummint is something one would expect to see on a Breitbart site or Free Republic, not Salon.