I May be a Black Woman, But I Care About the Economy

As Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the two leading democratic candidates, fight for South Carolina’s votes in advance of Saturday’s primary, one issue has taken center stage—even as many voters try to distance themselves from it. Questions about whether the state’s black women—whom analysts estimate will make up more than one-third of democratic voters—will vote for their race or their gender have been increasing steadily over the past few weeks.
The intrigue surrounding the possibility of the first black or female president in history has been discussed in online forums, “talking head” cable shows and late-night show monologues for months. But now that the donkey party’s three-ring nomination circus has set up in this typically conservative (and historically racist) state, the race vs. gender “debate” has reached a fever pitch. But should this really be an issue?
A Jan. 21 article on CNN.com titled “Gender or Race: Black women voters face tough choices in S.C.” was one of the most popular articles written that day. In it, the author visits a popular hair salon (many of which are being targeted by candidates because they are popular places for women to gather and talk) to listen in on the day’s political debates; namely, what dem candidate will get the vote? While most of the conversation—both in the salon and the body of the article—centered on issues like the economy, healthcare, and whether experience will play a role for voters, the title of the piece would lead readers to believe the theme was more sociological than political.
Readers took serious offense to the website’s suggestion. CNN.com received dozens of angry and sarcastic emails from readers angered by the notion that they would think only about their race or gender when determining a candidate best suited to win the White House. One said: “Duh, since I'm illiterate I'll pull down the lever for someone. Hm... Well, he black so I may vote for him... oh wait she a woman I may vote for her... What Ise gon' do? Oh lordy!"
To the website’s credit, an editorial was published within hours featuring many of the email’s responses. There was no apology or explanation given beyond what the emails brought up.
Not that there should have been. The original piece—and the subsequent editorial—broached an interesting concept. Naturally, a candidate’s policy and their ability to stick to it are of more concern to a voter than their skin color or sex. But the distinction is historical and deserves to be discussed. Black women, especially those in the south, are faced with a unique pressure to vote their race. For the first time in our political history, the voting process has been affected by the perception that race trumps gender.
Sensationalist media outlets deserve to be checked by its readers. Otherwise, we’ll be getting our election coverage from The Globe and TMZ.com (Duff? Nah. We got pics of the other Hillary taking body shots in Acapulco!) But while the article could have gotten a less leading headline, the story never actually deemed race and gender a voting prerequisite. Sarcasm may be hard to resist, but we should only check that which deserves to be checked.
Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail, and we can all discuss this with scrutiny and humor like adults. At least, the candidates are.
At Monday’s debate, Obama was asked about Toni Morrison’s comment that Bill Clinton was America’s first black president.
“I would have to investigate more of Bill's dancing ability…before I accurately judged whether he was, in fact, a brother,” said Obama.
To which Clinton responded, “I’m sure that can be arranged.”


http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/21/blackwomen.voters/index.html?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail --gender or race article
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/21/emails.race.gender/index.html?iref=mpstoryview – editorial