Better to be black, or female?

By Jennifer J. Foster

Published: May 22, 2008

Hillary Clinton made no bones about her history-making campaign as the first serious female presidential contender. She raised more money, won more states, won more delegates and got farther along in the process than any other woman in the history of the United States of America.

Now that her presidential campaign seems to (finally) be near the end of its 37th life, Clinton is speaking out—and she’s not happy.

In an interview with the Washington Post, Clinton said this about the “sexist” treatment she has endured during the campaign:

“It’s been deeply offensive to millions of women,“ Clinton said. “I believe this campaign has been a groundbreaker in a lot of ways. But it certainly has been challenging given some of the attitudes in the press, and I regret that, because I think it’s been really not worthy of the seriousness of the campaign and the historical nature of the two candidacies we have here.“

Later, when asked if she thinks this campaign has been racist, she says she does not. And she circles back to the sexism. “The manifestation of some of the sexism that has gone on in this campaign is somehow more respectable, or at least more accepted, and . . . there should be equal rejection of the sexism and the racism when it raises its ugly head,“ she said. “It does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments by people who are nothing but misogynists.“

Clinton’s feminist friends are standing by their sister.

Geraldine Ferraro, the first female vice presidential candidate, called Barack Obama “terribly sexist” and said she may not support him in the general election.

An prominent—but anonymous—Clinton supporter decried “the pervasive and insidious sexism that runs rampant through our country.“ The unknown author encourged women not to vote for Obama, but to write in Hillary Clinton’s name and cast a protest vote in November. This is necessary, the author said, because “the DNC thinks we will vote for Obama because like abused women we have no where else to go.“

The Washington Post’s Marie Cocco said Clinton faced “unrelenting, sex-based hate” during the campaign and concludes, “But for all Clinton’s political blemishes, the darker stain that has been exposed is the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture.“

Conservative pundit Rich Galen opines on the state of the ladies’ discontent and what it means for the Democrats in the general election in his most recent column, not accidentally titled “Girls, Girls, Girls.“

(Get it?)

Galen wonders whether there may be “a growing sentiment that being Black in America is better (at least if you are running for President) than being a Woman in America.“

What do you think? Does Obama’s near-imminent nomination mean that America is closer to stamping out racism than sexism? Is it better to be black in America than female in America?