Even Cowgirls

  
Get The Blues

By Hank Edson

James Carroll published an insightful column the other day, entitled: “Questions for Hillary Clinton.” In his column, Carroll makes the point that like her husband, Hillary has attempted to co-opt the Republican’s posture of being “strong” on foreign policy, meaning “dangerously prone to destabilizing violence.” My favorite observation from Carroll’s column is this one:

“Coming into power as the world’s relationship to military force was being fundamentally altered by such figures as Anwar Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin, Óscar Arias, Lech Walesa, Mikhail Gorbachev, Václav Havel, Nelson Mandela, John Hume, Corazon Aquino, and Pope John Paul II, [Bill] Clinton was unable to claim what should have been his natural place among them.”   

(Carroll's column can be found at: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/20/3283/),

The Big Question Carroll poses for Hillary Clinton is thus: Will she repeat her husband’s foreign policy mistakes just as she has adopted his foreign policy posture of strength? Before you respond by explaining how it is necessary to adopt a posture of strength when you are a woman in a patriarchal society, that’s precisely the calculation Carroll assumes Hillary has been making, just as Bill made the same calculation to overcome being perceived as a draft-dodging hippie.

Carroll’s point is that whether the calculation is politically justifiable or not, it is a calculation that has left intact a Cold War industrial-arms complex and foreign policy mentality that is simply bad for the whole world. In fact, it is a calculation that is vulnerable to become disastrous for humanity when the political party that takes over next chooses a puppet president to serve the interests of its developing fascist impulses: the corporate economic monopolists, the religious authoritarians, and the neo-conservative mercenaries. That last part is my characterization, of course, not Carroll’s.

Now, here’s my two cents: Supporters of the women’s movement, of the anti-war/peace movement, of the civil rights movement, of the labor movement, of the gay liberation movement, and of the progressive movement in general have all eagerly anticipated the day when a woman would become President of the United States of America. We have dreamed that when a woman sits in the seat of power, real change will be possible. We have argued that a female president would both represent a shift away from the selfish, aggressive, and egotistical nature of the patriarchal order and an opportunity to create a wiser, more ecological, more nurturing order, such as that which is commonly associated with matriarchy.

Now we are all in a huge, but foreseeable bind. Of course, the first woman to have a real chance of becoming president does not represent matriarchy anymore than does her husband, “Bubba.” The lesson we must take here has nothing to do with Hillary, but everything to do with us. In pinning our hopes on Hillary, we have put the cart before the horse.

The presidency has never been the horse of leadership it claims to be; it has always been the cart. The real leadership in society is us, the American people. We are the horse that must pull our old-boy government like a cart into a new era in which a matriarchal worldview is embraced by society and as a result society finds the power to heal our war-torn, pollution-fevered, financially way-off-balance planet.

It’s not “new age” fluff; it’s intelligent revolt against “old age” inhumanity, corruption, and crap, when I say: We, the people, must locate the feminine within us and begin to seriously develop its political wisdom. Rather than bash or question Hillary, as though she alone should overturn the entire paternalistic world order, we must begin to distinguish between two cultures: One which is as old and unjust as monarchy and feudalism, which is patriarchal, and another which is experiencing the rebirth of its nurturing insight and creative power, which is matriarchal.

When I describe this second, succeeding culture as matriarchal, I do not mean so much that it is led by a woman (ie., Hillary), but rather that it is led by a feminine and nurturant worldview. When the matriarchal worldview is developed and embraced by society, women who can truly represent the goals of the women’s movement and all the other progressive movements will then be elected frequently to the presidency. We won’t be stuck with Hillary. First, however, the people must cultivate and organize this matriarchal culture. Then, from within it, we will be able to effectively oppose policy positions we specifically identify as sharing the same dangerous and destabilizing flaws of the old patriarchal order.

The change that will bring equilibrium, wisdom, and honor back to American democracy is not a change of one individual sitting in the oval office; it is a change of worldview embraced by society. For months now, and even years, we have been puzzling ourselves over Hillary Clinton, what she means for America, for women, and for foreign policy. We have been wasting our precious time.

If we really want a woman president who represents the priorities, commitments, and worldviews of women—if we believe this is crucial to the future of our nation—then we need to create a society in which those priorities, commitments, and worldviews hold majority stakes in the face-time provided by the mass-media, in the boardrooms of corporate America, and in the poll booths on Election Day. It is not enough to have a majority of women in our population. We need a culture of matriarchal understanding to swallow up the old patriarchal order and its calculated betrayal of our democratic humanity.

To begin building this culture we need to shift our attention away from Hillary Clinton toward the activists of Code Pink and the grieving mothers of our soldiers, like Cindy Sheehan. We need to articulate the matriarchal worldview in the public discourse and not depend upon candidates to do it for us. There are many people out there who are doing this well. They are just not running for president.

I am currently reading Tom Robbins’ brilliant and hilarious 1976 best seller, “Even Cowgirls Get the Blues,” about, among other things, a woman with enormous thumbs, named Sissy Hankshaw, who makes history as a hitch-hiker, and another named Bonanza Jellybean, who creates the world’s only all cowgirl-run ranch. It is a book that calls up old matriarchal wisdom to imagine the surprising seeds of a more authentic, more integrated, and more beautiful societal culture. It’s an up-hill battle, for sure. For now, I can only offer to Hillary Clinton the author’s consoling words: Don’t worry, Madam President, even cowgirls get the blues.

Copyright © Hank Edson 2007

Copyright © Hank Edson 2007