I am fascinated by what you wrote about women in public office being seen as "empty". In therapy, we identifying the experience of emptiness as a disavowal of grief, of a loss of meaning and connection. When I think of the most genuine moment for any political leader in recent history, I think of Jacinda Arden in her public response to the Christchurch mosque attacks. For me, she expressed the collective grief and resolve of her people in the most authentic way I have ever seen--it was unforgettable. In sharp contrast, are the truly empty men parading their narcissism at rallies--displaying their grandiosity and contempt in response to the moral vacuum and complete void in which they exist. When these men describe Harris as "fake" this is a projection of their own vast emptiness. They have no capacity for love, for meaning, empathy, or grief because they cannot tolerate a modicum of pain. Jacinda Arden puts them to shame.
Jacinda Arden has been a heroic person, and I regret that she has left politics. Hopefully, she will return. Thank you, Lisa, for the specificity and clarity with which you wrote this message.
As I look around me at the wreckage old white males like me have made of our country, our planet, and our future, I am more than ready to have women take charge of pretty much everything. My 50+ years of working in American hospitals has shown me the strength, compassion, wisdom, competence, and caring that female leaders can bring to the table. I am happily casting my vote for Harris-Walz. I salute all who do the same.
I remember, all too well, when "the real Julia" (Gillard) episode happened here in Oz politics. The 'earlier' Julia was considered 'robotic', "a puppet", inauthentic' etc. because she went along with various, supposedly professional, (and mostly male) political spin-doctors, minders and attendant spivs who gave advice on how to behave if she was to be (in their eyes) 'electable'. The later-emerging "real Julia" (resorted to because the spivs' advice wasn't working) was then said to be 'undisciplined', 'unpredictable', 'chaotic', "not a team player".
I live in a conservative area, and even among non-conservative women I know, one of the first things I heard about Harris from them after she announced her candidacy is that they heard she “slept her way to the top.” I was stunned. Once upon a time, though, I might’ve let that burst my bubble, unaware that it’s such a typical notion to trot out about women. I think I was able to recognize it for what it was because of your book.
Kate, you’re so brilliant but it’s hard to understand how you can make these arguments while choosing deliberately to exclude those very real “progressive scruples”. Many people would have loved to vote for such an on-paper transformative president, but they are not supportive of Harris because of her role in facilitating a genocide. It feels disingenuous to not at least acknowledge that basic truth in this piece.
I get and respect those who've made the call differently than I have. I want to be clear that anyone who is not voting for Harris over Palestine--which I have always regarded as an unforgiveable genocide--is not being accused of misogyny here. In the end, I believe the best strategy is to do everything we can to keep Trump out of the white house and then FIGHT LIKE HELL for a commitment to a ceasefire immediately, among other things. But I respect the fact that progressives like you and I diverge on this. Sending love and support.
That is exactly how I view this situation. Harris *must* defeat Trump, but then our government's lack of concern for the people of Gaza must change. (Some people in government care, but "the government" has not shown care.)
How are we to get Harris to commit to a ceasefire after the election when she is actively facilitating it before the election and is stating that she will continue to support Israel?
All I’m saying is I hope we think carefully and strategically here. I voted for Jill Stein in 2016, and I’ve regretted it ever since. This time the stakes feel even higher— trump and his cronies are prepared this time. If you have the inclination, I kindly suggest reading socialist Joe Mayall’s take on the strategy of not voting for Harris at this juncture, and what our strategy can be in the future instead: https://www.joewrote.com/p/im-unconvinced-by-the-leftist-arguments. I’m inclined to agree— if we want any bargaining power, we need to strategize better and earlier to make our demands. I say all of this in good faith and with true solidarity.
Do you see any sign that withholding a vote from her is getting her to commit to a ceasefire now, before the election? How likely is that ceasefire if Trump wins (or steals) this election and implements Project Esther? I’ve been protesting too, all year. My choice in this election is clear— I don’t want us to have to organize from prisons, camps, and graves. There are exactly two options at this juncture—one terrible for Palestine and one far worse— and I know which one will be more possible to fight in. If we can prevent a fascist from winning, I think we have an obligation to do so.
I still consider myself a progressive, even though I've heard so much hateful rhetoric about Israel and Jewish people since 10/7. An awful loss of life, yes, but it's a country defending itself, just like Ukraine defending itself against Russia. I'm not saying that I agree at all with Israel's right-wing government, but I do think that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself. Hamas is fully responsible for the horrific conditions they have created since they took over Gaza in 2006, and for not protecting Gaza since the war started. Harris represents the best way forward, because she hasn't been directly involved with Bibi and his cronies, and hopefully can help see the way forward.
I keep coming back to the phrase you highlighted, “There’s just something about her...” and how its a manifestation of internalized misogyny. You shone a light for me that has never gone out.
I fear for your adopted country. I fear for us all if you get the Republican candidate for President.
All the people I know who aren't voting for Harris, aren't voting for her because she supports the genocide of Palestinians. I understand the desire to keep Trump out of office above all else, but if genocide is not a redline, a dealbreaker that we just don't cross no matter what -- then I really don't know what to say. The calculus I'm hearing is that we have to vote for Harris and her genocide so that things can maybe be better for us, but the ongoing slaughter of 200,000+ Palestinians is not, under any circumstances, an acceptable price to pay. It's just not. Vote as Left as you can down ballot, but genocide is a redline for me - and I hope it's a redline for some of you reading this, too.
For me, the existential threat to the US’s nearly-250-year-old constitutional republic is more important than anything — that is my red line. If the US collapses from within (with an assist from Russian and Chinese disinformation), exterior matters (Gaza, Ukraine, etc.) become moot.
This. I’ve been sitting here since I read that comment thinking along the same lines. Circling back here & you just said it. (Thank you.) There’s no way we can help anyone else if our own country collapses.
Either Trump or Harris is going to win the election. I think it's a citizen's duty to vote for whichever one is less bad. I don't think one can say they're the same, even with what's going on in Palestine. I guess it depends on what one wants on their conscience. I can't imagine bearing the burden of a Trump victory and the massive suffering that will entail, both here and abroad, and knowing that I hadn't voted for Harris to try to stop it.
Meg, you are completely right, it is absolutely unacceptable and it is a red line. Sadly, neither of our two options is on the right side of that red line. At this point in time, we have no bargaining power, and we have to vote for what will be the best outcome for Palestine and its supporters. That’s why I agree with the Palestinian leaders from Arizona that released a statement endorsing Harris. Trump has been beyond clear that he intends to completely destroy Palestine and all of its allies, as well as criminalize all of us that support them here. Things /can/ get worse, and he promises to do it.
As voters we are in a tough spot. Both parties have enacted a neoliberal economic agenda that is deeply exploitative. However, the Republicans have aligned with the Christian Right which is terrifying and their position with regard to Israel will be worse than Biden's. Strongmen around the world will be emboldened by Trump winning which will have global implications. It will likely be the end of any semblance of democracy we have and an eradication of our civil rights. As our hearts break for Palestinians, we have to consider whether a protest vote will help Palestinians and who else it might harm. We have to follow our conscience and take everyone into account.
This is the definition of genocide: "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group." This is not what is happening in Gaza. Hamas' charter does include committing genocide against the Jewish people of Israel, but Israel defending itself is not a genocide. It would be incredibly tragic if people who falsely believe this to be a genocide deliver the US election to a fascist, who intends to become a dictator.
The GOP is a cult and the leader of that cult is the most unfit person to ever run for the office. In my opinion, the choice is clear. But when Harris was running for president in the last election cycle, she had such low support among Democrats that she dropped out of the race before the first primary (she was at about 3% support when she quit). I don’t remember much talk about misogyny then. Here, you appear to be putting misogyny front and center and implying that misogyny is the dominant factor that is driving Harris’s struggles. But that obscures an array of other critical factors that are also contributing to her struggles.
I didn't take it that way. To me it's, these are factors, they're not the only factors, or even necessarily the most important ones, but they are factors Kate has expertise to share with us on. The thing about misogyny is there are always going to be other factors; the question to ask is if and when misogyny taints our perception of the other factors, and to be aware of it. For the record I think if she loses it will be because the Biden administration is unpopular, and her progressive policy positions from her earlier run are also unpopular, and it would be difficult for any politician to create something new in the face of that. I don't know whether voters would cut a male politician more slack although I suspect they would. But I think she was the Democrats' best (and really only) option, and we are in a time when Republicans aren't batting an eyelid at killing pregnant women. It might not be enough though.
I am fascinated by what you wrote about women in public office being seen as "empty". In therapy, we identifying the experience of emptiness as a disavowal of grief, of a loss of meaning and connection. When I think of the most genuine moment for any political leader in recent history, I think of Jacinda Arden in her public response to the Christchurch mosque attacks. For me, she expressed the collective grief and resolve of her people in the most authentic way I have ever seen--it was unforgettable. In sharp contrast, are the truly empty men parading their narcissism at rallies--displaying their grandiosity and contempt in response to the moral vacuum and complete void in which they exist. When these men describe Harris as "fake" this is a projection of their own vast emptiness. They have no capacity for love, for meaning, empathy, or grief because they cannot tolerate a modicum of pain. Jacinda Arden puts them to shame.
Jacinda Arden has been a heroic person, and I regret that she has left politics. Hopefully, she will return. Thank you, Lisa, for the specificity and clarity with which you wrote this message.
As I look around me at the wreckage old white males like me have made of our country, our planet, and our future, I am more than ready to have women take charge of pretty much everything. My 50+ years of working in American hospitals has shown me the strength, compassion, wisdom, competence, and caring that female leaders can bring to the table. I am happily casting my vote for Harris-Walz. I salute all who do the same.
I remember, all too well, when "the real Julia" (Gillard) episode happened here in Oz politics. The 'earlier' Julia was considered 'robotic', "a puppet", inauthentic' etc. because she went along with various, supposedly professional, (and mostly male) political spin-doctors, minders and attendant spivs who gave advice on how to behave if she was to be (in their eyes) 'electable'. The later-emerging "real Julia" (resorted to because the spivs' advice wasn't working) was then said to be 'undisciplined', 'unpredictable', 'chaotic', "not a team player".
That's some catch, that Catch-22.
...Mike
I love you Kate Manne. I wish CNN would interview you about this stuff. Nobody can put these issues into words like you.
🙏❤️
+1K, Alison.
I live in a conservative area, and even among non-conservative women I know, one of the first things I heard about Harris from them after she announced her candidacy is that they heard she “slept her way to the top.” I was stunned. Once upon a time, though, I might’ve let that burst my bubble, unaware that it’s such a typical notion to trot out about women. I think I was able to recognize it for what it was because of your book.
Kate, you’re so brilliant but it’s hard to understand how you can make these arguments while choosing deliberately to exclude those very real “progressive scruples”. Many people would have loved to vote for such an on-paper transformative president, but they are not supportive of Harris because of her role in facilitating a genocide. It feels disingenuous to not at least acknowledge that basic truth in this piece.
I get and respect those who've made the call differently than I have. I want to be clear that anyone who is not voting for Harris over Palestine--which I have always regarded as an unforgiveable genocide--is not being accused of misogyny here. In the end, I believe the best strategy is to do everything we can to keep Trump out of the white house and then FIGHT LIKE HELL for a commitment to a ceasefire immediately, among other things. But I respect the fact that progressives like you and I diverge on this. Sending love and support.
That is exactly how I view this situation. Harris *must* defeat Trump, but then our government's lack of concern for the people of Gaza must change. (Some people in government care, but "the government" has not shown care.)
How are we to get Harris to commit to a ceasefire after the election when she is actively facilitating it before the election and is stating that she will continue to support Israel?
All I’m saying is I hope we think carefully and strategically here. I voted for Jill Stein in 2016, and I’ve regretted it ever since. This time the stakes feel even higher— trump and his cronies are prepared this time. If you have the inclination, I kindly suggest reading socialist Joe Mayall’s take on the strategy of not voting for Harris at this juncture, and what our strategy can be in the future instead: https://www.joewrote.com/p/im-unconvinced-by-the-leftist-arguments. I’m inclined to agree— if we want any bargaining power, we need to strategize better and earlier to make our demands. I say all of this in good faith and with true solidarity.
Do you see any sign that withholding a vote from her is getting her to commit to a ceasefire now, before the election? How likely is that ceasefire if Trump wins (or steals) this election and implements Project Esther? I’ve been protesting too, all year. My choice in this election is clear— I don’t want us to have to organize from prisons, camps, and graves. There are exactly two options at this juncture—one terrible for Palestine and one far worse— and I know which one will be more possible to fight in. If we can prevent a fascist from winning, I think we have an obligation to do so.
I still consider myself a progressive, even though I've heard so much hateful rhetoric about Israel and Jewish people since 10/7. An awful loss of life, yes, but it's a country defending itself, just like Ukraine defending itself against Russia. I'm not saying that I agree at all with Israel's right-wing government, but I do think that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself. Hamas is fully responsible for the horrific conditions they have created since they took over Gaza in 2006, and for not protecting Gaza since the war started. Harris represents the best way forward, because she hasn't been directly involved with Bibi and his cronies, and hopefully can help see the way forward.
I keep coming back to the phrase you highlighted, “There’s just something about her...” and how its a manifestation of internalized misogyny. You shone a light for me that has never gone out.
I fear for your adopted country. I fear for us all if you get the Republican candidate for President.
so.freaking.good. I needed to read this today. Thank you for sharing.
Wow - powerful, Kate! I am not empathetic enough to put myself in the shoes or place of someone who thinks as you described.
In your opinion are people eschewing Jill Stein and/or Claudia de la Cruz because they are women?
All the people I know who aren't voting for Harris, aren't voting for her because she supports the genocide of Palestinians. I understand the desire to keep Trump out of office above all else, but if genocide is not a redline, a dealbreaker that we just don't cross no matter what -- then I really don't know what to say. The calculus I'm hearing is that we have to vote for Harris and her genocide so that things can maybe be better for us, but the ongoing slaughter of 200,000+ Palestinians is not, under any circumstances, an acceptable price to pay. It's just not. Vote as Left as you can down ballot, but genocide is a redline for me - and I hope it's a redline for some of you reading this, too.
For me, the existential threat to the US’s nearly-250-year-old constitutional republic is more important than anything — that is my red line. If the US collapses from within (with an assist from Russian and Chinese disinformation), exterior matters (Gaza, Ukraine, etc.) become moot.
This. I’ve been sitting here since I read that comment thinking along the same lines. Circling back here & you just said it. (Thank you.) There’s no way we can help anyone else if our own country collapses.
Either Trump or Harris is going to win the election. I think it's a citizen's duty to vote for whichever one is less bad. I don't think one can say they're the same, even with what's going on in Palestine. I guess it depends on what one wants on their conscience. I can't imagine bearing the burden of a Trump victory and the massive suffering that will entail, both here and abroad, and knowing that I hadn't voted for Harris to try to stop it.
Do you think the other choice will help Palestine? He will not. He told Netanyahu not to accept a cease fire until after the election.
Meg, you are completely right, it is absolutely unacceptable and it is a red line. Sadly, neither of our two options is on the right side of that red line. At this point in time, we have no bargaining power, and we have to vote for what will be the best outcome for Palestine and its supporters. That’s why I agree with the Palestinian leaders from Arizona that released a statement endorsing Harris. Trump has been beyond clear that he intends to completely destroy Palestine and all of its allies, as well as criminalize all of us that support them here. Things /can/ get worse, and he promises to do it.
As voters we are in a tough spot. Both parties have enacted a neoliberal economic agenda that is deeply exploitative. However, the Republicans have aligned with the Christian Right which is terrifying and their position with regard to Israel will be worse than Biden's. Strongmen around the world will be emboldened by Trump winning which will have global implications. It will likely be the end of any semblance of democracy we have and an eradication of our civil rights. As our hearts break for Palestinians, we have to consider whether a protest vote will help Palestinians and who else it might harm. We have to follow our conscience and take everyone into account.
This is the definition of genocide: "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group." This is not what is happening in Gaza. Hamas' charter does include committing genocide against the Jewish people of Israel, but Israel defending itself is not a genocide. It would be incredibly tragic if people who falsely believe this to be a genocide deliver the US election to a fascist, who intends to become a dictator.
The GOP is a cult and the leader of that cult is the most unfit person to ever run for the office. In my opinion, the choice is clear. But when Harris was running for president in the last election cycle, she had such low support among Democrats that she dropped out of the race before the first primary (she was at about 3% support when she quit). I don’t remember much talk about misogyny then. Here, you appear to be putting misogyny front and center and implying that misogyny is the dominant factor that is driving Harris’s struggles. But that obscures an array of other critical factors that are also contributing to her struggles.
I didn't take it that way. To me it's, these are factors, they're not the only factors, or even necessarily the most important ones, but they are factors Kate has expertise to share with us on. The thing about misogyny is there are always going to be other factors; the question to ask is if and when misogyny taints our perception of the other factors, and to be aware of it. For the record I think if she loses it will be because the Biden administration is unpopular, and her progressive policy positions from her earlier run are also unpopular, and it would be difficult for any politician to create something new in the face of that. I don't know whether voters would cut a male politician more slack although I suspect they would. But I think she was the Democrats' best (and really only) option, and we are in a time when Republicans aren't batting an eyelid at killing pregnant women. It might not be enough though.