^{by Tom Head, About.com Guide to Civil Liberties}

Photo: David McNew / Getty Images.

The Clinton-Obama race for the Democratic presidential nomination, which promises to finally end the white male monopoly on major-party presidential nominations, is inspiring in many ways--and depressing in others. Nothing sums up the limitations of the so-called race versus gender debate better than the conundrum faced by black women.

Because the logic is inescapable:

• If all women who vote against Hillary Clinton display a lack of solidarity with other women, and
• If all African Americans who vote against Barack Obama display a lack of solidarity with other African Americans, then
• This leaves no way that a black woman can vote and not be guilty of betraying either her race or her gender.

This is an excellent example of the way that women, and people of color, are marginalized from these debates.

See also New York NOW president Marcia Pappas' response to Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), who endorsed Barack Obama:

Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard ...

We are repaid with his abandonment! He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman president, just not "this" one) ...

This latest move by Kennedy, is so telling about the status of and respect for women’s rights, women's voices, women’s equality, women’s authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation - to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first woman after centuries of men who "know what’s best for us."

Nowhere in Pappas' letter is the existence of black women, who make up 51 percent of African Americans, acknowledged. Pappas' letter paints the picture of a conflict between white women and men. People of color are simply not part of the discussion.

And it is not hard to imagine that a nearly identical letter couldn't be written and directed against Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), who had endorsed Clinton. Perhaps something like this:

African Americans have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Nelson's endorsement of Barack Obama's opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit African Americans hard ...

We are repaid with his abandonment! He's picking the new white over us. He's joined the list of progressive white men who can't or won't handle the prospect of a black president who is Barack Obama (they will of course say they support a black president, just not "this" one) ...

This latest move by Nelson is so telling about the status of and respect for civil rights, the voices of people of color, racial justice and our ability - indeed, our obligation - to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first African American after centuries of whites who "know what's best for us."

Or we could focus on the fact that John McCain, if elected, would be the oldest candidate to become president in U.S. history. Perhaps this would work as a press release:

Seniors have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Cochran's endorsement of John McCain's opponent in the Republican presidential primary campaign has really hit seniors hard ...

We are repaid with his abandonment! He's picking the new, young candidate over us. He's joined the list of progressive middle-aged senators who can't or won't handle the prospect of a president over 70 who is John McCain (they will of course say they support a septuagenarian president, just not "this" one) ...

This latest move by Cochran is so telling about the status of and respect for the elderly, the voices of seniors, anti-ageism and our ability - indeed, our obligation - to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President who is the first true senior after centuries of younger candidates who "know what's best for us."

I could go on. Bill Richardson would have been the first Latino major-party presidential nominee; my endorsement was more or less split between Richardson and Obama (I have personally supported Obama since January 2007 but wrote that Richardson had a better civil liberties platform), which I suppose must mean that I'm a half-committed antiracist misogynist who discriminates against the elderly.

Reality check: When the first black president is elected, it will not end racism in America. When the first woman is elected president, it will not end sexism in America. These problems are too deep to be solved by one election. It's hard to imagine how significant it could be for kids who aren't white males to finally be able to look up at the television screen and see a commander-in-chief who breaks the mold. Electing Clinton or Obama will change this country, no question.

But does either candidate really represent the majority of women or African Americans? Does either candidate really stand, in any compelling way, as an example of the marginalized and oppressed? They are both privileged national celebrities who have had so many opportunities in life that they are actually running for president. How can any commentator have the unmitigated gall to say that anyone who doesn't vote for Hillary Clinton is, by virtue of her gender, somehow harming the women in this country who make 77 cents on the dollar relative to men? Or women who are most subject to domestic violence and sexual assault? Or women who struggle with low access to birth control or high infant mortality, who are forced by inadequate health care to have miscarriages and prevented by law from having affordable access to abortion? Hillary Clinton is not the face of oppressed womanhood in America.

Nor does Barack Obama's life show much evidence of dreams deferred. He graduated from Harvard Law School, wrote a bestselling memoir, was elected to the U.S. Senate, and is now the frontrunner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. Does his life story--can the life story of any presidential candidate--really represent those who have been most affected by racial injustice?

Electing Barack Obama could have a profound impact on the self-image of many black youths, not all of them male, but it will not end racism. Electing Hillary Clinton could have a profound impact on the self-image of many young women, not all of them white, but it will not end sexism. The stakes of this election are very high--but in terms of race and gender, I believe they've been overstated. There is no shortcut to moral progress. The hard work of social justice will still need to be done, and the grim realities of our institutionally racist and sexist country will still exist, long after the next president is inaugurated. Our own conduct and our own moral values--not the race or gender of our favorite presidential candidate--will determine whether or not we are guilty of the "ultimate betrayal."

See also:

• Hillary Clinton vs. "The Black Candidate"
• Racism and Electability
• Iowa: What Does It Mean?