Editorials & Other Articles

elleng

(131,081 posts) Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:09 PM Feb 2016

Madeleine Albright: My Undiplomatic Moment

'I HAVE spent much of my career as a diplomat. It is an occupation in which words and context matter a great deal. So one might assume I know better than to tell a large number of women to go to hell.

But last Saturday, in the excitement of a campaign event for Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, that is essentially what I did, when I delivered a line I have uttered a thousand times to applause, nodding heads and laughter: “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.” It is a phrase I first used almost 25 years ago, when I was the United States ambassador to the United Nations and worked closely with the six other female U.N. ambassadors. But this time, to my surprise, it went viral.

I absolutely believe what I said, that women should help one another, but this was the wrong context and the wrong time to use that line. I did not mean to argue that women should support a particular candidate based solely on gender. But I understand that I came across as condemning those who disagree with my political preferences. If heaven were open only to those who agreed on politics, I imagine it would be largely unoccupied.'>>>

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/13/opinion/madeleine-albright-my-undiplomatic-moment.html?

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Madeleine Albright: My Undiplomatic Moment (Original Post) elleng Feb 2016 OP

#ImNotKiddingMaddi it's MomentSSSSSSSSS. Plural. nt stillwaiting Feb 2016 #1

That's a very good walkback. And clarification. Demit Feb 2016 #2

yeah, seems like she and Steinem have the same writer. 6chars Feb 2016 #4

What walkback? jeff47 Feb 2016 #5

I don't see where she's saying women have to vote for a woman. Demit Feb 2016 #8

She says it repeatedly. Here's the first one: jeff47 Feb 2016 #9

Damage is done Truprogressive85 Feb 2016 #3

Albright was being herself, as she was here too: Jefferson23 Feb 2016 #6

Ah. So she doesn't think "it was worth it"? Wilms Feb 2016 #7

Well, Maddy.... MrMickeysMom Feb 2016 #10

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)

1. #ImNotKiddingMaddi it's MomentSSSSSSSSS. Plural. nt

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:12 PM

Feb 2016

Demit

(11,238 posts)

2. That's a very good walkback. And clarification.

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:14 PM

Feb 2016

People who got all shrieky and offended didn't know the context in which she has said it in the past. She took for granted that the audience would know it was almost a catchphrase, not to be taken literally. I'm glad she issued this statement.

6chars

(3,967 posts)

4. yeah, seems like she and Steinem have the same writer.

Reply to Demit (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:27 PM

Feb 2016

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

5. What walkback?

Reply to Demit (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:48 PM

Feb 2016

While she's distancing herself from literal damnation, she's still saying women have to vote for Clinton because she's a woman.

She's also still treating young women like they are idiots.

And while young women may not want to hear anything more from this aging feminist, I feel it is important to speak to women coming of age at a time when a viable female presidential candidate, once inconceivable, is a reality.

Demit

(11,238 posts)

8. I don't see where she's saying women have to vote for a woman.

Reply to jeff47 (Reply #5)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 07:57 PM

Feb 2016

It sounds different to this woman, jeff.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

9. She says it repeatedly. Here's the first one:

Reply to Demit (Reply #8)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 09:43 PM

Feb 2016

However, I do want to explain why I so firmly believe that, even today, women have an obligation to help one another.

The context of this whole situation is Clinton's campaign. Exactly what "help" are women obligated to give Clinton, if not a vote?

Truprogressive85

(900 posts)

3. Damage is done

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:22 PM

Feb 2016

why clarify now ?

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)

6. Albright was being herself, as she was here too:

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 06:04 PM

Feb 2016

?t=5

Wilms

(26,795 posts)

7. Ah. So she doesn't think "it was worth it"?

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Fri Feb 12, 2016, 06:07 PM

Feb 2016

I understand how she got tangled in this. I hate to pile on. But 500,000 kids dying is pretty damn harsh.

She'll survive, and continue to live quite well.

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)

10. Well, Maddy....

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Sun Feb 14, 2016, 09:57 AM

Feb 2016

If that's your walk-back after receiving a ton of shit from us hustings in response to your thoughtless remarks, you might consider what actions would REALLY help women...

1) Policies that permit the family unit to stay together when an employed woman delivers her babies...

2) A livable wage for all workers to keep the family unit afloat economically...

3) Pay equity to recognize fair labor practice/each labor position, regardless of gender.

4) The kind of job AND economic growth when we invest in education, sustainable energy technology sector and the filling of long-needed skilled labor positions in re-building our crumbling infrastructure!

Reply to this discussion