Razer's Class Warfare

May 11, 2018

Razer: Hillary Clinton’s religious, if nonsensical, performance to Melbourne’s true believers

Hillary Clinton spoke to a 5000-strong crowd on a freezing Thursday night in Melbourne. Her observations on misogyny failed to adequately warm Helen Razer.

Helen Razer — Writer and broadcaster

Helen Razer

Writer and broadcaster

Last night outside the civic wound that is Melbourne’s Convention and Exhibition Centre, five thousand persons in near-freezing conditions found their heat inside a long, long queue. That I felt none of this arterial warmth may make me a “misogynist”. We’d learn later that misogyny is just about everywhere, and the basis for every critique of Hillary Rodham Clinton ever. My stone-cold observation: warmth for women of the white knowledge class is the product of friction between (a) privilege and (b) the privileged belief that all women are unified by a totalising experience of “misogyny”.

Oh. Before we get to that, permit me to briefly explain the usage of  “misogyny”, which you may foolishly believe describes the deep hatred for all women occasionally present in individual men.  The term “misogyny” was used so often last night by Clinton, and by Julia Gillard, with whom Madam Secretary undertook an interview (one sold as a chance for its audience to “eavesdrop” on the chit-chat two powerful gals would have in the Ladies’ at Davos but performed with all the spontaneity you’d expect from politicians) I lost count.

Free Trial

You've hit members-only content.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions

47 comments

Leave a comment

47 thoughts on “Razer: Hillary Clinton’s religious, if nonsensical, performance to Melbourne’s true believers

  1. [email protected]

    Hey Helen, did you know it was sponsored by Defence Connect. Blurggh. I can’t understand why… I actually I wonder now if it’s to advertise Defence Connect to that particular woman crowd.
    Or is it because Hilary is pushing this discourse on behalf of the corporate weapons people… Her friends… “The Russians create division, and you’d better watch out, because the Chinese will do that, here.” so that Australians might fulfil their true calling as buyers and makers and purveyors of weapons for the Alliance. Did I say blurggghh?
    Disclaimer. I am also a privileged woman. On Yidindji country.

    1. AR

      Well pinged – you have said all that is needed about this exposition.
      By their sponsors, shall ye know them.

  2. James O'Neill

    I am surprised that you spent your time and money listening to a sociopathic, psychopathic liar whose only proper forum should be before the International Criminal Court.

  3. AR

    Until I can understand how/why over 50% of college educated white women voted for the Drumpfster there is a black hole where intelligence once resided.

    1. Rais

      A big part of the reason is the Clintons. And let’s face it, Trump hasn’t actually physically done many worse things that his predecessor, the great deporter, droner, prosecutor of whistleblowers, didn’t do. Yet.

  4. Eva Cox

    Good one, Helen. What happened to feminism as movement to correct the basic gender biases that saw macho masculinity decide what mattered and denied the social basis of relationships any value? This personalized version leaves out so much that it fits with neolib crap.

    1. Marilyn

      I wouldn’t waste a second of my life listening to Hillary or Julia whinge about misogyny when one is married to a thieving serial womaniser who ”gave” her power or Julia whose biggest whinge was Abbott was nasty to me on the same day the senate were passing her laws to punish single mothers and who walked all over Beazley, Crean, Latham and Rudd to get a job she was not suited to.

      1. AR

        It saddens me that you are correct.

      2. Srkiv

        Don’t forget she cried whilst telling us she single handedly improved the opportunities for peopke from low socio economic backgrounds to attend tertiary education, as she cried she also took away funding for scholarships for those very people.

    2. CN

      Eva, I fear you too are lapsing into the ‘personalised version’ …

  5. Robyn

    Lighten up Helen. Cheeeze

  6. Andrea

    Helen your mind was made up about what you would encounter at this event before your attendance. I have no firm view on HillaryClinton but regarding Julia Gillard I do and she was indeed a victim of misogyny in her tenure as pm. “Deliberately barren” “ditch the witch” and sentiments abounding, even here, regarding her treachery when male politicians doing same would not be judged. As for comments saying she was not a good pm, I vehemently disagree. Look at her record on legislation and what she was up against – not just the opposition but a wafer thin margin and Rudd in the curtains.

    1. john OCallaghan

      Yes i agree on Julia Gillard,a great PM and maybe if given more opportunity one of our best,and on Clinton i am not a fan, as i think she is disingenuous and a war monger to boot and just as dangerous as that other lunatic Trump!

    2. RoRo

      Yeah. She definitely was treated differently and way worse because she was a woman. Anyone remember that revolting Queensland liberal party dinner menu? Although Anne Summers tends to IMO be a bit of a liberal feminist, the “her rights at work” essay is pretty bang on re laying out the sexism Gillard faced.
      She was also an effective PM in terms of getting shit done in a minority govt.
      That said, yeah it is true that she hit working single mums and continued, no beefed up!, Australia’s refugee and asylum seeker policies, and the intervention. Basically she did some awful things with her power that no amount of “misogyny” can excuse or justify.
      Maybe we can have two things at the same time: she absolutely was subject to gross and flagrant sexism while in office, but equally doesn’t get a free pass for all of the terrible policies she either presided over enacting or continuing.

  7. StrayMuttsInc

    For $200 I could score and buy a couple of bottles of rather nice bourbon.
    Maybe not as interesting as a dissertation on privilege, or an audience subscribing to the presumption of the collective individual, but certainly warmer, and one might assume, despite being male, substantially more romantic.
    Men and fire, so primal, so instinctually base. And, apparently, unloving of ladies.
    Bah. So untrue . . .

  8. CN

    Helen, I am intrigued by the distinction between misogyny and sexism as being one between individual and collective, viz. ““Misogyny” has replaced the concept “sexism”, which once referred to a tendency socially and not individually enacted.” I’ve always perceived the difference to be one of animus – sexism is about male entitlement and misogyny is about actual hatred. There is no reason why you cannot describe a culture of misogyny as a socio-political/cultural construct.

    1. Helen Razer

      So, it’s just a difference of intensity for you.
      The Macquarie dictionary agrees.
      I don’t.

  9. Lorraine Paul

    I feel sorry that you had to cover this type of middle to upper-class crap, Helen. As for myself, I wouldn’t walk across the road to listen to Clinton. As you have just demonstrated she would have nothing to say for the (un)privileged. A scion of a particular type of American who is unable to see the injustices and inequalities inherent in the Capitalist system and fiddles around on the edges firmly convinced that the system will work ‘if only’.

  10. Metal Guru

    Ho, Ho Helen! This is one of your best and you have written some and I’m not even a fan!
    Gold stars plus. Not only was Gillard sticking it to single moms on the day of her famous (sic) misogyny speech, she was also colluding with one Peter Slipper, a true misogynst and closet gay if ever there was one. Giving him the Speakers job in a minority parliament on the premise and promise he defect from the Liberal Party. Who can forget his appalling description of female genitalia? Well the privileged white liberal ‘cognoscenti’ can. let’ s
    remind them. Perhaps you can Helen from a woman’s perspective. I’ll also never let her forget her rubbish Fair (Unfair) Work Act – “WorkChoices Lite”.
    There’s too much jewells here in Helen’s piece – the bit about Hilary’s Libyan fiasco, the overwhelmingly white female privilege contrasted with the mostly male, coloured underprivelege of the security and venue staff, the spontaneity of politicians (one of the best), the Goldman Sachs boondoogle – all everything except the fact it was brought to us by an American multi death corporation. One of your readers did that and for that Helen should only be criticised.
    Keep sticking it to them. Those like Eva Cox, a self-imposed egotist and garbage talker waffler from the Fabian Society, should remove themselves from the debate completely as they have little to contribute. Helen on the other hand has just too much.

Leave a comment

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...