why hillary clinton is courtney love

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A recurring concern in the current Presidential race has been what successive Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton Presidencies would mean for American democracy.

But those making this point seem to forget that there is a fundamental difference between being someone's child, and being their partner.

Is it any surprise that two young, talented, ambitious people should be attracted to each other in their twenties and then both go on to have great success in their forties and fifties? It shouldn't be, but when this happens, the woman in the partnership is often singled out for vitriolic abuse, and her success is deemed to be based solely on the talents of her husband.

Such 'power couples' include John Lennon and Yoko Ono, Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love, Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham, and Tony Blair and Cherie Booth.

The women in these couples have not generally been praised for their glass-ceiling-busting achievements in the male-dominated worlds of Rock music, Art, Politics, and Law. Instead they've become public hate figures, and are also often blamed for the problems, or even the deaths of their husbands!

Of course, dynasties such as the Bushes, or the Bhuttos in Pakistan, pose a threat to democracy, social mobility and meritocracy. George W was an alcoholic, drink-driving C-student who wouldn't have a shot and the country's highest office if he'd been from Anywhere USA. But this shouldn't be confused with young women who climb the ladder on their own merits, and just happen to be married to successful men.

kate sb

If you enjoyed this, you might also like:

not for girls: how teachers are limiting horizons

humourless feminists

crush on obama