We’re proud of our liberal ways... until it comes to a woman in power

Similarly, if Obama doesn’t make it, he can draw solace from the belief that America was not ready for a black president

We’re all liberal, open-minded, generous to a fault. We’re unprejudiced. We don’t discriminate based on creed, race or gender. We can be trusted to pick people for important jobs based on their expertise and experience, undistracted by the colour of their skin or their sex.

We’re way ahead of the grassroots, the backwoodsmen, the rednecks. We’re a quantum leap more progressive than the majority of the population.

That’s what emerges from a survey published this week by Newsweek, about the presidential prospects of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The survey found that 92% of respondents said they’d be willing to vote for either a woman or an African-American candidate for the White House.

“But the numbers drop significantly,” Newsweek added, “when respondents are asked whether the country is ready to accept a black or a woman in the White house.”

Only 59% believed the US was ready for a black. Only 58% believe their country is ready for a female president.

Whether this kind of projected peer pressure — “I’m liberal and open, but the rest of the nation is way behind in its thinking” — will matter to the result of the election is unclear at this point. All we know is voters like to be on the winning side. Voters convinced their votes won’t change anything may not vote at all. So Americans convinced the benighted majority will render their vote pointless may not cast it for Hillary or for Obama. They may project their fears onto unnamed others and derive a weird kind of self-imposed peer pressure from that.

Hillary Clinton’s enemies, of course, would say that if she doesn’t make it, her loss will have damn all to do with her gender and everything to do with something more simple: the fact that she hasn’t — so far — demonstrated the visceral connection with human beings demonstrated by her husband. Failure to win either the Democratic nomination or the presidential election will owe something to the perception of her identified by one hostile commentator, who observed that: “She and her crowd see themselves as a guardian class. They see their mission as moulding American life according to some grand design… There’s an arrogance there. It’s one people can smell, and they don’t like it.”

If Hillary doesn’t make it back to the White House, the argument that America wasn’t ready for a woman president will at least be a consolation prize. Similarly, if Obama doesn’t make it, he can draw solace from the belief that America was not ready for a black president. He’ll have some evidence to support the proposition; although his team are keeping schtum about it, racist messages and threats have been constant since he declared his intention to run. It will be difficult, post-election, to work out the degree to which racism contributed to the loss. Other factors may also contribute, including his inability to conceal his tiredness and impatience in public and his tendency, in public debates, to revert to subtle argument conducted in academic terms.

If Hillary does make it she will, quite rightly, play down the significance of her gender to that victory, as she has downplayed it throughout the campaign, stating that she’s not running as a woman, but as a candidate of proven experience and capability. She will, nonetheless, go into the record books as the woman who ended a 212-year pattern of male presidents. If Obama makes it, he will put an end to a 212-year pattern of white presidents.

However, going into the record books is, of itself, no great virtue. Lots of people got themselves into The Guinness Book of Records in times past by eating a revolting number of eggs (or worse) in a short period of time.

If we end up with a second — but this time female — President Clinton, it’s questionable that her election will have a big impact on women. Don’t get me wrong. Women (even the ones who wouldn’t vote for her) will be thrilled that someone from the distaff side is in the White House. Some women will see it as the beginning of a newer, gentler era in politics, informed by the unique sensibilities of a woman, and as opening gates for women everywhere.

Dream on, sisters.

In Ireland, we’re now so used to having female presidents that some of the male politicians are getting anxious that the Áras will become synonymous with femininity. Nobody’s saying it out loud, but every time Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly opens her mouth, male political teeth get gritted to grinding point, not because of what she’s saying, but because they see each of her utterances as a step towards an Emily for President campaign.

The more important question is the degree to which having female presidents has changed the life prospects of the rest of the women in Ireland. Take away admiration for the differing ways Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese have done their job. Take away the well-meaning guff about role models, and what are we left with?

In political terms, we’re left with a Dáil chamber where women are few and far between, two or three female ministers — and the Lovely Lucinda Syndrome.

In each Dáil, in recent times, we’ve had a female TD who has won herself disproportionate media space through good looks. Up to this year’s general election, the holder of that dubious distinction was Liz O’Donnell, constantly referred to, offline, by male TDs as “the lovely Liz O’Donnell”. And what harm, I hear you say. No harm at all. It’s just a compliment. It does not demean the individual in any way.

You’re right. I’m sure the heart-stoppingly gorgeous Tom Kitt, for example, wouldn’t mind at all being referred to as the lovely Tom Kitt. He would never see it as a denigration of his abilities or as distracting from the good job he’s done in some of the difficult roles he’s been given. He would know that he was really, really respected by all his colleagues of both sexes, not seen as just a pretty face.

He’s not going to have to worry, anyway. The syndrome applies only to Mná na hÉireann.

This time around, the mantle seems to have fallen on Fine Gael newcomer Lucinda Creighton. It was inevitable, really.

In terms of looks and self-presentation, it could be applied to Mary Hanafin, but you get the feeling that if you called the Minister for Education the lovely Mary, you might lose a lung or a liver. Or both. Plus, the initial letter of Ms Creighton’s first name gives a handy alliteration.

Because the lovely Lucinda has a big brain on her and ambition to match, she’s unlikely to get pompous about her new title.

It’ll do until a better one comes along.