The Many Possible Faces of Yasser Said, The Man Who Pulled The TriggerTexas-born Patricia (”Tissie) Said, formerly of the Owens family, is the mother who lured her two teenage daughters, Sarah and Amina, to their deaths at the hands of their own father this past New Years Day in Dallas. How can a mother do such a thing? Even if her own life was threatened, even if her husband Yasser had literally held a gun to her head and told her to trick her daughters into returning, isn’t a mother supposed to sacrifice herself for her children? Or at least to protect them? What can explain such a perversion of maternal instinct and of the life force itself?

“Tissie” Said is not the first mother to have participated in an honor killing on American soil. In 1989, in St Louis, Missouri, Brazilian-born second wife, Maria Isa, held her daughter Palestina (”Tina”) Isa down for twenty minutes as her father, Zein Isa, a Palestinian Abu Nidal terrorist operative, viciously and repeatedly stabbed her to death. The entire murder had been taped by federal authorities who were tracking the Abu Nidal group. The jury got to hear the girl’s heartbreaking cries and found both parents guilty. (Unsuprisingly, Zein Isa had the same mind-set that Islam Said, the brother of the honor murdered Dallas girls has. Isa said that “he had stabbed his daughter in self-defense, that she had so shamed him, that he had to commit a crime to restore his honor.”)

Palestina tried very hard to please her parents. She was overworked, treated “like dirt,” chronically beaten and constantly abused, both verbally and psychologically. But, like Amina and Sarah Said, Palestina also had academic ambitions–and she had an African-American “boyfriend.” Such Americanized behavior doomed all these honor murdered girls.

Both research and anecdotal evidence document that women collaborate, both directly and indirectly, in honor killings. According to a study which I cite in my 2002 book, “Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman,” Arab girls and women gossip about and slander others girls and women in a way that demands that the men “do something” to restore their families’ honor. Palestina Isa’s three sisters kept pestering their father to “do something about the nigger-loving whore.”

Sometimes, a mother might physically murder her own daughter on her own, by herself, directly, not indirectly. For example, in 2003, on the West Bank, Amira Abu Hanhan Qaoud, brutally murdered her 13 year-old daughter Rofayda who had been raped and impregnated by her two brothers. Amira was quoted as saying that “I had to protect my children. This is the only way I could protect my family’s honor.”

Surely, I am not saying that this mother in Texas murdered her own daughters physically, with her own hands, am I? No, I am not.

Indeed, in Texas “Tissie’s” favor, let me note that in late December, she ran away with her girls, whom she also calls her “angels.” At that time, “Tissie” also admitted to one of my interviewees that Yasser had threatened to kill the girls. In addition, she paid two months rent up front for a place in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where she and the girls were going to live.

Once, long ago, “Tissie” had also admitted that Yasser had been sexually abusing Sarah and Amina when they were seven and eight years old. But she didn’t turn him in–her mother, the girl’s maternal grandmother, did that. And, according to her Owens relatives, “Tissie” laughed it off, “giggled,” minimized it all. “Tissie” stood by her man and she helped the children recant their sworn testimony because otherwise, “daddy would go to jail.” The girls subsequently told relatives that their recantation was false.

After “Tissie’s” own mother had turned Yasser in to the police, “Tissie” kept all the relatives on her side of the family far away from the girls. She and Yasser kept moving, roving, “like nomads,” (or like sociopaths), to escape school or child protective agency scrutiny.

According to my interviewees, “Tissie” also went to jail for her man when she was caught collecting welfare and a housing subsidy based on Yasser’s presumed absence. (In reality, he would sneak into the government subsidized housing at night). “Tissie” also worked as a store clerk, as did her daughters. According to my interviewees, “Tissie,” not Yasser, was the main support of the family. Yasser only worked as a taxi driver “when he felt like it.” And he kept his money to himself–or so they think .

Even now, when her daughters are dead and her man is still on the run, “Tissie” has chosen to live with one of Yasser’s brothers and she has warned her great-aunts not to speak out and not to call this cold-blooded murder an “honor killing.” She claims that her first-born son Islam needs her, and that he has grown up with his first cousins on his father’s side. Indeed, Islam’s need for her–perhaps her need for Islam–is the reason “Tissie” gave for having to return to Yasser, leaving her girls behind somewhere in Oklahoma.

According to my informants, “Islam bosses his mother around. And he stalked his sisters, he spied on them. But Islam also spends all his time at home with his mother. That’s where he’s been ever since he dropped out of school when he was 14. There is something wrong with him.” My informants tell me that “Tissie” could never control her son; that she minimizes, denies, and forgives his “weird, frightening, anti-social behaviors.” He is her wounded child. He still needs her. None of my interviewees are clear about whether Islam Said suffers from a learning disability, a psychiatric condition, or has simply been raised to be an aggressive predator against women with a deep hatred of America.

“It’s all of the above” my interviewees say.

After “Tissie” left her daughters in Tulsa, she returned home to Dallas. And then “Tissie” called her daughters and begged them to come back to Dallas to accompany her to put flowers on their grandmothers’ grave (the very grandmother who, a decade before, had turned their father in for child sexual abuse). “Tissie” told them that Yasser was contrite, that he only wanted to have tea with his daughters and to talk things through.

On television, Islam Said insisted that the boyfriends of Amina and Sarah were the ones who pulled the trigger. I think that “Tissie’s” hand steadied that trigger far more fatefully.

I called “Tissie.” She answered immediately. I told her that I was interested in her side of this story. (l am). She was indignant that I had called “so late,” (it was 9pm), and ordered me to “never call again.” She sounded very angry. Perhaps she was not alone, perhaps her every word was being monitored, both internally and externally. Maybe she was Yasser’s victim too. Maybe mitigating circumstances exist that would diminish the charges that will eventually be brought against her.

I asked my interviewees, four of her female relatives who represent both her maternal and paternal lines, whether they thought that Yasser beat her, whether “Tissie” was afraid of him. All four were adamant: “Tissie” loves him, he never battered her, they never saw any bruises on her.

By contrast, over the years, the Said girls were notoriously bruised, and had red welts visible on their bodies. In one instance, Yasser had embedded one of his daughters’ braces in her lip. “Tissie” covered up each instance. And she never left him because he battered their daughters.

My four informants do not believe that “Tissie” is now being or was ever held hostage. Of course, if she kept herself apart, her relatives might not know such details. Even though they remember incidents in which Yasser did not let “Tissie” leave the house and an incident in which he once blocked her car–”Tissie” could have left at some other time.

Or could she?

I asked my interviewees if “Tissie” is simple-minded, mentally ill, or mentally retarded. They all said no–although they did view her as “very passive.” One female relative thought that she might have been “jealous” of her ambitious, freedom-loving daughters but hastened to add that this was “only her opinion.” All four interviewees did think that, after so many years of marriage to Yasser, that “Tissie ” was probably brainwashed.

Brainwashing is often accomplished by isolating the target from anyone else and immersing her in a culture of like-minded people. Both threats and rewards characterize a brainwashing campaign. This seems a likely possibility in “Tissie’s” case–which, however, does not mean that she is morally or even legally innocent in the matter of her daughters’ abuse and death.

At the beginning of this article, I asked how such a perversion of maternal behavior can be understood. At one level, it is quite simple to understand: “Tissie” behaves in the same way that any normal, uneducated Arab Muslim wife might behave. What makes such behavior unexpected, or culturally “abnormal,” is that “Tissie” was born in America and raised in a Christian (although not in an especially religious) household.

However, like many girls in the Muslim world, (and sadly, among the poor everywhere), “Tissie” dropped out of high school ; she may only have completed the 8th grade. At fifteen, she married Yasser, who apparently presented himself to her family as a wealthy Egyptian “prince”–someone who had property and other holdings back in Egypt. Unlike many American girls who cleave to their families of origin , “Tissie’s” primary alliance is not with her own family but with her son, her husband, and with her husband’s family. This is typical behavior for Arabs and Muslim women but is less typical of Europeans and Americans.

I am indebted to my good friend and colleague, the psycho-analyst and Arabist, Nancy H. Kobrin, for the following insight: What balances such family dynamics out and partially “protects” the women in a culture which otherwise despises and fears them are the practices of arranged marriage to one’s first cousin and the relationship between brothers and sisters . If one’s mother-in-law is also one’s aunt, a daughter-in-law might be safer living with a family with whom she has probably grown up than among complete strangers.

Also, if “Tissie” had Arab Muslim brothers of her own, they might potentially come to her aid against her husband or on behalf of her daughters–but they might also help her husband enforce the rules and customs of Islamic gender apartheid against her. These customs and relationships, which may seem (and which are) “primitive,” actually preserve a peaceful status quo partly by keeping the wealth within one’s own family.

In the Arab and Muslim world–and in “Tissie’s ” world in Dallas , daughters are nothing but “trouble.” Their chastity has to be guarded, their modesty ensured. Otherwise, they will bring shame to their entire family. Among other things, this means that no one will marry the family’s sons or the other daughters. Disobedient daughters are dangerous and expendable.

But “Tissie” lives in Dallas, Texas. Why does she behave as if she lived in the Middle East?

Some of “Tissie’s” female relatives believe that she converted to Islam. However, they are not entirely sure since she has behaved in secretive ways. They have seen (or were told about) photos of “Tissie” and Yasser in Arab dress, posing with guns and knives in exaggerated “jihadic” poses. But they are unclear about whether Yasser and his family are religious or not. Or political. Or criminal. Violent–yes. Murderously “crazy” on the subject of women–yes. Gun-loving–yes.

But some non-Arabs and non-Muslims in America also engage in these behaviors–but not necessarily in all of these behaviors simultaneously: Some own guns and participate in a macho gun culture. Some batter and stalk their wives and physically and sexually abuse their daughters. Non-Arab and non-Muslim mothers also stand by their batterers (who may have girlfriends, and who, like Yasser, may leave for extended periods of time); and, they have been known to scapegoat their daughters for having “provoked” paternal lust.

But, such parents do not usually kill their daughters. And, if they do, they are seen as monsters, not heroes. Their families often give them up. They do not shelter them. Their families testify against them. (Recently in Israel, which in many ways is a western democracy, the women of an Arab Muslim family all testified against their men after the ninth female relative had been honor murdered). Our western culture has at least criminalized wife- and daughter-battering, incest, stalking, and femicide. While we may not always be successful in preventing or prosecuting such behaviors, we know that they constitute crimes.

But, if many kinds of people (Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, native-Indians) engage in some or all of the above behaviors (wife-and daughter-battering, incest, etc.) what might we have to do to prevent honor killings in America? Can we eject all people whose cultural backgrounds value honor killings? Can we refuse to allow people from such cultures to become residents or citizens here? Can we “test” them on these issues? Or pre-educate them? If this approach became known public policy, some people might simply lie.

What if people who come from an honor killing culture desire asylum from it? What if the women of such cultures, transplanted to American shores, are relying upon American law to prevail and to save their lives? What is the “American” thing to do?

I do not have a simple answer. However, Sarah and Amina Said were American citizens. America was their culture. Their desire to live as Americans, and not as Arab Muslims in Egypt is precisely what doomed them. They were each one of ours. We failed them. How can we do better?

I will adress this question in a future article. Meanwhile, I urge my readers to please send me your best suggestions about how American law enforcement, school, social service officials, legislators, mental health, and religious professionals may prevent the next honor killing in America.

I would like to acknowledge the brave and informed assistance of Gail Gartrell, Jill Owens, Joyce Boucher, and Connie Maggio. You may listen to a blog radio interview that I did with three of these women HERE.

PRESS HERE TO LISTEN TO MY INTERVIEW WITH THE MURDERED GIRLS’ FEMALE RELATIVES.

Islam Said blames his sisters’ deaths on their boyfriends. On March 8, 2008, the Lewisville High School celebrated the lives of the honor murdered Amina and Sarah Said. Local media was there. I watched as Islam grabbed the microphone and characterized his sisters’ boyfriends as “gang members” who “killed his sisters.” He also said: “They pulled the trigger, not my dad. My dad is the victim here.” PRESS HERE

http://www.nbc5i.com/newsarchive/15546408/detail.html

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/tv/stories/wfaa080308_wz_saidsisters.36b3726f.html

It is absolutely crucial for Westerners, especially Americans, to understand his mind-set. This is a cultural and political mind-set which has nothing to do with the color of one’s skin and everything to do with one’s political ideology. Despite heated denial and much controversy, it is also a mind-set which is correlated with the practice of Islam in its current, highly politicized jihadic mode.

Thus, when anyone tries to describe the crimes against humanity which are committed in the name of Islam (the religion, not the man whom I quote above), both Muslims and politically progressive non-Muslim Westerners cry “racism.”

But this is a primitive/totalitarian tactic used to silence those who dare to expose injustice and who wish to resist terror and tyranny. The charge of “racism” is a rallying cry which is first used against dark-skinned Muslim and ex-Muslim dissidents. The lovely dark-skinned ex-Muslim feminist freedom-fighter, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, has been characterized as a “racist” in Holland and in the pages of America’s Nation magazine. This fascist tactic works best among guilty, liberal Westerners who really do want to atone for or end the world’s awful history of racism.

The West crusaded against and finally abolished slavery. Many of us remain conflicted about its terrible legacy. Muslims have never launched a campaign against their own racism. The Arab Muslim slave trade continues to this day in many forms, both in the Middle East and in the West, especially among United Nations diplomats who are posted here.

Muslim employers in Saudi Arabia are not apologizing to their Philippina servants whom they imprison and routinely force to work around the clock as domestics and sex slaves. Ethnic Arab Muslims in Sudan are not guilty about gang-raping black African girls and women in Darfur–no more than they are guilty about genocidally exterminating black Africans who are also Muslims, Christians, and animists.

It’s the same mind-set that inspires Islam Said to view his father, Yasser Abdul Said, the honor murderer, as the true “victim.” The defender of the faith (whether that faith is conceived of as one’s religion or as one’s family “honor”), is always the glorious “victim.” Yes, even suicide killers who blow up innocent civilians in Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan and who gun down Jewish children in religious schools in Jerusalem are viewed as victims and martyrs. Their supporters do not view them as murderous aggressors nor do they view themselves as such.

While I would like to attribute Islamic gender and religious apartheid to a cluster of factors including normalized childhood abuse, poverty, a lack of education, and to a super-aggressive and non-introspective cultural psychology, (see above), it is also increasingly clear that many wealthy and well-educated Muslims, who live in Muslim lands and in the West, share the same views. Like Islam Said, quoted at the beginning of this article, many well-educated Muslims still view women as animals, (yes, perhaps as “sacred” animals), and they still view Jews and other infidels as unclean, poisonous prey.

The very trait which has been hated in religious Jews (the desire to live “apart,” to eat differently and perhaps to also dress differently), is deeply respected, even lionized when it appears among religious Muslims. Increasingly, all across America, Muslim women are wearing headscarves and burqas–in university settings and on the streets; Muslim communities are demanding and receiving separate eating and washing facilities, separate hours for recreational facilities or separate facilities, etc.

If such outward behaviors were not intimately linked to dangerous, often murderous apartheid beliefs and behaviors, I would have no objection. But that is not the case. For example, based on extensive interviews that I have done with the female relatives of the murdered Texas teenagers, it is clear that:

a) Amina and Sarah were expected to wear headscarves. Their failure to do so, their “hidden” lives as normal American teenagers, doomed them.

b) Amina and Sarah were expected to enter into arranged marriages against their will to much older Egyptian men whom they had never met. Their refusal to do so doomed them.

c) Amina and Sarah were expected to keep quiet about the horrific sexual, physical, and psychological abuse which was heaped upon them by their father, mother, and brother. Their failure to do so doomed them.

d) Amina and Sarah were not supposed to have “boyfriends.” At the very least, their friends, both male and female, were not supposed to be Christians. The fact that they were friendly with Christian male teenagers doomed them.

e) Amina and Sarah were supposed to learn to hate America and to choose Shari’a law. Their failure to do so doomed them.

These are only some of the “rules” that Amina and Sarah were expected to obey. One of my informants has quoted their brother Islam, who often stalked his sisters, as saying: “They knew the rules. They broke them.” Islam is saying that it is their fault that his father had to kill them.

Thus, whenever you see a woman in a face veil, headscarf, or burqa, it is very likely that these rules also apply to her.

For the record: Let me again repeat what I have written before, namely, that there are many individual Muslims who are personally peaceful and who favor human rights for everyone, even for women and infidels. There are also individual Muslims who oppose and who have fled Islamic apartheid regimes. However, most Muslim religious leaders do not condemn the barbarism committed in the name of their religion. (A brave handful do).

There were also individual Germans in the Nazi era who did not personally hate the mentally ill, Jews, gypsies, anarchists, homosexuals, or American and British soldiers; a few even risked their lives to save such targeted “enemies.” However, most Germans (and Poles, Austrians, Ukrainians, etc.) chose to opportunistically profit from the persecution of the Jews and refused to risk anything in order to resist Hitler. Their failure to do so meant that they enabled and collaborated with him. To quote Edmund Burke: “All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men (and women) to do nothing.”

I stand ready and willing to honor and to work with all those Muslims and non-Muslims who oppose Islamic gender and religious apartheid. Our lives depend upon such heroism.

“I have been warned to shut up. But when Yasser Abdul Said killed those girls he did not just spill Muslim blood on American soil. He shed my blood. I am not going to be quiet. I made a promise at their funerals that I would speak out.”

I am talking to Gail Gartrell, the great-aunt of Amina and Sarah Said who were honor murdered by their father, Yasser Said, on New Year’s Day, 2008. (I have written about this tragic case before for Pajamas Media.) HERE http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/phyllischesler/2008/01/
As of this writing, Yasser Said has not yet been captured.

The girls were murdered in Irving, Texas, an area with a large Muslim population that is also known to some experts as a place where Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood may be active. Gail and the other female relatives with whom I have spoken believe that Yasser Said is “possibly some kind of terrorist. I was only recently told that Yasser always seemed to have a lot of guns, machineguns–they’re illegal here–but handguns too.” Gail tells me:

“It’s another face of jihad. These men come here from Egypt, they marry American women in order to become American citizens. The American wives convert to Islam. Then, they have children who are natural-born American citizens–but who are raised to hate America and to want to live under shari’a law. Then, these men expect their teen-age American daughters to marry much older Muslim men from Egypt in arranged marriages. I know that Yasser wanted Amina to marry someone from Egypt.”

On March 8, 2008, nine relatives, who live in Texas and who are Christians, gathered on the spot where Amina and Sarah were murdered to “celebrate their lives.” The spot is right near a shooting range and shots continued to ring out as they and their Minister spoke. (Gail told me that here is another example of Yasser knowing “exactly what he was doing. He did not want anyone to pay attention to a gun going off when he shot his daughters dead.” )

The girl’s own mother, “Tissie” (Patricia) Said, was not at the March 8th Celebration. She is the one who effectively lured her daughters to their deaths. Also not there was their brother, Islam Said, Yasser and “Tissie’s” first-born son.

Gail is proud that her great-niece Amina refused to accept an arranged marriage, glad that they were both brave enough to run away. Both girls had non-Muslim boyfriends. Neither girl wanted to wear hijab. Clearly, these American-style choices are all capital crimes to someone like Yasser Said.

After my original articles ran, Gail Gartrell, Amina and Sarah’s great-aunt, reached out to me. I have now talked with her, with two other great-aunts: Joyce and Jill, and with Connie, who is “Tissie’s” sister.

Gail, Connie, Jill, and Joyce are all risking their lives in speaking out. Here’s an idea of what they are saying.

That Yasser is probably still hiding out in Texas; that his brothers are hiding him; that Yasser and his brothers may have committed another honor murder in the past. They were allegedly heard plotting to kill their own sister when she threatened to leave her husband; that Yasser beat and sexually assaulted his two daughters; that “Tissie,” their mother, both denied and enabled the sexual and physical abuse.

Since the double honor murder, “Tissie” Said has been living with a brother-in-law (the murderer’s brother). She has broken with her Texas female relatives and has warned them to shut up. Here’s what Gail Gartrell has to say:

“Tissie” is a dead woman, no matter what happens. They will kill her if she leaves. But they will also kill her even if she stays. Why? Because she once dared to run away with the girls, if only briefly. But she came back to Yasser and she convinced the girls to come back. I believe that they will kill her because she ran. ”

I will be publishing a series about this double honor murder. I will also post a radio interview with Sarah and Amina’s brave female relatives later this week. Stay tuned.

BREAKING RELATED SPOOKY NEWS: Two African models, both of whom were anti-FGM activists, have been found dead in Europe. As Fausta Wertz asks, “is this a coincidence?” Is this another kind of cultural honor murder? See Fausta’s blog HERE
faustasblog.com/2008/03/missing-top-models-and-other-sunday.html

ORIGINAL STORY
There was a time when feminist groups did high concept performance art/political theatre as a way of shocking, enlightening, and entertaining us all. That time has not passed. In the past, the late, great art critic, Arlene Raven, kept me apprised of whatever Suzanne Lacey and others were doing–and they did great things.

Now, in honor of International Woman’s Day, (March 8th), a number of anonymous European feminist groups has expanded their mission to veil-and-shroud the female statues and monuments in the cities of Moscow, Finland, Germany. In their press release they state that they wish to “inspire the public to discussion concerning Islamisation and associated taboo subjects. ” Thus far, they have veiled eight statues with a Burqa or a headscarf. Each statue has been fitted with a signboard which compares western-style concepts of gender equality and human rights to be contrasted with a quote from the Qu’ran. The press release further states:

“The aim of the campaign is to refer to the creeping Islamisation endangering the European idea of UNITY IN DIVERSITY and other similar cultural achievements of the liberal thinking world. Particularly, the phenomenom that Muslim women wear increasingly Burqa or headscarfs, is a visible expression of the challenge and threat to our liberal societies with their values such as women’s rights, democracy, liberal and secular thinking.

Through our action we want to show that there exist taboo subjects in a certain religious movement…,It is not racist to point out these issues, it is racist to keep ourselves from protecting and advocating the rights of the women in the Muslim world, whether they live in foreign countries or in ours. So, where are the women’s rights activists who used to stand up for women’s rights for the Western women in the our world? There is no reason and no need to leave these Muslim women alone without help in sight.”

Well, I am in complete agreement with this goal and have staked my reputation on it. I am saddened that people can no longer safely use their own names or the name of their group to express their ideas–lest they be mocked as “racists,” stalked, exiled, imprisoned, and murdered for them. This is now the case for so many Muslim dissidents in the Muslim world–and for civilians everywhere who are at the mercy of terrorist intimidation.

For more information: http://veiledstatues.blog.de/

LINK to the pictures:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/veiled_statues

LINK to the press release and former actions:

http://veiledstatues.blog.de/

.

This column might offend or at least suprise many people, including myself. It is the column in which I urge those who live in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont to vote for Hillary Clinton in the upcoming primaries.

Thinking as an individual and on an issue by issue basis, as opposed to thinking as an ideologue or party member, ususally offends everyone. Changing one’s mind as a function of the historical moment also confuses people and leads to charges of “flip-flopping” or opportunism.

No, I am talking about myself, not about Hillary Clinton. But the observation applies to her as well.

We are at war and voting to defend ourselves is a prudent and responsible move; it is not a treacherous or “dumb macho” move. Hillary Clinton voted “for the war” and she was wise to do so at the time. Yes, perhaps we should have invaded Iran, the Pakistani tribal areas, and Saudi Arabia, not just Afghanistan and Iraq; perhaps the war against totalitarian barbarism is unwinnable by both military and educational means –although win we must or we are doomed; perhaps we should have sent more troops early on and equipped them more efficiently–but the “surge” now seems to be working. Let’s give Clinton credit for that.

Not all feminists oppose self-defense. On the contrary. Many of us pioneered a battered woman’s right to self-defense and a woman’s right to enter previously male-only fields, including that of the armed forces. It is true: Organized feminism has a lousy track record when it comes to supporting the military, including women in the military; many feminists supported only those military women who alleged rape or sexual harassment but not those military women who wanted to become career officers. Read Erin Solaro’s excellent book on this subject: “Women In The Line of Fire: What You Should Know About Women in the Military.”

Not all feminists view John McCain negatively because he is a genuine bona fide war hero –I certainly do not. His suffering on behalf of our country was heroic and what he did with his life afterwards in terms of public service has also been heroic. I have not yet studied his voting record and proposed policies in the domestic and foreign policy areas and will obviously do so but in the near future, not tommorrow. This is the historical moment in which registered Democratic Americans must choose between Clinton and Obama.

My son has done volunteer work for Clinton ’s campaign but he really “believes that the two Democratic contenders are “99% similar.” He has implored me not to sound too hysterical/polemical/”racist ” when I write about Obama. I think that my son is representative of many Americans who are between 18-30 and who “groove” to black rap, athletic, and entertainment stars and who may unconsciously view Obama similarly, as a “political” star. My son’s generation views such African-American stars as “sexy,” (never mind that such eroticized adoration might be another more disguised form of racism); my point is that young Americans take our hard-won feminist gains for granted. Women in power are not “sexy,” we’re kinda like Schoolmarms who may be right but who are…no fun.

This generation think they are politically correct about racism and feel that voting for someone because they are African-American (or because they are both white and African-American) is a “cool” or even redemptive thing to do. Here’s where I sigh. The young are always too young to recognize a cult in formation, too breathless, too optimistic to recognize the possible beginnings of fascism.

No, I am not saying that Obama is a fascist but that his cult-like following is ripe for the taking. Here’s where I agree with Herr Doktor Freud: Life itself is tragic. And this moment in history is essentially a tragic one too. Failing to understand this is a fatal flaw –our Achilles heel if you will.

Clinton, unlike Obama, is a known quantity. She has not waffled–at least not anymore than any independent thinker and politician is obliged to do. Clinton has worked very hard in the Senate and is very good on all the core domestic issues: women, children, education, health care, etc. She is unfairly hated–not because she is married to “that man;” and not because she has collaborated with him or at least profited from her husband’s corruption and abuse of power but because she is a woman who actually cares about women’s rights.

There, I’ve said it. ‘Tis true, the media (which if oft perceived as far too politically correct–and by me!) still remains sexist to the core. Yes, one can both walk and chew gum at the same time. Thus, the media has barely challenged Obama but has done nothing else but challenge Clinton. Often viciously. And non-stop.

But, most importantly: Not enough women are bonding to elect the first woman Presidential candidate who really has a chance to win. I have discussed all the possible reasons for why women sabotage each other or do not behave in team-like ways in both my 1998 book “Letters to a Young Feminist” and in my 2002 book “Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman.”

Feminists are also not bonding to elect Clinton. What began as a pro-peace and pro-Obama petition launched by Katha Pollitt of Nation magazine in New York City has gone national and attracted at least 1000 or more signatures. The signatures are very instructive. They belong to many women whom I know personally but whose politics have always been more Marxist or socialist than feminist. I and others have fought with them for at least 40 years because of this distinction. Many of the signatories are tenured and Distinguished Professors, celebrated artists, activists, authors, and politicians such as Kathleen Chalfant, Barbara Ehrenreich, Ronnie Eldridge, Mary Gordon, Marilyn Hacker, Alice Kessler Harris, Frances Kissling, Margaret Randall, Susan Sarandon–and many of the high profile feminist faculty at my old university, the City University of New York.

Of course, they have the absolute right to prefer and to campaign for Obama and I have the absolute right to do so for Clinton. It’s what makes our country great.

For those in the know: Please appreciate that I am actually in agreement with Gloria Steinem and Robin Morgan on this one. (This does not mean that I agree with them on other issues, believe me).

As for tommorrow: May the best woman win! And then onward to the floor of the Democratic Convention and to the election itself.

This is Part One of a two-part series.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the New York Times recently run a front-page but barely factual story about Senator McCain’s alleged improper or romantic relationship with a much-younger lobbyist? Today, the Times has buried an in-depth, highly factual report of Senator Obama’s possibly improper relationship to Tony Rezko, a Chicago real estate developer who goes on trial for corruption tommorrow; the article appears on page 25. According to the Times, “the Obamas obtained their dream house” through Rezko who also “bought an empty lot next door.” Isn’t this front page material given that the Texas and Ohio primaries take place on Tuesday? Given their bias, why did the Paper of Record even bother printing this artcle at all?

This reminds me of how the New York Times buried its coverage of the Holocaust against the Jews of Europe on its back pages–and I am talking about the real Holocaust, not about the trendy, Orwellian, inflammatory use of the phrase to further demonize the Jewish state which has been undertaken by the international media. Recently, Reuters and the BBC, both claimed that Israel, a country whose civilians have been under relentless attack by rockets launched against them both by Hamas and by Al Qaeda–and from an utterly unoccupied Gaza–had finally threatened to take some self-defensive and self-protective action. The British media reported that the Israeli Deputy Defense Minister had threatened a “holocaust” against the Palestinians, most of whom had voted the rocket-launching Hamas into power and none of whom are actively resisting their reign of fundamentalist tyranny.

Good Germans–moderate Muslims; a great idea but if the “good” people do not actively resist and oppose the “bad” people then, at the end of the war, they are seen to have collaborated with evil in order to save their own lives or to profit from the misfortunes of a scapegoated group.

For reasons like this, years back I started reading the the mainstream media back to front. And, when they savage a film–I go see it.

Dear Readers: Please share your favorite media stories with me.