![](http://library.vu.edu.pk/cgi-bin/nph-proxy.cgi/000100A/http/web.archive.org/web/20121205220833im_/http:/=2fs.huffpost.com/images/quickview/gear_animation.gif)
Madeleine Albright once said, "Anybody who thinks the world would be a better place if it were run by women doesn't remember high school." She may have a point.
Most research into the lives of teenage girls reveals a world of alphas and betas. Women never forget on which side of the social fault line they spent their formative years, which is why many studies show that who we are in high school may determine who we become as adults. (Men, generally speaking, can't relate. As boys, their social demarcations were less subtle -- wedgies, pushing one another into lockers -- and therefore likely not as lasting). In contrast, the hierarchy that women establish among themselves, and for themselves, in high school often far outlasts those four years.
In high school, the alpha girls dominate. They rule fashion, set the lexicon, and make the ironfisted judgments about who is in and who is out. The beta girls, by contrast and in as equally gross a generalization, are accomplished. They get the grades. They excel in sports. They play instruments. They run the student council. But while they are known, they are not generally revered. Science has proven these categorizations are lasting: A recent study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that girls who were more popular in high school go on to make more money than those who were not, largely because they're more likely to understand the "rules of the game" socially, and know how to gain acceptance and support.
As supporters rally for a possible Hillary Clinton bid for president in 2016 -- though she has said, more than once, that she will not run -- I think about that, the idea of high school hierarchy. I remember the power players in my own high school. I think about how far and how long we carry the social successes, or burdens, of our adolescence. And I wonder: What role will that thinking have in Clinton's chances of becoming the first female president?
Though just four years ago, when she ran the first time, women were divided on Clinton. Now, however, the soon-to-be former Secretary of State's popularity is sky high. She has proven herself a strong leader and advocate of women's rights, and a key member of the political party a majority of female voters support. She places value on herself and on family, citing among her reasons for vacating the position of Secretary of State wanting to exercise, travel, and be available to the possibility of grandchildren.
But it's not just what she's done that has earned Clinton this seemingly newfound popularity. It's who she is -- proof that our propensity to turn to labels to categorize, and vet, one another is a hard habit to break. This year, Clinton has been called, at turns, "the coolest person on the planet" and "The James Dean of our generation." In April, much fanfare was made after she was photographed "swilling beer and hitting the dance floor" at a Cuban bar while visiting Colombia with President Obama. Obama, in contrast, who did not go out that night, was painted -- even if somewhat jokingly -- as a boring stick in the mud with no friends. The Internet meme "Texts from Hillary," which published fictional, and hilarious, texts sent from the Secretary of State, further cemented the growing obsession with Clinton's dual personas, especially after she submitted one herself, and signed it "Hillz." Here was a woman so many other women could either relate to or emulate: A woman who got things done -- and then went and had a beer.
Why does it matter? Part of the problem with Clinton in the past has been that we have not quite been able to pinpoint what sort of girl she was, or is. Is she the alpha girl who is winning just like she always did? Or is she the beta girl who, forgetting her place, wants to walk right past the cool kids table to sit in the most powerful chair on earth? Laura Sessions Stepp, who writes extensively about adolescents and families, has introduced the idea of a third subset of girls. "Gamma girls" are smart, accomplished, funny, friendly, and so universally well liked that they transcend alpha and beta. I buy into the idea of the existence of these gamma girls, except that I don't think the gammas are created whole. Instead, I think they came from the emotional ranks of alphas and betas, but have just repackaged themselves on the power of their intellectual and emotional intelligence.
I would say Hillary is a gamma, except for that part about being universally well liked. But she's getting there. Like every type of girl back in high school, she has her detractors, and women are not traditionally the biggest supporters of one another, though that's beginning to change, too. Professional women may not like her because no matter what they have accomplished, she has accomplished more. Older women, though historically among her strongest supporters, may not like her because she is too much "like a man," willing to do what a girl's got to do to get what she wants. Younger women might not like her because they may see her as one of the over-50, empty-nested cohort of women prone to experiencing their own private, privileged summers.
But then, of course, the beer. And the photos of her dancing the rumba at that Cartagena nightclub. Could Hillary Clinton be the ultimate gamma, after all? Could she transcend categorization?
Time will tell. But it does matter. Because even if we reinvent ourselves after high school, and then reinvent that reinvention many times over as adults, I don't think any of us ever fully escapes the gravitational pull of our middle and high school years. The people you like now are very likely to be the same people you liked then; the same people who treated you well -- and whom you treated well -- are likely the same as today. Don't believe me? Try asking your friends who Clinton reminds them of among the girls in their high school. Almost everybody has an answer. But chances are it's different than it was even four years ago.
This first appeared on HelloGiggles
Follow Dr. Peggy Drexler on Twitter: www.twitter.com/drpeggydrexler
Lincoln Mitchell: A Clinton Campaign Would Help Obama
Hillary Clinton: Finally The Cool Kid
Hillary Clinton Gets Hip On Tumblr, Becomes The Coolest Chick In ...
How Hillary Clinton Got Hot After Years of Being Stuck With a Cold ...
Previewing Your Comment.
This comment has not yet been postedFor example,
1. After Japan's devastating nuclear melt downs, was it "cool" for Mrs Clinton to tell Japan that the U.S. wants them to continue with nuclear energy:
http://enenews.com/nikkei-clinton-personally-pressured-japan-leader-to-keep-nuclear-power-as-president-obama-wishes-it
2. Was it "cool" for Mrs. Clinton to sign a pact with Japan to "continue buying seafood from Japan, despite that food not being tested for radioactive materials."
http://seniorcitizenspublicsquare.com/2012/03/30/hillary-clinton-signed-a-pact-with-her-counterpart-in-japan-agreeing-that-the-u-s-will-continue-buying-seafood-from-japan-despite-that-food-not-being-tested-for-radioactive-materials/
3. Was it "cool" for Mrs. Clinton to not "be shy" about pushing nuclear technology to the Czech Republic?
http://www.voanews.com/content/clinton-pushing-us-nuclear-sale/1557260.html
Let's be clear:
Japan has been devastated by their nuclear meltdowns.
Radiation is in their food and water.
Children of Japan are sick and are testing with radiation in their thyroid glands.
If Mrs. Clinton or any leader was really "cool," they would be banging the drums loudly for the health of Japanese children and doing everything to help them.
Lastly, look at this photo of a Japanese child being checked for radiation exposure.
And tell me, is this "cool" to ignore?
http://www.sott.net/image/image/s3/76146/full/Japan_radiation_290x300.jpg
Thank you.
I was a supporter of hers and disgusted by women who purport to support women, who fled to Obama because the actuality of a woman as president was unthinkable. Perhaps they did not actually trust women or, conversely, liked to rally for women who were underdogs, but cared less for winners.
In any case, I have always thought Clinton to be amazingly bright, resilient, complicated, flawed, wise and funny and comfortable in her own skin, a perfect president. She long ago proved herself capable enough and experienced enough got the presidency. No extra "proof" was needed.
But, alas, she will not run again. Age, money, the allure of other pursuits will negate this possibility.
The author's comment "Why does it matter? Part of the problem with Clinton in the past has been that we have not quite been able to pinpoint what sort of girl she was, or is..." does not rise to the level of excellence that Clinton has attained.
Silly. It may be "the problem" with the author; it's not a problem with Hillary.
At that time, every deep and shallow wave of attack will surge forward. It's difficult for many to recall how viciously Ms. Clinton was attacked during President Clinton's campaigns, and especially during his terms in office.
It was an unending stream of vitriol. And it is currently being stored up, waiting to repeat itself, perhaps even amplify itself, in a campaign for the top office.
None of these streams of public discussion are making any press today because Ms. Clinton is deliberately keeping focus on her excellent performance of a non-political job: that of Secretary of State.
But the instant that she announce her candidacy, the locks will be opened and all of it will spew forth.
I am likely to support Hillary if she chooses to run, but in a contested Democratic primary (and there's every indication that there will be one in 2016) I still do not forget the covert and overt racism that Hillary employed against President Obama during the primary season.
That was a _major_ black mark against her campaign, and against her personally.
Just as the sexism that President Obama's campaign surrogates used against Ms. Clinton was a major black mark on the President.
Not by my lights.
Intelligent, sharp, focused, calculating...yes, she is all of those.
Effective? Well semi, but even semi is a step up from her predecessors. At least she's not as dishonest as Rice was, actually serving a broader national agenda rather than a narrow one serving a criminal clique.
I'm not sure how she'd be as President, not because she's a female, but rather because she serves a party that has become Republican Lite, and shows zero inclination to regulate the behavior of those who caused the economic meltdown. I voted for a woman this last election, Jill Stein of the Green Party. Gender doesn't determine capability.
All this talk of Alphas and Betas just tells me some folks never outgrew high school, probably referring to them as "the best years of my life". To them I say: grow up please, and understand that the social trivialities of high school have little bearing on the pragmatic demands of running a nation. Presenting Ms. Clinton in this light trivializes both her and the office of the President.
Alpha and beta are so 10 years ago.
Hillary is a driven political animal not to be taken lightly. Here's a thought; President Obama sent her to the ME when that scrap between Israel and the Palestinian broke out. That fight shortly afterwards stopped. Is it a coincidence?
Factor this, our President sends a woman to these countries as our Secretary of State. These guys aren't famous for being accommodating and respectful to women, right? Who does he send? Hillary, lol. If you think she makes some of us nervous, I'm sure they are intimidated as well.
I think she is doing a great job. My only critique is her skills with the Russians.
She had all those qualifications before; too bad you did not realize it when she was the candidate.
She's never going to run for President again. Age. Money. Stress. Once was plenty.
That's the most ridiculous notion I've heard recently (and there's a steep competition.)
You don't climb at the top of the ladder if you "have no friends." The idea that President Obama has no friends is naive. "Boring"?? Universally viewed as one of the coolest, hippest statesmen of all times, here and in the world, he needn't dance and sip beers in local bars to appear cool. Cool is much more--demeanor, mentality, sharpness, a way to be and behave.
Hillary has always struggled with "cool". She has connections (and friends), but she's never appeared cool. How she comes across--pedantic, sanctimonious, stiff and cold--has been her major issue. Opposite of cool. Her books were an effort to tamper that. Bill's affair helped her image some. And then she ran in 2008. Unluckily, her opponent happened to be the King of Cool. She had no chance. Had it been John Kerry, she might have won.
Today, she's transforming her image for 2016--dancing, drinking, carrying her hair loose. We'll see.
I like Hillary and hope she runs in 2016. But the idea that she's the cool kid, while Obama's not, is as delusional as a 2012 Republican pundit.
As for Hillary, I was disappointed when she didn't win in the primaries and have often thought she would have been the better choice but at this point I think she needs to get her life back and get some rest. I like the idea of seeing her on our Supreme Court as some are suggesting.