Print This Post
Aug
31
American Princess writes on BlogHer and on her own blog. I’m not that familiar with it, but I spent a few moments there this morning. I like what I found – even though I disagree with it. If I were a conservative woman, particular in her generation (let’s just say I could be her mom – I’m finding I could be the mom of a lot of women who let me befriend them lately though!), I can imagine making very similar arguments in favor of Sarah Palin. Hattip to Denise for linking.
In her posts about Palin, American Princess deploys the debate points I’d make if I thought even for one minute that I could support Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate. But Sarah Palin and I differ on pretty much every single issue (i.e., I’m pro-choice, I believe that creationism is a fabricated construct intended to get religion into the public schools, I’m anti-gun, I’m against drilling in ANWR, and I have ideas about what vice presidents do), so this is a no-brainer for me: on the issues alone, I wouldn’t be voting for her, even if I lived in her hometown of Wasilia or her home state of Alaska, let alone as a VP candidate on the GOP ticket.
That said, the danger in accepting as acceptable all the arguments that American Princess makes in favor of Palin as a totally awesome, appropriate and best selection for the USA’s vice president, following in the footsteps of people like Dick Cheney, Al Gore, Walter Mondale and even George Bush the first, exists in what it means from here on out:
Recognizing, allowing and granting women success when they push for what women like myself have always believed was worth pushing for and using as debate points with employers, when looking for work after having children and claiming that being on the PTA and raising kids more than prepares us for leadership in pretty much any sector:
That those experiences do matter.
However, my gut and other evidence suggests that while the Palin Pick may be the face of feminism, it is a face that is completely detached from the soul, which would make and champion this argument of what, in a life experience, matters, and when.
In real life, not the life of John McCain trying to get elected, when women argue the value of the PTA to potential employers, they get “pffft.” I know. I had this happen to me late last fall. It was absolutely demoralizing, insulting and wrong – to have my literally decades of service and accomplishments – in paid and unpaid roles – consider to be nothing – absolutely nothing, because I have not been employed except as a freelancer, since 2000.
So, if I believed that having Sarah Palin on the GOP ticket would mean that from here on out, we will be giving the political party structures, and every other sector that needs leaders, hell every time they pfffft at the PTA and city council experiences mothers (or fathers for that matter) bring to the table, and we could say, “But look what John McCain said was enough!?,” and the employers would crumble and fall and say, “Ah, yes! Of course!” and women would start to succeed over the pfffts, and women like American Princess would continue to help fight this battle for all the parents who serve on PTAs and city council and have to fight to have those experiences recognized as valuable, then hey – I would love this pick too, even though, as I said, I don’t side with Palin on the issues.
Thing is, of course, that the breaking of the ceiling for women with Palin-like experience is not what this choice is about.
This choice is about helping the man, about getting John McCain elected and not about helping parents who juggle and debate and decide to swap board meetings for PTA meetings. Remember that when Palin references Hillary Clinton’s 18 million cracks, Clinton made those cracks because she was going for the top, not because she was asked to help a man get to where he wants to go.
No one but those trying to make sense of the Palin Pick have even tried to argue this angle – that now America must accept what women like myself have always known: serving on the PTA and raising a family absolutely provides you with great leadership skills and experience.
Why isn’t anyone making that argument?
In part because, serving on the PTA and raising a family does not qualify you for being vice president of the United States. In fact, the Palin Pick actually has the potential for knocking women off the ladder and not propelling them through the ceiling because every time a woman now steps forth to say, “But look! I have what she has!” and still doesn’t get the offer, or the raise or the promotion, we are back where we started.
Finally, does anyone honestly believe that the GOP – or anyone else – will now and forever come forward and offer leadership roles to women with the exact same modicum of experience as Palin, and ask them to bring it on and challenge and get support from those ahead of them when they do challenge?
For example:
Bobby Jindal, age 37, newly elected Louisiana governor – which women would the GOP support against him?
Kevin DeWine – would the Ohio GOP support any female Republican with the resume of a Sarah Palin against him?
John Boehner – the Ohio GOP going to support small-town Ohio female GOP mayors against him?
Or Chris Redfern, the Ohio Democratic Party chair – any women being supported right here right now for that job? I know many women who have as much experience as he has, certainly in comparison to the Palin Pick over the other VP potentials.
If Sarah can be selected over numerous individuals like Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, why not other small-town mayors with the same experience as Palin over individuals like those named above, for far less sweeping roles than vice president?
Because Palin is not on the ticket as a prod to move in the direction I just described, and no one is having her tout the fact that PTA members are good enough, experienced enough and doggone it electable or employable enough to be selected for all kinds of leadership roles.
I don’t know as much about feminism as pretty much all the other women on the feminist listservs I follow, but I’d rather that Hillary tried and fell short than Sarah Palin provide nothing more than a face without a soul that gets ahead.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:52 am August 31st, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Culture, Debates, Gender, Hillary Clinton, Ohio, Politics, Sarah Palin, Sexism, Social Issues, Vice President, WH2008, Women
Comments
19 Responses to “Sarah Palin: Settling for the face of feminism while trading in its soul”
Leave a Reply
2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
by Tips and TricksNews Now
Nailed it, as usual.
One other thing – I’ve done several stories about successful women in politics and the fact is that, in many cases, they get into the system over one issue – be it PTA or a dangerous corner with no stop sign etc. So in that way local contributions can lead to more. It’s just that OTHER issues are what prevail here – the ones you’ve enumerated.
I keep meaning to ask you if you think Karl Rove had anything to do with the Palin Pick. Just a thought that’s been bouncing around my head since Friday.
Given her social positions, I’m not sure she could even reasonably be passed off as the face of feminism — she strikes me as more of a mask.
It’s impressive that she appears to have successfully dealt with being a hocker mom,* while simultaneously running an organization of half a million people (the state of AK). I don’t know how successful I’d be at that task, but I suspect I’d find it pretty tough.
But.
Money will tell the tale. Ignore small donors and cultural conservatives, look at corporate donors. CEO’s. CFO’s. Lobbyists. Business (not ideological) PAC’s. Watch McCain’s donations from these types of sources in the week following the RNC’s convention. If they keep pace with how they’ve been to date, she’s a wash — no effect. If they increase, businesses may think McCain has a realistic shot. If they drop, McCain’s a dead duck.
To truly gauge Palin’s reception as a nominee, follow the GOP’s corporate money. Until then, liberals are just wasting a lot of bandwidth over someone who was clearly never meant to appeal to liberal sensibilities anyway.
~~
* NBC’s Andrea Mitchell hilariously keeps mixing hockey & soccer when she tries to say “hockey mom.”
PS: Want to really impress me? Show me a Calvinball mom!
“…while the Palin Pick may be the face of feminism, it is a face that is completely detached from the soul…”
I guess it depends on what you think feminism is. Here’s Megan McArdle:
“For many, to be a feminist, you have to want to make radical state-sponsored change to the economic system in order to promote equality. You have to grant rape accusers extraordinary presumption of truth-telling. You must endorse a hard line on abortion rights. If you do not agree with these propositions, you are a non-feminist, or an anti-feminist.”
This is exactly like the argument that to be “authentically black” you have to have left-wing views and do poorly in school. Or to not be a self-hating gay, you have to support an increase in the capital gains tax and vote Democrat. It’s an argument for the Democratic plantation.
Here we have a woman who at 44 is the governor of her state- with high approval ratings- has five kids, and has an apparently supportive husband. I mean, my god! If anything, I’d say that she’s the soul of feminism; the face belongs to Andrea Dworkin and Amanda Marcotte.
[...] Sarah Palin: Settling for the Face of Feminism While Trading in Its Soul posted on August 31, 2008 at 7:59 pm [...]
The world will be a better place when there are just as many PTA dads as there are PTA moms.
Palin is not the soul of feminism, but I would say she benefits from the centuries of efforts toward equality and suffrage for women. At the same time, McCain is definitely using her — you nailed that Jill.
McCaine is not using her, she’s getting something out of it. She’s a willing participant in this game he is playing. It makes you think how people, men and women, will essily dismiss the things they say they believe in for power.
Good points made in the article and your discussion on qualifications reminded me of how women, and white women in particular, are treated in the workplace. I am a black woman and have been in the work world for decades. I have too often seen the young white woman come into a workplace with a college degree but no other experience and wala! She lands the big job over other qualified candidates with the same or more credentials! This is the true scenario playing out with Sarah. She’s not qualified and they know it. Yet, She has been compared with Barack Obama’s impressive background and education and leadership. She shows up on the scene–thin resume in hand–and immediately said to be more qualified than him, the democratic nominee of his party after a long hard fought campaign that showed how qualified and intelligent he is. Yet the Repubs and others compare her to Obama to try and diminish him (they rarely compare her to Biden!) They say Obama isn’t qualified but that she is!? It is such a joke. Your articles says that too, but in a more round about way. The Palin pick is a joke in prinicple but a strategic move to play the race card by pitting a white woman against a black man. I know we don’t want to talk about race during this campaign (Barack is not on board with that), but any black person in America who has ever watched as the less qualified candidate got the promotion over you will know what I mean. That folks truly believe that Palin is more qualified than Obama is sad and it makes me wonder if America is really ready. Yet, he has garnered almost 19million votes and has inspired hundreds of thousands to regiister, so maybe we are ready. But Sarah Pallin isnot ready to be vice president/president.
Jackie – on your comment about not wanting to talk about race but here she is? I could not agree more re: thi is the affirmative action that conservatives have decried for decades. I know I have read that even in the minority communities (women included), the value of affirmative action is debated but I support it in the case of historical discrimination.
This is a much longer discussion, I know – but I wanted to repeate what I wrote in this piece – this is affirmative action and the thought bubbles over Mitt Romney et al’s heads say the same things.
[...] Jill Miller Zimon also tackles the idea of feminism and how the Palin selection effects that idea. [...]
You wrote:
” . . . Clinton made those cracks because she was going for the top, not because she was asked to help a man get to where he wants to go.”
Later, you wrote:
“Finally, does anyone honestly believe that the GOP – or anyone else – will now and forever come forward and offer leadership roles to women with the exact same modicum of experience as Palin, and ask them to bring it on and challenge and get support from those ahead of them when they do challenge?
“For example:
“Bobby Jindal, age 37, newly elected Louisiana governor – which women would the GOP support against him?
“Kevin DeWine – would the Ohio GOP support any female Republican with the resume of a Sarah Palin against him?
“John Boehner – the Ohio GOP going to support small-town Ohio female GOP mayors against him?”
I have to ask: Did you get the memo that Palin is the current Governor of Alaska, not the current Mayor of Wasilla?
In doing so, she broke a glass ceiling in Alaska, and she was the top of the ticket, not second fiddle to a man.
She beat an entrenched incumbent within her own party.
So when you ask if I would support a woman to replace DeWine as head of the Ohio GOP, I’d say “sure.” I’d pick Mary Taylor, but it’s not because she’s a woman. It’s because she’s the closest thing we have to a reformer in Ohio, keeping government accountable no matter the political party of the office-holder, and because she demonstrated a capability and willingness to campaign all over the state of Ohio, not just in the SW corner of the state where the base is strongest. I worry that in the statewide contests in 2010, DeWine will rely too heavily on running up margins of victory in SW Ohio and end up on the short end of the stick, because I don’t see much evidence of him building the party in northern Ohio. Taylor’s resume is stronger than DeWine’s, but is weaker than Palin’s. Betty Montgomery has a stronger resume than Taylor or DeWine. Montgomery campaigns in all areas of the state, so I’d be inclined to support Montgomery over DeWine, also. Palin’s resume is stronger than Jindal’s, DeWine’s, Boehner’s, and Taylor’s. Most of the experience of those four are in the legislative branch, qualitatively weaker than the executive branch experience that Palin has.
“I believe that creationism is a fabricated construct intended to get religion into the public schools.”
You do realize that Genesis has been around a tad longer than the American school system, right?
Ugh. I’ve been following your comments over on blogher and decided to jump over here to see what else you had to say, as your comments seems pretty intellligent, but this one jumps the shark for me.
Hi Deirdre – thanks for browsing over!
Why do you feel “this one jumps the shark”?
About Creationism being a construct for getting religion into school, here in Ohio? We have a VERY long history with the Intelligent Design folks, which became so convuluted that even the ID folks in Seattle were disavowing what proponents in Ohio were doing. And I feel very strongly that the entire ID thing is/was only a way to try and make Creationism into a science so as to get it into the public schools.
Likewise, I feel that – and maybe I could have been more clear in that post – that Creationism, when it’s discussed as something that should be “taught along side evolution” as though both belong in a science class, is indeed also a false construct for trying to get that type of learning or discussion into a public school classroom the only way it may seem to be able to get in there.
I promise you, as I sit with my kids’ religious school calendar at my elbow, waiting to be entered into their schedules, I’m quite aware of the history of Genesis – having just returned from Israel two weeks ago today where we visited the City of David, among many many other ancient Biblical places, I know about how long its been around.
But again – thanks for venturing here, thanks for the compliment re: seemed intelligent – but what is it you think jumped the shark?
I suspect that what Dierdre is referring to is the creationism remark. Creationism per se is not “a fabricated construct intended to get religion into the public schools.” Creationism is the religious doctrine that’s being pushed. In that light, Dierdre’s appeal to tradition re Genesis’ longevity is understandable.
What you actually described was the “Intelligent Design” movement. Creationism is the subject matter being advocated; but it is not the political movement or legal strategy. Given the Dover decision, it’s mostly a matter of semantics anyway. I’m not sure it’s shark-jump worthy, unless of course Deirdre is a Cdesign proponentsist (of which I have my suspicions).
Consider: if you walked into a medical exam room and saw a tank full of leeches sitting on the table with a large astrology chart posted on the wall, would you expect quality medical care? Would you even stick around? If not, then why should children be subjected to the academic equivalent in science class?
Creationism is a bunch of quaintly parochial bullshit cooked up by Bronze Age semitic nomads who didn’t know any better. In the modern era, we DO know better, and that mythical nonsense has absolutely ZERO place in the science curriculum of any school. Comparative studies, sure. Science class, fuck no.
[...] It’s a simple fact that my friend Jill Miller Zimon said so well. Palin is “settling for the face of feminism while trading in its soul.” [...]
I understand why the feminists disagree with some of Sarah Palin’s views, like abortion, and I understand their disappointment at loosing Hillary as the first female President, or Vice President. But, now they have a real chance to elect the first ever female Vice President. A woman who exemplifies so many amazing qualities, including her successes and 85% approval rating as Alaska’s governor, mother of five, and the whole nine yards. In addition to breaking the glass ceiling, Palin can finally bring about tremendous reforms for women.
As International abuses keep coming to light regarding women’s rights, including everything from burkas, to white slavery, to honor killings, you would certainly think that women would be tripping over themselves to elevate one of their own to such a high position. What a shame the feminists are so petty that they can’t see the big picture, set aside their conflicting grievances, and make a couple of concessions, in order to progress in such a big way.
Gina – you’ve got some great stuff and some stuff that I don’t see as so great in your comment. I don’t think you are a bot who goes around putting this same comment everywhere – so I hope you aren’t.
The good stuff: you statement of understanding the other side.
The not as good stuff: you’re suggesting that people override the issues that are important to them just to elect a woman. I don’t much like that suggestion. That’s swapping out principle.
As for breaking the ceiling, she won’t be – she’s beneath it, propping up McCain whose head will be above it. That’s how I see it anyway.
But here’s the one thing that, if I heard it from her and saw evidence of it in the work she’s done as mayor and governor, that would shift me even a little bit:
You write, “Palin can finally bring about tremendous reforms for women.
As International abuses keep coming to light regarding women’s rights, including everything from burkas, to white slavery, to honor killings,…”
Gina – there is absolutely ZERO evidence that Palin cares one iota about any of that. She cracked a joke (not funny to me but apparently so some listeners) about community organizing. I simply do not see her as the policy champion of anything related to women’s rights. Not a thing.
And then of course there are the groups like Focus on the Family and Family Research Council and the GOp platform – women’s rights are not enshrined in a way, by those entities, that I can agree with.
I’m not sure why you say ” the feminists are so petty” – feminism isn’t a liberal thing. For one thing, Gov Palin belongs to Feminists for Life – as do many other women.
So – I’d be careful with those labels.