Sexism: Suck it up.
The past week or so has been an interesting time in politics. Of course the party conventions have been going on. A great deal of speechifying has been done, many brickbats tossed in both directions. The more interesting thing that has come out of both conventions though is the sudden holier than thou attitude that politicians and pundits (not pundints, John) have suddenly adopted towards women. Leave us remember that American politics is the biggest “gentleman’s club” (sadly without lap dances..for the most part) on the planet. With very few exceptions it’s members are all old white men in suits and ties. Suddenly though, with the nomination of Governor Palin as the republican veep candidate, the Red side of the aisle has gone all “sensitive”. It seems that it’s now unnacceptible to ask any question of and about a woman candidate that casts her in anything other than a warm rosy light.
When her dedication to her family (incedentally this is a point raised to me by two women) is questioned, it’s sexist. When her preparedness to become POTUS ( very real possibility given McCain’s age) is questioned it’s sexism. When the “elite media” reveals that she may not have the “eye popping integrity” that she says she has, it’s sexism. When her overall level of experience is questioned (a central issue in the Republican platform) it’s sexism . Well that’s a convenient way of “answering ” those perfectly legitimate questions without actually having to defend your candidate. Remember that there is a relatively important job at stake here. You cannot reasonably expect that some questions should be off limits when asked to only one candidate. This seems to suggest that a candidate ought to get a bye on specific issues simply BECAUSE of her gender..Where’s your sexism now?
The republicans are cynically using the sexism card to manipulate disaffected clintonistas into voting for a party whose ideology is diametrically opposed to theirs. How condescending. The assumption that women are not smart enough to see through this is the epitome of real sexism and the antithesis of everything that Hilary Clinton represents.
Suck it up repubs.. A change IS coming.
princess slea Said,
September 12, 2008 @ 6:55 am
questioning her dedication to her family definitely IS sexist. no one questioned if JFK was dedicated to his family when he ran for president (or any other man who had young children when they ran).
is it because it’s a woman’s responsibility to be the primary caregiver?
i’m not knocking the women who ARE the primary caregivers as I happen to be one myself. I do disagree (not saying YOU feel this way but it seems to be implied by all these people questioning her dedication) that because she is a mom that she somehow isn’t capable of caring for her family AND running the country. (i’m not saying she IS capable of running the country because i haven’t made my mind up yet but I would not take her off the list simply because she has “other” responsibilities.)
It’s no secret, a strong, smart woman can multi-task better than a man on any given day.
Chimp Said,
September 12, 2008 @ 9:38 am
Re the multi-tasking: Certainly true. Re the questioning her dedication to her family: The only people who had mentioned this to me were women and I hadn’t honestly considered it before that. Their point being that how much care was her baby going to get (even assuming her husband would quit his job in order to provide said care).Is it sexist if women cite that as a concern?
My main point however was and still is that the republicans have now co-opted sexism as a blind to prevent any serious criticism of their VP candidate. I wonder if it’s now sexist of Charles Gibson to have asked her if she supported the Bush Doctrine when she clearly had no idea what he was talking about? Was he just asking that because he saw her as a “stupid woman”? Or is it, as with most lines of inquiry, perfectly legitimate given the job that she’s applied for? HINT: the answer is the last one
princess slea Said,
September 12, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
no need to patronize. of course it’s not sexist of him to ask, but it is sexist if you assume she doesn’t know because she is a “stupid woman.” the same way that it’s racist if someone assumes obama doesn’t know something because he is “just black.”
yes, it’s still sexist if the person asking is the same race, color, gender. AND, quite frankly i think it’s sad that another woman would not believe in “woman” enough to know she can be more than “just a mom.” sounds like the women you are talking to need some self empowering seminars (unless the said women are women I know and love and in that case, maybe they were just thinking out loud and didn’t REALLY mean that a woman’s place is home with her kids.)
reminds me of a funny The Office skit when Michael is trying to teach Diversity and has everyone put labels of minorities on their foreheads. they were directed to talk to people in stereotypical ways and Pam told Dwight that “based solely on stereotype…he maybe wasn’t such a great driver.” and Dwight immediately said “I’m a WOMAN, damnit!”. (he was asian btw). In the same scene, Kevin asked Angela “you want to get high?” She said coldly “no” and he said “i think you do…mon.”
Oscar had a card on his forehead that said “West Nile” LOL.
BTW, MY main point was and still is that ALL the people in politics are using whatever card it is that they can pull out. It’s all about winning (or are you so far up obama’s butt that you actually believe he is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? oops, don’t go pulling the homophobe card on me now.)
Chimp Said,
September 12, 2008 @ 5:19 pm
“MY main point was and still is that ALL the people in politics are using whatever card it is that they can pull out. It’s all about winning (or are you so far up obama’s butt that you actually believe he is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? oops, don’t go pulling the homophobe card on me now.)”
Ha! No chance. I am not so naive as to suggest that any one politician has a lock on the truth but as far as it goes I stand on my assertion that McCain/Palin are using “sexism” as a blind to deflect scrutiny away from the Governor. Also as far as which campaign is more commited to women’s rights let’s not forget that they are both, McCain and Palin, committed to overturning Roe V Wade so kiss reproductive rights good bye. McCain has also voted against a bill that would have guaranteed equal pay for equal work to all women and against legislation that would have forced insurance companies to cover birth control (they already cover Viagra).Governor Palin is against sex education for our children and her administration in Wasilla supported charging rape victims for evidence gathering forensics.All of this is documented fact There’s a lot more but I don’t want to sound like a broken record.The point being that they are not pro woman simply because they have a woman on the ticket and nor do they have the best interests of american women at heart as they seem to be inferring.
And lastly, because I support a specific candidate doesn’t mean I have my nose up their butt.I know you aren’t for Obama but the democrats won’t make you less free, a McCain Palin presidency will.
princess slea Said,
September 12, 2008 @ 6:30 pm
it seems to me that people who are for obama, just think he is all mighty and can’t see any flaws or faults. it irritates me.
mccain is pro-life. plenty of WOMEN are pro-life, does not make them “anti-women” just means they believe that a fetus is a baby. how can you have laws that allow women to abort a “fetus” and that is legal, yet if someone kills a pregnant woman, they get murder for both the mother and the “baby”. mccain wants the states to be able to make the decisions on abortion and gay marriage.
no law can take away my rights to my body. i CHOOSE to have sex (no jokes from the peanut gallery), unprotected or not. i CHOOSE to use birth control or not.
now before you get your panties in a wad, i am pro-choice but i can see both sides and understand people’s passion about it on both sides. i respect mccain and palin for being honest and up front about their views on it. i am appalled that obama was pro-late term abortions (sticking a needle into the babies developed head and basically turning their brain to mush).
let me ask you: when your sil had a still born baby, was it really a baby even though it never breathed life? or is it a baby because it was wanted?
i’m not trying to be shocking or controversial, this is a personal issue that i struggle with myself and really wonder what you think, especially given how much you love children.
Chimp Said,
September 12, 2008 @ 7:41 pm
But I and most of my friends (some of whom are women) are pro choice. It’s interesting how the “Pro Life” faction presents it’s self as that. Does that mean reproductive rights adherents are pro death? Obama is not “pro abortion” it’s disingenuous to assert that. What he said about voting against bills to restrict it(partial birth abortion): “On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I’ve said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn’t have that.”
Sorry I won’t discuss my SIL’s stillbirth in this context but I’ll be happy to talk to you about it in private mainly because it’s her private life…and yes.. children are the nuts!