Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe F-Card Won't Wash
The New York Post calls her "a feminist dream". National Public Radio asks if she's the "new face of feminism". And the Wall Street Journal, ever subtle, calls it "Sarah Palin Feminism". I call it well-spun garbage. (Yes, I'd even call it a pig in lipstick.) It seems you can't open a newspaper or turn on the television without running across a piece about how the Republican vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, is not just a feminist, but the feminist - a sign that all is right in the US when it comes to gender equality. (Turn in those Birkenstocks and picket signs, gals!)
Palin's conservative cohorts are claiming her candidacy as a win for women and proof that it's Republicans who are the real agents of change. After all, what more could American women want in a vice-presidential candidate than a well-coiffed "hockey mom"?
Never mind that Palin talks about her teen daughter's decision to keep her child while awaiting the chance to take that choice away from American women. Don't worry about how Palin cut funding for a transitional home for teenage mothers. And forget that, under Palin's mayoralty, women in Wasilla, Alaska, were forced to pay for their own rape kits to the tune of up to $1,200.
We're not supposed to care about these issues because - say Republicans - we should just be happy that there's a woman on the ticket. The McCain campaign is cynically trying to recreate the excitement that surrounded Hillary Clinton's candidacy, believing that all women want is ... another woman.
Ann Friedman, deputy editor of the American Prospect, wrote: "In picking Palin, Republicans are lending credence to the sexist assumption that women voters are too stupid to investigate or care about the issues, and merely want to vote for someone who looks like them ... McCain has turned the idea of the first woman in the White House from a true moment of change to an empty pander."
What's worse is conservatives can't understand why women aren't lining up to thank them. In fact, the same people who moaned that women - those darn feminists, especially - were only supporting Hillary because of her gender are now screaming to the rafters because they're not supporting Palin for the same reason. That's what makes Republicans pulling the feminist card that much more insulting - the stunning hypocrisy. The McCain touting himself as the person who will put a woman in the White House is the same man who joked that Chelsea Clinton is "so ugly" because "her father is Janet Reno".
And despite the talk about being the party of change, appropriating feminist symbols - such as at a Pennsylvania rally, where people held up signs of Rosie the Riveter with Palin's face - and propping up anti-feminist women as trailblazers is typical of the Republicans.
Organisations such as the Independent Women's Forum and Concerned Women for America, who call themselves the "real" feminists while fighting against things such as equal pay and legislation to combat violence against women, have been around (and funded by conservatives) for years. Their brand of feminism means benefiting from the gains of the women's movement while striving to keep other women down - all for a patriarchal pat on the head. Sound familiar?
As the feminist writer Rebecca Traister says: "Palin's femininity is one that is recognisable to most women: she's the kind of broad who speaks on behalf of other broads but appears not to like them very much ... It's like some dystopian future ... feminism without any feminists."
The good news is, this twisted homage to feminism means conservatives must recognise it as a force in American politics - why spend so much time framing Palin as feminist if we're all just a bunch of hairy man-haters? The bad news, however, trumps all. If this campaign is successful, American women will suffer. We'll be under the thumb of yet another administration that thinks nothing of rolling back women's rights.
No matter how many times feminists point out the hypocrisy of Republicans pulling the F-card, however, the bigger truth is that it's not Palin's anti-feminist bona fides alone that matter. While Palin is bad for women's rights, she's terrible for America. In addition to being investigated by her own legislature for abuse of power, she is also reported to have asked a librarian about the process for banning books in Wasilla, doesn't support sex education, and has made lying about her record unusually central to her candidacy - even for a politician. These are big warning signs that cut across gender lines.
So while the McCain campaign holds Palin up as a shining example of feminism in action, let's not forget the truth about who's doing the spinning and what they're selling. Because the last thing America needs is another corrupt and lying politician - man or woman.
44 Comments so far
Show AllThe opening paragraph of this essay is SO misleading !
The New York Post is hardly a serious newspaper. Why not cite Star or National Enquirer ?
NPR merely asked a question and opened up a discussion. "Stanford University historian Estelle Freedman, author of No Turning Back: The History of Feminism and the Future of Women, and host Jacki Lyden discuss whether a conservative such as Palin can be called a feminist in 2008."
The WSJ article was an Op-Ed piece written by a Christian woman discussing the changing roles of Christian women and how the media is slow (or loathe) to acknowledge the changes.
Palin is a political caricature of a vicious mob think that is on the brink of either extinction or cultural dominance. The closer the corner comes to extinction, the more vicious and irrational the response. Much like any animal.
So, to defuse her importance, her viciousness...She needs to be minimized, ignored, as being relevant to the national and international stage.
I swear the more I hear from her and about her reveals the lack of awareness of a lot of writing here and elsewhere.
Sarah who?
"In picking Palin, Republicans are lending credence to the sexist assumption that women voters are too stupid to investigate or care about the issues, and merely want to vote for someone who looks like them."
Well, I bet it'll work out well for them as some women will vote McCain/Palin strictly based on Palin's gender.
She is indeed the "archetype" for feminist -- if you simply bypass the inner landscape of her "human" being. Hey, for those who sense the world without the gift of eyes and ears -- like the sage, Helen Keller -- Palin probably appears as she truly is -- another power hungry, anti-feminine being driven by that old theological story that entitles life only to those who mirror her and who will stoop to being her subjects. She's dangerous to democracy and the world -- and is NO feminist.
Terrifying:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWxhDpX8IZs
By the way, I'd like to include a quote:
"Suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over a man, but to be in silence."
1 Timothy 2:12
SLBR GOOD: You raise some good points. Personally, I believe feminism is the beginning of validating the perspective and SENTIENCE that women are endowed with that is not meant to emulate men or the long enculturation to patriarchal "values," but rather to act as its co-pilot and "navigational aid." The masculine view of heroism used to promote and conduct war after war is a passe concept, one that is indisputably DEADLY. I call this "Mars rules" as it shows a disproportionate homage to militarism and the 'god' of war. Its feminine counterpart NOURISHES life from the onset, and is intended as counter-balance to force first. BECAUSE women only recently have been granted the vote, and because academe and its theories/topics/subjects have been defined and directed by men (and the women accredited have to march lock step with these protocols and agendas) the FEMALE half of collective perception has not yet come into balance with that of the Male.
Mankind requires BOTH oars to move upstream, rather than circle endlessly seen as 1. His-story repeats and 2. Hu-MAN nature never changes. Feminine life-respecting values are often seen in Indigenous tribes, and those cultures that predate Rome and the rise of militarism. Because we've been conditioned to aggression and dog-eat-dog competition through religion, political systems, economic hierarchies for centuries, MOST think this is the way the world is meant to be. I applaud the souls who congregate for THE WORLD SOCIAL FORUM as their motto: "Another World is Possible" is so important. Ditto the work, "The Great Turning," and other visionaries who paint the way to the manifestation of OTHER possibilities. We can see where "onward christian soldiers/march to war" as historical redundancy is taking us...
I tend to agree. The indigenous people of N. America were polytheistic hunter/gatherers and, like the larger carnivores, were territorial for survival, but were not afraid to share food supplies inter-tribally, by negotiation and trade. I have the nagging thought that the labor distribution of the sexes in those cultures helped to reinforce the more nurturing aspects. There is knowledge there.
As to the rise of militarism with the growth of Rome. Nah. It, the mentality and it's application began long before that. It is the genetic behavioral extension of 'fight or flight,' a reactive rationalization as opposed to objective thinking and self-reflection.
IMHO this immediacy is it's ability to survive the advances in knowledge of most human endeavors over the millenia. Belief systems that have been politically attached to this phenomena become increasingly difficult to separate with education that is humanity based as opposed to that based on 'His-story' and monotheistic religions that prefer guilt and fear and blind obedience.
As for women dancing in 3 inch heels? Only 'pole dancers.' Perhaps a short waltz...
I lost my thought. Oh well...it won't matter. The reptilian inner brain folks will off and on rise up and continue the regression of our species as others carry us forward.
I must say that I have never encountered one who uses her logic combined with her blogging obsession as a massive cudgel to smash at her enemies again, and again and again in perpetuity?
The question that begs consideration.
Is sexual indiscrimination any better than sexual discrimination?
If Obama drops Biden at this stage of the game it will blow up in his face...in fact Hillary would be foolish to accept...perhaps she'll parlay the Top of the Ticket with Obama as VP...or maybe she'll do the smart thing and watch him fall on his face, leaving her the logical nominee to run against Palin in 2012
Biden was a stupid pick by a stupid inexperienced man...Palin was a stroke of genius...and the polls show it
We don't know anything about Palin yet. Don't be too quick to think she is great just because of the stupidity used against her. She can't continue to depend on the stupidity of the Democrats and other idiots to keep up their false attacks.
Sooner or later she is going to have to step up and be judged.
Palin is not a pure feminist and is being put up for show. No woman in her right mind would take a new born baby to work, nor would they wait to give a speech and fly from Texas to Alaska without telling the airlines her amniotic fluid was leaking - especially knowing it was a high risk pregancy. If she really believes this a good thing for women then all I can say is a corporation must own her soul because that is not dedication - its either a obsession or a subtle form of slavery.
Women are different and being strong does not mean you should have to a man in heels. We CANNOT do everything men do and we should be proud and stand tall that we are entrusted with birthing and raising our future leaders. Feminism was not about women being just like men or having it all just to prove we are capable of working ourselves to death. Feminism is about being the moral strength and the rock of the family. It's about respect for the work we do and all the contributions we make to society that keep it functioning. I personally think it's insulting to put Palin in what looks like 3 inch heels, (I may be wrong)during the campaign. Heels are for dancing or meetings. Women wearing really high heels are not taken seriously no matter how smart they are because everyone knows the heels are meant for distraction. If she really were that powerful she would wear longer dresses - with nylons like a real lady - or keep the knee skirts and wear shorter heels. Maybe that's the whole point though, distraction? What are we being distracted from if that's the case?
slrbgood
Sarah Palin is a cow. She was selected because she is malleable, a party sycophant and incredibly ignorant of the world around her. End of story.
http://twocanpete.blogspot.com/
I don't know about whether Sarha Palin's good for femminists but she's sure good for bridge builders. It turns out that she's having a second Bridge to Nowhere built from near her home in Wasilla to Anchorage AK. The cost is estimated to be between $600 million and $1 billion. That's right, possibly a billion dollar bridge. But not to worry, Sarah says she's for it because it will cut her commute time.
duplicate
M. D Harris says:
She is The Beast. Many members of her former congregation know that she has the Mark of the Beast (666) on the top of her head (no coincidence then that she usually wears her hair piled up high). While she would have you believe she is a devout believer in our Saviour, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, she is in reality The Great Deceiver. SHE MUST NOT BE ELECTED TO POWER! Pray to Jesus to ensure that this does happen. No matter what you think, I am completely sincere in my heart. All praise to Jesus. Jesus is Lord.
M. Emrich says:
"Revelation 14:9-11 "And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive A PLAIN RASH in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."
Notice the words - a plain rash
now rearrange the letters- Sarah Palin
Maybe MD Harris is onto something here.......
amazon.com/tag/politics/forum?_encoding=UTF8&
DOG FACE: I read Backlash and consider it a VERY important book. Your comment dovetails most powerfully with that left by HIDESERTIAN, and also the savvy obsrvation by PROGRESSIVE PARTY that "stardom trumps substance (or principles) in our culture." Think about it, killers get celebrity. I once met a guy who told me if he wanted to be famous, he'd JUST rob a bank. When you raise people on Cowboy & Indian movies, the concept of the reckless individualist can mean pretty weird things to some.
George Lakoff, Orwell and others have taught us to understand the power of words. Many power words have been co-opted by corporatists. Another example in addition to "Feminist" is "freedom" as in free trade. Free? Sometimes when I see an item really cheap, let's say it's eggs, I say "hmm. Cost the chicken more" just to see what other shoppers will make of such a comment. But the one that REALLY upsets me is the co-optation of the word ORGANIC as was explained in an issue of the newspaper published by PUBLIC CITIZEN. This is a big problem where holistic foods are concerned. The waste (and that includes bio-hazard waste) industry wanted to use the word organic to represent their "recycled" waste products. Shakespeare must have had an intimation of our times when he penned the words, "Fair is foul and foul is fair."
Calling Sarah Palin a feminist is an insult to everything feminists have worked to achieve for women. She is interested only in the power of choice for herself and like minded lemmings. Choose away as long as what you choose doesn't differ from what has been selected for you. Religious extremism does not tolerate diversity of opinion.
The Bush administration's policies toward women and social programs will seem positively left-leaning if we subject ourselves to her influence in Washington.
I'm beginning to think allowing women the vote may turn out to be a disaster after all. This lady is insane and women are voting for her why? Cup size maybe? It can't be anything to do with experience.
I heard that these are the woman voters that wanted Hillary to win the nomination and because she did not get it, they are going to vote for McCain. Boy! They are sure gonna show us huh!
More women are going to vote for Mccain because of Palin? I don't see much of that out where I'm at. I see guys lining up for Palin because she relates to the gun owners all too well. But I'm in Idaho so your mileage may vary.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
The polls I have seen as of today - of women voters - put McCain/Palin AHEAD of Obama/Biden! It's incredible, but it was due to Obama's stupidity in choosing Biden instead of Boxer, Clinton, Murray, Mikulski, Lee, Holmes Norton, Granholm, etc.
"it was due to Obama's stupidity in choosing Biden instead of Boxer, Clinton, Murray, Mikulski, Lee, Holmes Norton, Granholm, etc."
Yeah right that crazy barbara lee would have been a great choice. I could be John McCain's VP and he would win in a landslide. "progressives" crack me up!
Palin is a perfect example of militaristic feminism that started to come up in the 1960s. The good feminism was shut off just like gentle manliness although that was a slower shut off. Men and women must learn to put aside their differences and hostilities and understand that the elites are dividing us to buy us out. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL.
The only good side to Palin is that maybe she will give militaristic feminism a very bad name and maybe moderation will have its say. And maybe neoliberalism and neoconservatism will suffer the unexpected death penalty. Could that be the result were Palin were to be president until 2020 at the latest? Only time will tell.
All of these comments are fine and true, but polling data does show that women ARE swayed into the McCain camp by the selection of Palin. She has become a media star, and "stardom" trumps substance in our culture. All the attacks on her backfire. I'm voting for TWO women: Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente!
Another piece about palin!!!
Bush with PMS!!!
Ignore her!!!
If you want a woman to vote for, the Green Party can offer you two: Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente, running for President and Vice President respectively, both bona fide feminists and bona fide progressives of the outspoken, in your face, truly dedicated variety.
Otherwise, I have to agree with everything in this article.
She does fail to point out the irony: Palin really is an example of feminism in action, just as anti-feminists like Anita Bryant were, even while opposing women's interests, and for that matter most people's, at every point.
Oregoncharles
I am progressive enough to vote for a woman president, however a woman president and a woman vice-president goes too far for me. Sorry.
With the two rather unpopular bought and paid for corporate parties to compete against one might wonder why the Green Party would opt for such an in-your-face feminist statement at this time.
I imagine you would vote for TWO male candidates? Why not two FEMALE candidates? McKinney and Clemente, along with Nader and Gonzalez, have the best platforms, ideas, and offer the best "hope" for "change" in this particular election.
Then why should a woman vote for two guys? Only because McCain /Palin are such ass clowns. I havet decided if that's enough for me, yet.
Two black peopel? Two Hispanics? What exactly is your threat level.
Dont accuse me of supporting Palin, or i'll hunt you down and kill you and field dress you.
Get im girl!
I do not object to the female candidates, rather to distraction of the feminist statement being made by the choice of the two female candidates. My objection is to voting for two candidates because they are two women or blacks or gays or left-handed or whatever because those are such a trivial issues.
It would be preferred if we all voted for the best female candidate for the offices, and we all voted for the best male candidate for the offices, and then flipped some coins to choose the office holders. At least then the candidates' sex would not be an issue distracting us from discussing policy, direction, character, competence, war, laws, healthcare, political systems and various other concerns worth discussion in an election.
Don't tempt me to accuse you of supporting Palin. I'm too busy.
"I do not object to the female candidates, rather to distraction of the feminist statement being made by the choice of the two female candidates."
That's just goofy, RandB.
Reason through substitution: what proportion of the time has your voting preference been determined by the implicit antifeminist distraction of two men on the ticket?
You have nominees and a party platform. Candidates' naughty bits are irrelevant.
The current system of allowing corporate interests to preselect our choices for us mimics democracy.
An alternative would be to elect people to the Electorial College who would search for suitable candidates, debate their merits and select the two people who appeared to best suited to be the next President and VP. A requirement for election to the Electorial College would be that one is not a member of or affiliated with a political party. I do not know if it would it be better that their deliberations were public or behind closed doors.
Lipstick? Not even Super Glue will stick those lips together.
Thank you Jessica. Spot on. There is just so much of this offensive Palin-McCain joke that needs the light of truth. Thanks for your insight.
FYI Concerned Women of America is front for the right wing fundies and was invented by media-giant and pro-censorship corp. Clear Channel. They are not a "brand" of feminism, so much as a "tool" for corporatism.
She's the devil with the blue dress on and the sheeple vote for appearances.
Start digging your fallout shelters.
The truth, of course, is that Palin is the lipstick put on the pig that is the Republican Party. The Republicans are void of any ideas that can change the course of this nation that the Frankenstein monster of Bush and Cheney created. Palin is just another Rovian distraction to keep the conversation away from the incompetencies of the administration. The ignorant dupes who watch Fox News continue to vote against their own personal interests because of wedge issues conjured up by the fascists who control the country. Until We the People wake up to the fact that the Bill of Rights has been decimated, the trend toward a more repressive state will continue. Welcome to Amerika, land of opportunists.
And if Sarah Palin is a feminist, I'm Georg W. Bush!
Palin is a good feminist in the same historic sense of the good German and currently the good America. Even if you remove Palin from the equation there is still serious problems. She's just a water girl for the big team. She can try and rouse up support with her cheers and body movements but she could never put on the uniform and play for the big guys. So I'm sure that she even recognizes the token she is. She is there to carry a message only. The Republicans will shoulder her with all the emotional issues she can carry. The Republicans need someone who can deflect attention away from the real issues facing the country. If it isn't Palin it will be another political whore. The government is full of them.
Hoa binh
Did anyone ever read BACKLASH by – Susan Faludi?
The Republican Party never gives up its power to any woman. The women that work for them may think they are independent, and in charge. However, the Party stands behind them pushing, punching and stabbing them from the rear. The Republicans put on a happy face but in reality they are just stealth body snatchers.
They do it to otherwise moderate men such as my father who finally quit the party and turned Democrat last year in the state legislation. He was primaried out unfortunately though. As for women, I'd say they knew what was coming and they have a chance to leave if they don't like it.
Jason Jordan
Sandpoint, Idaho
I dont think that they "think" they are independent. i think that alot of them think they shoudl NOT be, because the Bible tells them to submit to their husbands.