Sarah Palin - The New Face of Feminism?

At some point, the term “feminism,” like “liberal,” became a dirty word (I guess that makes me a very dirty girl). Be that as it may, the word “liberal” has a true meaning that is far more attractive than one might be led to believe by conservative name-callers (it means favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs; favoring or permitting freedom of action and freedom from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant,open-minded ).

The labels “feminist/feminism” also have a far more benign meaning than we currently suspect. “Feminism” means “the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.” “Feminist” simply refers to someone who follows that doctrine.

Unfortunately, the term “feminist” has become so criminalized that most women are no longer willing to use it in reference to themselves. Do women realize that in doing so they are actually saying that they don't support equal rights for women? I don't believe for a minute that this is the message they mean to convey, but sadly, even the women who believe that they do indeed deserve equal rights have been brainwashed into saying that they don't...without even realizing it.

Regardless of the negative connotations the label brings to mind for some, the current presidential race here in America has brought attention back to feminist values. For so many women, Senator Clinton's run for the White House reignited the flame of feminism and sadly, for just as many, Sarah Palin's addition to the Republican ticket threatens to extinguish it.

I read a post recently whose author wondered aloud where all the so-called feminists are now...why are they not coming out in droves to defend Sarah Palin against all of those horrible sexist attacks (you know, things like being asked about her administrative experience or her position on nationally-relevant issues). Why, demanded the author, are women not outraged? Where is the National Organization for Women (NOW)...why are their spokespeople so strangely silent? (Actually, they haven't been totally silent - read NOW's official position on Sarah Palin here.)

Why indeed. NOW defines it's purpose as “dedication to making legal, political, social and economic change in our society in order to achieve our goal, which is to eliminate sexism and end all oppression.” To get more specific, NOW lists the following as the organization's primary objectives - To:

• eliminate discrimination and harassment in the workplace, schools, the justice system, and all other sectors of society;

• secure abortion, birth control and reproductive rights for all women;

• end all forms of violence against women;

• eradicate racism, sexism, and homophobia;

• promote equality and justice in our society.

Based on what little we know of Governor Palin's positions on the issues, is it any wonder that NOW is not rushing to the aid of Sarah Palin? Not really.

NOW does make a point of fighting sexism wherever they find it. The trouble is they haven't found much in the case of Sarah Palin. True, some questioned her ability to be a mom and lead the nation at the same time which is sexist, but those concerns were quickly dropped by many and replaced by far more meaningful and legitimate ones such as “Why is she refusing to cooperate in an investigation in which she had originally offered her full cooperation?” “What does she know about economic policies?” “What foreign policy experience does she have?” “Why does she keep lying about the bridge to nowhere?” “Why won't she release her tax information?”

Tough questions on these subjects are not sexist, they are relevant, fair and necessary. Complaining that these types of questions are unfair, “gotcha” media tactics implies that Gov. Palin isn't up to the task...that she can't handle tough questions...that she isn't capable of holding her own in an interview. Now that's sexist.

The women who fought on the front lines of the feminist movement did so because they wanted to make sure that women were not barred from any opportunity simply because of their gender but the reverse is also true. Feminists did not, and do not, promote the idea that women should be entitled to any position or opportunity simply because of their gender. We need to keep this in mind when we think about vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Just as she shouldn't be disqualified for the vice presidential slot because she is a woman, we must also remember that she isn't qualified to be vice president (or to be supported by feminists, for that matter) simply because she is a woman.

I think that I can freely speak for many of the women that I know when I say that we don't want any woman, a token woman, in the White House; we want a capable, competent and accomplished woman in the White House – one who has earned her place through hard work and dedication to sound ethical principles. We want a woman of whom we can be proud, someone who stands as an example of that to which we, and our daughters and granddaughters, can aspire. Sarah Palin has shown us in myriad ways that she is not this woman.

Repetitive lies, secrecy, blind ambition, knowledge and experience deficits combined with arrogance...Sarah Palin does not represent me or most of the women I know. She does not embody my highest ideals. She is nothing more than, at best, a throwback to an earlier time when the most a woman could hope for was to be an adornment, a beautiful bauble with little substance or purpose other than to provide a shimmering distraction from the decline of the man upon whose arm she resides. At worst, she is a dangerous woman who will stop at nothing to achieve her goals no matter how self-serving and detrimental to the common good they may be.

But there is no need to accept my opinion of Sarah Palin. Perhaps you might be more interested in knowing what those who know her best think. The people of Alaska have a lot to say about Governor Palin, but for some reason it seems that few are listening.  See for yourselves.  In a state whose citizens are not exactly known for their participation in public demonstrations, surprising numbers of Alaskans are coming out for anti-Palin rallies.

Make no mistake, Sarah Palin is not the new face of feminism. She is simply a woman whose ambition surpasses her abilities and whose presence on the national political scene threatens to set the feminist movement back a hundred years. Ladies, we can do better than this - don't doubt it.  While we all want to see a woman in the White House, we want the right woman. At first glance, Sarah Palin seemed like the answer to many a woman's dreams, but she is nothing more than a shiny penny. The glimmering, mirror-like surface attracts our attention, but upon closer inspection we find that what lies below the surface is far less valuable than we might have anticipated or hoped.

Comments

[Effortless Abundance]

Thanks for sharing this well written and insightful piece. I am not American, but as an outsider I find the current election campaign fascinating. This post throws an interesting perspective over Palin's candidacy.

[Liz]

This was a really great piece of writing. Thanks for expressing so well why Sarah Palin is NOT the woman for the job, and for pointing out the sexism in trying to protect her from the "hard" questions.

[Lori]

Thank you both for the kind remarks. I've become a little obsessed with this campaign (as anyone who reads this blog already knows!). Like many of you, I can't wait 'til it's all over and Palin (hopefully) disappears into obscurity.

[Kelly]

I believe that everyone who votes for the McCain-Palin ticket is a one issue voter. John McCain was tolerable to independents, but the choice of Sarah Palin relegated his ticket to the same ranks as a Huckabee or Rush Limbaugh presidency. Unthinkable. One issue voters are one or more of three things: selfish, ignorant, or lacking in intelligence. If McCain and Palin win, it simply will reinforce how the rest of the world views Americans. And I thought Bush-Cheyney was the worst we could get.

[Lori]

Kelly,

I think that you're right for the most part. McCain/Palin supporters do tend to be either one issue voters, or, voters who are basing their choice simply on their "perception" of John McCain or the Republican platform rather than on reality.

I've noticed that McCain supporters often have their eyes and ears closed...they don't want to talk about it or to investigate claims or educate themselves as to what is really going on (Who needs facts?). They buy into the old maverick image of days gone by, a label that no longer applies, and the many times disproven "trickle down theory." Unfortunately, their perceptions (e.g. "I want less government intrusion into my life so I'll vote for McCain" or "I want lower taxes") are often outdated or out of touch with the reality of the current Republican platform and candidates.

It surprises me that so many are willing to cast a vote based on generalizations, political rhetoric and catch-phrases, personalities etc. If they were only willing to spend a little bit of time gathering information and evaluating the truth of candidate claims, they might see the real picture. How did we get to be so gullible and so lazy? In a time where so much information is so readily available, why is it that so many rely on campaign ad claims? The truth is out there...right at our fingertips...and yet no one seems to be interested in looking at it.