Sarah Palin Sexism Watch
September 18, 2008
by Violet Socks, Editor
|14 Comments
Sarah Palin Sexism Watch is the name of a terrific resource we’re adding to our blogroll. The blog author says:
I am a female professional – a working mother – who lives in Wisconsin. I created this blog to monitor, and round up, the sexist treatment given to Republican VP nominee, Sarah Palin. This blog will focus on sexist reactions to the Palin nomination by the media and politicians. Please email me tips at: palinsexismwatch@live.com.
Kudos to her for doing this. Alas, if only the list of entries weren’t already so long.
WOW!!! I went there…sad to see people had said this stuff. Not surprised … all of this stuff was said about Hillary in the primaries.
In my area here in Ohio…when Sen Clinton came to speak to us in Canton, she was met by Obama people with signs calling her White trailer trash, I heard the same now about Palin.
When Michelle Obama spoke in downtown Canton during the primaries… she was asked about Obama’s statement about clinching to guns and bible and Hillary’s response…Michelle Obama said that Hillary took it out of context. (meaning Hillary is a liar)
Calling any woman who does not support Obama …un-educated, lying, white trailer trash is nothing new for these people.
Funny.. we are now only good for 2 things…the first is for sex…the second for votes….
Dear blogger,
As a professional woman who works for NASA (very very small numbers of women employed in contrast to men). I too dislike the sexism and name-calling, however, as a woman working in (so far) s man’s world, I am also of the opinion that crying “sexism” at every single turn only exacerbates the problem. You can do that yes, however the best way we can negate sexism is by electing a candidate (I wish that could have been Hilary Clinton) who strongly supports a woman’s right to choose and equal pay – that candidate is Senator Obama. Not Senator McCain.
All women (at least those I know and love) are sisters and do not condone “name calling”. However, please let’s vote intelligently this time, not with a gut reaction agaisnt sexism. Do you really want a woman who does not believe that “Global Warming” is “real” to hold the second highest office in a an increasingly warming planet? NO. NO. NO. I don’t want this for my daughter…
Please refrain from spreading unfounded rumors about Gov. Palin. You are certainly welcome to express your opinion and debate the issues, but this website will not become another signal station on the rumor wire.
Why did Charlie Rangel call Sarah Palin “disabled”? See the video at http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=178653
Thanks for the bump back onto the path, Editor.
In the spirit of debate and fact, and in recognition of the truth that most “truths” aren’t as simple as we might like, I offer up the following:
The statement has been made that we should elect the candidate that “supports” the right to choose and equal pay and that this candidate is (stated as fact) Senator Obama. Not so fast. Bring back the silverware.
Women are accused of being myopic to focus on sexism to the exclusion of what, I presume from the tone of the referenced comment, are the two more pressing issues, overshadowing all else.
For the moment, we’ll set aside the mounting evidence that Senator Obama has no record of action on either of these topics to back up his rhetoric (I suggest reading the review in The Economist (9/18) of the Freddoso book “The Case Against Barack Obama” for more on that and the broader topic it suggests).
Rather, there are two interesting notes with respect to the comment related to the right to choose and equal pay.
I’m not sure where it has ever been stated that Senator McCain or Governor Palin are opposed to equal pay. That’s certainly a new one. But, looking at facts, looking at, for example, the staffs of the two Senators, as was done recently by some determined investigative reporters, the facts are that there is a far greater disparity in pay between men and women doing comparable work in the offices of Senator Obama than in the offices of Senator McCain.
I’m sure there are reasons that are unknown to anyone else for the disparity (which I assume will be supplied here shortly) but at least it’s a fact. More reliable, at least as a starting point, than a promise in a speech or platform. But, again, I’m not clear on the citation to McCain or Palin’s opposition to equal pay. At least in action, there is a pattern. And, it does not make Senator Obama the “only” choice as is suggested. Or even the right choice.
The other issue is more difficult, obviously. Governor Palin is certainly a “pro-life” Republican. No doubt about it and she is clear on that, both in speech and in personal action. That is her personal belief.
But, again, waving this flag to scare off female voters is simplistic and manipulative (in my opinion), especially when coupled with an implicit suggestion that we ignore Senator Obama’s shortcomings across the board and focus only on what he says, which changes by the day, polls and audience.
When asked directly about Roe v. Wade, the Kryptonite to which some would like to expose Governor Palin, thus automatically disqualifying her from ever receiving the vote of a female in this country, Governor Palin gave an interesting answer [I always like to hear what someone thinks from them rather than someone else]. She was asked, in her interview on Fox News, what she would do, as Governor of Alaska, should the federal decision in Roe v. Wade be overturned, would she support a state action in this area. Her answer was: That would be up to the people of the State of Alaska.
I thought it was a reasoned response and reflective of an elected “representative” of a citizenry.
My point? Simply that, as usual, things are not as simple as they might be made to seem.
A personal disclosure, for whatever it’s worth, if required. I’m not a woman but I was raised by an incredible woman after my dad’s passing when I was relatively young, had two amazing sisters, married a very special woman and now have two remarkable daughters. Politically, I vote the candidate. I was a very strong Hillary Clinton supporter (always thought she was the better half of that marriage — still do) and am impressed by Governor Palin. I’ve always been impressed by John McCain though occasionally exasperated by him. I did not like the “surge” idea and thought he was sinking his campaign to so doggedly support it. Well, he was right. As even Senator Obama has said, it has succeeded “beyond our wildest dreams.” McCain has always been like that. There is no question in my mind that he does what he thinks is the right thing in the circumstances. Like or don’t like his politics, that’s the man we all know. He’s been around too long for any opposition attempt to re-cast him to work.
The notion that he’s Bush III is just absurd. Senator Obama has voted far more in lock step with his party than has Senator McCain and Senator McCain’s entire political history is marked with the occasions of his bucking his own party to forge consensus.
If you’ll remember, there was even talk last time around of trying to get John McCain to switch parties and run on the DEMOCRATIC ticket. His immediate challenge this cycle came, not from the Democrats, but from the conservative wing of his own party.
Anyway, this is about the notion that Senator Obama is the ONLY choice a woman could make because of two issues: right to choose and equal pay.
I obviously disagree, I can see any number of reasons for women — and men — to vote the McCain/Palin ticket in November. Throwing Roe v. Wade and Bush-Clone around isn’t going to change that. It rings hollow.
Call if woman’s intuition. Which I wish I had. For me, it’s just calling it like I see it and trusting my gut. Oh, and looking under the surface for “the rest of the story.”
That site has very little credibility when you look at it more closely. It ignores the McCain campaign’s misogynist treatment of Palin. Even more disturbing is that it ignores McCain’s repeated sexual harassment of Palin at public appearances.
Also, why is it favorably quoting an article where notorious misogynist Phyllis Schlafly attacks feminists?
libhomo, you bring up a good point. I don’t know about “repeated sexual harassment”, but I do think we need to take account of the campaign’s characterizations of Palin with relation to her gender.
Yes, New Agenda, please look at, and compose a press release on, John McCain and Palin’s relationship, how the campaign has treated her, how she, herself, is behaving.
John McCain has cynically selected a realtively weak woman running mate who he is systematically silencing by not allowing her press conferences or interviews. He is “handling” her in such a paternalistic way that I cannot believe that “non-partisan” The New Agenda is not aggressively addressing their behavior or working to get that in the Washington Post. And his campaign is using the charge of “sexism” as a self-serving scare word to frighten off critics–thus co-opting the term to silence criticism rather than for its very serious true definition. If Palin is such a feminist, and so ready to be VP, why is she allowing herself to manipulated in this way. If she is such a qualified and capable candidate, why shield her from the press? If she is a strong, capable and independent woman, why is she hiding? Why is there such outrage when someone asks her tough questions that any Vice Presidential candidate should be able to answer directly and without made-up bravado? Such questioning is not sexist, it is due diligence by the press. Hillary never flinched when asked hard questions, and she never allowed the sexist comments and behaviors to ever derail her from appearing in public, meeting with the press or taking unscripted questions. Just because she is a woman does not mean we should support Palin. I personally shudder at the thought of another charismatic ideologue like Bush becoming President.
To this point, Indie suggests that she is open-minded and cites her answer the the question about Roe v Wade. What I heard was a dodge of the questions, just as she dodged almost all the questions put to her by Charles Gibson.
Unfortunately, in our current, admittedly broken, two-party system, an ideological rejection of an Obama Adminstration (which is what we are voting for in November–the whole package, not just the President) is de facto support of a McCain Administration. Such an administration will do nothing, zip, zero to advance the New Agenda.
Given that ABC edited out MUCH of her answers in the Gibson interview, is it any surprise that both McCain and Palin are not buddying up to the press at the moment?
IF YOU WANT TO SEE PALIN REALLY BASHED WATCH THE VIEW…A SO CALLED WOMEN’S SHOW…THEY MAKE
MSNBC LOOK LIKE FEMINISTS….
Given that ABC edited out MUCH of her answers in the Gibson interview, is it any surprise that both McCain and Palin are not buddying up to the press at the moment?
Talking to the press is part of the job.
“I’m not sure where it has ever been stated that Senator McCain or Governor Palin are opposed to equal pay”
Lily Ledbetter. The Fair Pay Act named for her.
She was discriminated against and paid less than her male counterparts for years. As most companies have policies forbidding discussion of salaries, she did not discover this for years.
Years when her base salary was lower and her raises were lower.
Case went to the Supreme Court, which decided, in a 5-4 decision based on statutory grounds, not constitutional grounds, that Ms Ledbetter only had 180 days from the first act of discrimination to file suit. After that, too bad, so sad, you were discriminated against but you don’t get justice. You can only sue for acts committed in the past 180 days.
Congress tried to pass the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act which would eliminate a statute of limitations or at least move it to when the discrimination was discovered.
John McCain voted against it. Barack Obama voted for it.
For all the talk about “empty words” this election, look who actually acted in favor of women and who acted in favor of enabling large companies to discriminate against them.
To be factually correct, McCain did not vote against the Fair Pay. He was not present – this may be equally as bad.
The goal of The New Agenda is to promote the issues listed under “Goals” to all parties.
We are in active dialogue now with the McCain and Obama Campaigns – and we are having our first call with the Green Party shortly. You can bet that we are asking all three parties to push forward the Fair Pay legislation that Hillary has just written!
Congress tried to pass the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act which would eliminate a statute of limitations or at least move it to when the discrimination was discovered.
John McCain voted against it.
To me this is incredibly upsetting. Bear in mind, in tort law it’s very common that the statute of limitations starts running when you discover the injury. So if your doctor sterilized you when he was supposed to be removing your appendix when you were 8, and at 30 you discover it when you come in to the fertility clinic wanting to know why you can’t conceive — you have time to sue. The court doesn’t say “Sorry, you should have figured it out when you were 8.”
In Ledbetter that’s basically what they did. And McCain is okay with that.
No. No friend to women.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...