DAILY BEAST: Time for Palin to Embrace Her Gender
April 5, 2010
by Amy Siskind
|The following op-ed by The New Agenda’s Amy Siskind is posted at The Daily Beast here.
Women voters are fed up with the state of America’s leadership, and are ready to elect a female president. Amy Siskind on why Sarah Palin—or someone else—needs to step up and capitalize on women’s outrage.
Women voters, who have decided almost every modern-day election, are up for grabs. Women are a force behind the Tea Party movement, and are marching away from the Democrats in dismay. Could the country’s disenfranchisement with our political leaders, experienced disproportionately by women, propel Sarah Palin on a path to the White House?
Sarah Palin has gradually become the de facto leader of the burgeoning Tea Party movement. While the Obama White House has tried to portray the Tea Party as radical, racist, and even violent, it turns out that the Tea Party, predominantly composed of women, is more akin to “Soccer Moms” with very mainstream concerns. The Tea Party movement enjoys a 37 percent favorable rating, not far off from the Democrats at 41 percent or the GOP at 42 percent.
It is unclear whether Sarah Palin will rise and capitalize on women’s sentiments.
Passage of the increasingly unpopular health-care bill has not only galvanized the Tea Party but also fractured women’s support for the Democratic Party. Liberal bloggers question whether the Democrats are losing their hold on women. Many women view health-care reform as anti-mom, and are despondent over Obama’s executive order that enshrined the Hyde Amendment. Terry O’Neill, president of the National Organization for Women, said: “We concluded that on balance… the bill actually is bad for women.” Bloggers hold a special disdain for Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s laughable attempt to make health-care reform a victory for women, noting that Pelosi’s sudden concern for women’s issues is about as genuine as Madame Mao’s interest in the proletariat.
The question is where these women voters will go in 2012. Health-care reform has been an awakening for women of all political stripes, a realization that neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party is the party for women. Will concern for our bodies and our children’s future be the agitator for women finally demanding a leader who understands these issues firsthand: a woman president?
But neither party is going to bestow their 2012 nomination on a woman simply because it is time to do this for our country. The Democratic National Committee had this opportunity in 2008 when Hillary Clinton was betrayed by the ever-present boys club. If voters want to get a woman into the White House, it is time to stop using a shoehorn and start using a sledgehammer.
Sarah Palin alone can wield this tool. Having resigned as governor, she no longer answers to the Republican National Committee. In fact, as the de facto leader of the up-and-coming Tea Party movement, the Republican Party answers to her. That is, if the Republicans hope to avoid what Dan Quayle describes as letting the Tea Party go Perot. If they hope to pull off a victory in 2012, they need Palin. And if Palin wants the White House, she needs to earn the votes of the disenfranchised women.
Yet it is unclear whether Sarah Palin will rise and capitalize on women’s sentiments. Since her re-emergence on the public scene, she has done little to show herself as a woman who will stand up for women, as a self-described feminist in Going Rogue.
Palin has failed to endorse important women of the Republican Party, and is actively supporting numerous challengers to Democratic women incumbents. She has become outspoken in her antiabortion views, turning away from what was a key factor in making her one of the country’s most popular governors and the de facto leader of the Tea Party: letting the people decide.
Perhaps there will be another woman politician who will rise from the embers of a country fuming over its political leadership—a woman who will very purposefully embrace her gender early in the campaign season and seek out the disenfranchised women voters, knowing that as we write the herstory of 2008, it was a miscalculation for Hillary not to have done so early on in her campaign.
For those doubtful about the effectiveness of embracing one’s gender, take a lesson from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. Local press cannot fathom why the “weak” incumbent Gillibrand remains without a serious challenger and is so scary to rivals. The local press continues to miss the story. Senator Gillibrand is surrounded by an army of thousands of women reconstituted from Hillary Clinton’s campaign. This time around, having weathered 2008, the army is fully prepared and savvy in guerrilla warfare. (See here, here, and here.) A women’s revolution is a well-kept secret in New York.
Let’s hope that Sarah Palin, or another savvy woman politician, will use the New York model and embrace her gender on the national scene. The time is now. The country is crying for empathetic leadership. It’s time for women voters, the bloc that has decided almost every election since 1960, to swing for a woman in 2012!
Please go and comment here.
Just thinking out loud here…Sarah has been repeatedly atacked by left side women’s groups, reporters and the like…perhaps if they were to extend an olive branch to her( ie a meeting with Terry o Neill and others) perhaps commonality can be discussed and reached and she and they can reach a rapproachment. But to me at least , it is they that need to lay down their verbal swords and keyboards and make the unarmed open friendly advance- what does everyone else think?
Bruce: If Palin wants to be nominated she needs to go to the women’s groups and seek a peace council. I used to give and give to NOW and since the last election I have nothing but contempt for them. I know they will not be easy to approach. NOW continues to wait for someone to give them the power they feel they deserve, they do not understand power, how to get it or how to use it. But no way are they going to approach Palin. The thing is they are not really women’s orgs in the sense that they care about women’s issues. They are actually just the ladies auxiliary of the Democrat party and a very well behaved axillary at that. They are not the most rational people, many have apparently never talked to an actual Republican and believe Republicans are evil. I guess I just question the rationality of menopausal women who live in this country at this time but still believe reproductive rights and abortion are the most pressing issues facing women. I do think women would be better off if a third party challenge came from the left and split the Dem vote. I don’t really think Palin is the woman for the President job I think Meg from E-bay is a better more politically astute candidate.
Great Article Amy!! The responses at the TDB are unbelievable. It is sad to see they want to sound intellectual, rational, even feminist, but they sound like a bunch of classist cheerleaders ganging up on the girl who did not submit to their click, and does not speak or dress like them.
They don’t understand that regular people, and people who really love regular people identify with Sarah Palin for very good reasons, such as the ones Amy listed. All of us understand the simple truth that it is important to have women represented by women, and that it is time to unite and leave many differences aside, as men do (remember: politics makes strange bedfellows?) to achieve this. We shouldn’t be surprised by this.
I’ve found to my surprise, as a new immigrant, that many liberals (unfortunately most in my experience) like regular people, the underdog communities including women, as long as they are submissive to their intellectual dictatorship and to their manipulation and subservience. Even sadder, liberals like regular people and these communities as long as they don’t have them in front of them, and as long as they don’t have to speak with these on an equal basis. Oh, Sarah Palin’s ordinary accent!! Ugh! Went to Ohio State not an Ivy league….went through several colleges, as many regular American kids did…Disgusting!! Got her degree… became governor… We can ignore all of this because of the prior sins mentioned. Well, I love it. I love this American story! I love this American woman, I find a lot in common with her, even though I disagree on several issues (including choice, although I am convinced she is not a radical on this issue).
I also hope this American woman, who has great opportunity to lead the tide to break the ceiling, embraces women on a broad basis. At least at this point,is our best bet for 2012.
WOW I like the article Amy – raised some very interesting questions and I appreciate the balance and recognition that Palin has serious issues for many women.
There is once again a backlash of anti-intellectualism going on in this country.
I got to say that I found Bes’ comment about menopausal women extremely SEXIST.
YES THERE IS A GENERATION GAP HERE. Feminist is about self-determination and to marginalize privacy/choice – is to throw out the foundation of feminism.
Also the guilt card so hard: I never have and don’t feel guilty that I have a successful career – and a family. As an executive in a industry, I was mentored and promoted by MEN and have used by success to bring both men and women up in their careers.
I am a feminist which to me is about embracing diverity and equal opportunity for all – men, women. Its about humanism.
But never ever ask this woman or generation to forget about the basis of self-determination: Roe v. Wade (and its earlier case law). It you find this position radical – so be it but history is history and those who forget tend to repeat it.
Thank you Lisa.
If women are to use self-determination (Roe) as the basis for voting, I guess the Democrats are not the way to go. I’m not a legal expert, but Jane Hamsher’s FireDogLake said Obama’s exec order codified Hyde whereas prior it had to be renewed essentially each year….and Terry O’Neill of NOW similarly said that Obama’s exec order was actually worse than Hyde and the biggest setback to choice since Roe. Voting on this one issue and expecting Dems to stand up for women simply does not work!
Good article. It’s hard to write about SP because just saying her name makes some people foam at the mouth and go all psycho. She’s a powerful woman when simply invoking her name sends some people into a tizzy.
By embracing her gender I suppose you mean advocate for women’s causes, support female candidates, etc? I think she’s in an interesting position, she can’t really win over hearts and minds that way because she’s the designated hate receptacle. Palin could join NOW and start endorsing Dem women candidates and people would still attack her. I think her power lies more in embracing who she is and rallying people around their natural rebellion as Americans. I think people are going to wind up supporting her not because she’s female but because they’ve forgotten all about her being female.
I think many of us in this country are wanting a radical champion of women’s rights, a hero, but we don’t know what that looks like, or rather we think it should look like a traditional liberal feminist. I’m all for that, but we’ve been doing things that way for some time now and getting nowhere. Perhaps it’s time to try something different.
I have already addressed the Executive Order in other posts just like I addressed the fact that HCR is legal and not unconstituional in response to the 10th Amendment lovers out there. Let’s not be redudant. And NOW issued a subsequent press release about moving forward.
Obama would be dammed if he did or did not.
Stupak language was stricken – this is a positive. Care to comment on that!
Hyde got reaffirmed – so this should make many women happy here since although they say they believe in choice, they don’t want to be paying for it (as if we don’t pay for it all everyday). Lets be real here Amy!
Me – well I believe in access and without funds – no access. So I will continue to work towards access and contribute to Planned Parenthood and other health care provides that offer services to all women regarding of her socio-economic status.
But, I am not going to bad mouth the Democrats here Amy – this is way beyond political parties. HCR has real positive benefits for millions of american families. As I posted before, if you have the BRCA gene – now you will not be uninsurable or subject to a cap, or that your daughter can get genetically tested without fear. Or that you college daughter can continue health care benefits through 26! This is not spin – this is fact.
So don’t throw out Obama and HCR on this single issue – the very thing that you want me to not do: vote on a single issue: see the irony here.
For the tenth time – gals: is not just about voting on “abortion” – doesn’t any one read.
Choice means more than legal abortion – read Roe and Griswold v. Ct. – read some social and legal history gals.
GENERALLY those who believe in choice also are people who care about the working poor, the less fortunate in society, the homeless, the hungry – we care because we are fellow human beings with universal experiences and perspectives – we do not let fear, anger, and rhetoric control our hearts and minds.
Again I was lucky to have access to education and I have traveled around the world. I married a Muslim at 36 and had kids at 39 and 40 – so I am also a soccer mom! We humans are capable of diverse experiences and perspectives.
You can label be a “liberal elitst” (which I am not) but anti-intellectualism does not make an argument valid.
Certainly this non-confirmist does not have the patent on universal humanism but whether its a generation gap, an education gap, an experience gap, or just those not familar with history, there seems to be a lack of perspective of what “choice” represents. Its not about voting abortion Amy. Its just not.
As far as Anger with the Government – Gary Hart had a nice comment on Anger on the HP – I urge you to read it.
I speak to the younger generation that lacks perspective
So you are saying that Jane Hamsher is wrong Lisa – that Obama’s order enshrined the Hyde Amendment? IDK Lisa – Jane has the 11th largest political blog in the country and seems to know what she is talking about? Her link is in my story.
No I am not saying that Jane Hamsher is right or wrong. I will check it out later and post later today.
I said what I posted – please re-read it. Sorry for the typos but I think my post is easy to understand.
Even it if “enshrined Hyde” (very dramatic here) – why ignore the other very important benefits of the bill?
BTW – do you support universal access to reproductive medical services including abortion services? Do you believe that we as a nation should fund such services? How do you feel about this issue – really – I am not sure where you and The New Agenda gals stand on this? I hear doublespeak!
Lisa: I am a post menopausal woman and I do not think it is sexist to talk about menopause as a catalyst for attitude change. I think it is ridiculous for women who do not have reproductive issues because they are too old or because they are lesbian and don’t have sex that could lead to unwanted pregnancy to consider abortion or reproductive rights THE top women’s issue. Women do not have representation in government or the court system, women who stand up to run for office are mocked and told to sit down at least by Democrats, we still make only 80% of what men make in the work place, We don’t have equal healthcare and aren’t even included in many medical studies, we don’t have a voice in corporate media. By clinging to reproductive rights women have not accomplished anyting or have moved backwards in all other areas. My point is many women can not recognize what is in their own best interest let alone act on what is in their best interest. IMO the women’s movement has failed in the last two decades and I blame them for their failure to remain relevant.
“I guess I just question the rationality of menopausal women who live in this country at this time but still believe reproductive rights and abortion are the most pressing issues facing women.”
” I think it is ridiculous for women who do not have reproductive issues because they are too old or because they are lesbian and don’t have sex that could lead to unwanted pregnancy to consider abortion or reproductive rights THE top women’s issue”
You just don’t get it at all – First of all Bes – if the wingnuts and neo cons did not try to put up obstacles to access or try to limit Roe for the past 30 years -maybe we could stop fighting the reproductive battle. It remains an issue because its alway at issue. Did you ever think this was one of the main reasons?
And just because a women is menopausal or a lesbian – is she suppose to forget who she is, where she came from and the history of privacy/choice. Are you suggesting that unless you are capable of reproducting, that this issue should not impact their belief system?
Did you even read my posts to understand why this issue is paramount – READ: its not about abortion and reproductive freedom and choice. Its a lot more to me and many like me with roots in the 60′s adn 70′s. Don’t marginalize or minimize this issue and what it really represents to women of my generation and the generations before – shame on you.
The women’s movement – has it failed? I certainly achieved success in my lifetime and was promoted up to an executive position while being pregnant – why: because I had access to education and used my god-given talents and intelligence to prove my value and worth – as a person. I was mentored by MEN but used my experience to mentor and promote both men and women.
I think you comment that some women don’t know what is in their best interests is shameful and not supported by any facts: most low income women are too busy taking care of families and working to think about how sexism impacts their lives. But to place blame on women for society’s failure to move past sexism is itself sexist!
“I think you comment that some women don’t know what is in their best interests is shameful and not supported by any facts: most low income women are too busy taking care of families and working to think about how sexism impacts their lives. But to place blame on women for society’s failure to move past sexism is itself sexist!”
Lisa – to correct you, TNA is composed of women from all political and ALL socio-economic backgrounds. And yes, the women in our group, who are as you put it “low income” find the time to blog here about sexism and women’s rights!
Amy- Can you please read a little slower next time; My comment was not directed at the New Agenda Gals – It was a possible explanation that why sexism is not at the forefront of every working women’s daily thought process.
Most of the young women that I mentor and support – don’t talk about sexism – they worry about feeding their kids and keeping their families healthy – having access to medical and dental service providers. The worry about their jobs and their spouses jobs. They worry about aging parents with chronic illnessess – they don’t sit around and point fingers at each other.
Here was the gravaman of the comment: To place blame on women for society’s failure to move past sexism is itself sexist!” Get it now?
Amy – are you going to answer my questions:
BTW – do you support universal access to reproductive medical services including abortion services? Do you believe that we as a nation should fund such services? How do you feel about this issue – really – I am not sure where you and The New Agenda gals stand on this? I hear doublespeak!
Oh Lisa, your elitism and leftist dogma absolutely dominate your comments. We’re dogging the second wave by refusing to address abortion, an argument that hasn’t moved an inch in 35+ years? Access, really? You haven’t lost any, despite 35 years of conservative attacks. See: http://wp.me/pfr8d-E.
And your comments about low-income women are off-the-chart offensive and reek of your privilege. I am and always have been a low-income female, a single mother for 13 years, and my number one issue (outside of providing for my child) the entire time was ending sexism. This was and is my focus because I am a low-income WOMAN raising a daughter alone (or at least I was until I married 3 years ago). I MADE the time to focus on this issue because I was smart and it mattered. It had f*ck-all to do with how much I made.
Sarah Palin? Are you kidding? April Fools Day was last week!
SARAH PALIN LIES ABOUT EVERYTHING, HER STUPIDITY SHOWS EVERY TIME SHE OPENS HER MOUTH….THEN COMES THE FACT CHECKS….THEN COMES HER DESERVED PUT DOWNS, JUST LIKE DURING THE ELECTION.
SHE’S STILL WHINING ABOUT LOSING BIG TIME! She is not a Womans Rights advocate, no Republicans are.
Questions for Palin:
HOW DID WE GET OUT OF THE LAST 7 RECESSIONS?
WHY DID NIXON SAY “WERE ALL KENSIAN’S NOW!
ANSWER: MONETARY EXPANSION BY THE FED BY GOVT SPENDING!
BECAUSE GOVT IS THE ONLY ONE WITH MONEY TO JUMP START THE
DEPRESSED ECONOMY. ALL THE OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED NATIONS
DID THE SAME THING…SUCCESSFULLY!
LISTEN TO PALIN ECONOMICS AND THE UNEMPLOYMENT GOES UP TO
24% AND WE GO IN TO ANOTHER GREAT DEPRESSION. THESE ARE HISTORICAL FACTS….NO AMOUNT OF MORONIC PALIN OR TEA BAGGERS WILL CHANGE THE FACTS. ….REBUKE THEM OR SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE LIES!
PALIN LIE #2 PRESIDENT OBAMA DEBATED ALL THE REPUBLICANS AT ONE TIME
141 TO 1 ….AND WON EVERY POINT!! NO TELEPROMPTER! FOX NEWS TOOK IT OFF THE AIR BECAUSE REPUBLICANS LOOKED SO BAD. FOX SUPRESSED THE NEWS SO THAT IT’S BASE WOULD NOT SEE THE TRUTH! PLEASE RUN
AGAINST HIM ….PLEASE! YOU WOULD NEED MORE THAN FOX TALKING POINTS AND MURDOCK LIES TO HELP YOU…..YOU WOULD BE CREAMED!
REPUBLICAN TERMITE STATES “WE HAVE A HEALTH CARE PLAN THAT WOULD DO ALL THAT AND COST NOTHING”
OBAMA: IF YOU HAD THAT, WHY WOULDN’T I DO IT? THE TROUBLE IS I CAN’T FIND ONE INDEPENDENT ECONOMIST TO SAY IT WILL WORK”
ME: IF YOU HAD SUCH A BILL, WHY DIDN’T YOU PASS IT FOR THE LAST 8 YRS
WHILE THE PROBLEM WAS GETTING WORSE AND REPUBLICANS WERE IN POWER…..YOUR BLATENT LIE IS EXPOSED AND REBUKKED!
Anna
Is that all you got: dogma elitism? what exactly do you mean dear?
Why such rhetoric – got any substance behind those words.
Amy is the one bashing Obama for the Executive Order – not me silly girl. What is your point and relevance to my comments?
I was born and raised in a steel town first generation Italian gal that had some brains, took risks, and looked/moved forward. Yes – call me names but offer no meaningful commentary or narrative to what I posted.
I did not mean to offend low income families – the comment was not meant to insult working families – I explained my foundation for my comment.
Just because I was able to obtain an education does not make me an elitist – you are so off base here its laughable. Again, nice name calling.
What exactly are you all about? . . . .
If you really read my posts in the context of the blog exchange I am not your enemy or an elitist – just perhaps a little older, wiser and aware – is this makes me a left wing elitist in your opinion – well so be it.
What is your point exactly?What is your perspective then? Pray tell me:
READING WAS A PRIVILEDGE OF THE RICH MEN, NOW IT’S A RIGHT FOR ALL INCLUDING WOMEN.
OWNING LAND WAS A PRIVILEDGE OF THE RICH MEN, NOW IT’S A RIGHT OF OWNERSHIP FOR ANYBODY INCLUDING WOMEN.
FREEDOM WAS A PRIVILEDGE OF THE RICH AND THE POLITICALLY CORRECT TRIBE, NOW IT’S A RIGHT OF ALL.
WOMEN’S VOTING WAS A PRIVILEDGE FOR MEN ONLY, NOW IT’S A UNIVERSAL RIGHT OF WOMEN.
a womans body and her children was a PROPERTY right of her husband and dictated by her religion and king, now it’s her right to own her own body and equally her child.
TORTURE AND ILLEGAL INCARCERATION USED TO BE THE RIGHT OF THE RICH AND CONNECTED, NOW IT IS ILLEGAL AND A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.
RELIGION USED TO BE MANDATED BY THE GROUP IN POWER, NOW IT IS A PROTECTED HUMAN RIGHT FOR ALL RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.
EQUAL PAY WAS ONCE A PRIVILEDGE FOR THE WHITE MEN, NOW IT’S EVERY WOMANS RIGHT.
EVERYWHERE, PROGRESSIVE THOUGHT, THE ENLIGHTENMENT, AND LIBERAL THINKING HAVE PUSHED BACK THE DARKNESS, WHILE THE RICH AND CONNECTED TRY TO TURN THE CLOCK BACK TO SLAVERY AND TYRANNY
. LIST THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY FOR WOMEN ON ONE PAGE AND YOU CAN QUICKLY FILL UP TWO OR MORE PAGES.
LIST THE ACHIEVEMENTS FOR WOMEN OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND YOU WILL QUICKLY SEE WHO CREATED THE CITY ON THE HILL , NOT THE PRIVILEDGED RICH , BUT, THE EMERGING , ENLIGHTENED MIDDLE CLASS
CREATED BY DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!
NO WOMAN SHOULD EVER VOTE REPUBLICAN…THEY HAVE BEEN THROUGH OUT HISTORY…. AGAINST YOU!
People like Lisa are why NOW named Mr. Obama a feminist. She is literally “blinded” by her alleged progressivism. Debating her is like herding cats….why do it?
eleanor,
I’m going to have to stop you there…to correct you, MOST of women’s achievements, including the right to vote, came under Republican administrations- many of the leading voices of the ERA were Republican. Now I’m not defending the Republican’s of today on women’s rights – nor can you defend the Dems – NEITHER is looking out for women!
JeninTX
OH Miss Jen from TX is here – how nice and nice try – again – attack me not the actual arguments. Here you go again, a so called law school graduate who believes the HCR bill is unconstitutional. And what was the connection that you made about Hitler – that was very odd and illogical. Kinda Scary -but I like black cats!
You just can’t stand that I don’t agree with you or Amy – You just hate that I have an OPINION. Keep attacking me not my arguments – try, but of no substance.
Meow Meow Meow I love cats!
Its hardly a debate if the only comments are personal and don’t have anything to do with the blog exchange.
Lisa,
A lot of the young women I mentored were physically abused by their boyfriends and husbands and were victims of rape both as young women and children. Many of my clients grew up in families where their education was minimized so that they could support the rest of the family and the family could focus on the male children.
My clients didn’t talk about sexism either. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t there.
Alison: thanks for your comment. Note, my comment did not imply that “sexism” was not there. What was important to take away from my comment(s) is that most women DO NOT SIT AROUND AND POINT FINGERS at each other.
Here is my response to the prior poster: read the last sentence:
“I think your comment that some women don’t know what is in their best interests is shameful and not supported by any facts: most low income women are too busy taking care of families and working to think about how sexism impacts their lives. But to place blame on women for society’s failure to move past sexism is itself sexist!”
The prior poster was arguing that the women’s movement may have failed because of women. Has the women’s movement failed? I don’t think so – there have been many strides: I am the product of it and have succeeded. There are many other women like me but just because we are educated does not make us forget our roots. Don’t dance on the graves of those who walked before us – and don’t diss your elders from a generation before you: never forget.
Just because we are educated does not make us liberal elites not that there is anything wrong with liberalism – its just labels don’t mean a thing without discourse.
What has failed is unfettered capitalism spurned on by decades of deregulation and greed. Then we saw 8 years of unfettered spending on 2 wars with the major beneficaries being Bush/Chaney’s military industrial buddies. ***Digressing here:
I am in the financial industry and I saw the risk that AIG and other financial institutions were taking while racking up billions in fees. My retired boss and I would say: no one could figure out AIG (We said they pre-Enron too) financials! This was 1997-98!
Don’t blame the homeowner – the real fraud and greed took place by by insiders: mortgage brokers, closing agents, and the greed of the mortgage banking industry (by offering rid. risky loans and loan terms) could not get enought in the early 2000s.
So the blogger wants to point her finger at women – at me, who believe in hope and progress. She wants to blame me, an educated “elitist” for the nation’s failure to protect women and women’s interest. She wants to blame other women? Shameful, tsk tsk tsk.
I think this thread and some of the comments at the DB show why I have a problem with the idea that Palin must embrace her gender. If she were to take that path, men and women in this country will not follow suit. Women have not learned how to support other women, so the favor would not be returned.
But also, Palin really is embracing her gender. She’s doing everything we want to see powerful women do, enjoying success, being involved in politics, leading a movement, raising her family, etc. I think when we say we want Palin to embrace her gender what we mean is we want her to heal the problems within the woman’s movement, to fix people’s response to powerful women, to make everything all better. She can’t do that, not directly, she has to simply take care of herself and lead the way
Lisa. In an earlier post you blast Bes for saying in essence that women’s rights were more than just choice by saying “to marginalize privacy/choice – is to throw out the foundation of feminism” and then you say regarding health care reform and it’s elimination of paying for a women’s right to an abortion “So don’t throw out Obama and HCR on this single issue…” If you really believe that women’s right to choose is the “foundation of feminism,” aren’t you obliterating that “foundation” by supporting the health care bill which specifically eliminates ONLY that? Either it’s the “holy grail” of feminism or it is one piece of the big picture, it can’t be both.
yttik,
I think there is the short-term and the long-term. I’m basing this on Anne Kornblut’s book in part, but upon reading that, the easiest thing Hillary could have done differently in order to win would have been to gender identify and ask for women’s votes as a woman. Sen Gillibrand does this shamelessly in NY and no one screws with her! It’s the path less traveled, but one that can work!
Loralee;
NO you did not follow the narratives – I was responding to 2 separate isues – two separate comments – review string.
New Agenda is “neutral” on abortion. I am not neutral on this issue and its a deal breaker for me for any candidate, male or female, to not be pro-choice.
When asked why I won’t deal on this issue – I explained my “foundation” that it has more do to with the act of abortion. You may want to re-review the string. Dont’ forget – Bes was questioning why menopausal and lesbian women’s adherence to choice as a dealbreaker – in a candidate.
Obama signed a historic health care bill. Obama also signed the executive order. I am not throwing out the health care bill because of the executive order – because its benefits outweight the status quo burden of Hyde but that does not mean I am not going to stop fighting for Hyde’s demise.
You see – The New Agenda can’t have it both ways: you can’t be really be neutral on abortion – if you are – why waive the big red flag on the executive order if your really don’t adhere or believe in public funding of abortion – see the irony here.
Its like: forget reproductive freedom and its history – we have more important things to tackle and talk about but yet Obama is being called on the Executive Order. What I said to Amy was I was not going to throw out the benefits of the HCR with Obama’s decision to maintain the status quo of Hyde. I named the immediate benefits to which no one has even bothered to comment on.
Next, based on my experience on this blog with women who admire Palin or may be conservative on abortion – they seem to argue that is a women’s choice to have an abortion but the gov’t should not pay for it! Did Obama sell out women by not eradicating Hyde – but did Obama sell out american families including single mother households when enacting the HCR: I think not.
I am looking at the bigger perspective here – so I am not going to throw out the baby with the bathwater. But I will throw out a candidate (not a sitting elected President) that is not pro-choice. What Obama did DOES NOT EQUATE TO BEING ANTICHOICE! Stupak’s language did not get in – this is a victory. Does any care to applaud the DEMS and Pelosi on this – No! Let’s just whine on a issue that the NG claims neutrality on.
Hope this makes sense to you. If not, sorry.
Amy,
great post and discussion!
However, I disagree with you that Hillary should have used gender identification when she ran for president. The MSM, the DNC, obama supporters and the blogs would not allow her to even mention that she was a “woman” or they would attack (they her attacked anyway). I think after the primary, people realized for the first time just how misogynistic our country really is and how wrong they were about Hillary. I still remember her magnificent speech in June to her supporters soon after the Democratic Convention and the realization that we may have just lost our chance to have one of the best presidents in our country’s history.
It is because of that “awakening” by the American people (particularly, women) that Senator Gilibrand is now able to run using gender identification. It’s a reminder that an extraordinary candidate — Hillary Clinton — was denied the nomination not because she was a woman (as many claimed along the way) but because of the lying, cheating and gaming of the caucus system and the outrageous actions of the Rules and By-laws Committee on May 31st in awarding obama delegates he didn’t earn and giving him 4 of Hillary’s delegates to boot, and then enabled by the DNC and a free pass by the MSM, in order to ensure that he got the nomination, despite Hillary’s winning the popular vote (sounds very similar to what happened between GW Bush and Gore in the 2000 election and the dems howled in protest at the cheating in that election!)
It was because of Hillary’s willingness not to quit after the Iowa primary and to endure the daily vitriolic, misogynistic attacks that makes it possible for Gilibrand and other women to use gender identification when running for office. Hillary paid the huge price for women to no longer be afraid to “run as women” and to assert the differences that women bring to the political arena and to governing that are greatly needed to get us out of our present mess.
Women have never been given anything in this country. We’ve had to fight, die and sacrifice since the country’s inception to get where we are today and we still have a long, long way to go.
We owe so much to women like Hillary and Sarah for leading the way to making the idea of a woman as president “unexceptional”! I just pray that I live long enough to see the day when we will finally hear these two words spoken — “Madame President”.
Kathleen,
Well you all know how we feel about Hillary – she is our hero and the raison d’etre for The New Agenda.
The link in my article goes to an article by Anne Kornblut of WAPO and her book Notes from the Cracked Ceiling. The conclusion of that book is that Hillary was late in getting women behind her – not until after NH – because she was busy being a macho candidate…and if women had been with her all along, she might have won. Now, yes, maybe should would have lost votes too, but it was AFTER she embraced her womanhood that she won state after state.
Amy,
I think Kornblut did not take into consideration what Hillary was up against with her own party. I’m certain she knew that her colleagues in the Senate had, behind her back, taken steps to push for obama to run for the presidency. She also saw how the DNC, the MSM and everything in between, said that if she did use gender identification, it would be viewed as a weakness because it would send the message that she wanted to be treated differently from her male counterparts. I don’t think she was being “macho” but was sending the message that, as a woman, she did not expect or want preferential treatment.
It was clear that she was expected to run as if the playing field was level and it was not until the end of the primary that we realized just how lopsided it really was in favor of obama.
Hindsight is always 20-20 and I don’t think it’s fair to say that had Hillary used gender identification more prominently, things would have been different for her. On the contrary. I think it would have been worse because the predominantly male run media would have turned her doing this as proof that a woman could not take the heat of a presidential election.
By her not using any kind of gender-based approach, she proved that a woman could go toe to toe with the men and beat them at their own game, by their own rules. It is because of that courageous decision that the negative progagando of using gender identification can no longer be used as a weapon against women running for office. In fact, it’s now viewed as a plus.
Lisa,
You are the one whose posts exude arrogance and pettiness, and I don’t see one in which you don’t insult or try to minimize people with a nice word at the end. “antiintellectualism” “You can’t follow the narratives”"you just don’t get it at all” etc. etc.I know the style, that’s how they teach you in college to feel better than the rest. But You got the wrong lessons.
According to you we’re dumb and “anti-intellectual” because we do not agree with you. Has it crossed your mind that there is a great deal of sense in the anti-establishment-intellectualism from left and right, which among many other things, joined forces to destroy a successful working woman and politician? We’re actually intellectuals (yes, even those who don’t have a degree), contributing ideas and proposals to move women into the future. You don’t have to agree, you can stay stuck in perpetuating the last 40 years.
I don’t care where you come from, and I applaud you for becoming the lucky 2% of the population of the world with an education like yours and most of us here (many of us have masters and PhDs, as well as little “formal” school); but that is not all in life, and it shows you’ve worked hard at erasing any of the transparency and decency of common people.
I can just visualize you …”If you just read my pooooooosts…you would realiiiiize….that I am greaaaaat……..and hold the aaaaaabsolulte truth….because I graduated from coooollege, and you don’t know where I wooooork and the positions I’ve achiiiieved…..you miserable insignificant, daaaaarlings”.
My apoligies, but you you came here to lecture us about our “wrong” ways. I don’t see any respect in your posts, and you evidently have not earned any here.
And Eleanor, as my 16 year old says…Get help.
Kathleen – you might very well be right. It’s always easier to coach a team looking at tapes of games so to speak. I suppose all that counts now is where we are and how we move forward. Here’s to that!
Yet another personal attack. You so funny.
Care to comment on what i said: not who you think I am?
Since when is caring that children have insurance arrogant?
Since when is standing against hateful fearmongering and hateful rhetoric anti-populist?
My posts are not about who is and not educated. Dare I say start over.
My college and law school professors did not teach in the manner you state above – that is why I learned critical thinking.
There is no one truth unless you are talking about hard science and math – very little about life is black and white – its more shades of grey.
You so funny: do you really think I need any validation from you or anyone – I was just stating my life experience – in response to the personal attacks. No more no less. Good God take a chill pill.
You so boring – put on your big gal pants and grow up! God forbid a person has perspective, education, and an opinion – you act like its a bad thing.
As far as you idol Sarah Palin or the likes of her pal, Michelle Bachman – I don’t need to say or do anything to destroy their careers or aspirations: they do it all by themselves everytime they open their mouths.
yawn – sorry to have made you think instead of just blink!
Before I go away – isn’t it sad that only 2% according to you post- have access to education.
Note – I am not questioning your stats – but its a sorry day if that is close to the number.
Education is one social equalizer in a complex technicial world that we live in: so too, is health care and access to health care services.
Is this elitist propaganda? Just because I desire that more people and women have more opportunities and access to both – does this make me an arrogant intellectual?
I think not!
Morning Cgeorge
Read you post again – i love when bloggers put words in my mouth: I did not call anyone dumb – so if I defend myself and ask the bloggess to read what I wrote in context – its hardly calling someone dumb!
How and what would I be perpetuating – you throw around words but really I am having a hard time understanding what you are saying –
And its funny that you are attacking me just because I have an opinion – and education. Attack the messenger not the message.
Don’t forget – when you point fingers at others – there are three fingers pointing back at you.
Yep, you betcha that I won’t be voting vagina anytime in this lifetime.
Sorry ladies but I have to say one more thin to cGeorgia
What would Hillary Clinton think of my position/arguments?
Is Hillary an educated elitist?
Why such a backlash against me – afterall the last 8 years this country has not been run by any brain trust in fact its the exact oppostite.
What am I perpetuating Georgia – care to actually explain your comments – care to illuminate?
Just because there is a populist movement (which is a good thing in my book) does not mean that we should discard rational thought.
Cgeorgia, Thank you for your post. I started typing a similar response when I went back and looked at the numerous posts and realized that it wasn’t worth it. There wasn’t going to be meaningful debate and I wasn’t going to gain any new insight on the subject. You validated my suspicions of rudeness and condescension in the midst of these “conversations.” I thought I was just being a typical overly sensitive woman (wink).
Kathleen,
You make a good point that Hillary proved that she could go toe to toe with the good ole boys. But didn’t she do that all along, even when Bill was Governor? Didn’t she prove herself in her speech at Wellesley and then as an intern (Republican)? Didn’t she blow Obama out of the water in virtually every debate? There are so many woman in this country who look at an outspoken brilliant woman like Hillary and think to themselves “why can’t she be more like Jackie O.” It’s as if a woman who shows her intelligience seems vulgar to a large part of our population. Even my extremely conservative friends (who despised Hilllary) were saying that since there weren’t good options they might vote for Obama. How is it that ultra conservative women who would have never considered voting for a Democrat would contemplate picking an ultra liberal male over a more moderate female?
On another note, I dream about Michale Moore doing a movie on Hilllary and Palin’s trevails during the election. I don’t know if anyone else saw Katie Couric’s interview with him years ago but I was appalled. Partly because I really admired the fact that Micael Moore was one of the first liberals to come out and really slam Bush (whne the Dems in Congress failed to). I didn’t love Katie anyway as I saw her speak at a women’s business conference. I am ashamed to say that I remember thinking that I had to sit through listening to ditzy Debbie “the cookie lady” in order to get to listen to Katie. Debbie was wonderful and outshined “the intellectual” Katie Couric who came off as well… a ditz. (sorry) Anyway, I am pasting a dialogue of Michale Moore’s interview. Is there anyone that knows him and can convince him to do a documentary on women in politics? Just a dream.
Was this the beginning of the end for good journalism or was I just not seeing it before this.
KATIE COURIC TRASHES MICHAEL MOORE ON TODAY SHOW
Posted By: Ghost
Date: Wednesday, 1-Sep-2004 12:33:07
In perhaps the most stunning morning news show interview I’ve ever seen, Katie Couric just got through thoroughly trashing Michael Moore.
She began by criticizing the scenes in Fahrenheit 911 depicting a pre-war Iraq of children peacefully playing and weddings taking place. “Wasn’t that misleading?” Moore claimed he only used the footage to show the kinds of people killed by US bombing, not to suggest Saddam’s Iraq was a “utopia.”
Next, Katie said that “many people say the Dems don’t want you to be the face of the party.”
“Who said that?” demanded Moore. “Well, Tim Russert for one,” answered Katie.
She added: “let’s face it, many people think you’re a jerk.”
An obviously hurt Moore responded: “but you don’t think I’m a jerk, do you Katie?”
Katie refused to come to his aid: “well, my views aren’t important, it’s the views of the Dem party.”
“But come on, Katie, you know me.”
“I really don’t know you very well.”
“But, come one, from talking after the shows, etc. You don’t think I’m a jerk, do you?”
“I really don’t know you well enough to say that.”
Finally, in a scene so amazing I could hardly believe my eyes and ears, Moore virtually asked Katie out on a date, and was shot down with a classic co-ed line.
Katie asked Moore if he’d be going back to the convention and Moore said he would, probably tonight and tomorrow. Then Moore added: “will you come with me, Katie?”
A shocked Katie replied: “No,” then, incredibly, added: “I HAVE TO RE-ARRANGE MY SOCK DRAWER.”
Yes, she actually said it. Katie made it clear that she loathes Moore and fears that as the prominent face of the party, he is dragging down her boy Kerry.
Nice girls – wink, nod, put on you little white gloves and have a conversation.
Too bad you have problems with bluntness, facts, and counterpoints – so I am perceived as “rude.” Any other names you would like to throw out – or how about somemore rhetoric – and name calling.
This site is not for my generation. Now you have made it a site that is anti-intellectual – don’t worry I won’t waste my time.
If you think my little comments are bad – wow you should read – what the other blogs say about this site and articles.
Have a lovely spring and don’t stain those gloves!
Loralee,
Yes, Hillary has proven herself a million times over. Women are expected to do that every day, no matter how extraordinary their work is.
As I’ve said many times in response to this country’s vitriolic response to any women running for high political office — “the men would rather destroy the village, than have a woman in charge of it.”
TNA has put up an excellent post about Brooksley Born who warned back in the 90′s that the economic bubble was about to burst and the boyz, Greenspan, Rubin and Summers more or less told her to shut up! Despite the fact that she was right and could have saved our country the economic heartache we are having to endure today, I bet she will not be given the recognition and appreciation she deserves for trying to do what was best for the country, nor will she replace any of these men. No, her courageous efforts will all be lost and forgotten and these men who were responsible for the economic meltdown will remain in power and not be held accountable in any way. How’s that for a double standard?
Amy – this site is not balanced or bipartsian. I don’t know if you will even post this because one of my other comments did not make it here.
What I discern is: The New Agenda Gals are united and if any other gal express an opinion, defends herself or is blunt (rude) – we suddenly become a label. A label with no factual basis.
When Hillary lost the primary – you switched your allegiance to McCain/Palin and now seem to blast everything that Obama and Pelosi do, not do, and now have done with HCR.
You articles here and on other blogs -love to criticize Pelosi (are we suppose to be united for women’s sake)for Stupak but did not say a PEEP about the eradication of Stupak in the final bill. Then you ding Obama about the Executive Order but won’t answer my question if you believe in funding for abortion (funding equals access). Silence. Nothing. Ever. . .
Like someone said, “Reality has a liberal bias”
You go from you so-called allegiance to Hillary, a pro-choice champion of all women to writing many articles about Palin – a anti-choice gal who presently is being perceived as aligned with the Tea Party and also courting the fringe with her “cross hair” rhetoric. speaking at ea Party and other neocons. If she is moderate, her words and actions defy her.
You can claim neutrality when your writings are anything but but I won’t go as far as what the other bloggers say about you and TNA because you are entitled to your opinion and beliefs. Note gals: I am not being rude or personally attacking Amy!
I just question why you write articles about Palin and not Pelosi and why you want to demonize Pelosi but not call Palin on her fearmongering and antichoice position. Or say anything positive Obama and the direct benefit to families arising out the HCR. Has Obama done anything right in your eyes?
I understand if you don’t answer – most of my posts end like this – nothing, silence, from the other side.
Thank you Loralee,
I agree with you and Kathleen. Some women participate in this: “the men would rather destroy the village, than have a woman in charge of it”.
But most curious, is that it is “progressive” men an women who are at the vanguard.
As Amy has reiterated, this has to open our eyes as to who does and does not support women, and look for real feminist alliances from everywhere in the political spectrum (would it be too radical to say embrace all those who are actually willing to support women?)
Kathleen, THanks for the heads up on the Brooksley Born thing. I ordered 2 DVD’s of PBS’s story on her, one for the CFO in the company my husband works for. How anyone can watch this and not question Obama on his appointment of Summers is beyond me.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am
February 17, 2012 at 2:39 pm
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
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...