@RNC: Where are the feminists?

Lots of other Republican female names were floated for consideration, including Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Meg Whitman, both of whom I actually respect, if I don't agree with them on most issues. Why were they passed over? Seems like a slap in the face to some truly accomplished women.  And from their reactions to McCain's choice, they were well aware of the insult.

I'll give you a hint:  despite their experience, wisdom, and achievements, they're not exactly spring chickens, and they actually have both had the temerity to step out of line and believe that women should have control over their reproductive systems. 

I'm a feminist who is defending her. 

On my girl empowerment blog I'm encouraging all mothers and fathers to speak respectfully of Sarah Palin whether the agree with her politics or not.

My hope is that our daughters never see another election with 4 men on the tickets and how we react to Sarah Palin will stick with our daughters in a fundamental way. 

http://traceesioux.blogspot.com/2008/09/i-hate-sar...

Empowering Girls: So Sioux Me ( http://www.traceesioux.blogspot.com )

Blog Fabulous ( http://www.blogfabulous.com )

"Amen" sister all the way!

Shelly P - you wrote:

PS The next time someone in one of these discussion threads at Bloger comes along and talks about Poor Sarah Palin and the sexist attacks against her: you'd better be prepared to have link, and specifics handy. Because I'm tired of you controlling ths conversation with innuendo and hearsay.

I apologize - I have two kids dancing around me screaming, and although it might seem calculated that I don't link or give specifics, I just can't juggle like most women do.  But I decided that it was important  enough to at least give a quick shout out how I felt.  I was just responding to the post, not trying to debate/argue with the other posters.   

are sometimes on the mark.

But sometimes, like
when her positions and experience are the issue, the complaint of
Sexism is a handy tool used by the GOP and their supporters to distract
from the real issues.

She's an engaging speaker. But she's not Veep material.

Period.

http://maurhoffbarney.blogspot.com/2008/09/so-wher...

~Margaret

I love you kid but I don't believe you are that naive.  This is not a simple issue.  First off, it is my perception that Palin is taking more hits from the fundamentalist right than from the liberal left regarding her parenting choices vis a vis her suitability to lead.

Maybe I haven't watched enough hours of television, read enough newspapers, or spent enough time on the web.  But it appears to me that most of the criticism the democrats/feminists/liberals (the ephemeral "them") does not discuss her parenting choices so much as it questions her right to freely bash others without receiving the same sort of treatment. 

I don't agree that attack merits an attack in kind.  But when the values that people hold dear are belittled and held up to ridicule, the average person tends to defend herself. 

I disagree with the commenter who sounds as though the fact that Palin is not a feminist means feminists have no obligation to defend her right to make her own personal choices.  On the other hand, I feel no obligation to support her simply because she is female.  As a woman who has chosen to run for public office, she must take her licks like a grownup.

She cannot freely (and I think unfairly) slam Obama and expect to not experience some backlash.

My question is this.  Is this really about misogyny?  Or is it about a shameless manipulation to woo unhappy Clinton voters?  Frankly, I do like Palin.  I don't like her politics.  And I don't see her as presidential material at this point in her career.  That's an opinion and not a judgement of her as a person.

I do not think that questioning Palin's ability to lead our country in the right direction is misogynistic.  The questions about her family are simply red herrings.  It is imperative that democratic and/or feminist women take a look at her, as well as at Obama, with regard to their platforms, their agendas, and what they have to offer this country in the way of competent leadership.

Being an old fart, I am truly more comfortable with the thought of Hillary Clinton in office than either Obama or Palin.  But silly as it may seem, my heart cries out for a president who has some concept of what it means to be "The Other."

I might like the idea of a woman in such a powerful position.  But I care deeply that it be a woman with whom I feel some political alignment.

Really, I'm trying to understand why women are so drawn to Palin, her mothering experiences aside.  So far, what I have seen of her record is disheartening when it comes to issues of education and healthcare. 

I don't think either side will ever truly believe that the other person has the country's best interests at heart.  And that, my dears, is why the political process will continue to be fraught with emotion, high rhetoric, and wild accusation.  We are, after all, talking about our lives.

Always in trouble...

She has an ideology regarding abstinence and sex education which did not work for her and her family, a policy of this kind  is something we do have the right to question her about. We don't have the right to bother her daughter, but yes in this case we certainly do have the right to question her on this, and she should be questioned fully on what she thinks of the women without the supportive family, without the moony , whose boyfriend took off, a women whose economic potential because of it will be forever affected, a women who has thought long and struggled with her decision. I'd like to know what she has to say because what can she say but she doesn't really give a crap about those women because she believes what she believes.

It's election time. I'm going to worry about not electing a group of people whose policies I abhor.
If I see something on my site sexist or racist I smack it down, but I don't see that often. I would comment on it if I saw it, but I'm not  going to go searching far and wide for it just to make an issue out of it when right now it is not as significant to me as the answers to questions on healthcare, choice, education, civil liberties, corporate welfare. Iraq, foreign policy, NAFTA, and pork spending

cooper

Freedom of religion does not mean that one group is free to impose their religious beliefs on me, and yet that is exactly what is proposed by many Republican policies. (Examples: teaching creationism in public schools, allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill legitimate prescriptions for birth control based on the pharmacists' religious beliefs, teaching abstinence-only education, allowing religious organizations that receive federal funding for secular work to discriminate against potential employees for their religions, etc. etc.) This is a candidate who tried to ban books that offended her from a public library, so obviously she feels free to enforce her personal religious beliefs on me.

Suzanne Reisman ( http://www.blogher.com/member/suzanne-reisman ), Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender ( http://blogher.org/topic/feminism-gender )
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants ( http://cussandotherrants.com/ )

Not in her role as a woman, mother, or wife, but as a candidate. In a speech that begged the Democrats to attack her, she (and Guiliani before her) attacked Senator Obama with ridicule (making fun of community organizers) and used blatant lies. She said that Obama would raise taxes and make it more difficult for people to make ends meet. (Obama's plan calls for raising taxes for those who make more than $250,000 year and for lowering them for everyone else.) She said she turned down the funding for the infamous Bridge to Nowhere (only after campaigning for it). In warm, fuzzy, I'm a wonderful Mom moment, she said she
would be the friend to all those people, who like herself, were rasing
a child of special needs. As the govenor of Alaska, she cut funding for
Health and Education. And at no time did she talk about her anti-abortion, anti-choice views. But what really irked me was how she had the gall to make fun of Obama, laugh at him--what is she, a late-night talk show host? I understand that at the Convention candidates can say outrageous things and the audience will wildly cheer no matter what is said. But, come on.

The McCain/Palin ticket scares me. With his documented memory lapses, Palin is poised to become President sooner than anyone thinks if they prevail in November. Give me a calm, rational, thoughtful, intelligent community organizer (MLK was a community organizer and so was Gandhi) any day over a pair of emotional and impulsive community disorganizers.

I think that sexism and racism is so insidious in our political structure that it makes dealing with a very complex task. I make every attempt to call out both when I see it, and I'm trying to check myself when I realize I'm acting or thinking in sexist or privileged white woman ways.

At the same time, I find myself balancing my relationships with how much I'm willing to say. Would I say to my 88 year old grandfather that he is being sexist if he makes a comment? Honestly, probably not. His heart couldn't take the conflict. But would I tell my father, a man who is open to considering other views (if not terribly inherently enlightened)? Yes. Absolutely. But I wouldn't call my in-laws on it probably b/c of what it would do to my husband. So it becomes fluid, which I'm not sure is appropriate, but it is what it is.

I'd like to think the times I speak matter more than the times I don't, but I think that is just wishful thinking. I know the consequences of silence. But I do think that sometimes is better than never; it's a start. 

Feminist here and I stood up for her http://sandradginzburg.typepad.com/inner_city_mama...

Doesn't mean I'm gonna vote for her.

Sandy

"When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with
any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or you know
maybe a sharper microscope put on her I say man that doesn’t do us any
good. Women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this
county. I don’t think it’s, it bodes well for her a statement like
that." - Sarah Palin

Take it like a woman Sarah and quit whining!

As a conservative woman, I take huge offense at that blanket summation of Republican women.  We're not all beauty queens, we aren't all incapable of speaking unless men feed us our lines, we have plenty of original ideas, and last time I looked, we still have freedom of religion in this country. 

Katherine Stone

I agree, we aren't talking about the issues but I also believe sexism (and yes racism too) are issues that need to be addressed alongside. Ignoring them doesn't do anyone any good.

And about racism, I certainly agree that we need to point it out and say it is not acceptable when we see it happening. We did that last night in the liveblog of Palin's speech. If it happens again, and unfortunately I'm sure it will, we'll call it out again. It's just as wrong and is not acceptable for any reason or by anyone.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Because we're not talking about the issues that should be talked about because of this constant focus on sexism. After a time, it becomes less a call to arms, and more a smoke screen to prevent hard questions from being asked.

Seriously, if you want to point out specifics, then I'll be there with wit and keyboard sharpened, ready to dig in. The same, as I hope, we would do with racism, such as Westmoreland's recent debacle, calling both the Obamas, "uppity". Uppity negroes, indeed. 

Otherwise, let's start talking about the issues.

You aren't suggesting that the only sexism worth standing up against is that displayed by party leadership, are you?

And you aren't suggesting that bloggers don't have any influence over people who read their posts, are you?

I hope that when you saw sexist behavior or heard sexist language from a Republican that you called him/her/it out on it. I certainly have been and will continue to do so.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Agreed.  Specifics, please.

I've heard many Dems defending Palin against sexist remarks.  In fact, on a grassroots site for Obama supporters who give feedback to the campaign, "Don't Focus on Palin's Pregnancy" is in the Top 5 Most Popular request from the grassroots since the news came out.

Though everything else?  Fair game.  That's politics and that is part of the process of vetting a potential President/VP.  If any of them, including Palin, can't handle the attacks on their policies and experience?  Then how can we expect them to handle Putin or any other foreign head of state?

Putin would care less that she is woman and wouldn't cut her any slack either.  

Specifics, Denise. Link to the sexist statement, or quote it fully.

Not some two-bit forum reader or blogger--we all know sexism and racism are both alive and well online. I'm talking about Democratic party leadership, or others who would have an influence on this race. 

Where are the specifics? Because after the last couple of days, the only sexists I'm seeing are the Republicans. 

Can you attack her policies while still standing up and saying "that's sexist, that's misogynistic" when she is attacked in those ways?

That's the question.

I don't think anyone who supports Governor Palin (though I can't speak for everyone) wants you to stop debating the issues or questioning Palin on her political or social ideas.

What we, or I, want to know is can those of you who do not plan to vote for her point out misogyny when you see it aimed at her? Can we all stand together to fight that one thing? Is it possible for all of us to stand together against sexism?

We didn't do a good job of it when Senator Clinton was in the race and I don't think we're doing a very good job of it for Governor Palin. If we don't take a stand on this together, right now, when will we? How many more women will run for higher office and be faced with sexist treatment by politicians, by media (both new and old) and by voters?

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Last night Palin was as negative as they come, and today all the dreamy eyed souls come along and say, Poor Sarah, all these people are mean to you.

You can't have it both ways: either Palin can handle herself, or she can't and confirms what we all know--that she would be a lousy vice president.

What did Gloria write (at http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/l... ( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/l...,0,1290251.story ))?

So let's be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been
a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Palin's value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control
of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest
high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the
lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

And Gloria wrote all of this without one reference to Palin being a mother. Because she wrote about Palin as a candidate for the postiion of vice president of the US. We not only have a right to question Palin, we have a moral obglication to do so.

After last night, the gloves are off with Palin. If she thinks she's going to get a free ride from this point, not a bloody chance.

PS The next time someone in one of these discussion threads at Bloger comes along and talks about Poor Sarah Palin and the sexist attacks against her: you'd better be prepared to have link, and specifics handy. Because I'm tired of you controlling ths conversation with innuendo and hearsay. 

Wow, I don't see Sarah or you in me.

You know, except for the uterus part.

When my grandmother and mother fought for
equal rights that they were fighting for my opportunity to vote for someone whose policies I most agree with.

Which means that I'm not voting for Palin.

I don’t subscribe to the line of thought that I’m supposed to vote my gender because it is my gender. That would make me no better than all of the white men who shut women and African Americans out of the political race for so long. And I think that equality means freedom to vote your conscience. Enough of this “You’re betraying your gender!” line of argument. It’s insulting to the intelligence of women.

I have always voted above the waistline and always will.  It is what my grandmother and mother fought for the opportunity to do.

But attacking her policies should be fair game. I've read plenty from feminists who have said the same thing. Plenty of feminists are outraged about how the focus has been on whether Palin is a "good" (good, of course, being relative) mother. And the outrage should be there.

But I will attack her on the policy issues that I have problems with. Which is very nearly everything. We don't expect men to band together just because they have similar anatomy. Men are always disagreeing about policy decisions. But I'm supposed to support Palin because we both have vaginas? 

I disagree with Palin on some very fundamental policy issues. That's sort of thing I'd like to see covered. I agree that she shouldn't be attacked by what her kids are doing or her personal life choices. But don't expect me to like her just because we're both women. 

And don't turn questions about her policymaking into questions about sexism. (The Republican Party is starting to do this.) Investigating Trooper Gate and wondering about how she would implement sex-ed funding is not sexist. Those are valid questions we'd ask a male candidate as well. 

This Time, It's Personal ( http://bloggingprofessional.blogspot.com )

YieldingWealth.com ( http://www.YieldingWealth.com )

All this negativity about a talented woman, makes me want her ticket to win even more.

And the attacks by women?   I wanna hand them the book "She Wins, You Win" by Gail Evans.    Articles like Gloria Steinem's made me sad.   How can people have so much ill will and sleep at night?

I see "me" in Sarah.  And every time they attack Sarah, I feel like they attack me and what's important to me. 

I liked Sarah Palin from the start.  Now I rabidly LOVE her : )     

and I know feminists, and feminists are my friends, and Sarah Palin is no feminist.

She's the dream Republican female candidate: she's a beauty queen, she does a very believeable job of parroting the line the men around her (Stevens, McCain, Rove) feed her, and she doesn't challenge them.  She has no original ideas.  Not to mention her church (Assembly of God), which is very conservative and patriarchal and whose values she thinks should be perpetrated throughout the rest of the country.  She's an enemy of women's progress, and she's utterly hollow.

Now, should Palin stop being a good little Republican woman, and the party drops her like a hot potato--that's when she might get some sympathy and support from folks like me.  So many women have to be badly burned before they understand just how they've been used and discarded by the old-boy network.

I'm a feminist who has repeatedly said that these attacks on Palin's "time to mother" or "quality of mothering" issue is a non-issue.

I won't be voting for her, but I will stand up for her right to be a working mother.

We are right here.

Standing up for Palin's right to choose. Not to have an abortion and not to force her unwed, pregnant teenage daughter to have one.

Standing up for Palin's right to juggle motherhood and family in the way she sees fit.

Standing up for Palin's right to accept the nomination of her party, despite the criticism of some that she's a thinly qualified woman.

Like I said, feminists are standing up for Palin. Even Christian feminists (womanists), like myself.

What we are not doing is letting others make us think that to raise questions about Palin's stand on abortion and what that might mean if the GOP wins, that questioning her budget cuts against pregnant teens in her state, and that shining light on duplicitous flip flopping on her part-- is to be sexist, anti-woman, and unfeminist- like.

Check out SomethingWithin ( http://www.somethingwithin.com/blog/ ) (www.somethingwithin.com/blog ( http://www.somethingwithin.com/blog ))