Both Sides Rally as Charges of Media Sexism Against Palin Surface
Today on CNN, a parade of significant GOP female talking heads - from Carly Fiorina to Bay Buchanan - looked equally shocked and aggrieved as they bemoaned the obvious sexism in much of the coverage of Palin.
And Politico.com notes that Clinton's aides have also remarked on it. (They should know, having been on the receiving end for most of her campaign without getting much sympathy.)
Politico also highlights one heartening fact: Now that the tables are turned and sexism has reached its sticky hands across the aisle for an equal-opportunity clutch, Republicans are in smackdown mode:
Many conservatives, who spent a generation ridiculing the politics of victimhood and group identity, are now zealously invoking both....A common GOP talking point here is that Palin’s gender and experiences as a mother should be counted as an asset among her qualifications....Ahhh...WWSST (What Would Sarah Say Today)?Just last spring, Palin herself scoffed when Hillary Clinton’s campaign complained about a double standard in coverage.
“When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism, or maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, 'Man, that doesn't do us any good, women in politics, or women in general, trying to progress this country,' ” Palin said.
Some women I know are angry at this turn of events - that Republicans are crying 'foul' right now and getting attention and sympathy, while the claims of Democrats were previously mocked, by no less than the GOP VP candidate herself - but I'm personally pleased. The more women who feel the sting of sexism, the more who will speak up and call the media out on specific incidents when they happen.
This may be one bipartisan effort that endures, no matter who wins the election.
You may also want to read: Sexism in Media Coverage of Hillary Clinton's Campaign
Comments
Well… if a person’s “gender and experience as a mother should be counted as an asset among her qualifications” then it is open season on a full assessment and examination of the factors and effects and results of this “experience” – namely, her family. After all, they are on the resume of “Hockey-mom.”
She’s being touted as a role model of the mythical “having it all” woman… and a ideologically religious and conservative one at that - the anti-Hillary answer to the right’s prayers packaged for prime time.
Ok. Then how can we expect her to keep Putin out of Georgia when she couldn’t keep a redneck boy out of her under-age daughter?
Humorous this all is to me… Liberal women dont see very clearly the whole innate distiction between feminine and masculine traits. You think because a female has female parts they are all the same. Hillary Clinton was about as man as a woman can become. Women were so excited about her because of her being a “female”, but many didn’t see the distinction between her and her counterparts. If she would have shown that she was proud to be a WOMAN and actually presented herself as a WOMAN, she would have impressed me. But she “said” she was proud to be a woman but “presented” herself like some old bitter man. The strength of a woman is not in her toughness. We are not tough or strong physically by nature. The strenth is in our convictions and ability to persuade… Clinton couldnt even persuade her foe in the same party to pick her as vp! I was voting for obama against clinton. But now voting for Palin because she impresses me… and hopefully by supporting her as vp in 4 or 8 years, if mccain makes it that long, we could have a true female president… not just a woman dressed and acting like a man….
To say Hillary Clinton didn’t count as a woman in politics simply because she “presented” herself as a man is downright idiotic. By saying so, you have completely underminded the ideals of feminism. Clinton was a strong, independent woman - and yes, in fact, toughness is an accurate indication of a woman’s strength. You have to be tough to survive in politics, no matter what gender you are. To say women aren’t tough and strong physically by nature is just the backwards kind of thinking that held women back for so long. Not to mention that being a woman should have no part in a person’s political campaign. You shouldn’t vote for Palin simply because you want a female president. That is just as moronic as NOT voting for her because she’s a woman. Regardless of gender, an intelligent voter chooses the person they think will be best for the job, even if that means a male president for another 100 years - after all, a terrible female president certainly isn’t going to do us any good.