Already a member?
Welcome to Brazen Careerist!
Jennifer Nedeau is using Brazen Careerist to share ideas. Join now to become a member and start networking with Jennifer Nedeau and other professionals just like you. Learn more.
Jennifer Nedeau is using Brazen Careerist to share ideas. Join now to become a member and start networking with Jennifer Nedeau and other professionals just like you. Learn more.
The largest critique I have about Palin running for Vice-President has nothing to do with the fact that I am a Democrat. It has nothing to do with thinking John McCain made a brash decision that only further highlights his lack of judgment and inability to lead. It has nothing to do with that fact that Palin’s family situation seems to resemble an episode of Desperate Housewives more and more, everyday.
While all of the above factors do contribute to my aversion to Palin, there is something about her candidacy that irks me more than her willingness to shoot wildlife from a helicopter.
It’s a simple fact that my friend Jill Miller Zimon said so well. Palin is “settling for the face of feminism while trading in its soul.”
In an era the Right has tried to promote as post feminist, I fear that young women, such as my GOP voting sorority sisters from college, will see Palin as the example of a modern woman: powerful, ambitious and able to maintain her femininity, be a mother and a loyal wife.
I fear that Palin will become the poster mom for the right-leaning pearl & pinstripes sorority girls who may have felt apathetic about a John McCain presidency, but are now energized to vote. I fear that Joe Trippi’s analysis of Palin as being seen as an “agent for change” may actually resonate with young women out there who want to see a woman achieve something great, despite the fact that she may be tearing down the rights of other women at the same time.
I fear that many young women will look past what is another sexist choice by the male paradigm and see it as a win.
Ladies, do not be fooled. This is not history changing before your eyes. It is just history repeating itself.
Palin is not going to break any glass ceilings or advance the rights of women. She is running to support John McCain. It’s another example of a woman standing behind a man, instead of standing up by herself.
McCain didn’t put her on the ticket in order to support women’s issues - but rather to use her as a prop in an effort to gain women’s votes. Unfortunately for those with two X chromosomes, Sarah Palin is not going to help women achieve equal pay, for equal work; discharge the Global Gag rule; ensure the protection of Roe v. Wade; create a health care system that advantage women or their families.
In the book Manifesta: Young Women, Feminism and the Future Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards wrote: “The presence of feminism in our lives is taken for granted. For our generation, feminism is like fluoride. We scarcely notice we have it-it’s simply in the water.”
As 24-year-old woman, I saw very few glass ceilings while growing up. I played a variety of sports from field hockey to swimming to crew to cross-country. I became Student Body President and starred in the high school musicals. I joined the debate team and the wrote for the school newspaper. I shared my opinions without facing misogynistic attacks. I opened up my own bank account and have secured my own financial freedom. I get to vote. I get to be promoted at work quickly and often ahead of my male peers. I get to wear what I want without stifling my femininity.
This is the story for many young women today. As seen in the recent New York Time’s Column by Hannah Seligson - many young women didn’t grow up staring at the glass ceiling. But the glass ceiling and many other issues - equality for women of color, women in poverty, fighting sexual discrimination - still exist.
Neither myself nor Seligson wouldn’t have quite as many opportunities without the hard work of women who have come before us and achieved the right to vote, the Equal Rights Amendment, Title IX, financial liberty, and Roe v. Wade.
And while Sarah Palin may represent one example of a modern woman, painting her as the next Rosie the Riveter doesn’t work for me and we can’t pretend to elect the face of feminism, without also representing its true values.
photo by sloomis08
Nothing like the upbeat topics of feminism and abortion to get the day movin'. Though I have enjoyed the sparring.
Like everyone, I have my own take on abortion (pro-choice) but I really don't see the male opinion as mattering so much. I'm almost positive I will never be prematurely pregnant, raped, or put in any such situation. Obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion as the one I'll share here, but I don't think its entirely right for men to take an absolute stance to remove the options surrounding a crucial life event that we will never, ever experience.
Its like if women began lobbying congress to end vasectomies because someone finds something in the bible the resembles that notion. Then I have a stance, my testicles, my decision. Absurd, but you get the point.
I understand adoption is an option, and a good one but lets pretend the aborted fetus of the last decade suddenly appeared into the system today. The implications of that are so far reaching its a completely different post. Its not as simple as, "You have not been aborted, have a great life". Quality of life, the health system, psychological affects, welfare, crime, etc etc. Life is full of gray areas. To paint all ill conceived pregnancies with the "pro-life" brush leaves many questions unanswered.
My main problem with Palin, is her statement to the press asking the media and viewers to respect her daughter Bristol's decision (see:choice) to have the baby.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/01/1318541.aspx
This is the same choice her political decisions would in the future remove from other women and families.
Yes I am sure there are women out there that perhaps use abortion as a parachute and don't take pregnancy as seriously as they should, but with the republicans still educating students on abstinence instead of contraception, the whole "pro-life" stance becomes a very unfunny joke.
@Honey - great info. on Biden and his children which also brings up another point regarding Palin.
With a down syndrome child at home that will require more attention than the average child, not to mention her other 4 children... how can Palin be regarded as being a great role model for women when she is essentially telling her young family to take a backseat for possibly 4 years or even *gasp* 8, and walking directly into the media spotlight.
This coming election has turned into a soap opera. And I'm not talking about your afternoon american dramas, I'm talking about your 2am latin american soap operas that are only fun to watch because they're so ridiculous.
No Parsing, I think it has become safe to assume that unless you are liberal, pro-choice and a feminist, you are not a woman. At least, from what I am gathering, maybe they are women but don't deserve respect or are unable to be held up as role models.
You're right - another great way to approach this argument is through the pro-life stance. Check out this piece by Marie Wilson, President of the White House Project. I can only hope to be as eloquent as she is on these tough issues one day:
http://blog.thewhitehouseproject.org/2008/09/02/hostage-to-abortion-poli...
Fortunately,I don't have to intern anymore b/c I got a handle of my professional experience before I graduated from college. Now people actually pay me to be this opinionated! I'll be the editor of the Women's Rights blog at Change.org starting in mid-September, so stay tuned - there is a lot more where this all came from :)
You use the word "fear" a lot here, which makes sense. The Queen Bee syndrome of your former internship employer, Nancy Pelosi, shines with the fact that Pelosi wants to have the highest position of power held by a woman until she is out of politics which would explain her support for Obama and not Hillary.
I also find it hilarious that you don't see "pro-life" as a puzzle piece to your "pro-choice", the choice in this case would be to BE "pro-life" and in fact would be one of the two decisions in a "pro-choice" person. Acting like all "pro-choice" people abort babies and labeling Palin as unfeminist for not supporting your own views while holding a government position and running a five child household boggles my mind.
I think instead of salivating over this situation you should go back and intern under Pelosi and help her on her failed book tour, Lord knows she could really use the help with those mudsliding books sales numbers!
Milena - what you are doing with your life is inspiring and remarkable - but I do have to say that there is a difference between being a female role model and being a feminist.
Being a feminist doesn't just mean standing up for yourself or your family and also being a woman at the same time. It carries a certain set of values that are in accordance with historical decisions: the right to vote, the Equal Rights Amendment, Title IX, financial liberty, and Roe v. Wade.
Now - with the Third Wave of the feminist movement the exact parameters of who is/isn't a feminist often gets muddled. Feminism today often takes form in queer feminism, girlie feminism, power feminism, global feminism, womanism and many other subsets.
Still - there is not a set agenda for the Third wave as there was in the First/Second waves. Therefore, at the forefront of the Third wave is protecting the legal standing of women's rights that were earned in the past, as well as framing a new agenda for the Third Wave.
Frankly, I'm impressed that you'd like to be called a feminist. The word has been radicalized and stigmatized so much since the epoch of the New Right that very few women use it proudly anymore. And, I like that you appreciate your own dynamic approach to the world - you don't want to be painted into a corner - and that is fine. But when you are running for office, such as Palin, the policy behind one's personal beliefs do matter.
Here is an interesting post from a mom who says that Palin is good for feminism, you might find it interesting:
http://workitmom.com/bloggers/momsonissues/2008/09/02/why-sarah-palin-is...
Also, if you want to be part of the feminist movement on certain issues - micro-financing for women abroad (Women for Women International), or donating resources to get more women elected to office (The White House Project) or supporting proper child-care policies and prenatal care for women (National Organization for Women on the Family and Medical Leave Act) - I am sure they will accept you with open arms.
While I understand what you're saying about the feminists appearing to be exclusionary - there is an agenda at hand and if there wasn't, where would women be today? Just don't forget about history when you accept the present....
Good luck with your masters and your family.
@Milena I have to agree with you on feeling excluded from feminism. There are many aspects of the ideology that I agree with but some aspects that exclude women of color, both now and historically. This election has made some of those cleavage even more apparent.
Vanessa - you are completely correct that historically there was an exclusion of women of color by the mainstream feminist movement; it is the major criticism of Second Wave feminists. But one of the key elements of Third Wave feminism is a shift in focus to women of color, which is why I used the term womanism earlier, which was coined by Alice Walker. I'd love to hear more of your opinion on what is still being left behind by the feminist movement when it comes to women of color - because that will only help further define the objectives of the Third Wave & it is necessary if women are going to come together under any common terms.
Chris - as for your question - there really is no way to compare Palin and HRC in terms of careers, political objectives or the place in the woman's movement.
As for the hypothetical you posed - HRC already ran for President. She ran on her own and garnered 18 million votes. Palin didn't. If HRC was chosen as Barack's VP after losing the nomination - I don't see her as standing behind a man to just so he can get women's votes - she already got them. She achieved all the 18 million cracks on her own. This is not something Palin has done.
Something to remember is that a woman being nominated for VP is not a first - a woman being elected for President would be. HRC ran for President, Palin was nominated for VP - there is a huge difference there.
Can I get an answer about the comparison of Palin to Hillary in the VP spot??
@Jen I realize that Third Wave Feminism is trying to be more welcoming of women of color now. It still seems as though there is a great deal of progress to be made. During the DNC, politicians spoke about equal pay for equal work and a glass ceiling which of course are problems in the lives of women, but not all women.
Many women of color are still trying to get the equal work part of the equation, being excluded from higher skill set labor and/or labor that pays a living wage.
I think the language and priorities of feminism, despite this third fresher iteration, still focuses on the lives and troubles of the middle class. Even when looking at the priorities of equal pay for equal work and the glass ceiling, feminism has yet to acknowledge how professional women of color are excluded from both men and often other women. Moving forward will require a serious discussion of women from across race and class boundaries.
Why is it that in order to be a feminist you have to support abortion? Why can't you value the life of a child and get paid what you're worth? What is the value of that label, anyway?
Parsing - like I said above - there are values that are aligned with the feminist movement. Why you anyone would want to be part of a movement or designate a label upon themselves without believing in those values, I don't know. Additionally - need I really remind you - it's not about being pro-abortion, it's about reproductive choices, rather than limitations for women. If you don't want to have an abortion, then don't have one. But let others choose for themselves.
Chris - as I already mentioned above - being a female role model isn't the same as being a feminist. It's nice when they can both be mutually inclusive, but women become role models for many different reasons - if you are trying to be a feminist role model there are certain values that go with that - and promoting a pro-life platform just isn't one of them because it doesn't guarantee women's equality in reproductive choice.
to Chris Ford - You're demanding an answer to your question (Palin vs. Clinton) as if it's accepted that your question is valid. When you got an answer, it wasn't the one you want. That's life. Get over it.
RE: reproductive rights:
The pro-life/pro-choice debate is fundamental to feminism, and the essential point is that pro-lifers are willing to impose their own set of values on others. It's all right to be pro-life in your own life; I applaud that. But it's not all right to impose that value on a 14-year-old sophomore whose parents are just making payments. She has a right to choose her own path. All women have a right to choose based on her circumstances, not on Palin's or anyone else's value system.
To the main point:
The essential question posed in this blog is whether Palin is just propping up McCain or whether she's a valid, viable candidate on her own. I.E., is Palin's candidacy moving women forward. It's a fair question.
I think both are true. Palin looks good and connects with her audience. Her story taps into the westward-ho narrative of women on the homestead taking care of business, even if it means shootin' varmints or bagging dinner. Great stuff. In her embodiment of that narrative and women's sense of self, she props up McCain by bringing attention to HIS campaign, through her personal accomplishments and ambition.
On the other hand, Palin is the Republican VP candidate. Her presence on the national stage, like Clinton's amazingly strong run for the Democratic nomination, is a visual that can't be ignored.
I'm a feminist; have been for a long time. I don't see these views as conflictual. Palin's not my choice and her values don't resonate with me. However, her candidacy moves women forward inch-wise. The imposition of her personal politics would move women back mile-wise.
Basically the author of that blog states that Palin is a pick based purely on the fact that she is pro-life. I have admired Palin for a while since one of her first interviews on, *Gasp* Glenn Beck, almost a year ago, the latest of such interviews airing this past April. Trust me, her pro-life stance, while awesome to me, is just one of her MANY great qualities. But, that blog didn't actually answer my question to you, just added little side tid bits.
I would like send you a congrats on your new employment. Welcome to the work force.
Hahahaha...thanks for the employment welcome party.
Actually I've been working for some time now - as a reporter, then in radio/tv, and now in marketing. This editor job will be a part-time gig in addition to my full-time marketing position & volunteer work.
Now to the pro-life stance; I was raised Catholic and very much understand the concept of making a personal decision to be pro-life - as well as the parameters by which that label exists. I am pro-choice b/c I believe that if you should have the opportunity to prevent unwanted pregnancies with birth control and to deal with unwanted pregnancies as you choose. Being pro-life, can be seen as anti-abortion and it can also be seen as choosing to allow life. I see what you're trying to say here....
But, while it would be nice to see Palin's pro-life position as just her choice on the matter, running for VP makes this a policy decision, not a personal one. And there is the Supreme Court situation at hand, which brings Roe v. Wade to the forefront of this election. As a woman, I just have hard time considering someone for office who will allow another conservative Justice to be confirmed, and likely overturn Roe v. Wade.
Additionally, while Palin's family may have the resources to deal with unplanned pregnancy, not every woman has that luxury. As a VP, she will be encouraging a system where young women who have to deal with unplanned pregnancies are faced with a lack of structural support for their situation. Nearly 750,000 teenagers get pregnant every year, of which 2/3 drop out of high school and additionally, unmarried mothers are the most likely to fall into poverty. Nearly 1/3 of young women face this situation each year and electing McCain-Palin administration would then offer them zero options at a policy level.
In my humble opinion, all this would leave many women - without much of a choice at all, right?
Well hell, welcome to marketing then! I am also in marketing and believe it or not, being a evil-hateful conservative, I work on youth programs for financial literacy.
Okay getting to your point. First of all I know a lot of people that have turned away from religion because of the catholic church and that is unfortunate. That being said you do give better insight to your views through your comments than the actual post.
I highly doubt that Roe v. Wade would ever be overturned, there are just too many people on each side and I think you realize that too. I ESPECIALLY believe it wouldn't be overturned in a McCain presidency because the guy leans too far to the left as it is!
Your statistics on teenage pregnancy are all ones I have seen before and I really do feel for the situations but you only show a two sided argument, keep the baby and your life is over OR abort and you will be a high powered business woman (that was exaggerated). The fact is that this is not a Palin debate but one of Roe v. Wade, I have had convos with Andrea about the very same thing and my stance on adoption instead of abortion, this would also free that teenage mother to live out her life and the baby would still survive. A lack of structural support in your argument is ON the government's hands, which is exactly what I am against anyway. This is a family support decision, which is where Palin coincidentally shines for her daughter. If the family support is not there, once again, there is always adoption.
My wife made a fantastic point, by the way. She read your post and noted that you are very much against Palin playing second fiddle to McCain and not REALLY breaking that glass ceiling, yet we don't see the same type of argument coming from the left when they were calling for Hillary to play second fiddle to Obama. Interesting....
My major criticism is of "feminism" itself. It is an elitist sorority of it's own kind. I am pro-life, quit my job to be a wife and hopefully a mother, so I am occasionally discounted in feminist circles. I have gotten the blank stares when I mentioned I voluntarily quit my great corporate job to stay home, but (gasp) still am pursuing a master’s degree. (What will a stay-at-home-wife do with an education??) I have also gotten the, "Well, some of us have to work for a living.” Not from my husband, but from a high-powered woman.
So what is feminism about when it ostracizes women (the people they are purporting to support) if they don't have the same belief system?
I think it's disappointing that individual contributions cannot be taken at face value, while the ones you disagree with set aside. You can still argue positions without discounting someone entirely.
I also think it's disappointing that we cannot feel confident in finding other female role models that inspire us, instead I see bloggers eager to completely trample Palin based on single issues and accusations that don't hold water. What if I do find her inspiring? Does that mean I'm anti-woman too? I don't think I am, but there is no way for me to tell, apparently.
I think the unwarranted fears circulating that Palin's going to ruin things for women everywhere are unrealistic, and unecessarily fear-based. There are plenty of inspiring women all around us.
One of my favorite sites is Working Mother, because it consistently highlights women in business, excelling, who are still married with kids. Those are my role models. They offer lists of women and businesses that are woman/mother friendly and promote the ability for women to find balance while breaking those glass ceilings you keep talking about.
http://www.workingmother.com/web?service=vpage/94
Even if Palin isn't your ideal female role model, I hardly think she will stifle anyone's chances at success or championing ideas fair for all women...which I'm still doubtful "feminism" accomplishes...like I said, I don't get to join the club.
@Jen - I became interested in feminism last year when I first started blogging. Most of my favorite bloggers happen to be women, and some wrote about feminism, and decided to figure out what it was about. To be honest, I couldn't find any consistent stance, like you mentioned, there are so many iterations, but I can say I didn't find my place.
I suppose there is a fundamental misunderstanding of feminism (personally), and perhaps it's not for every woman.
I'll just have to settle for associating myself with humanism. I think that a lot of human rights policies will inherently cover women's rights, and I don't think that discredits any of the work women who call themselves feminists have done for personal liberties.
Well that is an interesting way of getting around the question. Yes, she got many votes. Yes, she shot to break that glass ceiling. No, she didn't make it. The question was in reference to playing second fiddle, which is what HRC WOULD have been doing and what Palin IS going to be doing. Give Palin a couple more years in the spotlight and I am sure that she could get just as many votes as HRC, not the SAME voters but just as many all the same.
So let me ask something else then. With everyone saying that she should stay at her home state and take care of her family especially with a down sydrome baby, why is Biden praised for going into politics as a single father after his wife tragically died?
I'm guessing that it is okay if it was a "pure" feminist, as you would say, but since it is a conservative there is a little bit of hypocrisy.
Great points Second Waver. Love the alias as well. You sure you don't have a blog to share with us? Sounds like you've got a voice to share... :)
Chris, it seems you are the one dodging the question, as Second Waver notes. Had Obama chosen HRC as his running mate, it would have been because she was a Presidential candidate who received over 18 million votes. That is far different from the way in which Palin was chosen; it seems like any attractive, conservative woman in government would have made an equally likely (and effective) pick. If McCain had chosen Condi Rice for his running mate, I don't think Jen would have the same criticisms that she has of Palin.
As far as the Palin's children v. Biden's children--well that answer is obvious. With his wife dead, he had to have SOME job. The fact that he commuted an hour and a half every day rather than staying in D.C. and had standing orders to interrupted in the Senate at any time if his children called Seems like a commendable accommodation to his circumstance to me. Of course, I don't have a problem with Palin working even though she has kids, either, though I deeply suspect she won't be as involved in their lives as Biden was in his children's.
Email
Print
