Smarts

There a lot of talk lately about female political candidates. Women in office. Women thinking of running for office.

Occasionally we hear their stance on the issues, but usually all we hear is noise. As of late it’s been about their Facebook escapades, the names they have been called, or their college religious preferences.

And now we have women on the left arguing with women on the right over who’s doing a better job standing up for females in the political arena.

Essentially, we’re having a nice, male-style, pissing match.

I have a better idea.

Mini @queenofspain the pundit - book her CNN!!

Let’s work together.

Clearly none of us get along. Clearly we couldn’t be further apart on policy, preferences and patience. But we do agree that the treatment of women in the media and by campaigns as we head into November could use some help.

On this we agree.

Let’s use it.

You don’t have to abort a fetus and I don’t have to let my neighbor’s house burn down. You don’t have to give away your money to the poor and I don’t have to suck up to big corporations.

We just have to continue to call out the sexism we see as we do our thing.

And keep everyone focused on the issues.

Comments

  1. I couldn’t agree more Erin…..it is so much more about the issues rather than what political affiliation someone belongs to. So ridiculous! Also, I truly hope if it can work out for your family, you really do go for it in 2012. I seriously would cheer all the way from the east coast (unless of course we find my husband that California job and move out there and can vote for you personally.) ;)
    .-= Cathy´s last blog ..Please disregard the schools wellness policy =-.

  2. I couldn’t agree more!
    .-= Keyona´s last blog ..Weekend Recap =-.

  3. Shan Singh Tinna says:

    Just what do you mean by “act[ing]…like the men” and “male-style pissing match”? Painting all men with the same brush is an instance of the very sexism you claim to oppose. I’m calling out YOUR sexism and hypocrisy as I do my thing. Promoting equality is great, but not when you do it at the expense of a certain demographic segments (i.e. males)—doing so is hurtful and defeats the purpose, as well as the very ideals, of “equality.” Not to mention for umpteenth time, such provocation is nothing short of sexist in itself.

  4. Super cheers to that notion!!

  5. Oh eyeroll Shan. BIG HUGE EYEROLL.

  6. Absolutely concur with you! We’d accomplish so much more if we put aside playground arguments and start working together. We teach our children to get along with others, how about if we start doing the same thing.

  7. Shan Singh Tinna says:

    “Oh eyeroll Shan. BIG HUGE EYEROLL.”

    I don’t exactly work well with euphemisms—pardon that; what are you trying to convey?

  8. You know I couldn’t agree more. But when some of those on the extreme right get wind of it, they start yelling, essentially, You’re liars! You’re mean to us! We hate NOW!, etc., etc., …. Like that helps anything or anybody.

    *sigh*

  9. I live with 2 liberal lesbians (redundant?) and my husband who thinks Rush Limbaugh is sane. And a 9 year old who still likes to have tea parties with me and that creepy stuffed monkey. Envy me.
    .-= Kirsten (Results Not Typical Girl)´s last blog ..the 253 pound tooth fairy =-.

  10. Agreed – We really should continue calling out on the Sexism that seems to be inherent in media coverage of female candidates.

    We’re doing our best to continue the coverage at Women’s Voices.
    From Diane Vacca (http://womensvoicesforchange.org/sexism-and-the-media-continued-a-complicated-election-landscape.htm)
    .-= Womens Voices´s last blog ..Newsflash- 13 Women National Book Award Finalists =-.

  11. I’m not sure if you saw this piece in the Washington Post today, “In 2010, may the manliest candidate win.” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/15/AR2010101503120.html?hpid=topnews )

    We’re calling out sexism generally and it isn’t just men who are playing the sexism cards, here. When a female candidate tells her opponent to “man up” or that he “doesn’t have the cojones,” (insinuating that *she* does?) we have something very similar to what you are talking about.

    Also, you are exactly right that there is far too much divisiveness in politics! (Rally for Sanity, anyone?) I’m also liking the civility thrust of the Coffee Party Movement.

  12. I am absolutely in love with this post. We all should just agree to get along and stop being so critical to each other on critical issues such as politics. It would be much easier to work together.

  13. There needs to be a distinction between the cat fight of a campaign and the obligation of those elected to govern responsibly in exchange for the voters choosing them to do that. Getting people to commit their vote really isn’t all that different in process from getting people to commit their money. Principles of advertising and getting those vulnerable to the message to act on it isn’t conceptually or practically different from getting people to buy the coffee that’s not on sale or getting a doctor like me to prescribe an expensive high profit pill when the stuff that Wal-Mart sells for $4 per month probably controls the condition. There is a science to doing this, a certain amount of research behind how to be successful at it, and people who are proficient at implementing it.

    The problem gets postponed to inauguartion day. In Delaware we have a tradition called Bury the Hatchet day which takes place a few days after election day in a sleepy rural burb named Georgetown. Successful and unsuccessful candidates show up in some form of formal dress somewhere between a left-over Halloween costume and traditional Hasidic Black, thank each other for enabling them to convey what they stand for and agree to govern in a professional dignified way. As a citizen of my state since 1980, I am pleased to report that with few exceptions they fulfill that benevolent intent once on the legislative floor.

    It used to be that way nationally, when Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson would make sure that the opposition had some means of influencing legistlation despite the majority party having ample votes. While there were some negative consequences to doing this, such as courting some real Dixie Bigots in the name of Derech Eretz, it kept our government a good deal more productive than we currently find it.
    .-= furrydoc´s last blog ..Diverting My Contribution =-.

  14. I am SO non-political … but I really appreciate this post. I am one of those, “Can’t we just all get along” kinda people :) First time visit and looking forward to reading previous posts!

Trackbacks

  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Erin Kotecki Vest, Erin Kotecki Vest. Erin Kotecki Vest said: Smarts http://queenofspainblog.com/2010/10/13/smarts/ [...]

Speak Your Mind

*