I don’t think it’s going to happen. But I also did not think the country would be more interested in Jersey Shore than this month’s election results.
So let’s talk about what would happen if the first female president of the United States of America is Sarah Palin.
It would be the moment girls like me have been dreaming of since we could dream, wrapped in a package we never expected. How, exactly, would we celebrate the achievement we’ve all been waiting for…while lamenting what it means for American women as a whole?
There is no question in my mind Palin and her policy’s are anti-woman, however a Palin presidential run and win would be history, epic, and game changing for females.
What to do. What to do.
I know what I plan on doing.
Working my ass off to ensure a pro-woman candidate wins.
However we would be remiss if we did not prepare for the inevitable questions and possibility our first female president is someone we do not agree with. This means continuing to work to make sure Sarah Palin has every opportunity to become president, and calling out the sexism she will undoubtedly will be subject to when she runs.
This will be a test for all true feminists across the nation.
Time to walk the walk.
In the meantime, let’s hope her chances are as silly as these two-
The thought of her becoming president always leaves me with a picture in my head of going back to the prairie days where women had to scrub their laundry in the creek. Except there’s no Carolyn Ingalls or half-pint to hang out with. I would much rather look at your silly kids. Their hats are awesome!
.-= Elle´s last blog ..When You Wish Upon A Star…And It’s Stuck…Up Where! =-.
We will have to reconcile the idea in our minds that women are scrubbing laundry in the creek AND running the country. The question is… how?
Even the republicans don’t want her to run, which says something. I think her chances of even being the candidate are slim, but that really depends on who is put against her. But you are right, we need to work toward getting a qualified woman candidate on a ballot in the not too distant future.
.-= MidLyfeMama´s last blog ..Go Mommy GO! Sing Mommy SING! =-.
and we’re going to have to come to terms with what a Palin run and loss, or win will mean for women. And how we handle it.
You know I disagree with you on this, at least as far as the ‘sexism detector’ applied to right-wing woman candidates. Here in Delaware we just lived through the horrifying election season of Christine O’Donnell. Although groundwork that collapsed my feet helped prevent her election, we’re by no means rid of her.
These women are not Rosa Parks. They’re Leona Helmsley. Their election means the same to feminists as Pope Joan means to Catholic theologians. I don’t have any responsibility to protect them, as a feminist or as anything else. Feminism isn’t about unconditional support of persons with two X chromosomes. That’s just silly.
(Although not nearly as cute as the silly faces above.) 😉
The only support is that of calling out sexism. Other than that, they are on their own. But if and when a conservative female wins, what will the progressive female reaction be? It has to be calculated now, because it will define a movement and a big moment in history.
I mean when these “conservative feminists” tout the victory of the “first female president” and champion the “struggle” – what will progressive feminists’ reaction be?
Which sexism are you going to call out?
Example: COD refused to speak to local media in Delaware. Had the (female) reporter for the state’s only real(ish) newspaper removed from any of her appearances, including press conferences. Then complained about being attacked in a sexist way by media. What media? The only media she ever talked to was Hannity.
I’m here to tell you, that was completely untrue. Did NOT happen.
When gawker ran that piece on her dating life, liberal feminist women all over the world closed ranks to protect her. Poor Christine. Bad sexism. Bull sh*t. That wasn’t a sexist attack on a woman candidate. If she didn’t write that piece herself, she sure as hell gave the pictures to the person who did. It was dirty politics, all right. But it was her dirty politics.
I’ve been an activist feminist since the 70’s. I totally refuse to let these people rewrite the identity of feminism. Just as I know they’re not ‘pro-life’ when they’re harassing women getting medical care, I know they’re not ‘feminist’ when they use that as a way to shut down criticism of women who’ve earned criticism, particularly as part of a political process that requires, for health, good, strong, criticism.
They are rewriting the identity of feminism. And refusing to acknowledge that sexism does exist against them certainly will not help. It’s there, and it’s real and we’ll need to figure out on a case by case basis the discussions to have.
But my personal pledge to make sure all little girls could grow up to be President did not come with the * that they be progressive. I will certainly not support the campaign, but it would go against what I’ve worked for to deny her the opportunity.
The thought of that woman becoming President makes me cringe inside.
.-= Karen´s last blog ..Oddly- I lived =-.
At what point did you acquire the power to ‘deny her the opportunity’? At what point did I?
ALL little girls can grow up to be President? No matter how mentally ill, or intellectually challenged, or dedicated to the eradication of the Constitution, or of various groups of citizens or non-citizens… at what point did feminism become equated to “If a girl does it, I’m behind her. Because I’m totally more about girl-power than about the impact on my civilization (including my daughters)”
Makes no sense to me.
I’m not behind her, by any stretch. But we’ve worked our entire lives to ensure a woman COULD become President. That means half the country and conservative women too… at least to me. I will not support her and do not want her to, and will work against her… but her opportunity is protected by people like us. The question is if you will protect it or not.
We’ve worked to assure that a woman could become president.
But not this one. Not the Sarah Palins, the Christine O’Donnells, the Sharon Angles.
If we look at anything except their qualifications for public office (in all 3 cases near zilch) we are as anti-woman as anyone who would do the same to the Hillary Clintons and Nancy Pelosis.
We want to make sure that whoever our President is, man or woman, that they be the best possible candidate for that office.
Opposing or supporting a woman candidate sheerly because she is a woman is a slap in the face to the women going back to Susan B Anthony, Lucretia Mott and Carrie Chapman Catt who fought for our right not as men or as women, but as citizens.
And if Sarah Palin manages (kayn ahora) to get herself nominated for President, I will feel the same way I did about, say, Dan Quayle or W.
No more and no less.
.-= Library Lady 61´s last blog ..I Want My Penguin Back =-.
I think you summed it up nicely when you said, “This means continuing to work to make sure Sarah Palin has every opportunity to become president, and calling out the sexism she will undoubtedly will be subject to when she runs.”
It is absolutely true that Ms. Palin’s views are not pro-woman, and because of that I will not vote for her, nor would I advocate others vote for her.
But as a feminist, I support the fact that she’s running at all. Because as a nation, whether the politician is Sarah Palin, or Hilary Clinton, or Nancy Pelosi, we need to get to a point where a woman’s political positions are approved of or criticized based on their merit, and not because the politician is a woman.
.-= Angela@beggingtheanswer´s last blog ..Death Awaits You All With Nasty- Big- Pointy Teeth =-.
We need to keep our focus on re-electing our current president. I’m afraid her popularity with the tea party and her show on TLC is what will get her voted in as the next Republican candidate for Prez. Very sad to say, FOX and reality shows are really doing a number on the uneducated and ill-informed. Why can’t we deport Rupert Murdoch?
On the upside, if the good-ol boys club on Capitol Hill don’t want her, she won’t have a chance. Listen to what Barbara Bush said about her here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TNVB3SgyX8
I totally support her RIGHT to run, I totally will do everything I can to help ensure she doesn’t win. My POV? I think the BEST candidate for the job should be elected & criteria for deciding what constitutes best should have nothing to do with things like what naughty bits a person has hanging or not hanging between their legs
But it’s not about the “good old boys” and they’re not being supported because of their merit, but in spite of it. They are supported FOR entirely sexist reasons, and they play to that.
This last election, in my state, two GOP Republican candidates. One was Christine O’Donnell. She never polled within single digits of her major Democratic opponent, whose name you probably don’t even know. She had no qualifications for the job of Senator and was completely unelectable. Karl Rove got in trouble for saying so. So did the chair of the state party. Most everyone in this SMALL state knows her within 2 degrees of separation, and every one of those people knows someone she hasn’t paid, or has, personally, done wrong. Yet she was the ONLY story on the national news, raised millions of dollars in out of state money, and even AFTER being given a giant asswhuppin’ in the election is the one on the news program.
In the same primary where COD beat out a 30 year public servant for the R nod in the Senate race, one of the GOP candidates for our sole House seat was also a female. Her name is Michelle Rollins. She’s a millionaire, based on a real estate empire she and her late husband built. She’s a lawyer. She lives mostly in Jamaica, administering a large resort property she owns, came from humble beginnings and is active in many charitable causes, including educational foundations and arts organizations, both in-state and in Jamaica. The attacks on her were ENTIRELY sexist, mostly centering around the fact she won beauty contests (in 1963) and married a rich man. Therefore, she’s dumb. @@
I supported her D opponent, John Carney, and, not being eligible to vote in the R primary, didn’t vote for her. But I might have voted for her against a different candidate, and supported her right to run. I would SURELY have voted for her against the gruesome uneducated Tea party candidate who won that primary. She wasn’t embarrassing.
The problem with your question, as posed, Erin, is that it uses a false equivalence on attacks on a woman candidate qua woman and questions about their actual fitness for the job. Nothing in feminism (or anything else) requires me to support incompetence. These women are not able to do the job. That’s a problem for us all.
Library Lady 61 said it so well: “If we look at anything except their qualifications for public office (in all 3 cases near zilch) we are as anti-woman as anyone who would do the same to the Hillary Clintons and Nancy Pelosis.”
I just had the weirdest sense of deja vu while reading this entry. Unfortunately, if it was in a dream or whatever, I don’t remember if it lasted long enough to know if Sarah Palin somehow won in 2012. If I remember more, I’ll let you know. 🙂
At what point did you acquire the power to ‘deny her the opportunity’? At what point did I? ALL little girls can grow up to be President? No matter how mentally ill, or intellectually challenged, or dedicated to the eradication of the Constitution, or of various groups of citizens or non-citizens… at what point did feminism become equated to “If a girl does it, I’m behind her. Because I’m totally more about girl-power than about the impact on my civilization (including my daughters)” Makes no sense to me.