Friday, September 05, 2008

Gloria Steinem: "Wrong woman, wrong message"

In an LA Times editorial, Gloria Steinem succinctly explains why Sarah Palin is the wrong person for the job.

Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for -- and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs."

Personally, I don't get the whole "I'm gonna vote for someone else to protest the fact that my candidate got nominated" argument. Frankly, I don't even get the whole "I'm not gonna vote at all because there are no candidates I'm interested in" argument. Both seem like a cop-out on the part of the voter. Voting for McCain (and let's be real here; few people vote for a VP candidate--although Palin is being touted as a real reason to vote for McCain for some odd reason) to protest that Clinton didn't get the nomination is not stupid; it is asinine. And, as I think Harrogate would argue, is tantamount to agreeing to kill more people in the Middle East and God knows where else many Republicans would like to start wars in the name of protecting our freedoms.

What Steinem does so eloquently is remind us that we're not electing Palin. McCain is the one who needs to be held responsible for this poor choice, for treating the American public--and American women in particular--like we're stupid, and for putting our country at risk. As she points out, if he wanted to put a woman on the ticket, he had lots of other options--elected officials with real experience, who wouldn't make the rest of us cringe, and, despite their status as Republicans, actually work for the cause of gender equality. Instead he chose a woman who mirrors every single one of his policies.

If identity politics is all that matters to us, then I suggest we look past what the candidates look like and listen to how the present themselves and what they say. Both Barack Obama and Joe Biden argue that women can't be equal outside the home until men do an equal amount of work inside it. That seems like a message most women would want to pay attention to.

3 comments:

harrogate said...

Great post on Steinem, m.

But Harrogate wants to point out that once we "look past what the candidates look like and listen to how the present themselves and what they say," then at that very moment we are proving that identity politics is NOT what matters most to us.

Sadly, the lines get blurred in popular culture especially. Not everyone seems to get it, that there is all the difference in the world between Identity Politics and, say, prioritizing women's rights and/or racial justice at the top of one's political agenda.

M said...

That was sort of the point of that sentence, Harrogate.

harrogate said...

Gotcha. Harrogate just thought it important enough that it needed to be repeated. Really it seems so obvious, but a lot of people, in and out of academia, resist it anyway.

Yet Harrogate is not as despairing about this election as he was when ye left us, M. Surely Palin was a dangerous pick for America. But if her craziness and ethical emptiness DOES manage to break out into the Big Conversation, this could be the best thing that has happened to identity politics, and for women's rights, and most importantly for United States Politics across the Board, in a long, long time.

(or mccain could win. but one tries not to assume the nightmare before it takes place)