Rant - "the woman candidate"
Aug. 30th, 2008 07:42 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
doc_strangeThose of you expecting a rant against the Republicans on this score, you're about to be disappointed. Nor is it praise for them. Nor anything about the Democrats.
Let's talk a little about Governor Palin. Oh, wait, don't I mean "Sarah Palin?" No, after all, we complained the press weren't calling Senator Clinton by her title while calling her opponents by theirs, as that's demeaning; but Palin, we're gonna never use her title? Strike one. You know who you are. Shame, shame. You can demean her by leaving off her office when you buck the party and fight your way to an office supervising over half a million people and over a half a million square miles.
If she were less comely, I suspect her actual history of 2 years in office might be in discussion rather than her looks. Admittedly, of course that's not a long time in high office - but how about we actually, you know, discuss it? Senator Obama is just as inexperienced and he's at the top of the ticket, and we HAVE discussed it.
Yesterday and today, I've read (all from people I took for social liberals) comments on her being a "bimbo," a "whore," a "walking uterus," "a token," and even some worse. Very interesting. Not a word on her actual 2 years as governor - for example, bucking the party on constitutional issues on the advice of the state attorney general, bucking party line by obeying court orders, renegotiating critical contracts with big oil, and opening up pipeline bids to international takers (Canadian company won), etc. I guess I have to ask if her 2 years as a governor are too little, then why are Obama's as a Senator not? Closet misogyny, that's why. If McCain had picked Liberman, would we be talking about the token Jew, a Kike, a Himey? Would Jindal be a token Indian (and he's really, really young), or called a "baby [ethnic slur here]"?
The obsession of looks->negatives is mostly coming from the general left, and maybe that's slanted because my friends' list is generally very left - but reading this outpouring of misogyny - and it is, you deniers, it is - I can only wonder if the left has more closet misogynists than the right.
During Senator Clinton's campaign, the media - even the left media - did some rather amazingly (closet) misogynistic things. They commented on her clothes and makeup as much as her speeches and positions. They made rude predictions on former President Clinton's role in the White House, and they questioned whether "having a woman in the White House" would affect our miltiary bearing. Rather a surprise for me how entrenched in the core of all US society misogyny is.
Senator Clinton complained about it, and, damned if she wasn't right.
And now we have it - worse, with real acid - for Governor Palin. Rather a disappointment for me, a disappointment in many of my friends. It's like discovering many of them are closet anti-Semites who believe they aren't prejudiced. "Hey, it's OK, I'd vote for a Jew candidate!" Uh, huh.
Why not discuss her as a candidate, rather than by her looks, as a "bimbo" for the right, etc.? Why is she not "the Republican Candidate"?
Remember the Saturday morning PSAs on prejudice?
"Who's Senator Palin, Jimmy?" "She's the Republican's woman candidate." Uh, huh.
Noooo, that's not showing a prejudiced core. No, sure isn't. Uh, huh.
My friends list is being trimmed, permanently. I will not remain "friends" with people whose souls are full of acid but who think they are full of balm. Those of you full of acid and happy to admit it, please stick around. You at least are honest, and sometimes a lot of fun.
Let's talk a little about Governor Palin. Oh, wait, don't I mean "Sarah Palin?" No, after all, we complained the press weren't calling Senator Clinton by her title while calling her opponents by theirs, as that's demeaning; but Palin, we're gonna never use her title? Strike one. You know who you are. Shame, shame. You can demean her by leaving off her office when you buck the party and fight your way to an office supervising over half a million people and over a half a million square miles.
If she were less comely, I suspect her actual history of 2 years in office might be in discussion rather than her looks. Admittedly, of course that's not a long time in high office - but how about we actually, you know, discuss it? Senator Obama is just as inexperienced and he's at the top of the ticket, and we HAVE discussed it.
Yesterday and today, I've read (all from people I took for social liberals) comments on her being a "bimbo," a "whore," a "walking uterus," "a token," and even some worse. Very interesting. Not a word on her actual 2 years as governor - for example, bucking the party on constitutional issues on the advice of the state attorney general, bucking party line by obeying court orders, renegotiating critical contracts with big oil, and opening up pipeline bids to international takers (Canadian company won), etc. I guess I have to ask if her 2 years as a governor are too little, then why are Obama's as a Senator not? Closet misogyny, that's why. If McCain had picked Liberman, would we be talking about the token Jew, a Kike, a Himey? Would Jindal be a token Indian (and he's really, really young), or called a "baby [ethnic slur here]"?
The obsession of looks->negatives is mostly coming from the general left, and maybe that's slanted because my friends' list is generally very left - but reading this outpouring of misogyny - and it is, you deniers, it is - I can only wonder if the left has more closet misogynists than the right.
During Senator Clinton's campaign, the media - even the left media - did some rather amazingly (closet) misogynistic things. They commented on her clothes and makeup as much as her speeches and positions. They made rude predictions on former President Clinton's role in the White House, and they questioned whether "having a woman in the White House" would affect our miltiary bearing. Rather a surprise for me how entrenched in the core of all US society misogyny is.
Senator Clinton complained about it, and, damned if she wasn't right.
And now we have it - worse, with real acid - for Governor Palin. Rather a disappointment for me, a disappointment in many of my friends. It's like discovering many of them are closet anti-Semites who believe they aren't prejudiced. "Hey, it's OK, I'd vote for a Jew candidate!" Uh, huh.
Why not discuss her as a candidate, rather than by her looks, as a "bimbo" for the right, etc.? Why is she not "the Republican Candidate"?
Remember the Saturday morning PSAs on prejudice?
"Who's Senator Palin, Jimmy?" "She's the Republican's woman candidate." Uh, huh.
Noooo, that's not showing a prejudiced core. No, sure isn't. Uh, huh.
My friends list is being trimmed, permanently. I will not remain "friends" with people whose souls are full of acid but who think they are full of balm. Those of you full of acid and happy to admit it, please stick around. You at least are honest, and sometimes a lot of fun.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-30 05:14 pm (UTC)I hadn't paid the slightest attention to who McCain might be looking at for a VP, and didn't have any clue who might be on the list, but when Obama selected Biden instead of Hillary, I was certain McCain would select a female VP.
It's entirely possible Palin is also the best candidate if you discount gender, but a multitude of statements from Clinton supporters earlier this year already made it obvious that discounting the gender issue would be premature. People aren't over that yet. They're fighting for justice, and it will be worth switching parties for some of them. There are people for whom the gender mix on the ticket is the most important issue, and it was obvious he wouldn't pass that up. Simple game theory, politics is ugly, and they go for the biggest bloc of votes wherever they think you can score them.
If we figure a roughly 50/50 split between Democrats and Republicans, and close enough to a 50/50 split between Obama and Clinton supporters, we have 25% of voters being disappointed Clinton supporters who have spent a year looking forward to having a female president. For some of them, that single issue has been the most important factor. McCain will gain votes based on this choice, the only question is how many. No other VP choice was likely to have this sort of impact.
We've already established that we're talking about established politicians and power-brokers. It's fanciful to think they might have overlooked this and selected someone based on non-gender merits alone.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-30 05:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-30 06:14 pm (UTC)Anyway, his short list was leaked some time ago.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-30 08:52 pm (UTC)Agreed. And the tendency of some to discount that set of single-issue voters while not similarly discounting other single-issue voters is very telling.
Also generally agreed on the other points. Thanks.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-31 07:27 pm (UTC)Since getting elected is about getting votes, and gender is a factor in getting votes, you CAN'T discount gender. Keep in mind that in choosing a running mate, a presidential candidate is far less interested in picking the best person for the job than he/she is in picking the person most likely to help him/her win the election.