The Importance of Being Sarah

I really did not think I would live to see the day when a major political party in the U.S. would find it necessary to add a woman to the ticket in order to win the presidency. It's a shame I can't be at all happy about the particular party and woman making history. However, if you will recall, I predicted something like this situation some time ago. I just got the particular woman wrong. As I noted in a comment on that post:

...the majority [of] people will love a non-traditional candidate who is a conservative much sooner than they will love a non-traditional candidate who is a liberal. Or, should I say, they will be made to feel less uneasy by a conservative non-traditional candidate. The conservatism compensates for being non-white and/or non-male.

The analogy...to engineering...[is] my observation that male engineers are comfortable with women engineers who do not agitate for women's or minority issues in engineering, who do not concern themselves with access and climate, who insist that they've never been discriminated against and that everybody should just be judged on their merits, as if that is what happens all the time except for when the bleeding heart liberals start talking about affirmative action. They will love a woman like this, and point to her as an example that there is nothing wrong and any woman can succeed if she only tries and they aren't biased because there is this one woman they admire.

Conservatives love Condoleezza [Rice], because she helps them feel not prejudiced, and she can out-conservative any of them, so she doesn't threaten their worldview with any of that ridiculous liberal claptrap. What she's accomplished is a separate question. I don't think she's a strong presidential candidate but I think she would be completely acceptable as a VP.

Just substitute "Sarah Palin" there for "Condoleezza Rice".

Liberals should not underestimate how important Sarah Palin is, and conservative women in general are, to this election's outcome. Ronnee Schreiber, author of Righting Feminism: Conservative Women and American Politics, observes

Having women speak for these causes helps legitimate them to other women and casts the Republican Party as one that cares about women's interests. Not surprisingly, the former president of the Independent Women's Forum, Nancy Pfotenhauer, is now a senior policy adviser for the McCain campaign.

McCain's pick of Palin is not lost on conservative women's advocates; indeed, it helps solidify their stance that women need to be speaking out for conservative causes - that these women need to play "femball."

Concerned Women for America, arguably the nation's largest women's organization, with local chapters in every state, praised Palin, not just because she opposes abortion but because she is a "woman of accomplishment who brings a fresh face to traditional values and models the type of woman most girls want to become."

Equally celebrated was that she "will bring to the forefront of our cultural conversations an intelligent, realistic, well-grounded woman's perspective." For groups like Concerned Women for America, Palin embodies modern conservative womanhood - she is politically active, personally motivated and decidedly conservative.

Independent Women's Forum has been at times reluctant to say that gender matters when it comes to who we elect. Yet it now touts the significance of Palin's being a woman.

And why not? Palin might be able to bring some undecided, yet moderately conservative women into their fold, especially if she is branded as the "everywoman" as in this observation by IWF President Michelle Bernard: "Sarah Palin might not win the votes of left-wing feminists, but she appeals to average women and men across the country."

That's right, folks. You and me, the left-wing, liberal, man-hating, hairy-legged, baby-killing, and no-doubt lesbian feminists of the country, of course we don't like Everywoman Sarah, because we hate America.

The branding here - what is being sold to the "average woman and man" - is that Palin is a Nice Sort of Feminist. She has a career, but she's a mom! She stands for traditional values! In fact, she doesn't want to upset the patriarchal applecart at all, no sir! She is your ideal woman, because she will make you think you can be all about supporting teh women without having to actually, you know, stop being sexist, or examine privilege, or care about women's reproductive health, or anything disconcerting like that. Michelle Obama may say (hat tip Sciencewoman)

I was raised to believe I could do it all, and that was very empowering. Then I got into the work force and realized there was really no support for me to do it all. ... We either have to fix that or be honest about it.

but you aren't going to hear that kind of honest assessment liberal whining from Palin. Nosiree! 'Cause Sarah Palin knows it's a man's, man's, man's, man's world. And why would anyone want to call attention to that?

Categories

More like this

Hey, I resent that! I really like left-wing, liberal, man-hating, hairy-legged, baby-killing, and no-doubt lesbian feminists.

In all seriousness, I think you hit it on the head. She is safe, non-threatening, "knows her place," "easy on the eyes," easy on the conservative brain (which really can't take too much threat to its cozy, comfy, little fantasy of what America should be).

By Jeff Knapp (not verified) on 17 Sep 2008 #permalink

"I really did not think I would live to see the day when a major political party in the U.S. would find it necessary to add a woman to the ticket in order to win the presidency."

That's it! I've been wondering about my positive liberal reaction to a Conservative VP candidate whose views I completely oppose. But you hit the proverbial nail on the head in that one sentence. The Democratic Party either didn't believe a woman could win, or that it was more important to have an AA candidate, or that it would be a disaster to have an AA and a woman on the same ticket BUT the Republican Party decided a woman would HELP!

BUT the Republican Party decided a woman would HELP!

Well, times change. Now that Virginia -- VIRGINIA!!! -- is leaning more and more Democratic...

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 18 Sep 2008 #permalink

"I really did not think I would live to see the day when a major political party in the U.S. would find it necessary to add a woman to the ticket in order to win the presidency."

You weren't alive in 1984?

Ferraro was picked by Mondale to make a statement, establish a precedent - not because having her on the ticket was the key to helping the Dems win the election. Which they did not. In this instance, Palin's gender was considered a plus in the VP position and something that was needed to help energize the very important base of conservative evangelical women who were not at all excited about McCain. As much as I was thrilled when Ferraro was picked, I had no illusions about her presence on the ticket helping with a victory. She was definitely a precedent-setter. But Palin is a strategic move designed to help win the election. The difference, for me, is acknowledgment by the old white boy power brokers that women are an important political force and cannot be ignored. They can't just assume they've got those votes. They have to do something to win them. THAT'S what I never thought I'd live to see - that women as a political force to be reckoned with, would be taken seriously.

The deeper we got into the Barack and Hillary show last spring, the more inevitable this strategy for the Republicans became. The stock of nonwhite and nonmale VP long-listers just kept increasing. Any Gov or Senator who qualified on the woman or nonwhite criteria was on the shortlist by what, May? April even?

These people who think Palin is a 'surprise' selection are totally high.

It consfuses that people can't see Michelle Obama as an Everywoman.
I mean, Michelle Obama never reminded me of Whitney Houston before, but she sure seems to be 1-up on Sarah Palin there ;-)
But then, maybe I'm crazy liberal! feminist!!eleventy! who just wants to have an arugula salad with Barack Obama!

I agree with DM though, Palin totally makes sense as a pick... as long as you want this country to be 1) massively in-debt 2) internationally despised 3) theocratically run and 4) perpetually at war for a long, long time after Bush leaves office.