In this strange new pro-woman tableau, feminism -- a word that is being used all over the country with regard to Palin's potential power -- means voting for someone who would limit reproductive control, access to healthcare and funding for places like Covenant House Alaska, an organization that helps unwed teen mothers. It means cheering someone who allowed women to be charged for their rape kits while she was mayor of Wasilla, who supports the teaching of creationism alongside evolution, who has inquired locally about the possibility of using her position to ban children's books from the public library, who does not support the teaching of sex education.
Maybe I misunderstood The Feminine Mystique, but that sounds like a great example of feminism. Women getting out from the quiet helplessness of a life lived to others' expectations and finding their own voice, even if what they have to say is not what is expected of them.
jcc, did you actually read that? Gaining power and prestige is great for women and might be a goal of feminism, but an individual woman gaining power and prestige by limiting the rights and opportunities of all other women is not.
Here's a brilliant bit of dodging the question from her recent speaking engagement in Michigan:
Asked for "specific skills" she could cite to rebut critics who question her grasp of international affairs, she replied, "I am prepared."
"I have that confidence. I have that readiness," Palin said. "And if you want specifics with specific policies or countries, you can go ahead and ask me. You can play 'stump the candidate' if you want to. But we are ready to serve."
GOP presidential nominee John McCain stepped in, pointing out that as governor of a state that is oil and gas plentiful, Palin was familiar with energy. She knows it to be "one of our great national security challenges," he said.
Guess what, genius? You just lost at "stump the candidate". Source.
jcc, did you actually read that? Gaining power and prestige is great for women and might be a goal of feminism, but an individual woman gaining power and prestige by limiting the rights and opportunities of all other women is not.
Power and prestige aren't the goal of feminism, I don't think... That wasn't the focus of what I was trying to get at... In The Feminine Mystique the author mentions how women's magazines would create a certain lifestyle and way of seeing the world, and that women were expected to blindly follow that lifestyle and way of thinking if they wanted to be recognized as real women. The point of the book was to break free of the expectations of others so that women could discover what their own thoughts and feelings were. It seems to me that this is what Ms. Palin does when she expresses her unpopular opinions. So it may mean that she is not part of the Women's Rights movement, but it would seem to make her a feminist.
The point of the book was to break free of the expectations of others so that women could discover what their own thoughts and feelings were. It seems to me that this is what Ms. Palin does when she expresses her unpopular opinions. So it may mean that she is not part of the Women's Rights movement, but it would seem to make her a feminist.
Many of Palin's opinions are unpopular because they limit the rights and opportunities of other women. Now think about that. Her opinions are unpopular because they are anti-feminist. That cannot make her a feminist.
What do you think it means to be a feminist? Does merely holding unpopular beliefs make you a feminist? Phyllis Schlafly holds some pretty unpopular beliefs. Do you think that she is a feminist?
Being a feminist isn't about holding certain beliefs, it's about a woman having the courage to find out what her own thoughts and feelings are. Unfortunately, in the process of resisting the old feminine mystique, something very similar to a new feminine mystique has been created. The old is about blindly following a certain lifestyle and way of viewing the world because if you don't you aren't a real woman, the new is about blindly following a certain lifestyle and way of viewing the world because if you don't you aren't a modern woman. A woman is a feminist when she builds her worldview and lifestyle off of her own thoughts and feelings as a person, without considering what their implications are for her womanhood one way or the other. Feminism isn't about rejecting old mores, it's about not living in lockstep. So maybe a woman is pro-abortion and knows her way around a vibrator but dresses in an old-fashioned manner and enjoys puttering around the kitchen baking cookies and sweets. Maybe she looks up to her grandmother, who dressed that way, and her favorite memories as a child were helping her bake. She's thought things through as a person, and taken action without regard to mystiques. If I understand correctly, that person would be an example of a feminist. You could also have a woman whose personal beliefs have lead her to smoke and drink, get tattoos and unusual piercings, and to not shave her legs and mostly wear jeans, whose same beliefs have lead her to be against abortion and sexually conservative. She too would be a feminist.
Part of the confusion, I think, is that Women's Rights the capitalized movement is not identical to women's rights the non-capitalized definition, it is possible to disagree with aspects of the one without disagreeing with the idea of the other. Also, both are separate than feminism, even if there is some relation.
In The Feminine Mystique the author mentions how women's magazines would create a certain lifestyle and way of seeing the world, and that women were expected to blindly follow that lifestyle and way of thinking if they wanted to be recognized as real women. The point of the book was to break free of the expectations of others so that women could discover what their own thoughts and feelings were. It seems to me that this is what Ms. Palin does when she expresses her unpopular opinions. So it may mean that she is not part of the Women's Rights movement, but it would seem to make her a feminist.
But the fact is, everything Sarah Palin does and says is effectively pandering to the patriarchal concept of what it means to be "woman" in this culture. She gains the power by conforming to the ideals of womanhood that conservative America holds. How else can you explain her comments about "Just an average hockey mom" and "pitbull in lipstick?" Part of the reason conservatives find her appealing is her constant appeasement of the dudely powers that be. She does not deviate from your "women's magazine lifestyle" or way of thinking, and in fact she owes her popularity among Republicans to it. Just because you have been given a choice, choosing the patriarchy friendly route does not make you a feminist.
While what you are saying is true, I think that when your position removes a choice or freedom of women then you are not inherently feminist. It completely fine to be pro-life, just as long as you don't make it so other people can not have the choice you were afforded when you choose to be pro-life.
But the fact is, everything Sarah Palin does and says is effectively pandering to the patriarchal concept of what it means to be "woman" in this culture. She gains the power by conforming to the ideals of womanhood that conservative America holds. How else can you explain her comments about "Just an average hockey mom" and "pitbull in lipstick?"
As I understand it, both quotes come from an attempt at a joke she made while in the middle of telling the crowd about how she grew up in a small town. It was during her vice presidential nomination acceptance speech. You can read what seems to be a transcript of the whole speech here.
One thing that people don't realize and would never know due to mass medias attempt to sway the peoples view is that before Palin became Governor of Alaska, politics in Alaska were very corrupt. Oil companies/ Special interest groups were basically running the government behind closed doors, in hotel rooms, and at restaurant tables. This has been a fact since the 80's. The very few politicians that fought the corruption were relieved of office for various reasons. When Palin came to office she fought hard against special interest groups, one of the key things she did was cut funding on all government spending, this includes the Covenant house and other such facilities. Only after she did this was she able to "re-structure" the political environment and "trim the fat" of our government spending. Shortly there after funding for such facilities as the Covenant house were reissued and life continued on. As far as firing the "only advocate of domestic violence" every politician including Palin is a supporter for reducing domestic violence here in Alaska. The man she fired abused his power and was not the best person for the job, firing him for not firing the "peace" officer was just the final straw in the proverbial hay stack. The "peace" officer abused his power almost on a daily basis, not to mention tasing a young boy. Though I may agree with a lot of things she has done here in Alaska, I do not agree with all of her views, and I hope in the future she can learn to seperate her strong religious beliefs from her political power. I support her not for the person she is but what she has done for Alaska. There is a reason she has a 90% approval rating here in Alaska. So before you judge someone as a whole view the person as a whole and not just one aspect that you may disagree with. I know that there are a lot of people who will disagree with everything I have said and will pick apart my comments piece by piece, don't judge me for what I say but judge me for what i do.
Seriously, not being from Alaska, I cannot guarantee that these events have to been "spun" to some extent by the time I have heard them. However, this does not change the fact that her statements seem to point to fanatical religious beliefs and social conservatism. I stand by the statement that she is not the best candidate from a women's rights perspective.
There is a reason she has a 90% approval rating here in Alaska..
The reason is that Alaskans are not very bright.
wow....how blissful are you?
I also agree that she may not be the best candidate for the job. I believe that she has a lot of unfinished business here and that she is not quite ready for such political power.
Insulting people is not going to win them over to your argument.
It's very hard for me to resist straight-line set ups like that. How else would you respond to "There is a reason she has a 90% approval rating here in Alaska"? It's just too easy to turn that into a joke.
That being said, I didn't really mean to insult you, Nanook.
Just so you know I am not a native Alaskan. And calling a non-native a Nanook is very offensive. That's like calling you a hick redneck jack hole. I know you didn't mean to insult and thanks for the criticisms. It gives me something to think/talk about.
I can't wait to see the vice presidential debate. Palin is frighteningly ignorant and, when asked a direct question, furiously inarticulate. Biden is an expert in many relevant fields. He is going to destroy her.
First, I want to say thank you, Bobblun, for providing us with some much-needed insight. Given not only our political positions, but our geographic positions as well, it is easy to separate ourselves from what Palin has accomplished in Alaska. It's great to hear that she's done well with the State, and I will concede that I was not fully informed on the matter of the Covenant house's recovery after the restructure was complete.
That said, however, one of your comments continues to ring through:
... and I hope in the future she can learn to seperate her strong religious beliefs from her political power.
Unfortunately, when a candidate says we're in Iraq doing God's work I lose confidence that this will ever happen. I think at this point it is clear that we're doing Bush and Chaney's work, and god (lower-or-upper-case) had nothing to do with it. To idly hope that a candidate for a position as important as the Vice President will simply "come around" is not a plan I can back.
I mean this with none of the biting sarcasm that it will convey, but: perhaps Palin should have stayed governor of Alaska. It would appear she did good things there, but I have much less confidence in her ability on a national scale.
... and I hope in the future she can learn to seperate her strong religious beliefs from her political power.
Unfortunately, when a candidate says we'rein Iraq doing God's workI lose confidence that this will ever happen.
Her religious beliefs get even worse. Have you read about her dealings with that witch-hunter guy? She subscribes to a religion in which people STILL BELIEVE IN WITCHES.
She is basically a tool being used by others to further agendas she does not understand. She is probably unaware of the reality of her actions, that is to say she is barely conscious. She seems to function at such a base level that I am reminded of a simplistic reactionary animal simply seeking relief from pain, embarrassment or uncomfortability. These kinds of people, these 'blank slates' as they were called before, are great second hand thinkers. If enough people around them think it's true, then it must be true. When someone like this goes into power it is extremely dangerous, especially when so many others in that realm are looking for someone weak to further their own agendas. In short she is simply a puppet there to dance to an other's strings, something that can be gauged and controlled.
I do not hate her because I consider her to be sub-human and therefore below such emotions, I do however feel vaguely disgusted by her and sincerely hope she does not come to power.
It would not surprise me if McCain dropped dead for some reason or other, and this fool to took over.
Her religious beliefs get even worse. Have you read about her dealings with that witch-hunter guy? She subscribes to a religion in which people STILL BELIEVE IN WITCHES.
I'm somewhat familiar with the situation, and overall believe it to be alarmist (in the exact same way that the Reverend Wright thing was alarmist). From what I understand, Palin basically said: "yeah, he does good work in his missionary in Africa," which was more-or-less true. That excludes, of course, that one time when he tried to oust a woman in the neighborhood for being a witch. I've taken to the witch situation as a case of cultural divide, one we may never fully grasp, and one that Palin didn't want to weigh too heavily on. Fine.
My concern with her religious tendencies has nothing to do with how crazy she or her associates might be. If they were crazy, but supported real sex-ed being taught in schools or were serious about medical research in this country, I wouldn't care. Neither of those statements are true, however, and from my understanding it is her religious beliefs that are to "blame".
Comments
Source.
What do you think it means to be a feminist? Does merely holding unpopular beliefs make you a feminist? Phyllis Schlafly holds some pretty unpopular beliefs. Do you think that she is a feminist?
Palin could not be where she is without feminism, but that does not make her a feminist.
Part of the confusion, I think, is that Women's Rights the capitalized movement is not identical to women's rights the non-capitalized definition, it is possible to disagree with aspects of the one without disagreeing with the idea of the other. Also, both are separate than feminism, even if there is some relation.
While what you are saying is true, I think that when your position removes a choice or freedom of women then you are not inherently feminist. It completely fine to be pro-life, just as long as you don't make it so other people can not have the choice you were afforded when you choose to be pro-life.
As far as firing the "only advocate of domestic violence" every politician including Palin is a supporter for reducing domestic violence here in Alaska. The man she fired abused his power and was not the best person for the job, firing him for not firing the "peace" officer was just the final straw in the proverbial hay stack. The "peace" officer abused his power almost on a daily basis, not to mention tasing a young boy.
Though I may agree with a lot of things she has done here in Alaska, I do not agree with all of her views, and I hope in the future she can learn to seperate her strong religious beliefs from her political power. I support her not for the person she is but what she has done for Alaska. There is a reason she has a 90% approval rating here in Alaska.
So before you judge someone as a whole view the person as a whole and not just one aspect that you may disagree with. I know that there are a lot of people who will disagree with everything I have said and will pick apart my comments piece by piece, don't judge me for what I say but judge me for what i do.
Seriously, not being from Alaska, I cannot guarantee that these events have to been "spun" to some extent by the time I have heard them. However, this does not change the fact that her statements seem to point to fanatical religious beliefs and social conservatism. I stand by the statement that she is not the best candidate from a women's rights perspective.
I also agree that she may not be the best candidate for the job. I believe that she has a lot of unfinished business here and that she is not quite ready for such political power.
Insulting people is not going to win them over to your argument.
That being said, I didn't really mean to insult you, Nanook.
Just so you know I am not a native Alaskan. And calling a non-native a Nanook is very offensive. That's like calling you a hick redneck jack hole.
I know you didn't mean to insult and thanks for the criticisms. It gives me something to think/talk about.
That said, however, one of your comments continues to ring through: Unfortunately, when a candidate says we're in Iraq doing God's work I lose confidence that this will ever happen. I think at this point it is clear that we're doing Bush and Chaney's work, and god (lower-or-upper-case) had nothing to do with it. To idly hope that a candidate for a position as important as the Vice President will simply "come around" is not a plan I can back.
I mean this with none of the biting sarcasm that it will convey, but: perhaps Palin should have stayed governor of Alaska. It would appear she did good things there, but I have much less confidence in her ability on a national scale.
She is basically a tool being used by others to further agendas she does not understand. She is probably unaware of the reality of her actions, that is to say she is barely conscious. She seems to function at such a base level that I am reminded of a simplistic reactionary animal simply seeking relief from pain, embarrassment or uncomfortability. These kinds of people, these 'blank slates' as they were called before, are great second hand thinkers. If enough people around them think it's true, then it must be true. When someone like this goes into power it is extremely dangerous, especially when so many others in that realm are looking for someone weak to further their own agendas. In short she is simply a puppet there to dance to an other's strings, something that can be gauged and controlled.
I do not hate her because I consider her to be sub-human and therefore below such emotions, I do however feel vaguely disgusted by her and sincerely hope she does not come to power.
It would not surprise me if McCain dropped dead for some reason or other, and this fool to took over.
My concern with her religious tendencies has nothing to do with how crazy she or her associates might be. If they were crazy, but supported real sex-ed being taught in schools or were serious about medical research in this country, I wouldn't care. Neither of those statements are true, however, and from my understanding it is her religious beliefs that are to "blame".