Who’s Afraid of Sarah Palin?
July 1, 2009
by Amy Siskind
|
Vanity Fair's rendering of Palin
A number of our members have asked me to comment on the latest hit job (calling it an “article” would be overstating things) by Vanity Fair on Governor Palin titled It Came from Wasilla. Even the title is a disgrace.
In case you are curious what sexism looks like, let me give you some real world examples courtesy of Todd Purdum of Vanity Fair:
…she is by far the best-looking woman ever to rise to such heights in national politics, the first indisputably fertile female to dare to dance with the big dogs.
and
anonymous McCain aides saw Palin as a “diva” and a “whack job.”
and
Some top aides worried about her mental state: was it possible that she was experiencing postpartum depression?
Now the question folks are emailing me to ask is why is this happening? Why the ongoing onslaught against Governor Palin? How can Vanity Fair get away with this?
Well let me explain what Hillary Clinton supporters learned, the hard way, in 2008 – sexism sells! Todd Purdum, who by the way is Dee Dee Myers’ husband (poor Dee Dee), also wrote a hit job on Bill Clinton, and Hillary by virtue, last summer just as the Democratic primary was winding down (that’s when I canceled my subscription!).
Let’s face it, when a women is in serious contention to become President, it’s an all out frontal assault by our media to discredit, belittle and then destroy her. Neither political party mind you stands up against sexism.
So why is it that sexism is free game? The media can get away with it, and in fact it sells. Can you imagine if Vanity Fair wrote an article and made racist comments? Or took on sexual orientation? Would NEVER happen. The groups devoted to those causes are well organized and they know how to work together.
I am struck by the successes of the gays rights movement. We have a lot to learn from how they operate. The gays rights group are able to form alliances and work on what unites them. There are different nuances that different groups focus on, but they still are smart enough to find common ground and work together. 250 heads of gay organizations were invited to the White House with our POTUS this past Monday. He has made grand promises to these groups.
Then there are the women’s advocacy groups. Let me give you exhibit A of the problem we face: our lack of unity and why Vanity Fair can get away with publishing this trash.
Readers here will have read my piece After a Coup d’Etat at NOW, the Future of “Feminism”. My piece is an endorsement of NOW and the importance of the organization:
The success of national women’s organizations such as NOW is as important to women’s advocacy as it was for Wall Street to have Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley find their financial footing.
Despite these glowing recommendation on my part, Diana Castaneda who is on the National Board of NOW took the time to write this comment on our blog:
You cannot claim A COUP, when all the work to give NOW new life came directly from NOW Feminist like me, that have never heard of the NEW Agenda. The fact that a very few of you attended does not make a coup! I am a National Board member from Texas. The first I have ever heard of you was from a NOW President,.We are not new agenda/Palin supporters. We support candidates and women that adhere to choice . We also do not condone Letterman or any one that promotes misogyny and abuse of women either in Word or Deed. I for one supported Terry O’Neill because she is the most qualified to take on the Fiscal challenges that NOW is facing. In this country there is room for all concepts of inclusion including the NEW AGENDA, but NOW is NOT RIPE for the picking! YOU, will have to do your own joint collaborations with other Legitimate groups to build a network just as NOW has in over 40 years. No coup was masterminded by the New Agenda, it was the membership that wanted a new direction. NOW is happy to have people that support our AGENDA, and inclusion of All women , and Women of Color. Diana Castaneda, South Central Region, Texas/Combating Racism Task Force Member
So here The New Agenda is supporting NOW and asking for unity. When other organizations support The New Agenda, the first I do is to thank them. Diana who is a National Board member of NOW has a different approach:
We are not new agenda/Palin supporters.
READ: If TNA defends Palin from sexism, we are all “Palin supporters” and beneath Diana.
YOU, will have to do your own joint collaborations with other Legitimate groups to build a network just as NOW has in over 40 years.
READ: TNA is not part of the clique. We don’t want you and your type. Get over it!
NOW is happy to have people that support our AGENDA, and inclusion of All women , and Women of Color
READ: Who are you including Diana? You look down your nose on women who support Palin. You don’t include women that are not pro-choice. You don’t even bother to mention men (TNA’s members are 10% men).
Oh, and by the way Diana, TNA was not in any way involved with NOW’s election. We are busy growing a national organization that IS inclusive.
Diana’s comments are precisely why Vanity Fair can get away with it.
The success of women’s advocacy will depend on unity. We need to focus on issues that unite, not divide us. We need women’s group to be a united front and work to eradicate the roots of sexism and misogyny, buried deeply in ignorance, bias and darkness.
And like I have said on numerous occasion, consider us Motel 6. We’ll leave the light on for all of you to join us when you are ready. Even Diana – she’ll come around. UNITY!
It would be one thing if NOW had only proven itself to be obsolete, but they have become the ladies auxilliary for the male bastion of politicians.
I know that TNA isn’t, but I AM a Palin Supporter. I consider that what she’s been through AS A WOMAN is important enough that I will put electoral muscle behind it.
It’s funny how supposedly “feminist” women will devote their lives to women’s issues and the “defeat” of sexism, but stop short every single tim eof considering it important enough to actually cast a vote over. Sure, they hate sexism. Right, they decry the sexual humiliation of women. Okay I’ll bite, they think men who degrade women are just like terribly awful.
They just won’t ever VOTE with that conviction. When the time comes to put some muscle into it, they quail and faint and pretend that so many other things cont more. Moose-hunting. Okay, so are they the national organization of WOMEN of the national organization of mooses? What matters more, casting a vote to support a moose, or casting a vote to support a woman who has been subjected to a public honor murder the likes of which I haven’t seen in ages, even taking Hillary Clinton’s disgusting baptism of fire into account?
“Sure,” they say. “I totally like don’t at all approve of what Keith Olbermann said about her. BUT … ” Yeah, but. But her stance on moose hunting matters more than sticking up for one of the most profound women’s issues we face: sexual degradation and humiliation. Push comes to shove, women like Diana just don’t care enough about sexism to push back against it. You can tell what people care about by what motivates them to lever their fat butts up out of their lounge chairs. For the Palin haters, and for NOW, that issues CLEARLY is not the sexual, misogynist degradation of women.
Like I said before, women like Diana need to knwo who got raped before they can say whether the rape was wrong. And if the victim doesn’t pass their smell test, then not only will they not care, but they’ll cheer it on. I have NO TIME FOR THAT GARBAGE ANYMORE.
Oh and BTW, Diana? If you want to run for office, I’ll still vote for you. No, I’m not kidding.
And don’t tell me how much you “care” about garbage like choice. I have been instructed enough times that I’ve lost count to “hold my nose” and vote for male Democrats who have held disgustingly anti-woman political positions, because apparently rallying behind the males of our little tribe means more than rallying behind females of another.
If I can be expected to “hold my nose” and vote for a jerk who flips off the first serious female candidate for president (and a woman far more qualified than he) and all but refers to another as a pig with lipstick, then I can goddamned well “hold my nose” and vote for a conservative woman who appointed a pro-choice judge to her state’s supreme court, worked in favor of same-sex partner benefits, and at least has the courage of her convictions and walks the walk when confronted with a situation where most pro-”life” hypocrites turn pro-choice real fast — being pregnant with a specials needs kid.
I don’t even think I’ll have to hold my nose for that.
If Castanada insists that we must only support women who “adhere to choice”, then there is no choice. Can’t she recognize her lack of logic? Her own prejudice? She feeds right into the divisiveness that prohibits women’s unity and cannot recognize that she herself is sabotaging feminism.
The power elite are afraid of sarah palin because she is not one of them and not beholden to them, Republican or Democrat. Over at Conservatives 4 Palin, the general consensus is this is an attempt to get rid of her right now and that the Romney campaign is behind much of it.
When will women ever figure it out? United we stand, divided we fall. If women want equality the quickest way to get there is by electing a female president.
Well, at least Castanada does not speak for all of NOW. I love how you have worked with Marcia Pappas on Monserrate and I think there are very likely more opportunities for TNA to work with NOW.
But there we go again. Castanada is showing classic signs of fear – fear of the 4th Wave.
Yes, we have a great working relationship with Marcia and several NOW Presidents.
So sad but when I see comments like Diana’s, I lose faith that NOW will be able to change. She sees nothing wrong with what she wrote. It’s the: You’re not IN the clique – you don’t respect what we did for 40 years…blah, blah….
Well that is why they have 60,000 members as of 2007 – likely less in 08 and 09 after they had lukewarm support of Hillary. I don’t know a single person in my community who is a member of NOW. That org has given such a bad name to feminism that we need a new term.
Well we’ll keep taking the high road. I guess in year or two when we have more members, maybe THEN she’ll wake up!
Castanada’s lack of both logic and reading comprehension skills are painfully evident by her comments in the previous thread. If she’s the best NOW has to offer, no wonder it’s an organization in decline. Let’s hope Terry O’Neill has the stuff to turn things around. She can start by purging the board of embarrassments like Diana.
In the name of unity, must we suffer fools gladly?
Terry is going to have her hands full keeping NOW out of bankruptcy based on Lynette’s numbers. I hope she gets some of the NOW presidents like Marcia, Shelley, Linda – who were pro-Hillary AND pro-Palin on the board. Else, yes, it will be more of the same old – you’re not in the clique – you haven’t earned it – be gone (and so they will).
We’ll do it folks. The country is ready. The New Agenda!!!
There is much more to the ongoing trashing of Sarah Palin than Diana’s inept approach. Like a lot what Janis wrote.
1. We have a lot to do to learn a new behavior WOMEN BANDING TOGETHER. I called myself a feminist for all my life, but when I supported Hillary I found myself explaining why and what is so great about her. not simply I want to see a female president. Just compare everybody crying for the first black president. they said nothing more, than he is black, he is not a white male and a minority and that was enough for over the top emotions. It will take a lot of re-education to find ourselves worthy to just want a female president.
2…several groups managed to have constitutional protection against misrepresentation, hate speech, discrimination. you can’t discriminate a person of color, any person for their religion whether it is the most unreasonable one you might think of and as Amy wrote the stage is set for gays to gains equal recognition. we need a huge push, that we will be included and get constitutional garantues to our rights (ERA). and this is important. if we had anti-discrimination laws for women, the offenders would need to prove that they were not discriminating. and didn’t we learn how useful lawsuits are in the political agenda. but we will never get the ERA, if we are not finally learn to band together.
i find it interesting that we older folks men and women were supporting Hillary and Palin, and the young women were mostly flying off to superman.
I find the vanity fair discussion so appalling that I would like to see a boykott like the letterman one, to teach these guys that we will not shut up.
just alone the depression statement to a young female contender who just had inspired millions with her stellar performance (in my opinion). I can’t get over that insult.
Marille, an awful lot of young women are on the husband hunt, and they are bending over backwards to make excuses and cut slack for substandard men. I swear to you that’s it in a nutshell.
And Monarch, women like Diana can’t understand that voting for women (but not men!) who defend choice is counterproductive the way the Dems have rigged it. They think that by letting it hang by a thread, they can get us to crawl over and timidly pull that lever for them over and over. Timidly pulling the lever will do NOTHING to ensure choice. It will all but guarantee that they let it hang by a thread forever.
But if we swallow hard and let them fall off the cliff once — just once — you’ll see them really beginning to shore up choice and making real progress. Sure, it’ll suck for us for a while but please — we survived eight years of a president who appointed a VETERINARIAN to a women’s health position. We can hold up to this. You’d think.
It’s like the nurses that were caught in Richard Speck’s basement. They were so afraid to risk their lives that they lost them. “We can’t try to escape! If we get caught, he’ll — ”
He’ll what? Kill you deader? The whole thing’s repugnant.
In the name of unity, must we suffer fools gladly?
Nope. All we have to do is vote for them. I don’t have to like the bitch, all I have to do is vote for her.
Seriously, that’s another myth that women need to jettison: they have to be like total ZOMGBFFS4EVAH with a woman if they vote for her. We’ve somehow internalized this ridiculous notion — born of MILLENNIA without any real power — that merely voting for a woman is equivalent to having a sleepover with her, doing our makeup and toenails, telling each other our Dream Boyfriend Secrets, writing Harry Potter fanfic together, and giggling over a smuggled can of low-alc cider.
All it is, is VOTING. I don’t have to LIKE her. I just have to VOTE for her. It’s amazing how easy it becomes even to vote for Nancy Pelosi once you make that realization. It’s very freeing.
Like I said, it’s like the card counter in Vegas who knows he has to take a hit on those two queens, no matter how bad his monkey instincts are yelling at him to stand. Once you know what you have to do, and that you’re in it for the long haul, it becomes remarkably stress-free to just do what you know will guarantee success. No decisions, no agonizing, no angst, no sleepless nights: just vote for the chick. Done. What’s for dinner?
Repeat after me everyone: “I don’t have to like her, I just have to vote for her.”
Janis
I also support Sarah Palin. She is one of the last true PUBLIC servants. She along with Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, and Ron Paul have put American before Goldman Sacks and the selling out of American.
I strongly supported Hillary Clinton and volunteered for her campaign. Lately its hard for me to even look at her or Bill. I cannot and will not support anybody who campaigned for Barak Obama.
Now our tax dollars are supporting Shar-iah compliant financing.
Our govenment owns 80% of AIG which is now a leader in Shar-iah compliant financing.
We have gone from the Bush family that held hands with Saudi Royals to Obama who bows to the Saudi King.
Sarah Palin is as far away from Barak Obama as she can be, and I love that about her. Every negative thing they reported about her during the election was a flat out lie.-Reference-Factcheck.org “Sliming Palin.” All of the bogus ethics complaints filed against her were dismised, but of course the media choose to ignore it.
I am still a great fan of Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich. Palin, like them, is for the people. Obama’s council is made up of Wall Street Financial Oligarchs who are about to bring the US under control of the World Bank and tax us without representation through Al Gore and other elitist’s Carbon Derivatives Market schemes. Another manufactored buble for Goldman Sachs to exploit.
My former party makes me sick. Dennis Kucinich should MOVEON to a new party. I think he is as disgusted with the democrats as I am.
I don’t know Janis.
I could never support Nancy Pelosi!
Lets just make it safe for more women to run for office. Then we will have much better choices than Nancy, (oh I forgot to disclose that I have financial interest in the Carbon Derivitaves Market,) Pelosi.
I always have to LOL when I hear people who vote for someone because they are Pro-choice. I decided long ago that opinions on choice have very little to do with respect to running the government anymore. Choice was very much an issue for the feminist movement many decades ago, but that time is long gone. My case in point is my state – CA. We are in complete fiscal meltdown. We have legislators who were elected because they supported one type of special interest group or another, and just about everyone here is pro-choice (elected officials that is). Obviously, those issues are not at the forefront right now. If CA had at least 50% representation in our government, I am convinced we would never be in this crisis.
janis as always brilliant
If Diana is speaking for the new NOW administration, nothing has changed
They should just get it done- change their name to the National Organization of Liberal Pro Choice Women- because in Diana’s NOW- they choose political agenda’s over getting women elected to office and breaking those ceilings. If you don’t support their agenda they wont let you in, and wont help you break the glass ceiling.They only want that” right” woman to get elected, all others are” fair game” and should be opposed. heck some of them dont even consider GOP females” women”. and clearly her group still doesn’t want men in it. Janis is so right on, vote for women, black white, gay, straight, conservative, liberal- if you dont like their agenda just hold your nose and vote for them anyway- otherwise your( female) majority in this country will be of no value because men will divide you based on agendas- I hope Diana does not represent the view of NOW and that your analysis, Amy of a few days ago is correct
“Vote for women, black, white, gay, straight, conservative, liberal…”
Do we have to add “dumb as dirt” to that list? Believe me, I don’t have to like a woman either to work with or to vote for her. I DO vote for the chick 99 times out of 100, whether it’s for president or dog catcher, and depending on who was Diana’s opponent in any given election, I might even vote for her. An elected official doesn’t have to be a Rhodes scholar, but incredibly stupid people in positions of power scare the sh*t out of me. I’ve seen the consequences in business and in government. I’ll take the smart SOB over the stupid nice guy every time. The NOW organization is a perfect example of what happens when idiots are in charge.
For the record, I’m not advocating the double standard wherein the woman candidate must be superior to a mediocre male candidate to be considered for public office. I’d vote for the less qualified woman (whether I agreed with her political agenda or not) if she displayed even a modicum of intelligence, but I do draw a line at someone who can’t make a remotely logical argument or string together ten words into a coherent sentence.
Oh, and before anyone accuses me of Palin-bashing, I think Sarah Palin is smart as hell. I’d vote for her in a New York minute (in fact, this life-long Democrat did).
Again I ask, in the name of unity, are there no standards beyond biological femaleness?
“It would be one thing if NOW had only proven itself to be obsolete, but they have become the ladies auxilliary for the male bastion of politicians.” – RIChris – what a powerful statement, so succinct and true.
TNA repeatedly shows itself to be inclusive and avoids single issues traps and pitfalls. There are forces that want to paint TNA as some kind of Sarah Palin cult but it is not working – people here freely point out their opposition to her politics and views but all are united against her being assaulted for being a woman. I don’t agree with all of her beliefs and policies but I voted for her because she was a qualified woman, only the 2cd VP candidate in our collective history.
Boston Nell,
Since the only qualification for men is to be smart enough to get elected, I’d vote for “dumb as dirt”. If she’s smart enough to get elected, she’ll be fine.
Boston Nell–I don’t know if anyone who can’t make a remotely logical argument or string together ten words into a coherent sentence will ever really run for office. I think this fear of stupidity is not founded. I think we should fear other things more, like greed, and unethical behavior, bias. I don’t know, I’d like to hear some of your examples of stupid people messing things up in government or business. My guess is it had less to do with the intelligence of one person, and more to do with something else…
I guess the only thing I can think of to watch out for when voting for a woman or for anybody is if s/he is a puppet figure for some interest group whose intentions are not to benefit the public but to benefit themselves…
hi folks– FemiSex.com here
a community requst today! a young woman has asked for some advice over at our site and I’d love to have some great feedback come her way. Her letter really touched me and the veracity is confirmed. Have a gander and if you have any suggestions on how a 16 year-old can deal with peer sexism, let her know!
http://www.femisex.com/content.....apt-sexism
thanks!!
And Graydon Carter is an old fart! Sadly a powerful fart in media.
So many good opinions here.
@Janis: I understand the politics of supporting only women candidates and that may be the only way to go to move toward parity. At the same time, while I agree with Cynthia McKinney on a lot of issues, I would not vote for her because of her record of assault and generalized battiness.
@Marille: Your analysis of supporting ERA is crucial. I never joined NOW because, while supporting rights for gays and diversity are laudable, there are other organizations set up for that. NOW wanted to be all things to all people and critical women’s issues of financial and political parity got lost in the shuffle, judging from what we saw during the presidential election. The other problem is I am always concerned about dogmatism from any group and NOW’s attitude toward Palin demonstrates that. I think Amy Siskind may be formulating something new and more focused here at TNA and I want to see how this evolves.
As far as the purdum hit job, Vanity Fair is Tiger Beat for the elite. Scuzzy and self-important publication. I can easily boycott that.
Agreed on “dumb as dirt.” Biological femaleness has been enough to keep women AS dirt for a million years. We’d better (for want of a better way of putting it) man the hell up and just do what’s needed.
And it’s important to define “what’s needed” — engage in completely nonviolent, totally legal, electoral means to secure our freedoms without firing a single shot. Just VOTE FOR THE WOMAN. Done.
Really, is that so bad?
Boston Nell,
A woman considered “dumb as dirt” is still more than likely smarter than the man she’s running against.
By virtue of the double standard, women are going to more than likely have better qualifications than the men. The most recent example of the huge disparity that still exists is Hillary vs Obama.
As famed feminisit/endocronologist, Dr. Estelle Ramey, once said:
“We will have equality when a female schlemiel moves ahead as fast as a male schlemiel. That’s equality, not when a female Einstein gets promoted to associate professor.”
I can say with great confidence that we’re not there yet. Women still have to be regular “Einsteins” to even be considered for positions of power!
And after considering you, they will shred you into chorizo for the unpardonable sin of being smarter than a man.
When a woman is Einstein, she’s allowed to come in second,a nd shot by firing squad for having the nerve to have even dared.
“Again I ask, in the name of unity, are there no standards beyond
biological femaleness?”
And again, I say that I’ve answered this question a zillion times in the comments on this blog. I’m not going to answer it again. Bruce has as well. If you ask questions and act as if you are just begging for answers, it behooves you to read the answers when they come in.
Thanks Janis- I will answer the dumb as dirt question. No one who gets to the level of running for president or the like is dumb as dirt, not even Joe Biden who surely makes gaffes but is incredibly smart.Jimmy Carter has a PHD, and look where it got us.If you can point out one” dumb as dirt” presidential candidate, ever- I’ll go out and eat liver for dinner tonight. The dumb as dirt idea is simply a red herring for then your analysis of the woman candidate becomes subjective. If they totally disagree with you, are the dumb as dirt, if they dont support your agenda are they dumb as dirt? That would be NOW’s analysis I assume from Diana’s comments-It was Steinam who said Palin wasnt a” woman” now THAT comment is dumb as dirt to me.
The fact is, and this is jsut a guy speaking, if you women want to win the white house you must be in complete comity, complete unity- men will not help you- and if you allow “dumb as dirt” type comments to interfer in your unity you will NEVER ,EVER break the ceilings. I have been fighting this fight since 1971- as the only guy in the first woman’s study class at UCLA( maybe the second not sure) and I can assure you- the guys as a whole are not with you- Keith Olberman and Mitt Romney and Steve Schmidt and Barak Obama, and Dee Dee Myers’( if she was subscribing to my philosophy the piece would never have been written I think) husband that schumck who worte that Vannity Faire hit piece- this issue unites THEM,so to win you need all of you together- You too Dee Dee- my old buddy from Canyon Country-and last I read you are the MAJORITY-So use the power of unity, get rid of the political agendas, and vote female- a vote for the male is a vote against your future and will simply strengthen that glass ceiling that we fought hard to break last year.
So, we’re talking about only presidential politics here?
Let me clarify that in my “dumb as dirt” comments, I was indulging in a bit of devil’s advocacy. I made the comment only after Janis (perhaps facetiously, perhaps not) said she would vote for Diana Castanada even though she (Janis), like me, does not “suffer fools gladly.” In speaking of a candidate who could not argue logically or write coherently, I was not speaking hypothetically, but was referring specifically to the very badly argued and poorly written comments made by Diana in the previous thread. My question then became, if someone as dumb as Diana runs for office, do we have to vote for her?
Of course, I am well aware that no candidate (and most especially not a woman candidate) for state-wide or national office can survive the primary process without a great deal of support and even more money. As such, I agree that any woman who makes it to the general election will indeed have a level of intelligence and competence at least equal to (and probably exceeding) that of any male opponent. It’s one reason I’ve been raising money for women candidates and voting the straight V@gina Ticket for some years now.
Apparently, Janis, you have not heeded Amy’s message of inclusiveness. Because I am not a daily participant here and have failed to read every thread/comment ever posted, I’m not part of the New Agenda clique, my seriousness is questioned, and my questions/comments dismissed. If you’d like me (or anyone else) to read previous comments which address our questions, you might do us the kindness of linking to them.
Like so many blogs I occasionally participate in, this one too risks becoming insular if non-regular commenters are made to feel unwelcome.
Bostono Nell – I think at the House, Senate and certainly the Presidential level, we have no choice but to vote gender when said women are qualified via experience and education regardless of her party affiliation. So many pretend there are huge differences between the Dems and Repubs, not so. Get the power and if any prove to have other than women’s interests way up top of their agenda, then vote them out as fast as voted in.
Boston Nell and everyone: A quick reminder that communicating through text can cause people to misread someone’s intended tone, usually making neutral expressions read harsher than they were intended.
We were born to communicate face to face, not through text.
Someone I know signs his emails with the phrase: “All we are saying is give peace a chance” and it has a surprising effect of softening any messages he sends. He tends to be very direct in the way he communicates, and I am always surprised at how negatively I react to his style of writing, until I read that last phrase, “All we are saying is give peace a chance.”
I agree Kathy
Our country has 99 problems and a Choice aint one.
I went over to femisex as requested to answer Elizabeth’s question, and it amazes me that anyone is suggesting that Elizabeth attend a party where underage drinking is obviously part of the party plan. I hope that those responding that way are not parents. Amy has made several comments and posts about the sexualization of young girls. I have refrained from placing the blame on parents. However, re this case – in my high school
teacher days I was privy to information about the time and place of parties where liquor was advertised as a reason to attend. My first response was to report the time and place of the party to the police, and I was not alone. It was easy because we had a policeman on duty in the school building. The cops would wait until an hour after the party started up to arrive. Then they would disperse the kids and arrest the parents whose home was host to the party. They never gave even a hint that teachers were ratting the kids out because we were great snitches. If you allow underage kids to drink in your home, there are legal consequences. Don’t do it. Your kids may have conscientious teachers who will help send you to court. No matter what messages the media sends out to our sons and daughters, parents can counteract it if they are willing to go against the crowd. Your child only needs a cell phone that can call you in an emergency – no camera, no texting, and limited call numbers. If you allow liquor to be served to minors in your home and you’re caught, you’re legally in trouble. If you let your daughter leave your house in “slutty clothes”, you’re sending her the message that she’s a sex object. The most powerful messages in the world come from a child’s own parents. How weak are parents today? Are they afraid of saying “no”? Elizabeth shouldn’t need help from a blog. Where are Mom and Dad?
M.A-went to the site and gave her the talk her father should give her- sorry I am a guy and that is how a father should respond, even if her’s did not( but I hope he did and that she has one to whom she can talk openly about such things.)
I live so far from America, I’m an addict follower of the US politics. I loved Hillary and I now see myself loving Sarah Palin.
I think now I understand why I love these 2 women. It was never because of their policies, which is already obvious that they are on opposite sides of policy. So I have loved them because they have both become VICTMS because of their biological make up.
TNA, you guys are a breath of fresh air. I will just second what one commenter said above by adding: JUST VOTE/SUPPORT HER, BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN.
Great title!
Look who’s afraid of women: Jay Cost.
Because women are “polarizing” and “divisive.”
Bush and BC were governors one of a small state before becoming President Her best bet in the Senate to burnish her credentials? That worked so well for another woman.
It was a stretch for an inexperienced Obama to start running for President after two years in the Senate and a razor thin resume but he’s a guy which trumps everything! Those are the breaks? Does he mean the historic misogyny in 2008? Call it what it is, Jay Cost.
Nice article, and agreed 100%.
Well, I have to take umbrage with the gay rights mantle. There’s no comparison, and the gay orgs do not have a leg-up on something like NOW. Gay rights are still young, and the HRC (Human Rights Campaign) is essentially like NOW — apparatchiks of the Democratic Party. They focus primarily on urban gay rights issues, with no concern for rural/suburban gays. And they, too, had lukewarm support for Hillary — who’s marched in Prides both as First Lady AND as as Senator, and promised to be the first President to do so — and instead joined the Obama train, who wouldn’t be photographed with Gavin Newsom, never marched in Chicago Pride (and was in Chicago during Pride ‘08), and brought homophobes as members of his Faith and Values tour.
And they’ve (as in, the HRC, but also all of us gays) been screwed since the election. And now write strongly worded letters.
Openly gay candidates are rarely on the radar for any election, and if so, treated as a novelty. The Democrats sit on their hands regarding “same sex union, nee marriage” equality, despite having full control to do something, even in a measure like pulling the Federal plank from DOMA.
As a gay man, I got a LOT of flak from other gays about voting Hillary, and then EXTREME heat for supporting Palin. I kept arguing that the sexism was wrong, and if this is going to happen so publicly for WOMEN, what does it say about gays and lesbians?
Gays may appear more united, join things like the HRC out of unity (I used to be a member, myself), but as gays become more public and the “issues” more viable, then the stress-fractures start to show. There’s already divides between the “activists” and the machinists, and any Republican Gay reaaaaally has to keep themselves on the down low. Give the gay orgs 20 or so years.
You know what this is?
Remember the old button slogan for the suffragists?
VOTES FOR WOMEN.
Well, guess what? That’s my slogan now. Only interpreted in a slightly different way.
VOTES FOR WOMEN.
Period. Votes FOR women.
I just began reading your blogs. I am astouneded how by bashing my sincere uneducated thoughts you have elevated my name in the blogosphere, on a national level. Looks like I am getting my 15 minutes of fame, good or not! Just what I wanted! Thanks! I am enjoying reading your hysterical vomit and intolerence for people you consider beneath your intellegence or differing opinion. My friend Theresa from a rural town would call it (BRAIN ASFHART). I call it “Boy do they have a life Just get a life! Thanks for making my day! Diana
[...] those stupid PUMAs running SarahPac and all of their other other stupid haunts, I am again doing this, you have again given me a whole load more [...]
Leave your Response
Supporting women.
Ending sexism.
Finding common ground.
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Blogroll
Find the New Agenda Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...