IN DEFENSE OF SARAH PALIN.

In Defense of Sarah Palin
July 7, 2009
By Elvin Lim
OUP blog

People love to hate Sarah Palin. I thought she was trouble on the McCain ticket, trouble for feminism, and trouble for the future of the Republican party, but I am troubled at the feeding frenzy that has continued despite Palin’s express desire and efforts to bow out of the negative politics that has consumed her governorship.

The speculation about what exactly Palin is up to is itself revealing - for it comes attached to one of two possible postulations - neither of which are charitable. Either Palin is up to no good, or she is completely out of her mind. Even in surrender Palin is hounded. Either she is so despicable that post-political-humous hate is both valid and necessary or she is so dangerous that she must be defeated beyond defeat.

Even Governor Mark Sanford got a day or two of sympathy from his political opponents before he admitted to other extra-marital dalliances and referred to his Argentinian belle as his “soul-mate.” Sarah Palin was accorded no such reprieve. Yes, I think gender is entirely relevant here.

Feminist scholars have studied the double-bind of woman political leaders for a while now. Women leaders are faced with a dilemma a still-patriachical political world imposes on them: women must either trade their likeability in return for male respect; or they preserve their likeability but lose men’s respect for them in exchange. When it comes to women in positions of political power in the world that we know, they cannot be both likeable and respected. Unlike men, they cannot have their cake and eat it as well. This is not the world I like, but it is the world I see.

Let me draw an unlikely parallel to make the point. People love to hate another woman that we saw a lot of in 2008 - Hillary Clinton. Like Palin, she was to her detractors the she-devil to whom evil intentions were automatically assigned for every action. But unlike Palin, she was respected and feared - she was everything Sarah Palin was not. What Palin lacked in terms of likeability she possessed in terms of respect (or at least reverent fear). No one underestimated Hillary Clinton, no one doubted her ambition. And of course, as Barack Obama put it in one of their debates, she was only “likeable enough.” Clinton was respected as a force to be reckoned with, but she paid her dues in terms of likeability. Just like the Virgin Queen and the Iron Lady, she could only be respected if she surrendered her congeniality.

Palin stands at the other end of the double-bind. Where Palin was in need of respect she gained in terms of likeability. She was the pretty beauty queen loved and beloved by her base, unapologetically espousing a “lip-stick” feminism (in contrast to a grouchy liberal feminism). But what she enjoyed in terms of likeability she lost in terms of respect. If there was one thing her detractors have done consistently, it has been to mock her. She was the running joke on Saturday Night Life, and now, a laughing stock even amongst some Republicans who see her as a quitter and a thin-skinned political lightweight. Strangely enough, Sarah Palin is Hillary Clinton’s alter-ego. Where Clinton is perceived as strong, Palin is seen as weak; whereas Clinton turns off (a certain sort of) men, Palin titillates them.

If we lived in a post-feminist, gender-neutral world, the two most prominent women in American politics, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton, would not so perfectly occupy the antipodal caricatures of women trapped in the double-bind of our patriachical politics. That they each face one cruel end of the double binds tells us that the two women on opposite ends of the political spectrum sit in the same patriachical boat. So the next time liberals mock Sarah Palin, they should remember that they are doing no more service to feminism than when some conservatives made fun of Hillary Clinton’s femininity allegedly subverted by her pant-suits.
*************************************************************
MY THOUGHTS:

Where do I begin? It's nice for a change to actually read that there IS a double standard where women are concerned in politics. But what has been done to Sarah Palin from the very second she was named as John McCain's Vice Presidential running mate, goes far and beyond the pale. Some people just can't stand it that she is a politician, a governor, and yet she is a real, genuine breath of fresh air. She doesn't have the educational background of going to Ivy League schools and that is one of the reasons some seem to disqualify her for higher office. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, does have the Ivy League education and she is hated by some for other reasons. Both women are loved so much by the people who love them and understand them. Both women are hated by those who see a side they cannot stand. Both women are favorite punching bags for the media. Hillary has gotten a little break NOW that she is the top diplomat in THE ONE'S cabinet. Otherwise, she would STILL be being bashed continually.

I personally saw and still do see Sarah as the most real and genuine person first and politician second. You KNOW she loves her country dearly. She wants the best for it and hates what she sees what is going on now with Obama totally DESTROYING America. Perhaps she wants to break free from being tied to the governorship of Alaska that she CAN do more to help get the country back on the right track. Whether that is by running for president herself or by helping others she sees capable of bringing about the change she knows the country needs. And just to get away from the media bashing her continually and taking their hatred for HER out on her children, even her Down Syndrome baby!

Hillary Clinton had 35 years of working for noble causes and protecting the rights of women and children. As First Lady, she traveled to 82 countries. Her famous speech in Bejing in 1995 where she said "womens' rights are human rights and human rights are womens' rights will go down in history as one of the more famous speeches ever! Hillary was NEVER the typical First Lady. She rolled up her sleeves and wanted to get to work to help her husband run the country. Even though her attempt at Universal Healthcare failed, I think the Republicans in Congress would never have allowed her to get that passed. Obama, on the other hand, has everything going for him. He has the White House, Senate (60 members!), and House. More than likely he will be able to push through any crap he wants to as he HAS already! During the primaries, Hillary, the experienced, qualified WOMAN was PUSHED ASIDE for the inexperienced, unqualified, no accomplishments empty suit black man. The Obama lovin' media made a big stink about Obama making history as the first black president, while totally IGNORING that Hillary becoming president would also make history as the FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT!! I thought and still do think that the FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT was much MORE HISTORIC than the first black president. After all, we now have had 44 MEN running this country in 233 years. We have NEVER had a woman. IF women had backed Hillary loyally as blacks backed Obama loyally, she would have been the nominee EVEN WITH ALL THE CHEATING OBAMA DID, EVEN WITH PAYING OFF SUPERDELEGATES FOR THEIR ENDORSEMENTS, EVEN WITH THE DNC RIGGING THE PRIMARIES, EVEN WITH FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN BEING TAKEN AWAY FROM HILLARY, ETC. ETC.

So YES, there is a double standard for women. They can't win in more ways than one. Can you imagine a WOMAN with Obama's non-accomplishments and non-experience winniing the presidency? She would have been laughed out of the race during the first primary! It is FRUSTRATING, AGGRAVATING AND UNFAIR. I CANNOT STAND INJUSTICE. IT BOTHERS ME MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN THIS WORLD!!

(This article and my comments will be cross-posted as my Hillary blog:
www.alwaysforhillary.blogspot.com.)