I love this:
http://perezhilton.com/2008-10-18-a-message-to-sarah-palin-from-the-young-women-of-america
Let's face facts, here, people: The only reason she's gotten this far is because she's prettier and more "typically feminine" in her pro-everything-housewifey platform: she's not a threat to people because she's not a feminist, in the way that the Great Unwashed have forever thought of feminism, which is can be easily defined by every negative descriptor they've called Hillary. Not that those things about Hillary aren't true, they just don't have anything to do, really, with her being a feminist, unless it has something to do with her generation of feminisim, overall, (which is to say that she can be strident, angry, and socially wooden). However, that's no crime, it's just a likability quotient.
I wouldn't have voted for Hillary because I didn't believe in her ability to play political ball, nor did I believe in her ability to be diplomatic-- after watching her for 8 years, I realized that she has a tin ear when it comes to relating to people in a genuine way. Unfortunately, that's part of politics and it unnerved me when she started with her dirty pool against Obama as some sort of legitimate attempt to discredit him. I worried that THAT would be her default strategy when it came to the situation in Iraq, and I felt it would be ineffective. All of this, however, had little to do with her being a woman. As a strong woman, though, I would have been assured of her position on women's rights, unlike the situation with Ms. Palin.
Obviously, I won't be voting for a ticket with Palin; she's the kind of person who, if she were from Texas rather than Alaska, would have her daughter's cheerleading rivals killed. She's vicious and petty, not to mention the ultimate patriarchal dreamgirl: a woman who is more of a man's man than some men, and hey! She's good lookin' to boot! Perfection for the conservatives, eh?
As a feminist, it makes me really hacked that THESE were our two choices. Hillary is far less offensive than Palin, obviously, but because her crappy campaigning and strong feminist standpoint ( again, unrelated!) , gets lumped in as a crappy scary WOMAN candidate instead of just a crappy candidate, period. Palin comes off like someone who'd be better off campaigning for a desk at FOX News than the VP. And yet, because of BOTH of them, it's going to be awhile before another woman tackles the choice to go to the White House, and the public accepts her. And that's upsetting. Dammit.
http://perezhilton.com/2008-10-18-a-message-to-sarah-palin-from-the-young-women-of-america
Let's face facts, here, people: The only reason she's gotten this far is because she's prettier and more "typically feminine" in her pro-everything-housewifey platform: she's not a threat to people because she's not a feminist, in the way that the Great Unwashed have forever thought of feminism, which is can be easily defined by every negative descriptor they've called Hillary. Not that those things about Hillary aren't true, they just don't have anything to do, really, with her being a feminist, unless it has something to do with her generation of feminisim, overall, (which is to say that she can be strident, angry, and socially wooden). However, that's no crime, it's just a likability quotient.
I wouldn't have voted for Hillary because I didn't believe in her ability to play political ball, nor did I believe in her ability to be diplomatic-- after watching her for 8 years, I realized that she has a tin ear when it comes to relating to people in a genuine way. Unfortunately, that's part of politics and it unnerved me when she started with her dirty pool against Obama as some sort of legitimate attempt to discredit him. I worried that THAT would be her default strategy when it came to the situation in Iraq, and I felt it would be ineffective. All of this, however, had little to do with her being a woman. As a strong woman, though, I would have been assured of her position on women's rights, unlike the situation with Ms. Palin.
Obviously, I won't be voting for a ticket with Palin; she's the kind of person who, if she were from Texas rather than Alaska, would have her daughter's cheerleading rivals killed. She's vicious and petty, not to mention the ultimate patriarchal dreamgirl: a woman who is more of a man's man than some men, and hey! She's good lookin' to boot! Perfection for the conservatives, eh?
As a feminist, it makes me really hacked that THESE were our two choices. Hillary is far less offensive than Palin, obviously, but because her crappy campaigning and strong feminist standpoint ( again, unrelated!) , gets lumped in as a crappy scary WOMAN candidate instead of just a crappy candidate, period. Palin comes off like someone who'd be better off campaigning for a desk at FOX News than the VP. And yet, because of BOTH of them, it's going to be awhile before another woman tackles the choice to go to the White House, and the public accepts her. And that's upsetting. Dammit.
posted by Jessica @ 5:05 PM
<< Home