ONE STEP FORWARD – AND WHAT FEELS LIKE TWO STEPS BACK
First of all, a disclaimer: I am a woman. In fact, I date my real entry into womanhood from November 22, 1963, a day when the world shattered, when our parents cried and underneath the sorrow, we young folks could hear a little hum of something new. I was sixteen.
In the 45 years that have ensued, our country has seen many changes, some good, some not so good. One of the most significant shifts in attitude has been underscored by the campaign of Senator Hillary Clinton. Though I have been an Obama supporter since February of 2007, I have watched this strong woman and admired her and been glad. Vilified, demonized, portrayed as the anti-Christ during the years of her husband’s presidency, Hillary Clinton has had the courage to step up and offer herself to the American people for more of the same. And, to our credit, we Democrats treated her JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CANDIDATE. This is huge. In fact, had we not had a candidate who embodied the same ideals as she and in addition had the ability to kindle hope in large populations accustomed to a daily diet of despair, she might very well be our candidate for President today.
I’m a huge fan of a little cable TV show called “Mad Men.” Since it’s set in that very year of my entry into the sadness of the adult world, it really fascinates me. And I’m here to tell you, it’s accurate. One of the continuing (and disturbing) themes of “Mad Men” is the role of women in the workplace and in the broader society. I watch and pretty much discount the men – they’re a bit stupid and bumbling and pretty much into drinking, smoking and lechery. It’s the women characters I find intriguing. For the most part, they completely buy into and perpetuate the cast-in-stone definition of womanhood received from their parents and their parents’ parents before, back to the dawn of time. I remember these women, though in my little south Alabama town they weren’t as glamorous as the ones on TV. But I also know that somewhere in this group of TV victims their sixteen-year-old daughters are thinking, “Not me.” And back in the actual America of 1963 one of those teenage daughters was, in fact, Hillary Rodham.
So I’ve been pretty pumped this year – it’s seemed as though change was in the air. All the hard work by so many women who were sixteen in 1963 -- and all born since then -- seemed to have finally gotten us somewhere. Then, lest I should get too giddy – along comes Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin would be right at home with the ladies of “Mad Men.” She commented long before her elevation to the national stage that she styles her hair and wears her glasses to tone down her (wink, wink) good looks – doesn’t want her (almost totally male) state constituency to be unable to take her seriously. Even though she herself was pregnant when she married, she certainly doesn’t support anything other than abstinence-only sex education in school – wonder how that is working for her family? Statistics show that daughters are much more likely to follow this severely limiting path, reducing the likelihood of higher education and career, if their mothers experienced this and NO REASONABLE SEX EDUCATION IS PROVIDED. And the fact tht her daughter has a CHOICE about what to do about her pregnancy has completely escaped everyone, it seems. Ms. Palin has referred to her daughter’s actions and to her own when faced with the birth of a Down syndrome child as a CHOICE – without ever acknowledging the whole point of this issue – which is that these choices are made by women and physicians, or within families, but not by governments.
Sarah Palin is committed to the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Sarah Palin is opposed to gay marriage. Before her son Trig was born, Sarah Palin slashed funding for special needs children in Alaska by 62 percent (although she seems to have had her consciousness raised by recent circumstances). Sarah Palin rejects the science underlying the phenomenon of global warming. Sarah Palin has spearheaded the move to build the largest oil pipeline in the western hemisphere from Alaska to the lower 48. Sarah Palin seems to have used the power of her office to further her vendetta against her sister’s ex-husband, yet claims an ethical high ground by opposing Senator Ted Stevens’ re-election. Oh, by the way, she also opposed Sen. Stevens’ attempt to keep the polar bear on the Endangered Species List because – bingo – polar bear habitat happens to be fertile ground for oil drilling.
There cannot be a woman in America who is more different from Hillary Rodham Clinton than Sarah Palin. Gov. Palin represents everything that Sen. Clinton has opposed for her entire life – in her law practice, as First Lady of Arkansas, as First Lady of the United States, as a United States Senator and as a presidential candidate. Can Senator McCain and his political operatives really believe that the women who supported Hillary will embrace Sarah? And sadly, the most important question – will we? Have we really made progress – or are we kidding ourselves? Are we not outraged, indignant, insulted, shocked, appalled, dismayed – and terrified? Will we speak out?
First of all, a disclaimer: I am a woman. In fact, I date my real entry into womanhood from November 22, 1963, a day when the world shattered, when our parents cried and underneath the sorrow, we young folks could hear a little hum of something new. I was sixteen.
In the 45 years that have ensued, our country has seen many changes, some good, some not so good. One of the most significant shifts in attitude has been underscored by the campaign of Senator Hillary Clinton. Though I have been an Obama supporter since February of 2007, I have watched this strong woman and admired her and been glad. Vilified, demonized, portrayed as the anti-Christ during the years of her husband’s presidency, Hillary Clinton has had the courage to step up and offer herself to the American people for more of the same. And, to our credit, we Democrats treated her JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CANDIDATE. This is huge. In fact, had we not had a candidate who embodied the same ideals as she and in addition had the ability to kindle hope in large populations accustomed to a daily diet of despair, she might very well be our candidate for President today.
I’m a huge fan of a little cable TV show called “Mad Men.” Since it’s set in that very year of my entry into the sadness of the adult world, it really fascinates me. And I’m here to tell you, it’s accurate. One of the continuing (and disturbing) themes of “Mad Men” is the role of women in the workplace and in the broader society. I watch and pretty much discount the men – they’re a bit stupid and bumbling and pretty much into drinking, smoking and lechery. It’s the women characters I find intriguing. For the most part, they completely buy into and perpetuate the cast-in-stone definition of womanhood received from their parents and their parents’ parents before, back to the dawn of time. I remember these women, though in my little south Alabama town they weren’t as glamorous as the ones on TV. But I also know that somewhere in this group of TV victims their sixteen-year-old daughters are thinking, “Not me.” And back in the actual America of 1963 one of those teenage daughters was, in fact, Hillary Rodham.
So I’ve been pretty pumped this year – it’s seemed as though change was in the air. All the hard work by so many women who were sixteen in 1963 -- and all born since then -- seemed to have finally gotten us somewhere. Then, lest I should get too giddy – along comes Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin would be right at home with the ladies of “Mad Men.” She commented long before her elevation to the national stage that she styles her hair and wears her glasses to tone down her (wink, wink) good looks – doesn’t want her (almost totally male) state constituency to be unable to take her seriously. Even though she herself was pregnant when she married, she certainly doesn’t support anything other than abstinence-only sex education in school – wonder how that is working for her family? Statistics show that daughters are much more likely to follow this severely limiting path, reducing the likelihood of higher education and career, if their mothers experienced this and NO REASONABLE SEX EDUCATION IS PROVIDED. And the fact tht her daughter has a CHOICE about what to do about her pregnancy has completely escaped everyone, it seems. Ms. Palin has referred to her daughter’s actions and to her own when faced with the birth of a Down syndrome child as a CHOICE – without ever acknowledging the whole point of this issue – which is that these choices are made by women and physicians, or within families, but not by governments.
Sarah Palin is committed to the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Sarah Palin is opposed to gay marriage. Before her son Trig was born, Sarah Palin slashed funding for special needs children in Alaska by 62 percent (although she seems to have had her consciousness raised by recent circumstances). Sarah Palin rejects the science underlying the phenomenon of global warming. Sarah Palin has spearheaded the move to build the largest oil pipeline in the western hemisphere from Alaska to the lower 48. Sarah Palin seems to have used the power of her office to further her vendetta against her sister’s ex-husband, yet claims an ethical high ground by opposing Senator Ted Stevens’ re-election. Oh, by the way, she also opposed Sen. Stevens’ attempt to keep the polar bear on the Endangered Species List because – bingo – polar bear habitat happens to be fertile ground for oil drilling.
There cannot be a woman in America who is more different from Hillary Rodham Clinton than Sarah Palin. Gov. Palin represents everything that Sen. Clinton has opposed for her entire life – in her law practice, as First Lady of Arkansas, as First Lady of the United States, as a United States Senator and as a presidential candidate. Can Senator McCain and his political operatives really believe that the women who supported Hillary will embrace Sarah? And sadly, the most important question – will we? Have we really made progress – or are we kidding ourselves? Are we not outraged, indignant, insulted, shocked, appalled, dismayed – and terrified? Will we speak out?
No comments:
Post a Comment