Motherhood and Hypocrisy on the Campaign Trail
I'm gonna go ahead and say something crazy and then duck for cover real fast:
Talking about Sarah Palin's family and her as a mother is fair game.
Now take some deep breaths and read this next sentence:
I 1000% agree that talking about and criticizing a politician's (or any other person in the media spotlight for that matter) family should be off limits.
HUH??
How in the world do those two statements, taken together, make any sense?
It's quite simple. The politician-- not the family-- is running for office. That's what matters. That politician's views on the issues that matter to this country should be on the table for discussion, dissection, and political attacking. A child didn't ask for any of it and is just an innocent bystander in all of it.
But once you start parading each member of the family out onto the national stage more than just for when it is necessary, once you start staging photo ops with the kids and place one specifically in the spotlight, and once you start basing your campaign-- your appeal to voters-- on your family and your role in that family, you put it all out there on the table. If you want to tell me that you're "just like every normal American" and that you're the "everymom," just like all other moms out there who are trying to balance it all, then I have the right to ask you about it.
Once you start including motherhood in the picture that you're painting for the American voter, you open yourself up to those questions. Simple as pie. No one asks male candidates about their fitness as fathers, because, among other things, they aren't talking about it. That narrative is just not there.
Please, don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating for the conversation on Sarah Palin as mother to continue. I wish it would die, actually, because every time someone mentions it, it takes time away from discussing the things that do matter, like the fact that she didn't really say no to the Bridge to Nowhere and that she doesn't really hate earmarks as much as she says she does. But the bottom line is this: if you don't want them talking about it, don't bring it up and definitely don't make it one of the the central themes of your campaign.
And forget about Palin's daughter being pregnant-- while many vocal conservatives used to judge and belittle other teenage mothers in the spotlight (it's great that they've seen the error of their ways!), there's no need to keep the story going just to expose the hypocrisy. Instead, we should be talking about the failures of an abstinence-only education policy and be asking our leaders to do more to support teen mothers in need. Not every teen mother is privileged to have parents who are as understanding and in good financial position, such as the Palin's, as support.
Talking about Sarah Palin's family and her as a mother is fair game.
Now take some deep breaths and read this next sentence:
I 1000% agree that talking about and criticizing a politician's (or any other person in the media spotlight for that matter) family should be off limits.
HUH??
How in the world do those two statements, taken together, make any sense?
It's quite simple. The politician-- not the family-- is running for office. That's what matters. That politician's views on the issues that matter to this country should be on the table for discussion, dissection, and political attacking. A child didn't ask for any of it and is just an innocent bystander in all of it.
But once you start parading each member of the family out onto the national stage more than just for when it is necessary, once you start staging photo ops with the kids and place one specifically in the spotlight, and once you start basing your campaign-- your appeal to voters-- on your family and your role in that family, you put it all out there on the table. If you want to tell me that you're "just like every normal American" and that you're the "everymom," just like all other moms out there who are trying to balance it all, then I have the right to ask you about it.
Once you start including motherhood in the picture that you're painting for the American voter, you open yourself up to those questions. Simple as pie. No one asks male candidates about their fitness as fathers, because, among other things, they aren't talking about it. That narrative is just not there.
Please, don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating for the conversation on Sarah Palin as mother to continue. I wish it would die, actually, because every time someone mentions it, it takes time away from discussing the things that do matter, like the fact that she didn't really say no to the Bridge to Nowhere and that she doesn't really hate earmarks as much as she says she does. But the bottom line is this: if you don't want them talking about it, don't bring it up and definitely don't make it one of the the central themes of your campaign.
And forget about Palin's daughter being pregnant-- while many vocal conservatives used to judge and belittle other teenage mothers in the spotlight (it's great that they've seen the error of their ways!), there's no need to keep the story going just to expose the hypocrisy. Instead, we should be talking about the failures of an abstinence-only education policy and be asking our leaders to do more to support teen mothers in need. Not every teen mother is privileged to have parents who are as understanding and in good financial position, such as the Palin's, as support.
Labels: politics
posted by elanit | 1:19 PM
3 Comments:
I disagree with you on this issue. The crux of my disagreement is your clause
more than just for when it is necessary
Exactly who would define what is "necessary"? Personally, I don't think that Gov. Palin has "paraded each member of the family... more than necessary."
She has characterized herself as a mother and wife - but I don't see where any discussion of her family has any bearing on her fitness to be Vice President. Ask yourself this: did Sen. Obama "parade his family on the national stage"? I'm told by many who watched the entire Democratic convention that Malia and Sasha stole the show with their cuteness. Michelle Obama adressed the DNC on her own. None of the Palins other than Gov. Palin have had speaking roles in any official capacity.
Once you start including motherhood in the picture that you're painting for the American voter, you open yourself up to those questions.
Sen. McCain's family had a more prominent role at the RNC than Gov. Palin's. Do you really think that this is an appropriate line of questioning? That certainly wasn't the kind of feminism I was raised on.
From what I remember, when Obama started the campaign, he allowed many publications to interview him and his family including watching his daughters. Then he put a stop to it because he decided that it was wrong to put the spotlight on them and that he didn't want his family to become part of the campaign. You don't see his daughters much anymore. At the convention, they were on stage for literally 3 minutes- was it staged to get attention? Of course. But I never said I agreed much with it.
I think it's difficult to measure what's necessary and what's not, but it seems to me that her family was all over the place the last two weeks. But, the crux of my argument is not the fact that her family was always there; it's that motherhood is a central theme of the campaign. Everywhere you look, that's what they're saying- she's a mother, she's a regular American woman, just like "you," she's raising 5 kids, one of them has Downs, etc etc. I didn't hear that about Hillary (or Bill for that matter when he was running for pres and Chelsea was just 12 years old), I didn't hear that about Obama. Saying it once is fine; but making it a central point in every single speech you give? That's either not knowing when you've repeated something one too many times or a deliberate ploy to tug at the heartstrings of American voters and "appeal" to them. If that's the case, then it's open game.
I'm not quite sure where you see "feminism" come up in this, especially in the line you quoted. Just because Palin is a woman and people are asking questions about her fitness to be VP, doesn't make it a feminist issue. Just like questioning Obama's fitness to be the president isn't a race issue. But again, my point isn't that I'm condoning this; it's that this is where they are asking for the conversation to go. And if that's the case, then they better be ready to answer the questions.
The reality is this ... Obama has in fact put his family in the spotlight ... he just has been more cunning about it than Palin. If you will note, a focal point of his campaign has been putting his wife out there in an effort to paint her as the everyday mom with household chores who has done a terrific job of raising her family. The fact that McCain hasn't attempted to point out the fact that she holds a high paying job (thus making her not like the normal blue collar mom) should not take away from the fact that Obama is attempting to sway voters by showing off his wife. Is that wrong? No it isn't ... but to argue that Palin has thrust her family in the spotlight and therefore deserves to be hammered is ignoring the fact that so has Obama ...
Post a Comment
<< Home