Gender and the 2008 Presidential Election

Oh, Fickle Young Love...

2009-03-12T23:43:00.000-07:00

The recent media coverage plaguing the Palin family is the news of Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston's break up. According to several news sources, the break up happened a couple weeks ago for unknown reasons, but only became public knowledge in the past couple of days. There is speculation Bristol broke it off with her fiance but there is no conclusive evidence as of yet. Some claim Bristol is heartbroken while others claim she is fine. Levi's sister, Mercede, has been quoted as saying: "Levi tries to visit Tripp every single day, but Bristol makes it nearly impossible. She tells him he can't take the baby to our house because she doesn't want him around 'white trash'!" While we can deduce this might have played a role in the split, it seems that Levi will continue to maintain a fatherly role in two month old Tripp's life.

Many claim to have seen this coming from the very beginning, so I have to wonder if Bristol and Levi were fooling themselves for the sake of Sarah Palin's image on the campaign trail? In trying to empathize with the single parents, though, let's drop the subject.

Yahoo featured a blog which gave Bristol advice in her new role as a single mother. Among the advice were "Reach out to other single parents" and "Embrace the family you have, not the family you envisioned." I found this blog very touching, because instead of poking fun at the recent developments, the post asked for others to contribute words of wisdom. What would you do in her situation?

The post also drew attention to the fact that there are over 13 million single parents out there, and that there has been a 3% upswing in teenage pregnancy. From 1991 to 2005 the number of teenage pregnancies was decreasing, but in 2006 it began to inch back up again. I wonder what caused this to occur? The blog blames the omnipresence of sex in the media, but with great sexual education I do not think sexual liberality can be blamed.

On a completely random note, how unfortunate is it that the split has left Levi with a tattoo of "Bristol" on his ring finger? Dating rule 101 could quite possibly be "Never tattoo someone's name on your body." I suppose he learned his lesson the hard way.

For further information visit:

People.com
Foxnews.com
Huffingtonpost.com
Chicagotribune.com

First Female President: Barack Obama

2009-03-12T12:33:00.000-07:00

When reflecting on this course, I noted that we subconsciously defined gender to be about women. This is very similar to the idea behind race, that is, a white person does not have to deal with race, just as men do not have to deal with gender.

Obviously, this makes little sense, as male is a sex just as much as female is.

And yes, there is a distinct difference between sex and gender, but the concept still applies.

I therefore decided to look at the males in the election, and stumbled on this article in Newsweek.

The author first notes that this is not the first time that a president's values, actions, and persona have emulated a person in a different role or category. He sites former president Bill Clinton as the "first black president" due to his penchant for playing the saxophone and his display of "almost every trope of blackness"

He goes on to say that Barack Obama seemed to be playing a traditional female role.

Obama doesn't play the sax. But he is pushing against conventional- and political party nominating convention-wisdom in five important ways, with approaches that are usually though of as qualities and values that women bring to organizational life: a commitment to inclusiveness in problem solving, deep optimism, modesty about knowing all the answers, the courage to deliver uncomfortable news, not taking all the work alone, and a willingness to air dry linen.

However, the campaign is over, and the authority with which Obama has taken office has shown that his not one to be trifled with. Perhaps this has made him appear more masculine, but I believe that it is his willingness to accept these gender stereotypes as part of his own that he has been able to pass the stimulus bill and get a strongly divided congress to agree on so many other matters.

Perhaps America does need a female president, and for right now, his name is Barack Obama

What Sarah Palin's Email Got Hacked?

2009-03-11T23:35:00.000-07:00

Yes its true, as i was browsing online for any recent information about Sarah Palin I came across a couple of articles saying that Sarah Palin's email had been hacked. Last September 2008, a group that called themselves, Anonymous, found a way to hack themselves into Sarah Palin's Yahoo email account. They got hold of two emails, a contact list, and a couple of family pictures and displayed them on a website. Supposedly according to another article, Sarah Palin in the past had been criticized for using web mail rather then official government servers, and so this in return as backfired on her. McCain on the other hand sent out a statement after he had heard what had happened:

This is a shocking invasion of the governor's privacy and a violation of law, the matter has been turned over to the appropriate authorities and we hope that anyone in possession of these emails will destroy them.

Apparently Time said that Sarah Palin herself could face charges for "conducting official state business with her personal email." However this investigation is yet to be solve. The secret service along with FBI are in search of more emails and anymore people in possession of the emails. Sarah Palin came to find that her email had been hacked by her aide who received the following email:

This email was hacked by anonymous, but I took no part in that. I simply got the password back, and changed it so no further damage could be done. Please get in contact with Sarah Palin and inform her the new password on this account is samsonite1.Thank you and best wishes,the good anonymous

In my opinion this is ridiculous how low can people get. Getting into someones account, especially Sarah Palin's you have got to know that you in return are going to get into big trouble with the police. But then again why didn't Sarah Palin use the official government website? Something like a yahoo account should be a no brainer that it is most likely going to get hacked. But I could be wrong, what do you think?

Obama's Stimulus Plan Won't Help Women

2009-03-11T22:39:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama’s proposed stimulus package that intends on creating 2.5 million jobs over the next two years sounds too good to be true. His proposal has fired up a number of feminists who believe this package will be of limited help to women. Unfortunately, women in the work force will not receive the same economic boost from this package that men will. In Obama plans on investing in road and bridge maintenance and school repair to create jobs and at the same time reduce energy use thus decreasing the affects on global warming.

The downside of his road to recovery that has many females up in arms is the way in which the program will provide jobs for male dominated industries. He wants to create more building projects which will generate jobs in construction, where women make up only 9 percent of the workforce. Obama also wants to increase green jobs, which lone behold is almost entirely male. A study conducted by the United States Conference of Mayors discovered that half the projected new jobs in any green area will be in either of the following areas: engineering, a field consisting of 12 percent female, manufacturing, agriculture and forestry.

Today women constitute approximately 46 percent of the labor force, and something needs to be adjusted in his plans to include jobs in female dominated fields. Obama can easily include opportunities for economic growth for females by concentrating on professions that build upon human capital such as social workers, child careers’, teachers, and librarians. All these fields consist of 75 to 95 percent females. Many of these areas of work are included in Obama’s campaign promises. Some may argue that women should participate more in the fields of engineering and construction, but their are programs out there that encourage women to pursue careers in these areas of work and they have had little success.

One well-known feminists in particular, Barbara Bergmann, decided to take a stand. She wrote a letter calling for a package that would do more for women. Her letter, addressed to Obama, began by applauding his noble intentions but turned to address the way in which the package will segregate women and only benefit males. She suggested three lines of action to insure a fair playing field for women as well. They read:

"1. Revive and enforce the Labor Department regulations that require government contractors to institute affirmative action plans that provide a share of the jobs for women and minorities. Closely monitor the contractors for compliance.

2. In connection with the infrastructure projects, institute apprenticeships, and ensure that at least one third of the positions go to women.

3. Add projects in health, child care, education, social service that will both provide jobs to women, and also provide needed services to them."

I agree with the actions Barbara has suggested. Recent research has shown that women’s employment has become more vulnerable to recessions than in the past. After the 2001 recession, for example, women's employment rates never returned to their pre-recession levels. Before, recessions tended to hit men's jobs harder than women's, but in the 2001 recession, that changed, and this pattern is expected to continue.

Hopefully, more women will stand up and in turn influence Obama to include more opportunities for women in his stimulus package. I believe we deserve the same benefits that males will receive from this package.

A Fortunate and Surprising Surge of Prospective Women Senators

2009-03-11T20:12:00.000-07:00

I recently stumbled upon this "Politico" article by Josh Kraushaar called, "Female Candidates Line Up for 2010." Apparently the mixed gender in the 2008 election caused a spark in female confidence and support, which I think is great! The article explains that there are many female candidates, mostly Democrats, who are planning to run for Senate in 2010. This looks as if it may cause change in the chamber which currently only has 17 women senators. Karen O' Connor, the director of the Women and Politics Institute at American University, says that, "it really is a landmark year because there's a farm team now...you have mayors, congresswomen, secretaries of state; they're waiting in the wings and they're not going to sit back any longer." Reading this excites me because it really shows that our class topic is relevant. The gender in this past election did cause a wave, not only of surprise, but also of support and identification for women.

The woman in the picture above is Carly Florina, former Hewlett-Packard CEO and McCain economic adviser. She is looking to run against Barbara Boxer for the Senate seat here in California. There is a slew of other women that are running in different states, and they list all of these determined women in the "Politico" article. O'Connor, whom I mentioned earlier, explains that female candidates have a better track record in elections when the economy is a main issue. This said, the United States should be looking to elect more females in the years to come. Jonathan Parker, EMILY'S List political director, tell us that "when kitchen-table issues are at the forefront, voters recognize it’s women in so many households across America that deal with these issues. That will resonate with a certain segment of voters." Although it is nice that this view will cause more women support, I don't think that it is the only factor affecting this increased support.

The 2008 election allowed us women to see how far we have come and after reading this article, I am sure that it inspired women to want to achieve greatness, not only in politics, but simply in general. Martha McKenna, who is a recruiter as political director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said that, "it’s becoming more and more common for the strongest candidate to be a woman, and that’s a good thing for the party and the country.” I anticipate the 2010 elections; hopefully the Senate will be a tad more gender-balanced after that, and the demonstration of increased female support will cause a snowball effect of equality!

Obama Creates White House Council for Women

2009-03-11T14:30:00.001-07:00

Today, Obama created a White House Council for women, which I believe is a big step for women all across the United States. The purpose of the new panel is to analyze how the government's policies will impact females. This panel will be headed by Valerie Jarret, who is a senior adviser to President Obama. Valerie Jarrett is a very powerful and influential women from Chicago, and a loyal supporter of Obama. During the primaries against Clinton, Jarret described one of the challenges Obama campaign's faced was “to introduce him to the American people so that they can see what the Women around him (Obama) know”.

Photo of Valerie Jarret

In a speech to introduce the Council, Obama stated that “It's up to us to carry on that hope, to ensure that our daughters and granddaughters have no limits on their greatness, no obstacles to their achievements, that they have opportunities that their mothers, their grandmother and great-grandmothers never dreamed of".

Obama also said that “I sign this order not just as a president, but as a son, a grandson, a husband and a father. These issues are not just women's issues. When women make less than men for the same work, it hurts families who find themselves with less income and have to work harder just to get by."

Here's the link of the news article for more info on the new White house Council.

We already saw a preview of Obama's interest in shattering the glass ceiling in the passing of the Lilly Ledbetter law, which created a policy of a woman's right to equal pay for equal work. I believe that the new White House Council for women is one of the first steps Obama will take to finish shattering the glass ceiling which Hillary left undone. This Council is a big deal in that it shows the amount of dedication the Obama administration is willing to put into women's rights. Who knows, maybe the White House Council for Women will help the Obama administration shatter the glass ceiling.

Solidarity among women--as reflected in common supporters of Clinton and Gillibrand

2009-03-11T10:33:00.000-07:00

Read Nicholas Confessore's story in today's NYT, "Old Clinton Hands Line up Behind Gillibrand." It reports that many Hillary Rodham Clinton staffers and supporters are now working with or for Kirsten Gillibrand, who was appointed to fill the U.S. Senate vacancy for New York after Clinton resigned to become Secretary of State.

The story features this quote from Karen Finney, who was a deputy press secretary for HRC in the White House and who is now an advisor to Ms. Gillibrand: “Kirsten has inspired the band to get back together ... It’s nice to be working for another great woman from New York.”

Here's an excerpt from deeper in the story, amidst many examples of women supporting Gillibrand:

Ms. Gillibrand’s back-to-back campaigns will also provide an outlet to the energies and enthusiasms of Mrs. Clinton’s ardent grass-roots supporters, especially in feminist circles.
One member of Ms. Gillibrand’s kitchen cabinet, for example, is Ann Lewis, a longtime Clinton confidante and a senior adviser on the presidential campaign. Ms. Lewis recently launched NoLimits.org, a Web site and blog, to allow Mrs. Clinton’s supporters to network and stay in touch.

One Clinton supporter who spoke on the condition of anonymity said:

Hard-core Hillary supporters are fully expecting her to run again in 2016 ... That is one reality. Kirsten is a more local reality. But for folks in New York, she gives them a focus.

Looking Back: "Class Bias Distorted Her Image"

2009-03-10T22:54:00.000-07:00

The ex-Presidential Candidate, Sarah Palin backlashes the media with her "guns blazing" in a recent interview. Palin blames the media for unfairly judging her as well as her social class. While being interviewed by a staunchly conservative film-maker John Ziegler, Palin attacked everyone from newspapers, news channels, the Republican campaign team, bloggers and the infamous stand-up comedians for misrepresenting her image, community and daughter.

In one of her outburst's she "predicts that the media will wear kid gloves in comparison when they talk about Caroline Kennedy, "John F. Kennedy's daughter, who plans on running for Hilary Clinton's New York Senate seat. She said, "As we watch that we will perhaps be able to prove there is a class issue here that is a factor in the scrutiny of my candidacy." Ironically, Kennedy herself has undertaken the wrath of the media when she was criticized for stumbling through a series of interviews, in one of which she said, "you know" an astonishing 138 times. Maybe someone should let Sarah Palin know that she is not the only one taking heat from the media.

Palin's attack on her own campaign team shocked a multitude of Republicans.She holds the McCain campaign strategists for repeatedly subjecting her to the memorable interviews with CBS newscaster Katie Couric. Anyone who saw how much difficulty Palin had in the first interview should have known not to put Palin in the hot seat with Couric again until she was more prepared. Even Sarah Palin acknowledged, "Going back for more was not a wise decision." The interviews with Couric exemplified Palin as naive, ignorant and ill equipped for the Vice Presidential office. The most publicized and replayed moment from the interview was when Palin appeared unable to answer the question of what recent newspaper she had recently read. Although, in this recent interview, she now describes herself as being "too flippant" in answering that specific question, and she adamantly insist that she interpreted the question as an implication that Alaskans did not read. Palin made sure to list all the newspapers she reads in this past interview with Ziegler.

During the Ziegler interview he plays her the clip from when Tina Fey mocked Palin, and said, "I believe marriage is meant to be a sacred institution between two unwilling teenagers." Palin reacted just as any mother would and lashed out at the underlying jab at Palin's teen, Bristol.

Not to anyone's surprise, she concluded the interview leaving open the possibility to be a Presidential candidate in the 2012 election. Her eagerness and enthusiasm towards seeking a national office worries me. To me, she has shown she is not ready to run the country. After all the scrutiny and attacks, why would she put herself or her family through such a difficult time?

So What Exactly are the Gender Stereotypes for Women Candidates?

2009-03-10T22:00:00.000-07:00

Warm, gentle, kind and passive versus aggressive, tough, and assertive.....which are the women stereotypes and which are the men? I can figure it out can you? Women and Men have certain personality traits that most people agree with. However when it comes to being a higher office leader which traits are social allowed in a leader and which are not? According to a scholarly article, masculine personality traits are more acceptable for an ideal leader then feminine personality traits are. They found voters weren't willing to back up a female candidate for president or vice president, because they felt as though women weren't capable of handling "traditional male issues." However this article goes on to find that there are some issues that females are capable of handling more then men. Issues such as arts, education, and health, while a male could handle issues on war, economy, and military.

female candidates can win national office if they convince voters that they possess masculine traits and are competent on 'male' policy issues.

So then a female should be okay for running for higher office if she possesses masculine traits, right? Think again. Hillary Clinton tried to play this role of being more masculine and it backfired. People accused her of being stuck between a double bind. She was conflicted upon whether to show her femininity or to be more masculine to show she was strong enough and capable of handling being President of the United States.

So then what should female politicians do then? If they are too feminine they can't handle being president, but then if a female tries to posses some male traits they get accused of being stuck in a double bind. Why are our female traits so degraded upon?!

"The Right to Bare Arms"

2009-03-10T18:32:00.000-07:00

Believe it or not, there has been considerable discussion about Michelle Obama wearing sleeveless attire. Looking at the photo to the left that caused all the commotion, I see little to be concerned about. Why must the "fashion police" be so critical of the First Lady? True, she is making a statement that she is going to be herself and wear clothes that she is comfortable in, which I definitely respect. Her well-toned arms are something to admire, she obviously stays in good physical condition and is going to serve as a good role model for healthy living.

Maybe we need someone who is not afraid to defy convention and to dress in clothes bought from places like Target, J. Crew and not limit herself to wearing designer clothes that few can afford. The image of Barrack Obama, before he was elected president, in a tee shirt and blue jeans when he was visiting his grandmother in Hawaii sticks in my memory as a symbol of common ground that middle class America has with the first family. It is true that clothes can make an impression and when in the public eye, are important. I do not suggest going to a job interview in blue jeans, but Michelle Obama has been wearing tasteful dresses and looks fine to me. People need to focus on issues more important than "bare arms". What about all the people suffering in Darfur, the millions of Americans looking for work and what can be done to stimulate the economy? ONce again, some people seem to enjoy attacking Michelle Obama picking up any little difference from norm that they can find. I think Michelle Obama is more normal than most of the critics, so comparing her to traditional first ladies, is like comparing pseudo royalty to an upper middle class mom. The critics don't really realize that the middle class roots of the Obama family are real and here to stay. I hope Michelle Obama continues to teach by example that living in the White House is a privilege that does not have to change who you are and that it is a good thing to be yourself.

"Fox News Racists and Sexist... No?"

2009-03-10T18:10:00.000-07:00

Looking back for stories about Michelle Obama, I was angered to see just how racist and sexist the Fox News Channel is. Not only have they portrayed the Obama's as Terrorists with their fist bump, they have now added insult to injury by their new description for Michelle Obama as "Obama's Baby Mama." Michelle Obama is a graduate of both Princeton and Harvard Law School and she is a successful attorney. Fox News needs to apologize to the Obama's and to see our world as it is today. The Obama's are a very well educated and talented couple that place community service above their own personal wealth. The Obama's should be celebrated rather than mocked. These two are people whom we should try to emulate; they have given up high paying careers in order to help poor communities. Fox News needs to take a look at the younger generation and see that the fist bump is used very often by professional athletes and NBA players, to symbolizes a high five. Obama who likens himself to Lebron James, said "the fist bump reflects a marriage that keeps him grounded," "it captures what I love about my wife." I feel that it is refreshing to have a couple in the White House that care about each other and the American people. The use of the derogatory term "Baby Mama," is disrespectful. Fox News would never call Laura Bush or Sarah Palin someone's Baby Mama. Their comment is both racist and sexists. The Obama's have a loving relationship and a wonderful family, they should be praised for their commitment to our country and one another. Fox News racist reporting and hate mongering only appeals to the far right and shows a limited view of reality.

Is Barack Obama a woman?

2009-03-10T12:14:00.000-07:00

A post from the blog "Read, Write, Now" discusses a Scripps-Howard article that presents the idea that no matter which democrat won the primaries, we would still get a female president (as long as the dems. won)."

"Clinton’s female supporters who are watching Obama’s movement coalesce, solidify
and take over should console themselves there will be a woman Democrat in the
White House either way if the Democrats win the general election. The nominee
will either be a woman with double-X chromosomes, or one with XY chromosomes who votes more like a woman than most with XX."

The article makes a good point about the advancement of women's rights and women's issues - it does not necessarily take a woman to make things more equal. For example, had John McCain won the election and died in term, Sarah Palin would have become President of the US, and women's issues would have taken a couple of long strides backwards. So then we have to ask ourselves, which is better for feminism: To have a female president, or to have continuing advances in the realm of women's issues? This is an answer that is subjective to each person, but I can confidently say I would rather have a feminist male president than just a female president. Once again I agree with this article when it comes down to it, chromosomes aren't the most important factor.

The blog post says:

"The gender weirdness of this campaign continues to demonstrate that Americans
have a keenly developed, if not completely sick, sense of the politics of
sexuality and gender. Obama is suspicious because he is too much of a woman, and
Clinton is unappealing because she is too much of a man."

I am hoping that both of these individuals will help to change gender roles and stereotypes so that a woman with a short haircut and a pantsuit like Hillary can still be as much of a woman as a lady wearing high heels and a miniskirt. I hope the same would apply to men, that he can be thin and well-dressed or in overalls with a beer and both would be considered men. This election proved more than anything that it really isn't the way one dresses or walks or even necessarily their chromosomes that defines their gender, it is their actions and values.

One more thing - what does it mean when I search "Barack Obama crossdress," and "Barack Obama in a dress" and get no images, whereas the first image in "Hillary Clinton man" shows this?:

Credibility and Perception of “She’s too Sexy?”

2009-03-10T11:26:00.000-07:00

I recently read an article that discussed the affect of people's perception of Palin and the possible relation with the unfavorable outcome that resulted for the McCain-Palin campaign. The group of people who focused intensely on Sarah Palin's looks were distracted from the important question of wether Palin was competent enough to be Vice President. The author of the article, Geoffrey Dunn, described a study conducted at the University of South Florida by Nathan A. Heflick and Jamie L. Goldenberg that was published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. In this study undergraduate students, whom the study used as a representation of the entire American society, who payed more attention to what Sarah Palin was wearing rather then her political strategies and ideas ended up voting for another candidate thus reducing the votes for the McCain-Palin ticket. The studies main point was the affect of the emphasis by the media on Palin's looks and how it negatively impacted voters opinions.

Mr. Dunn, who had a doctorate in sociology, says that he takes this study with a "block of salt" since many of these "academic" studies use "false assumptions and bad science" to recreate results that the study desires. The entire study consisted of inaccurate and poor methodology. The study gathered research by having students write down their thoughts about one of two American women celebrities, Sarah Palin or Angelina Jolie. From that group, half were asked to write their opinions about the person and the remaining group was to discuss the person's appearance. The students then evaluated their subject in terms of certain attributes such as competence. Finally they were to identify who they were intending to vote for in the next election. The study asked questions that would not relay any insightful information. To further support the inaccuracy of this study is the number the subjects observed. The study used 133 students all ranging in the same age group, which does not relay appropriate information to draw an accurate conclusion. Also the study's participants consisted of 96 females and an underrepresented number of males totaling 37. The list goes on for all the variables that were not considered for an appropriate "academic" study.

I frequently run into studies that are supposedly credible because they are peer reviewed articles, but this study still brought up an interesting point to further analyze. Initially, the Republican party contributed to Sarah Palin's representation as "the hottest governor in the coldest state" and as "Caribou Barbie" with signs at events and buzz words in the press. Although, they soon recognized the sexism behind these loaded words and images which led voters to question her credibility and competence. I believe Sarah Palin was hurt politically by the poor representation by the media and its focus on her looks and unintelligence. Even though Palin played into the objectification, and unfortunately for her campaign she was unable to move past the attacks and prove herself as a reliable, competent candidate. She ultimately could not prove to the country that they should place our economy and safety into her hands. Lack of knowledge and her fumbling interviews only weakened her position.

I still would like to know whether or not her portrayal as a sex symbol impacted our perception of her? I believe it has and there is evidence that supports this claim, other than the article mentioned above. There is no doubt in my mind that Sarah Palin was treated in an absolutely sexist manner. None of the male candidate's faced the same scrutiny on their appearance as intensely as Palin. This is simply another example of the media placing emphasis on the materialistic and trivial information of a female candidate, rather than judging qualifications based upon knowledge, skill, and ability. Sara Palin played a part in her on objectification, her winking into the camera and her choice of sexy clothing along with her pageant strides across the stage all contributed to the countries perception of her sexy portrayal. The RNC also played the sex card with Palin, but only when it was beneficial to them and then they turned the table and complained when it blew up in their faces. All in all I feel Palin's lack of knowledge compared to the competing candidates was the ultimate cause of her downfall. Even if her sexy representation lead to her portrayal as unintelligent, she still lacked all other qualities that are required for a Vice President.

“Which more fervently permeates the fabric of American society, racism or sexism?”

2009-03-10T00:26:00.001-07:00

After looking back at the 2008 election, I have realized how livid I am at the idea that society does not hold sexism to the same level of scrutiny as racism. The representation of the 2008 election by the media has demonstrated that it is more politically correct to be sexist than racist. Today American culture tolerates sexism to a degree at which it would never tolerate racism. Women have made significant strides in the recent presidential election. For instance, Senator Hilary Clinton became the first woman to ever win a state primary and Governor Sarah Palin became the first female Vice Presidential running mate on a Republican ticket. Even though some of us have differing opinions on either candidate, no one can deny the fact that both have made remarkable achievements for women.

The campaigns during the 2008 election have catapulted widespread complaints about sexism and racism in the media and public perceptions. Senator Clinton definitely experienced harsh attacks by media commentators. The media has treated Sarah Palin unfairly as well, although not nearly to the same extent as Clinton. Our current President, Obama, couldn't escape the scrutiny from the media either. He was targeted by video pranks and his opponents displayed other disgusting forms of dislike. Looking at the attacks on Obama you can clearly tell that they were on the basis of race, although it was not as visible as attacks on CLinton for her gender. The question I would like to know is how come we did not see this kind of scrutiny portrayed upon John McCain?

The debate on wether American society is more racist than sexist began decades ago, when slave and women's suffragist Frederick Douglas and women's rights activist Elizabeth Stanton came to blows over the question. Although both activists advanced to rights for women and slaves, Stanton was outraged that black men were able to vote after the Civil War and women were not.

The New York Times reported in March that a poll revealed that "Americans think racism is a more serious problem than sexism in the U.S today. In a CBS News poll, a plurality of Americans, 42% said racism was a more serious problem for the country compared to 10% who said sexism was the more serious problem."

I believe that we have a greater problem with sexism in our country and the portrayal of women in the 2008 election was a prime example. Polls form the 2008 election show that white men still feel more comfortable sharing power with a man of color over a white or even possibly colored woman. The 15th Amendment to the Constitution, granting black men the right to cote, was ratified in 1870. Then 50 years later the 19th Amendment granted women the right to vote on the federal level.

I look forward to the time when racism and sexism are no longer factors in American politics. So far, the legacy of 2008 will remain as a progress for fighting racism while sexism will remain on the back burner of American minds.

The Effects of the 2008 Presidential Election on the American Feminism Movement

2009-03-09T23:32:00.000-07:00

After researching the 2008 election for all this time, I have come to the conclusion that there was sexism in the 2008 election. In fact, the sexism displayed in the election period was so strong that I believe it has impacted our society and brought a new wave of sexism which has damaged and almost undermined the American Feminism Movement. Many have believed that Palin and Clinton have tremendously helped the Feminism movement since they have brought a limelight on the long overlooked plight of American women due to the glass ceiling. For Americans, these two female politicians represented a huge advance in the feminism movement since the women's suffrage movement only ended seventy nine years ago. In reality, the 2008 election became a setback for the feminism movement due to the result of the media portrayal of the female candidates, the campaigns' use of the gender card, and the public acceptance of sexist portrayal of the female candidates.

One of the main causes of the surge in sexism during the past months was due to the campaign tactics that Hillary used. Mark Penn, Hillary's chief strategist, was the man behind the tactics. He suggested that since women make up 54% of the electorate, Clinton could win over as much as 24% of the republican female vote based on the emotional element of potentially having the first female president. In the beginning, Clinton dismissed exploiting women and decided to run a clean campaign. However, when reality hit Clinton that she may lose the nomination, Clinton began to unleash her storm. She began to make well-known comments directly linking herself to the feminism movement. One way she did such task was by making her gender one of the central themes of her campaign. She referenced her gender theme as often as she could in speeches such as one in Wellesley College, an all girls university, where she stated “In so many ways, this all-women's college prepared me to compete in the all-boys club of presidential politics”. In one single swoop, Hillary complained of being ganged up by two “boys”, referring to Obama and Edwards who she insists runs on the same themes. In addition, the New York Daily Times even reported that Clinton said that one of the six reasons Hillary wanted to be president was because of the “women in their 90s who had told her they were born before women could vote, and they wanted to live to see a women in the White House”. Such usage of the gender card did pull on the emotional strings of females across the country, but it also infuriated Obama and non-Clinton supporters which in turn provoked them to make sexist comments and attacks. During her concession speech to Obama, Hillary referenced gender ten times. One of her most notable evocation of gender was when she stated that she had made “eighteen million cracks in the nation's highest glass ceiling”. With many allusions such as the ones she made in her concession speech, Hillary supporters and voters inferred that Hillary ran for women's rights. Therefore, by representing herself as the face of the feminism movement, the feminism movement lost supporters due to the fact that not everybody supported Hillary.

Picking up on Hillary's loss, the McCain campaign was also to blame for the rise in sexism. When the McCain campaign saw how many votes Hillary received from feminists, the McCain campaign decided to take advantage of the opportunity. Surprising the world, McCain picked an unknown Governor from the far away region of Alaska. As soon as she was picked, Palin quickly made her central theme revolve around how she was just like any ordinary “hockey mom”. She fortified her campaign theme with subtle parts in her speeches such as calling herself a “pitbull with lipstick” in her speech at the Republican national convention. She further evoked gender during the Vice Presidential debates when Palin continuously described her role as a mom: “But it wasn’t just that experience tapped into, it was my connection to the heartland of America. Being a mom, one very concerned about a son in the war, about a special needs child, about kids heading off to college, how are we going to pay those tuition bills?” By making her gender a qualification, many opposing Palin were able to use it against Palin. When Americans think of “hockey mom”, they think of protective mothers whose morals and values are reflected by their children. The media and the public soon focused their attention on the Alaskan hockey mom's family and criticized her family. The media and the public made fun of Palin's underage unwed and pregnant daughter and mentally handicapped baby since they thought that they represented values which were opposite to her conservative values. The attacks on Palin due to her family's seemingly nonconservative values soon expanded and the attacks on Palin alluded to attacks on women. By twisting her role as a mom to being a qualification for the vice presidency, Palin further provoked Americans to make sexist attacks. The McCain campaign was also able to use Palin’s gender as a counterargument from opponents. For example, when Obama’s campaign commented on Palin’s inexperience, Carly Fiorina, a senior McCain adviser said “I am appalled by the Obama’s campaign’s attempts to belittle Governor Sarah Palin’s experience. … Because of Hillary Clinton’s historic run for the Presidency and the treatment she received, American women are more highly tuned than ever to recognize and decry sexism in all its forms. They will not tolerate sexist treatment of Governor Palin.” The McCain campaign’s blatant attempt at accusing their opponents of sexism was just one of the many examples doing the 2008 election. Due to the campaign’s abuse of Palin’s gender, Americans and the media make numerous sexist remarks and attacks which proved to be a setback to the American feminism movement.

Even though the campaigns were a major factor in invoking sexism, the media was also partly to blame. Since media is very influential in the United States in terms of the impact it has on the publics' perceptions, its coverage of the election was detrimental to the American feminism movement. Over the course of the election, studies have found that female candidates were getting not only less airtime, but also getting a greater percentage of negative media coverage. Negative media coverage for female candidates came from all spectrum of the media and stereotyped women into two categories: either as a strong, and masculine women or a weak and feminine women. Hillary was identified to be a strong and masculine woman, and therefore considered to be unacceptable. Such stereotyping of Hillary was seen in the media and news portraying Hillary to a cold hearted “witch” with a shrill voice. SNL even called Hillary to be a “boner shrinker”, a derogatory term which suggested that women were sexual objects. Fox news also compiled and played clips which showed Hillary's cackle and in turn molded Hillary into the stereotypical masculine cold hearted women. In contrast, Sarah Palin received a different media coverage radically different but still with stereotypes. In comedy, there were the infamous Saturday Night Live skits which made fun of her previous record as a beauty queen and talent contest type girl. In the news, many topics come and go, but for Palin, they seem to stick. For example, the clothing scandal, which was when Palin instructed some staffers to go on a shopping spree at Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue, the media still reported the scandal months after it has happened. Such prolonged media coverage on Palin fortified the stereotypical concepts of a feminine women being obsessed with their looks. The conventional stereotypes played out by the media not only incited sexism but also encouraged public acceptance of sexism.

Subconsciously encouraged by the media, the public soon became more willing to accept sexism during the 2008 election. Since the media and McCain campaign womanized Palin, many thought it was fine to accept and display sexism. During the election, many commented on how hot Palin's body was. The magnitude of the publics' obsession with Palin's body was revealed when a high end porn movie featured a Palin lookalike. Called “Nailin Palin”, it featured two Russian solders outside of Palin's governor's man before engaging in sexual intercourse. By allowing people to objectify Palin, society has made it seem that such acts are tolerable and acceptable. However, not all women politicians were treated the same. Since Hillary was more of a masculine women, she was criticized more for her unfeminine behavior. During the democratic primaries, college students could be seen sporting tee shirts stating “Bros before Hoes” with a photo of Obama on Bros and a photo of Hillary above Hoes. Media depiction of Hillary such as Saturday Night Live's website called Hillary the “Bitch in the new Black”. Such sexist language was reiterated in the public and nobody decried such activity. With so much uncalled for disrespect to women politicians in society, the 2008 presidential election was a setback in the American feminism movement.

To many, the 2008 election was a beacon of hope for both Africans Americans and females all over the country. For women, the presence of a female vice president one heartbeat away from the presidency and the candidacy of the first serious woman contestant for presidency inspired women around the world. However, a closer view reveals a far darker secret of America: Sexism is still prevalent today. The provocation of sexism by the media, politicians, and society caused a resurgence of sexism which was so strong that it became a setback for the American feminism movement. When the candidates linked themselves to the feminism movement, they gained female voters but at a cost. With the faces of Palin and Hillary plastered as the icons of the American feminist movement, sexist media coverage and societies' behavior incited sexism. The American feminism movement which is trying to quell sexism have found themselves in a world with even more sexism. What may have been a strong force pushing the feminism movement into the 21st century was only slowed down by the 2008 election.

Don't miss Maureen Dowd on Michelle Obama

2009-03-09T20:41:00.000-07:00

Read Dowd's column, "Should Michelle Cover Up?" here. Yes, we're talking about Michelle Obama's recent baring of her biceps--among a wide range of weightier topics that Dowd also touches on in the column.

Here's an excerpt from near the end of the column:

I love the designer-to-J. Crew glamour. Combined with her workaday visits to soup kitchens, inner-city schools and meetings with military families, Michelle’s flair is our depression’s answer to Ginger Rogers gliding around in feathers and lamé.

* * *

Her arms, and her complete confidence in her skin, are a reminder that Americans can do anything if they put their minds to it.

I'm purposefully omitting the next sentence because there Dowd (of course, once again, never miss a chance . . . ) slams HRC.

I agree with Dowd's assessment of Michelle's confidence and competence; I'm not so sure I buy the Ginger Rogers comparison.

Did Palin's looks hurt?

2009-03-05T10:23:00.001-08:00

Politico blogger Ben Smith wrote today of a new study published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology. The research discusses how Sarah Palin's looks and the focus on them hurt her and John McCain.

The sample consisted of Republicans and independent voters. Participants were asked to rate former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin and celebrity actress Angelina Jolie on various factors including competence.

"The study suggests that their confidence in her abilities may have decreased the more they focused on her looks – and thus, in feminist terms, objectified her."

I think this research paper affirms that sexism did play a role in the 2008 presidential election.

Americans, especially the male population, view Angelina Jolie as one of the most "attractive" female celebrities. Americans also tend to believe that celebrites are not the most "intelligent" people.

This study confirms that Palin was considered a political "celebrity." Because of this status and Palin's physical appearance, her intelligence was questioned by the American people. I still stand by my statement that she energized the Republican Party and gave McCain a fighting chance of victory.

The full research paper can be found here. (Note: It is not free)

Entering a new age of political correctness

2009-02-26T12:12:00.001-08:00

Few people will argue that the Saturday Night Live sketches done by Tina Fey and Amy Palmer had an effect on public opinion. While I do not believe it was a deciding factor in the election, I think that it was an important step for the media. These sketches allowed the stigma surrounding women and feminism to fall. Fey and Palmer were quick to note that while sexism runs rampant in our media, we try to pretend that it does not. My attention was recently brought to a piece done by Onion News, entitled: "First Female Dictator Hailed as Step Forward for Women." I noted this because I feel that a dictatorship is a very masculine concept. I am not promoting a dictatorship in any way, shape, or form, but I do feel that it is a very interesting concept.

Why is it the women are not dictators? Is it because there has not been a women with a strong enough following to create such a senario, or is it because we simply laugh the thought off. Society tells us that a women is not strong or aggressive enough to rule a country in such a way.
These views are prevalent enough that The Onion felt that they could mock them. However, I do not believe that, (despite how forward The Onion tends to be) they would have produced this video prior to the SNL skits.
I have thought a lot about why these sketches were acceptable, and I believe it comes back to the two women behind it. Men would not take on sexist issues for fear of being called sexist. However, because Tina Fey and Amy Palmer are represented as strong and self-assured women by the media, they were able to highlight sexism as it presently exists in the media and society at large.
By doing so, Fey and Palmer have brought sexism out from behind the curtain, and I feel that we can only go forward from here.

Hillary Clinton Speaks at Women's University

2009-02-24T21:42:00.000-08:00

In a recent New York Times article, Mark Landler detailed Hillary Clinton’s stop at the Ewha Womans University in Seoul to talk about nuclear missiles in North Korea, among other things. I feel that Clinton’s behavior during this event, or at least the way it was presented in this article, is incredibly reflective of the ways in which she has tried to align herself within the margins of both the expectations of a mother and a position of leadership. Maybe this following quote from the article helps explain it:

On Friday, nearly 3,000 female students packed an auditorium at the Ehwa Womans University in Seoul to hear Mrs. Clinton deliver a speech that ranged from North Korea’s nuclear threat to the challenge women face in balancing work and family.

In the opening sentence of the article, Clinton is described at a “stern” diplomat, yet Landler goes on to write that her appearance at the university was also flecked with more casual issues such as raising children.

It’s definitely nice to see Clinton giving a fresh rendering of the image diplomatic figures are given in areas such as South Korea, and that she feels comfortable enough to take a more lighthearted approach at the periphery of more pressing issues.

On each stop of her Asian tour, Mrs. Clinton is redefining the job of secretary of state, fusing the weighty themes of regional security and nuclear proliferation with lighter encounters in which Mrs. Clinton is quizzed about her musical tastes or asked what it was like to raise her daughter.

It is Clinton’s ability, wonderfully demonstrated here, to balance to-the-task potential with more everyday priorities, that has made her a positive example for so many people. Whether or not the media prefers to take one of these sides of her personality, and generalize it to the whole in an effort to meet conventional expectations, is another issue.

Politically Incorrect: One man’s joke is another’s racial slur

2009-02-24T15:23:00.000-08:00

New York Post's page six cartoon, caricaturing Monday's police shooting of a chimpanzee in Connecticut, has created considerable controversy. The actual cartoon depicts two befuddled looking police officers holding guns looking over the dead body of a chimpanzee they just shot. The famed cartoonist, Sean Delonas, was referencing the mauling of a woman by the chimpanzee in question. In the cartoon, one of the police officers says to the other, "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill". the drawing and the caption are replete with violent imagery as well as what may be construed as racist comments, which sparked a fiery rampage from critics. Many people who are critical of the cartoon view the drawing as a comparison of President Obama to a chimpanzee in a commentary on his recently approved economic stimulus package. Contrary to critic's opinions, the post described their cartoon as solely a mockery of what they called an "ineptly written" stimulus bill. The post recognized that the cartoon appeared to be a " depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism".

A day after the publication of the cartoon the New York Post apologized as well as defended its action and even attacked detractors. Their statement read, " this most certainly was not its intent, to those who were offended by the image we apologize", "However, there are some i the media and in public life who have had differences with The Post in the past --and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback," the statement says. "To them, no apology is due. Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon -- even as the opportunities seek to make it something else."

At its most benign, the cartoon suggests that the stimulus was composed so poorly, that monkeys may as well have written it. Others believe it compares the President to a rabid chimp. Either way, the incorporation of violence and race into politics is bound to cause controversy. Critics that linked Obama as the author f the stimulus bill may need to review the structure of our government. the Prwesident is not generally in charge of such economic responsibilities, and although President Obama oversaw the process, Nancy Pelosi and Henry Reid as well as other members of the House of Representatives/Senate were the prime instigators. The cartoon was intended to mock the poor structure of how the bill was written, and not to target Obama, though critics would like us to think otherwise.

If we truly want to get pat racism we must not interpret everything and anything within an overarching perspective: not very every comment is intended, nor is it. Furthermore Obama is President, not the black president, of this country. Once we reduce him to the color of his skin we fall into the rut of small-minded people, demean the transcendent aspect of his presidency, and perpetuate the very "disease" which the protestors attempt to eradicate. There is a fine line between satire and plain un-American, unethical behavior. There are some jokes that are better left unsaid, but our media is charged with adherence to a degree of social behavior that instills in us a sense of Americanism, which does not insult our moral social fabric. However, one would expect people within our society to maintain a dialogue and to bring enlightenment to our causes without such a harsh display of separatism.

Michelle Obama: The Popular New Girl at the First Ladies' Lunch Table

2009-02-24T15:11:00.000-08:00

A recent article published by Dalia Sussman in the New York Times reported that Michelle Obama has thus far received the highest ratings of any first lady in the past 28 years. The poll, taken by the New York Times and CBS News, indicates that currently, about half of Americans polled (49%) view Ms. Obama favorably, 44% have not yet formulated an opinion, and only 5% view her unfavorably.

The article mentions that the other first ladies of the past quarter century have generally received approval ratings of about 30% with the exception of Hillary Rodham Clinton, of whom 44% approved. These polls were all taken within the preliminary months of their husbands' terms in office.

What I found most interesting was that women are, at this point, more likely than men to rate Michelle Obama positively; 56% of females polled approved of Ms. Obama as opposed to only 41% of men. We've recently been commenting a great deal on our first lady's representation in the media, particularly with respect to her role as a mother. Is Michelle Obama's crafted image as a doting mother and wife significantly changing the way the public sees her? Do American women find Michelle Obama's relatively new sense of femininity and style relatable and appealing? It seems that the womanhood portrayed so publicly by Michelle Obama does strike a chord with females, and although men generally do approve of her role as first lady as well, they find her image less admirable or respectable than do American women. But has she always been seen so positively, or are her ratings actually improving with time?

The answer is that no, Michelle Obama hasn't always been so universally admired. Sussman notes that "during the presidential campaign last year, Mrs. Obama's opponents cast her as unpatriotic and carrying racial anger, prompting questions about whether she might be a political liability for her husband." Another article published in the Telegraph by Alex Spillius back in January points out that Michelle Obama was harshly criticized for her infamous comment that her husband's election marked the first time that she was "really proud" of her country. At the time, Michelle Obama was widely seen as detrimental to the Obama campaign. Now the beaming, composed first lady, often clad in pastels and pearls and constantly attending to her young daughters, is hardly a controversial character.

It seems that many of us have picked up on the conscious shaping of Michelle Obama as the next most popular first lady and "first mother." How does her embrace of the role compare to first ladies of the past? Who is most responsible for this change in portrayal? And how will we continue to view her as her husband's term advances?

Who'd run the best daycare?

2009-02-24T12:03:00.000-08:00

As I was browsing the internet last night, all of a sudden, a poll on the U.S. News & World Report website caught my eye. "Who'd Run the Best Daycare?" The poll went on to ask, "If you had a choice of four daycare centers run separately by Michelle Obama, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi, which would you choose for your kids?" http://www.usnews.com/polls/whod-run-the-best-daycare/results.html Had this poll not proceeded the 2008 Presidential Election, I would have been utterly shocked that a major news publisher would have the audacity to allow such a blatantly sexist question to be posted all over their website. Unfortunately, this election seemed to pave the way for the acceptance of sexism as a form of discrimination which was no longer seen as very offensive.

Rather than looking at these four women as serious politicians, the media is once again shedding light on the fact that they are just that, women, and more specifically, mothers. Although this poll may seem like a very minute example, almost a joke, it's small things like this one that are looked upon as the building blocks for the perception of gender roles in America. Setting the tone that women, even those in high positions such as the four in this poll, should be looked upon as women and caretakers, seems to overshadow all the accomplishments they may have in the political world. Throughout the election, this same perspective pervaded media articles around the nation. Rather than being looked at as politicians first and foremost, the media began focusing more attention on personal lives of the female candidates, and on various occasions, the women vying for office were looked down upon for leaving their families behind in order to pursue political recognition, especially in the cases of Sarah Palin and Michelle Obama.

But putting all the criticism and gender stereotyping aside, I fell into the trap that this poll was setting up. I gave in, and soon found myself clicking the "View Results" button. Ironically, and much to my surprise, after all the mocking and harsh words of disapproval, Sarah Palin was winning overwhelmingly.

36.38% First lady Michelle Obama's
58.83% Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's
2.58% Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's
2.21% House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's

Strategically Taking The Beaten Path

2009-02-24T11:01:00.000-08:00

In the latest episode of The Secret Life of the American Teenager, the mother of the pregnant teenager, Anne, is dressed in business attire preparing breakfast for the family when her husband, George, saunters in. George gives her the one-over and scoffs something along the lines of: "What, just because you're the mother of a pregnant teenager you think you can be mayor now?" Whether this was an innocent remark or a sly dig at Sarah Palin, I drew a connection and later decided to check in with the "First Mother" of the United States.

In an article titled "Michelle Obama takes well-trod path in first lady role", the Chicago Tribune discusses how Michelle seems to have taken the position of "First Mom" over that of "First Lady" in the beginning days of the new presidency. Apparently Michelle Obama has been reading books, scheduling games, meeting with chefs, and getting to know the neighborhood.

There is doubt expressed over the fact that "First Mom" is the largest role such a high-powered woman will take. Hillary Clinton is discussed and the journalist writes that Michelle is probably trying to avoid Hillary's mistakes as First Lady:

First Lady Hillary Clinton suffered a backlash for barreling straight to the role once termed "co-president" after joking that she had chosen professional fulfillment instead of cookie-baking and tea-hosting.

Michelle Obama is clearly taking the opposite approach, starting with hearth and home and venturing outward. It's a more familiar route for the experienced six-figure professional with a reputation for sizing up the waters before diving in.

In that quote the journalist claims the "First Mom" strategy is just a way for Michelle to ease into the role of First Lady, but I have to wonder: Is Michelle truly going about this in a "professional" manner, or is she just doing her best to conform to the "undefined role of the first lady?" Michelle is an advocate of the "work-life balance." Is it a true lifestyle or just a way to sooth the Social Conservatives?

"She is looking and learning and isn't going to make the same mistakes because she's aware of what the mistakes were," said Letitia Baldridge, the author who served as social secretary to Jacqueline Kennedy when she was first lady.

Isn't it possible that Michelle is just making sure her husband's transfer into office is as smoothe as possible by giving the public what they expect and desire?

While I don't necessarily fault her for it, I have to question whether I, as a feminist, would rather have had a First Lady who barrels straight for co-president, or a First Lady who will "help women realize that a woman can juggle the two, that she can find that division between family and job, and experience joy in both places."

What do you think?

"Gender Affinity Affect", Major or Minor Play in the 2008 Election?

2009-02-24T00:43:00.000-08:00

Gender was one of the play cards used in the 2008 election; however, to what extent did it work? According to a scholarly research article, the gender affinity affect is when women voters are most likely in support for female candidates. This article found women do actually feel positively towards a female candidate because of the "shared sex identity".

In this past election Hillary Clinton was a female candidate up for running as president. The Washington Post conducted a survey and found that 51 percent of women supported Hillary while 24 percent supported Obama and 11 percent supported John Edwards. Here is a clear example to the gender affinity affect. However how far does this affect go? Far enough for women to cross over parties? Interestingly, John McCain was the main candidate that tried to used this phenomenon for his advantage, and it somewhat worked. He felt as though having Sarah Palin as his vice president nominee would switch women supporters of Hillary Clinton over to support his campaign. However this article states otherwise:

......women often evaluate female candidates through the lens of political party. That women respondents feel more positively toward female Democratic candidates than do men, but do not have the same affective feelings for female Republican candidates, suggests that any gender gap in evaluations of female candidates should take into account partisan differences as well as sex-based identity.

Overall John McCain's pick for Sarah Palin as his running mate made a difference, but not a drastic difference. A poll conducted by Newsweek found that only 14 percent of female Hillary Clinton supporters wanted to switch and support McCain. This was an affect on McCain's campaign, but not substantial change enough to help him win the election.

The gender affinity affect, in my opinion, played a major role for Hillary Clinton. There were huge numbers of Hillary Clinton supporters that were female and this did help her in the election. On the other hand, McCain thought he could use this affect to his advantage, but it ended up only playing a minor role and not helping out as much as McCain wanted. The gender affinity affect did exist in this election as much as we did not want it to. This article has found that with the number of women increasing in office, we as women are getting a greater understanding and becoming more complex in our thought patterns, when choosing a candidate to support. To some this affect may play a minor role, but the gender affinity affect does exist sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worst.

Rationalizing the Democratic Primaries

2009-02-23T17:44:00.000-08:00

I did not decided who I was going to vote for in the democratic primary election until I got into the voting booth. I researched both Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama thoroughly, comparing their stances on many issues, ranging from education to the environment, to the war on terror. However, when I prioritized my views, it all came down to classic women's issue, such as abortion, equal pay for men and women, and gay marriage.

Both Obama and Clinton both supported me views, and as I realized that all other issue paled in comparison to these, I felt both ashamed and confused. I was ashamed because I knew that there were many other issues that these two candidates differed on that were very important for the whole country as well as the rest of the world and confused because I still had no idea which candidate I preferred.

I worked as a poll worker during the 2007 and 2008 elections, so I was very closely tied them, having experienced them from both sides. Photo: http://www.pollingplaceproject.org/

While I was not present during the presidential election because I was here at school, I spoke to my mother about her experience late that November night. She told me that when we opened our garage to allow voting to begin at seven, there was already a line forming down our street. We were not alone as this was a trend all around the country.

Being a poll worker has given me a new perspective on elections. I remember during the primaries, watching people come into my garage to vote. Some looked self-assured, others mirrored my own confusion, but everyone appeared to understand the implications of their decisions. Knowing that there were others who had feelings that were just as confused and muddled as my own were gave me a feeling of unity. Before then, I never felt, and for the most part, still do not feel that democracy is unifying, as I imagine it ought to be, but in that moment, I was proud to be an American.

Perhaps that was what stirred the memory that decided the election for me. As I entered the voting booth, I was stuck by childhood dream. As a child, I wanted to either be a veterinarian or the first woman president. Deep in the throes of college applications, I knew I was already following one of those dreams and politics was not involved. Perhaps it was the stigma of being able to see both of my dreams achieved, I took my "special" ballot marking pen and drew a line connecting the arrow next to Hillary Rodham Clinton's name and did not look back on my decision.

I was not upset when Obama won the nomination and I eagerly voted for him in the November election from my dorm room, and was ecstatic when he won later that night.

Looking back on it, I did not have a large preference between Obama and Clinton, and my decision came down to a childhood wish. Would I be hypocritical and judge other people for making decisions for similar reasons? Yes. Do I feel that this decision was rash? Probably. Do I regret my decision? Not at all.

The Portrayals of Michelle Obama as First Lady

2009-02-23T16:07:00.000-08:00

Today I'd like to discuss Michelle Obama as not only a First Lady but as a Vogue cover model. I went searching for stories on the politics page of CNN.com and found two interesting videos: one regarding her role as First Lady and the other pertaining to her wardrobe and her appearance in Vogue magazine. I thought it fascinating how differently these two videos portrayed Ms. Obama. The former, entitled, "Michelle Obama's Role," made her out to be a qualified and serious woman taking on the position of First Lady with ease. The latter, called, "Michelle Obama Covers Vogue," gave little notice to Ms. Obama's professional life and instead focused on her fashion and this sort of "femininity."

The video regarding Ms. Obama's role begins with Michelle at a press conference saying, "I'm going to spend the next several weeks, or months, however long it takes, going from agency to agency just to say hello, to learn, to listen, to take information back where possible. But truthfully, my task here is to say 'thank you and roll up your sleeves because we have a lot of work to do.'" The video goes on to explain how Ms. Obama's office told CNN that the three main projects for the First Lady will be: focusing on working parents, helping military families, and boosting volunteerism. I was glad they brought this up because I had been wondering what her duties would be when she is 'at work.' I use quotes here because being First Lady is not technically a job. In this video, Robert Thompson from Syracuse University explains, "being First Lady in the United States of America has got to be one of the most frustrating jobs to hold because for one thing, it isn't even a job, for another thing, it has no job description, but for a third thing, you are constantly being evaluated as to how well you're doing." I really liked this quote because it's true; First Women are always under scrutiny even though their position lacks strict guidelines. With the duties outlined earlier, I believe Michelle Obama will really do some good and make the change needed. I'm excited to see how she handles her position, not only as "mom-in-chief," as she calls it, but as a hard-working, capable First Lady. This video shows her speaking to, working with, and showing compassion toward people, which gives us the same sense of pride and hope that her husband exudes.

The second video starts with Michelle Obama speaking to business students at Howard University, but this clip only lasts for thirty seconds. Anderson Cooper then veers from this subject and says, "since moving to the White House the First Lady's been busy making the rounds at federal agencies and schools; people want to know what she has to say, certainly, and also what she's been wearing. Next month her style and substance come together when Ms. Obama graces the cover of Vogue magazine." "Her style and substance come together?" I thought that was a particularly important phrase. Does anyone remember a time when a president's "style and substance [came] together?" I understand that this is the viewpoint of most people here in America, to distinguish differences between the sexes, but it bothers me. I also understand why Ms. Obama agreed to this article and photo shoot with Vogue. She is reaching out to a certain, and definitely a major demographic of women here. Something that stuck out to me in this clip was hearing that all of the clothes worn in the shoot were right out of Michelle's closet; she spent no extra money on clothes for this occasion. I think that shows character, and while appearing on the cover of Vogue is a feminine move, she is still able to maintain her respectable and strong persona. In this video they ask, "what makes Michelle Obama cover-worthy?" Andre Leon Talley, the writer of the Vogue article, claims that, "she represents power, she represents the seismic shift in our times and our culture, being the first African American First Lady of our nation." I agree with this statement and as the video went on, I began to further appreciate her choice to do this article. I think it's great that the Vogue subscribers will get to read about Michelle Obama and become inspired by her. In slight contrast to the other video, this clip shows her hugging small children and shows pictures of her with her family. The last line of this video is, "what this First Lady wants is for women to have fun with their clothes; don't take fashion too seriously, even if you are on the cover of Vogue." Clearly the two videos are showing different sides to Ms. Obama. While I tend to respect the first video's portrayal more, I do see that both sides to this woman are important to show. This way she can reach out to everyone, men and women alike, and show that she will not only be a loving mom and a confident, attractive woman, but that she will also be an amazingly dedicated First Lady to her country.

The Election Is Over; Now It Is Time to Analyze It

2009-02-22T23:00:00.000-08:00

Yes, the election is over, and Obama is already taking his first few footsteps in the White House, but we cannot leave this noteworthy election behind. This past election was important to us in so many ways. It marked the beginning of many opportunities for change. It was the first time a serious woman candidate was in the running, and it was also the first time an African-American was running to be president of the United States of America.

As a very aware and intellectual society, it is our calling to analyze the results of this 2008 presidential election. As a whole, as a country, we need to work together in trying to understand the twists and turns of this election-- who voted for whom, possible influences on voters' preferences for a candidate, etc. Our class has been pondering this all quarter long now. It is very hard to know exactly what caused specific events or situations to happen and how much of an effect certain influences did have.

Our class sent out an online survey that included questions about the reasons why voters voted for whoever they chose. People's reasons varied immensely; however, it was interesting to see and note that some women voted for Clinton (in the primaries) just because she was a woman. Interestingly enough, some African-Americans voted for Obama for the same reason-- just because he was an African-American. They wanted to see "their kind" take foot in the White House.

The New York Times has posted a very interesting interactive graphic on "How Different Groups Voted in the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primaries." You can click on the boxes underneath the graphic to see how different demographics of voters voted. I examined "Women" and "Blacks." When I clicked on the "Women" box, I noticed that there was a pretty even split-- about half the states had stronger Clinton support, and half had stronger Obama support; however, when I clicked on the "Blacks" box to see how African-American voters voted, all 28 states represented in the graphic were on the right-hand side. They all had stronger Obama support. This really sparked my interest. Did African-Americans feel a greater need to support an African-American candidate than woman did to support a female candidate?

There are so many factors that probably influenced the election. There was a range of different influences that could have affected voters' decisions-- from media to voters' perceptions. There is no way to perfectly analyze the election results and the reasons why everyone voted the way they did, but we should look at all the results and hard proof that we do have to better understand this 2008 presidential election.

My Flirt with Sarah Palin

2009-02-19T19:34:00.000-08:00

A feeling of relief inundated my mind as the results of the November 4 presidential election were announced. No longer would I have to debate others over who I voted for in the presidential election. My decision was made and now the election season was finally over.

I am a Democrat. I have been since the presidential election that occurred when I was in second grade. I support a woman’s right to choose, the freedom to choose one’s life partner, the environment, and helping the poor. I was against the War in Iraq from the beginning. I supported former vice-president Gore for president in 2000 and United States senator John Kerry in 2004. In 2008, I wholeheartedly supported Hillary Clinton for president.

After Hillary conceded the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama, I became disappointed and even depressed. I could not recall a time when I had so fervently supported one candidate. To me, Hillary was a hero, an inspiring politician, and a champion. I decided to commit my support to Hillary in January 2008. When Hillary won a primary or a caucus, my spirits were lifted. When she lost a contest, I voiced frustration but also heightened support for her to remain in the race. Just like Hillary’s other supporters, I was angry at the media and the Democratic Party establishment. In my opinion, they were biased toward Barack Obama.

Once Hillary’s loss became a reality, I turned to Obama to see whether he would do all he could to raise money to retire Hillary’s campaign debt. I looked to see if Obama would choose Hillary to be his running-mate or someone who had supported her. Neither of these things happened.

John McCain chose Sarah Palin, a dark-horse candidate and little known governor of Alaska, to be his running-mate on Friday, August 29, 2008. During the days leading up to vice-presidential announcements, I suggested that Obama choose Evan Bayh and McCain choose Palin. To say I was surprised when I found out would be an understatement. I screamed and jumped all around my apartment. McCain did it! McCain did it! He actually chose Sarah Palin. (Never did I think McCain would take a gamble by selecting Sarah Palin!)

McCain made a political decision when he selected Sarah Palin. It was clear McCain was sending a signal to disgruntled Hillary supporters and disappointed women that a woman may still have an important role at the White House. I think McCain was playing the gender card and he was smart to do so. His campaign was struggling and dying. McCain desperately needed a game-changer.

Sarah Palin brought to the McCain campaign three things: a new image for the McCain campaign, expanded support among voting demographics, and a revitalization of a failing presidential campaign.

Palin, 44, brought her youth to McCain’s campaign, invoking a refreshing and new picture. The image of Palin’s family brought family issues such as teenage pregnancy and special needs children into the presidential debate. Palin’s conservative credentials shored up support among factions of the Republican Party. Her executive experience coupled with McCain legislative experience added to the presidential ticket.

I did not agree with Sarah Palin on a wide-range of issues including the right to an abortion and keeping ANWAR off limits. I did not agree with many statements Palin made. I thought her debate performance with Joe Biden was awful.

So why was I attracted to the McCain-Palin team? It’s simple, the McCain-Palin ticket reached out to me. While I realize McCain was just trying to earn votes, he appealed to me when he praised Clinton’s historic candidacy. He appealed to me when he chose Sarah Palin, a political newcomer and maverick.

Do I think the choice of Sarah Palin as vice-president was a smart and risky decision? You betcha!

Did Sarah Palin cause more damage to or reinvigorate support for McCain’s candidacy? That’s debatable.

It was a difficult choice when it was time for me to fill out a vote-by-mail ballot. As attractive as the selection of Palin was to the McCain campaign, I did not vote for McCain. I also did not vote for Obama. Who did I vote for? I voted for Hillary Clinton.

Why I Voted for Barack Obama

2009-02-10T12:19:00.000-08:00

I'm a moderate republican. I like the 2nd amendment, the death penalty, and Ayn Rand. I'm a capitalist at heart and I believe the best societies have more financial freedom. I'm also a woman, and some of my social views are pretty liberal. Because of this I spent a long time debating who I should vote for, making lists of the candidates' platforms and voting records, and trying to align those with my own views. Even though there were only two choices, I felt like who I picked would tell me a lot about myself and which views I found more important. For a long time, I couldn't make the decision. The answer easily came to me in early September, and my decision never wavered after that.

I chose to vote for Barack Obama because of the introduction of Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice Presidential pick. When I initially heard rumors of McCain's choice, I thought two things. 1) He is using her gender to get the female vote, and to compete with the fact that the democrats had a historical nominee. 2) It could be nice to have a female as second in command for a change. The second thought disappeared as soon as I discovered Sarah Palin in no way represented the values that I do, as a female, and Barack Obama absolutely did.

When I heard Palin say things like, "I'd oppose abortion even if my own daughter was raped," my feelings about guns and the free market were no longer important. When I found out about her desire to push an abstinence-only sex education on the nation's youth, it was like I had not even read The Fountainhead. Sarah Palin opposed expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation (I believe homosexuality is included in women's issues), and advocated making women buy their own rape kits, and just in general, seemed to oppose everything women activists have fought for for the past century.

2008 was my first presidential election, and it was certainly very interesting. What I took from it, more than anything, was that the economy will rise and fall as it normally does. I am always open to my political views changing, as they have in the past. I was not born a republican, but a woman, and I will die a woman, so I am a woman first, and my rights need to be protected. My right to govern my own body, my right to marry who I want, my right to not have to take out a loan to find out who raped me, my right to the knowledge about safe sex - all of these made Obama the right choice for a female who finds these issues important. Most of all I learned that the gender of an individual doesn't make them a feminist, their actions and choices do. If Sarah Palin had become the Vice President of the United States, I believe feminism would have lost a lot of hard-earned progress, and that is why I voted for Barack Obama.

Something (else) Michelle Obama and HRC have in common?

2009-02-08T19:47:00.001-08:00

A story by Rachel Swarns in today's NYT reports that Michele Obama is raising eyebrows in Washington by weighing in on some policy issues. The headline is "'Mom in Chief' Touches on Policy, and Tongues Wag." Swarns characterizes Mrs. Obama's plan to visit all cabinet-level agencies as "a notably different approach" than Laura Bush's, who tended not to discuss legislation and policy, like most First ladies before her. Yet, Swarns reports:

Some observers praised Mrs. Obama’s foray into the legislative debate, saying the new first lady, who is a Harvard-educated lawyer and a former hospital executive, was eminently qualified to promote the president’s policies.

Others expressed surprise, saying they had expected Mrs. Obama to focus on her daughters and on the traditional issues she had emphasized in the presidential campaign, like supporting military families and working parents.

Swarns quotes a scholar who studies first ladies, Myra Gutin:

"She went to some lengths to say she was going to be first mom in chief . . . . I don’t think we ever really imagined her edging toward public policy like this. It’s not like she’s making public policy. But it’s a little less neutral than some of the other things she’s talked about focusing on.”

Swarns suggests that Mrs. Obama's recent forays into policy still don't rise to the level of the role Hillary Clinton played in her husband's administration, and she may be right. But tongues certainly wagged about Mrs. Clinton's role as something other than White House hostess. (See these 1994 columns here, here and here by Anna Quindlen about HRC).

Perhaps Mrs. Obama will evolve into a more HRC-esque role, which wouldn't bother me. After all, we are occasionally (often?) reminded by the media that Mrs. Obama is a Harvard-educated lawyer coming off a high-powered career as a hospital executive. We would not want her intellect and experience to go to waste, would we? And what's so controversial about her supporting her husband's policy positions -- maybe even having some independent positions of her own--and making those heard? Why shouldn't she add her influence to debates about issues of the day?

The Israeli version of Hillary Clinton/Palin?

2009-02-08T17:28:00.000-08:00

It looks like we have another Hillary Clinton (or Palin), except she's not in the United States: She's in Israel. After the Israel Prime Minister Ehud Olmert stated that he would resign, an election was scheduled. Tzipi Livni (pictured below) won the September 2008 election, and would have become the prime minister had she formed a coalition government with different political parties. She had 90 days, but many parties refused to join the coalition government, causing an election to be scheduled February 2009.

A quick background to the Israeli government: The way the Israeli elections works is extremely different from elections in the U.S.. First of all, there are numerous parties, not like United States’ two central parties. When an election is held for the Israeli parliament, the percentage of votes casted for a party means the percentage the party is represented in the government.

Tzipi Livni? Who is she? Many of us outside of Israel have never heard of Livni, and you can’t blame us. Livni is currently the acting prime minister of Israel, and was previously the Minister of Justice, Minister of Regional Cooperation, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Minister of Immigrant Absorption, and Minister of Housing and Construction. In her very early career, she was a Mossad (Israel’s equivalent of the United States’ CIA) agent, and had a role in covert operations during the 1982 Lebanon War. She was ranked the 52nd most powerful women in the world in 2008 by Forbes, 39th most powerful women in the world in 2007, and 40th most powerful women in the world.

Just a week ago, the Israel’s 2009 legislative elections ended. It was an extremely close call for Livni, who was running to defend her position as acting prime minister of Israel. In fact, Livni won with such a close margin that many have suggested that Livini’s victory could have been due to women voters. This was the article which inspired me to write this blog post:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKTRE51852B20090209

After reading the article, I was extremely surprised at Livni’s blatant attempts to use her gender to her advantage. Livni’s party had many billboards plaguing Israel promising a “different kind of prime minister” and “urged Israelis to elect the country’s first women prime minister in three decades”. Just like Hillary, Livni avoided using the gender card until the few weeks leading up to the election. With so much experience in the government, I thought that it was very interesting of her to evoke gender by including simple statements in her speeches like “I make decisions, not coffee”. In the days leading up to the elections, Livni even went an extra step to exploit her gender by making visits solely to please the feminist crowds. Once such event was a techno dance rally for women. (see the picture) Just behind Livni, a slogan states “Gentlemen, the time has come for women”. Such usage of gender was also seen on Livni’s opponents. The Likud party, a major opponent of Livni, even ran a sexist and anti-feminist campaign stating that the role as prime minister is too big for Livni.

Gender seems to play a larger role in today’s politics and not just in America. This may be because our society today is unable to change our traditional values, a belief that women should not have leading roles. However, we now see females in governmental roles even in predominant Muslim countries, where females were treated like second-class citizens. However, this does not mean that politicians and leaders should be able to use gender to their advantage. Do you think that Livni’s “gender card” is justified? Was her opponent’s anti-feminist slogans fair?

Gender in 2008 Survey

2009-02-04T12:24:00.001-08:00

Here is the link to the survey created for this class.

Send it to people you know so we can get as many responses as possible!

Sarah Palin Opens a PAC

2009-01-28T16:05:00.000-08:00

The former Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin launched her first political action committee (PAC), SarahPAC, yesterday.

Here is an exerpt from the Politico article.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) has launched a political action committee designed to raise funds for local and national candidates.

It is interesting to note that with a majority of the news articles I have read about Sarah Palin and John McCain, journalists refer to the lack of a strong and "negative" relationship between the two former partners. In this article, they point out that Sarah Palin only briefly mentioned her failed bid for the vice-presidency in 2008. Why do you think the media is specifically targeting Palin and McCain's relationship?

A comparative perspective on mothers in politics

2009-01-26T20:48:00.000-08:00

Eleanor Beardsley's report on NPR about French Justice Minister Rachida Dati returning to work five days after giving birth makes a lot of good points about whether this is a good thing or bad thing for women.

Here's a quote from Florence Montreynaud, a writer and feminist:

I think it's terrible for all the women in France . . . . Because this example separates women into two categories: a few superwomen with a wonderful job, and millions [of] other women that are totally normal to feel a little tired after birth. These women are — what to say — sissy? Or weakling?

The editor of the French magazine Closer, however, praised Dati, 43, calling her a symbol of the modern woman. He said:

I think these images will stay on the memoire collective, on the memory of all the French women, because it's a very strong image . . . . I think this image gives hope to women in their 40s, women who want children. Because it shows that you can be pregnant and keep very important responsibilities in your job.

Dati happens to be unmarried, and she has not disclosed the identity of the child's father. She is also iconic in France because she is a rare immigrant success story, the daughter of Algerian-Moroccan parents.

One angle that Beardsley doesn't amplify but that speaks for itself in this report is how we judge women--especially mothers--for their choices. She reports poll results indicating that 56% of those surveyed disapprove of Dati's quick return to work.

French law provides a 16-week paid maternity leave and strong job protection for mothers.

How would we respond to her if she were the U.S. Attorney General? How do we feel about Kirsten Gillibrand working until the day before she gave birth eight months ago?

Obama's Plan to Revolutionize Politics

2009-01-26T17:38:00.000-08:00

As we all know, Obama has proven to the world that fully utilizing the internet as a campaign tool can yield incredible, successful results. But how will he continue to engage the American public now that he has taken over as president? A New York Times article called "Melding Obama's Web to a YouTube Presidency" provided a description of how the White House plans to implement its goals using the numerous mechanisms the internet has to offer.

Obama, a former community organizer, has made it clear from the beginning that turning his campaign's unprecedented usage of immensely popular new media into a functional government tool is one of his most important ambitions for the administration. By involving the public with its government through social networking websites and directly reaching Americans with YouTube videos, Obama hopes to break through the middle-man media and connect with citizens more directly and efficiently.

However, legal barriers apply; the White House is unable to use the 13-million-person email list compiled during the Obama campaign due to the fact that it was created for political purposes, so instead the huge undertaking of updating American politics to a nation of YouTube and Facebook users has been delegated to the Democratic Party. The group in charge of assembling Obama's upcoming machine of video messages, blogs detailing administration policy, and other political resources is still fundraising and has not fully developed a website but has ambitious plans for implementation.

While it's certainly important to keep up with the mainstream technology and news-gathering habits of America, it is also necessary to consider those who are being left out of Obama's project. The internet is expansive, but it's also not readily available to all American citizens, particularly those who don't own computers. Older generations who have computers but don't necessarily go online on a regular basis are also not being included in this internet-based political system.

Moreover, communicating information directly from the White House to the public eliminates the media as a moderator. If citizens rely unquestioningly on this discourse alone, they miss out on the press's criticisms and may interpret the administration's characterizations of events and policies as the absolute truth.

So far, Obama's moves to convert the country to a pop media-based age of information have been incredibly effective (after all, he got elected). I was interested to see if this issue might be somewhat gendered, so I found another article printed by the New York Times almost a year ago regarding Hillary Clinton's contrasting political strategies. Entitled "The Audacity of Hopelessness," this article chastises her tendency to "[keep] to the Bush playbook," playing it old school throughout her campaign and failing to engage the public the way Obama did. The article reads:

Clinton fans don't see their standard-bearer's troubles this way. In their view, their highly substantive candidate was unfairly undone by a lightweight showboat who got a free ride from an often misogynist press and from naive young people who lap up messianic language as if it were Jim Jones's Kool Aid.

Once again, the media blames Hillary Clinton for playing the gender card. While Clinton certainly didn't employ innovative campaign tactics like her rival Obama, it seems unfair to blame her failure on whining about sexism. In this way, it seems that candidates' strategies for promoting themselves is at least somewhat tied up in gender.

President Obama's plan to change popular politics and engage citizens to influence policy and increase their civic participation is certainly ambitious, but judging from the way he revolutionized the 2008 election, the administration's goals seems entirely possible. One just has to wonder if such formidable goals could have been accomplished by a woman with her own political strategy.

Obama's Desire for More Women in Science

2009-01-25T13:11:00.000-08:00

I found an interesting article in the New York Times on how Obama plans to address issues of women in science. It is not that women are not capable of researching such math-heavy and logic-oriented concepts. Likewise, it is not that women do not not have the drive and stamina to keep up with the work of such time-consuming jobs. Rather, it is actually for a science-related reason that most women choose not to go into such demanding careers within the field of science. Women are the child-bearers of our country. Women are needed to have families and produce children that can continue our nation, our ways of living, etc. This hugely time-dependent reason might be what is holding women back from pursuing careers in science. Obama wants to try to fix this. In the article, "In 'Geek Chic' and Obama, New Hope for Lifting Women in Science," Natalie Angier writes:

Dr. Mason and other legal experts suggest that President Obama might be able to change things significantly for young women in science-- and young men-- by signing an executive order that would provide added family leave and parental benefits to the recipients of federal grants, a huge pool of people that includes many research scientists.

This would probably cause there to be less of a gap between genders when it comes to math and science and research. It is nice to know that Obama is looking out for women wanting to reach their full potentials, career-wise and all.

More than Just the First African-American President

2009-01-25T02:20:00.000-08:00

New York Times writer Jodi Kantor's article, "Nation's Many Faces in Extended First Family," highlights all of the diversity and history that is being brought to the White House through our new president. Not only does Obama bring the title of "first African-American president" to the capital, but he also brings a detailed and very diverse past with him. Kantor writes:

The family that produced Barack and Michelle Obama is black and white and Asian, Christian, Muslim and Jewish. They speak English; Indonesian; French; Cantonese; German; Hebrew; African languages including Swahili, Luo and Igbo; and even a few phrases of Gullah, the Creole dialect of the South Carolina Lowcountry. Very few are wealthy, and some- like Sarah Obama, the stepgrandmother who only recently got electricity and running water in her metal-roofed shack-- are quite poor.

I think this extreme diversity that Obama encompasses will be an asset to the White House and to his role as president. Having grown up with a family born into slavery, limited resources, and no fame to his name (has no predecessor like the former president, George W. Bush, had), Obama had to make a name for himself. In order to propel himself this far, he had to have some serious dedication to his education and to reaching his potential. Obama's self-determination for success can probably only be a benefit to our nation.

The new U.S. Senator from N.Y. -- as mother

2009-01-24T06:46:00.000-08:00

N.Y. Governor David Paterson hinted that the U.S. Senate seat for New York, held until recently by Hillary Rodham Clinton, has become a woman's seat when he announced yesterday that U.S. Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand will fill the position. Caroline Kennedy, considered by many the front runner, had withdrawn her candidacy a few days earlier.

There is a lot I could comment on regarding Ms. Gillibrand's politics, but I want to focus here on the media's portrayal of her as a mother because this is a topic that keeps cropping up in our discussions of gender and the 2008 Presidential election. It is deep in the NYT story by Michael Powell and Raymond Hernandez before we learn that Ms. Gillibrand is the mother of young children -- including an infant. Here's an excerpt:

Ms. Gillibrand is indisputably intense; a rising corporate lawyer before entering Congress, she worked until the day before she gave birth to her first son, Theodore, now 5 (and received a standing ovation on the floor of the House when she did the same before the birth of her second son, Henry, who is now 8 months old).

The accompanying slide show on the NYT site also includes two photos of Ms. Gillibrand as mother, but they are the final two in the group of ten images.

So, it seems, Ms. Gillibrand's status as a mother does not loom large, at least not in the NYT coverage.

Superstar Power

2009-01-23T17:25:00.000-08:00

One of the interesting things about The Good, the Bad, and Joe Lieberman, a James Wolcott piece in February's issue of Vanity Fair, is the discussion about celebrity influence on the election.

Wolcott mentions, for example, Black-Eyed Peas frontman will.i.am, whose song Yes We Can "was alchemized into an anthemic, iconic YouTube classic" and included "testimonial cameos from Scarlett Johansson, Herbie Hancock, John Legend, Amber Valletta, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar."

Did will.i.am's song send voters to the polls? Did Matt Damon's condemnation of Sarah Palin persuade any voters? Did comedians Tina Fey and Sarah Silverman impact the election in any significant way?

Do celebrity endorsements even matter?

According to a pair of economists at the University of Maryland, celebrity endorsements can make a difference. In their study, The Role of Celebrity Endorsements in Politics: Oprah, Obama, and the 2008 Democratic Primary, the economists reveal that Oprah Winfrey had a "statistically and politically significant effects on Obama’s political outcomes." In fact, the study estimates that Oprah was responsible for 1,015,559 votes for Obama.

Since Oprah's audience is predominately female, I can't help but wonder--how many of those 1,015,559 votes were cast by women?

Related Reading:

Obama's Celebrity Army at Time

Celebrity Power? at Forbes

John McCain's Presidential Campaign Endorsements

Barack Obama's Presidential Campaign Endorsements

Introducing The Esteemed Authoress, Sarah Palin

2009-01-22T20:03:00.000-08:00

She may not have had the degrees, diplomas, or credentials to be a viable vice-president candidate; however, few can contest the fact that Sarah Palin could earn some substantial income by selling an autobiography. Working mothers relate to her struggle to balance five kids with a career. Parents of autistic children or young mothers feel a bond with Sarah Palin. Aspiring politicians are bound to learn something from her biography whether it is how to appeal to the public, or how to earn a little temporary infamy on SNL.

Liz Wolgemuth wrote an article for US News exploring four ways in which Palin relates to working women: Being a mother on the job, the implications for the children, newborns and working mothers, and lastly, attractiveness and determination defining a new type of working woman. One of the most important pieces of information was the following, which hints toward the large audience to whome Palin's autobiography might appeal:

Maria Bailey, founder of BlueSuitMom.com, says a recent survey on her website found 74 percent of women feel they can relate to Palin. 'They're telling me that they don't think what she's doing is any harder than what they have to do," Bailey says.

In an article in the LA Times by Andrew Malcolm, Robert Barnett, an attorney who has negotiated book contracts for Bill and Hillary Clinton among others, is reported as being Palin's new representation. The autobiography is seen as being not only a method of income, but a way to potentially reconstruct Palin in a political sense from her current "dimbo" status:

But she's got a fine line to walk now. She's got to keep Palin out there in the media now and then to keep her name in the GOP buzz for 2012, but she can't keep talking about last fall, even though that's what she'll surely be asked about. She's also got to be seen focusing full attention on running an open, efficient state government well.

CBS featured an article by Brian Montopoli which also claims that TV producers would love to get their hands on Sarah Palin, as she is a former sports reporter.

All in all, it seems like the future is very bright for Palin. Rumor has it that she may sign a deal for around 4 books in exchange for $14 million

That seems ridiculously high for a book deal," a publishing insider told OK magazine. "Even though she's a huge star, that doesn't mean anyone wants to read an autobiography by her. To make back that much of an advance, the publisher would have to sell 'Harry Potter'-size numbers." (Mercury News)

I just have to wonder... What next, a Sarah Palin reality TV show?

Ten Principles Paralleled

2009-01-22T12:29:00.000-08:00

Being a daughter, Obama’s letter to his daughters Sasha and Malia struck a chord with me. In 'What I Want for You — and Every Child in America, ' Obama draws upon a variety of guiding principles of effective leadership to express his vision in the cause for “Change.” It might surprise some that the same ten principles used to build leaders in the West Point military academy are being used by Obama to communicate with his daughters and the public: duty, honor, faith, courage, perseverance, confidence, approachability, adaptability, compassion and vision. The letter as touching and genuine as it may be obviously has a deeper political purpose. I see an interesting parallel between military leadership techniques and Obama’s persuasive strategy.

One aspect of effective leadership is to have vision. Obama’s letter to his daughter represents dual purposes. It is in part an expression his appreciation and vision for the future for his daughters as well as a vision and goals for the children of all people. It serves as a road map and call for action and change. He highlights his vision for education, and touches on health care, and jobs, then moves to the environment and wars as factors that affect families.

He opens with a humorous reference to eating junk food, which reminds us of our duty to ourselves to eat right. It connects on an emotional and rational level. He creates a sense of community and sort of social moral contract. Duty is another key guiding principle for effective leadership. He tells both his daughters and the public of a duty to hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself and make this imperfect nation more perfect. He eloquently weaves a connection to faith, honor and duty saying, “The blessings these men and women fight for are not free.” He also refers to religion and the need for broader perspectives later mentioning the connection between religious differences and division in community which sometimes keeps us from seeing the best in each other. We are left with the tone of contrasting seriousness in connection to everyone’s duty on the national level.

His message applies principle of honor too. Honor involves creating a sense of community. He gives recognition and approval, especially in the closing, saying he is proud and grateful for his daughters “patience, poise, grace and humor.”

He further creates an intense sense of awareness of the importance of community, and particularly families, when he mentions that all his big plans for himself didn’t seem so important after his children were born. He wanted both his daughters and every child in the nation to have opportunities for happiness and fulfillment. He conveys a sense of the importance of the principle of perseverance by referring to his personal life quest which began as a young man, thinking “it’s all about me” and then referring to the larger lesson learned from his grandmother involving the need to persevere to attain the principle of equality for all men.

In many ways he includes the principle of compassion. He expresses empathy on a personal level recognizing how the campaign was not easy for his daughter’s Malia and Sasha and their mother and his compassion on a political level, for those who have not been granted the full rights of equality as spelled out in the declaration of independence.

The way he leverages important social issues from the campaign: education, the environment and war, saying he wants his daughters and other children to see the discovery of new technology and inventions that make the world cleaner and safer, was effective selling of his ideas. In doing so, it becomes a call for action from educators, scientists, environmentalists and the military to join in his vision. He even alludes to collegiality among women using terms like “committed women” near the end of his letter.

The Effects of Gender and Race in Politics: What Effects?

2009-01-22T01:58:00.000-08:00

From observing politics for the past few years, I came to the conclusion that there are no dramatic effects of gender or race unless a politician provokes such effects. Now, I do know that voters do tend to choose candidates according to who they can relate more towards, but I don’t think that such impact is so profound that it’ll change votes single handily.

During the 2008 presidential election, I was surprised that gender had a much bigger impact on the election than I had initially thought. According to the New York Daily Times on May 2008, one of the six reasons Hillary wanted to be president was because of the “women in their 90s who had told her they were born before women could vote, and they wanted to live to see a woman in the White House”. When Hillary lost the Democratic nomination, McCain saw the opportunity to win over disgruntled Hillary supporters due to the emphasis that Hillary put on feminism in addition to Hillary’s slow and cautious backing of Obama. Surprising the world, McCain picked Palin to be his VP, an action which he would later regret. Palin made her central campaign theme focused on how she was just like any ordinary “hockey mom”. She fortified her campaign theme with subtle parts in her speeches such as calling herself a “Pitbull with lipstick” in addition to twisting her role as mom to be a qualification for being a VP. For example, during the VP debate, Palin continuously described her role as a mom when she stated:

But it wasn't just that experience tapped into, it was my connection to the heartland of America. Being a mom, one very concerned about a son in the war, about a special needs child, about kids heading off to college, how are we going to pay those tuition bills?

The full VP debate transcript can be found here.

Unfortunately for Palin, her choice of using the theme of being a mom also had a disadvantage. Because Palin thought that being a mom was something worthy of being in the spotlight, the media naturally also focused on her theme of being a mom. So in today’s society, what does the normal “hockey moms” do? They take care of their kids, do daily household chores, and go to PTA events. All of which were topics that the media focused on. Many complained such treatment was sexist, but then again it was Palin’s own choice. She could have ran on her executive experience as governor, but instead she chose to run on being the first women to the white house.

I have also come to notice that just like gender, race doesn’t affect politics unless the politician makes race a key factor. For example, when Governor Blagojevich controversially appointed Burris to take Obama’s seat, many senators (including the democrats) initially objected to his appointment and wanted to block him from the senate. However, Senator Burris defended his appointment with a variety of reasons. One of the reasons, according to his good friend Representative Bobby Rush of Illinois, was because Burris is black! During the last few minutes of the press conference Gov. Blagojevich held regarding Burris’ appointment, Rep. Rush stated:

Let me just remind you that there presently is no African- American in the U.S. Senate. Let me remind you that the state of Illinois and the people in the state of Illinois and their collective wisdom, have sent two African-Americans to the U.S. Senate. That makes a difference. This is just not a state of Illinois matter, although it’s (INAUDIBLE) to appoint and (INAUDIBLE) — which is in the state of Illinois, but it (INAUDIBLE) — it has tremendous national importance — national importance. We need to have not just one African-American in the U.S. Senate. We need to have many African-Americans in the U.S. Senate.

So I applaud the governor for his decision. And I will ask you to not hang and lynch the appointee as you try to castigate the appointer. Separate, if you will, the appointee from the appointed. Ronald Burris is worthy. He is the only one, I believe, that could stand in the gap (INAUDIBLE) time, and gather the confidence — reestablish the confidence of the people of the state of Illinois.

(…….)

This is a matter of national importance. There are no African- Americans in the Senate, and I don’t think that anyone — any U.S. senator, who’s sitting in the Senate, right now, wants to go on record to deny one African-American for being seated in the U.S. Senate. I don’t think they want to go on record doing that. And so, I intend to take that argument to the Congressional Black Caucus.

The full transcript of the press conference is here.

Currently, there is heavy speculation that because Burris played the race card, many senators were afraid to block Burris’ appointment since the senators were afraid that they would be labeled as racist. Burris’ strategic usage of race heavily differed from Obama’s position with using race in his campaign. Surprisingly, Obama never mentioned race and gender in his campaign despite being the first African American presidential nominee. Even when issues about Obama’s race were brought up by his opponents, he brushed off the accusation and focused on the main issues campaign issues. Obama’s decision to never use race or gender in his campaign just shows how a politician is able to control whether or not race or gender will be an issue.

Hard times help women in politics?

2009-01-22T01:45:00.000-08:00

Sexism is a double edged sword, and in every imaginable situation, women seem to be getting shortchanged due to this concept. In a recent news article, the author suggests that in the political world, we see that in some cases, voters will point to a woman running for office and consider her to be weak because she doesn't live up to the masculine expectations society holds of effective leaders. In turn, voters refuse to accept her as a viable candidate. In other cases, a female politician might be looked upon as a caring individual that would be more concerned about the people and their issues. The latter seems to be the case with Queensland's Anna Bligh, who is on her way to becoming Australia's first elected woman premier. The article insinuates that during hard times such as those being faced by Australia seem to be the perfect conditions for a woman to come and and "clean up the mess" left behind by her male predecessor.

PhD researcher Mary Crawford was quoted saying that "research suggests that while women politicians don't pursue a different style, voters perceive their interests are different - that they are more likely to be concerned with the daily concerns of people, like jobs, food prices, education and so on." Unfortunately, the situation isn't that simple, especially when we take the recent United States presidential election into consideration. Taking into account the weak state of the economy and the hard times we are facing as a society today, why is it that Crawford's theory didn't hold true? Americans had two opportunities to elect a female candidate, and chose to cote for males in both situations.

Preconceived notions about how a female candidate would lead as a politician continue to thwart any progress our nation can hope to one day achieve in terms of gender equality. Women have always been looked down upon by men as the "weaker" gender. As much as the people of this country go on talking about equality and acceptance, the truth is that even though we are living in the 21st century, our underlying ideals and stereotypes seem to resemble those which Americans held almost a century ago. If we truly want to see ourselves taking a step in the direction of equality, we have to set aside this discrimination.

Michelle Obama as the First Lady

2009-01-22T00:32:00.000-08:00

I stumbled across an article by Rachel Swarns published in the New York Times the other day, in which the tone of Michelle Obama’s role as first lady was predicted at a time fringing inauguration day. I was surprised (well, in a way) to find that the most discussed points spiking from the face of Michelle Obama’s then imminent position as the first lady concerned items such as fashion, White House decorations, and family, as well as minor references to her agenda.

She has hired a politically seasoned team of advisers and an interior decorator committed to creating a family-friendly feel in her elegant new home. She has sketched out a vision of a White House brimming with children and ordinary Americans while suggesting she may delegate some traditional first lady duties to her staff: food tastings, china selection and the like.

While it is true that she will help stamp the image of America’s most watched family, I half expected the piece to be inlaid with a look at what is surely one of the main tasks cared for by first ladies - providing support, acuity in insight, and invaluable advice to the president.

I also found it interesting that Mrs. Obama herself is pressing for acknowledgement through her first name (a point which had been noted earlier), as mentioned in the article:

And she has highlighted the warm, informal tone that she hopes will characterize her time in the executive mansion by signing e-mail messages to supporters simply as ‘Michelle.’

So while it seems to be the case that the media identifies women in power by their first name, it doesn’t appear to be wholly unwanted (at least in some instances) by the women to which it is applied.

Mrs. Obama’s recent activities and statements relating to her role as the first lady appear to be localized around a presentation of herself as a mother who will care for her children and new home. As Paul Schmitz explains, “She understands the needs of women.” The emergence of this identity is not completely new. In the time leading up to Obama’s inauguration, she had been whittling away certain parts of her public identity and emphasizing others, as described in the writing:

Her approval ratings have soared since she refocused her image on her role as a wife and mother, but she still comes under periodic attack from conservative bloggers and others.

With Michelle now following her husband into the walls of the White House, it will certainly be interesting to see how her image progresses and adjusts under the weight of the media’s scrutiny and expectations.

Let Freedom Ring

2009-01-21T00:07:00.000-08:00

Let it be told: there is a time when truth needs to be faced. Lately, in these dismal years, faces of our very own Americans, once representative of extreme pride, have glowed a sentiment of uneasiness. We were once the great nation that stood by our democratic ideals, and even amidst the horrors constantly brought to developing countries around us, our country still stood strong and proud. This has changed. Our sense of pride as a nation has diminished. Whether it be because the nation transformed into something other than a "peoples' nation" or because we simply needed a different plan of action, it became evident that change was necessary.

To keep America shining from sea to sea and regain that glow of pride, we have realized that we need to take charge and address the problems we are facing. As a country, we are making this happen one step at a time. It is just the beginning of a new era; however, it is the beginning of a new era for hope, a new era for change, and a new era for freedom, peace, and enlightenment. Like Martin Luther King Jr.'s sister, Christine King Farris, said to the Chicago Tribune in reference to what Martin Luther King, Jr. might say of this turning point, "He would say that we have reached a great milestone but we still have other milestones to reach. But this is a great beginning."

As President Barack Obama took oath on this 20th day of January 2009, our nation came together to recognize the importance of this drastic change and need for action. President Barack Obama delivered his Inauguration speech with such solemnity. He clearly presented all the problems that we, as a country, need to address, and he did so with such an uplifting tone and manner. His reoccurring theme of hope throughout the speech truly inspired Americans and gave our country the trust that we need to instill in a leader who is willing to take on such a challenge.

Like Franklin D. Roosevelt, it is evident that Barack Obama cares about his country. Both he and Michelle, First Lady, want to show their deep connect with the people of the United States of America. Barack has said that he wants to make use of new technology, such as YouTube, and Rachel Swarns, a writer for the New York Times, published that Michelle dreams of picnics with local citizens and their children.

Also, the way Obama delivered his speech reminded me of how a religious official or clergyman might deliver a sermon. He was very direct in his words to the people, and he continually referred to "we" (as a nation) making the changes, as opposed to just him. He emphasized that this will be a "team effort," like a congregation in a church or temple, and we will all be working together to "be the change [we] wish to see in the world" (Gandhi).

Let us welcome this great face of change into the White House: the face of Barack and the face of the Obamas as a family. In fact, Michelle will also bring some change to the White House. Rachel Swarns wrote in the New York Times:

On Inauguration Day, Michelle Obama will become the first African-American to assume the role of first lady, a woman with the power to influence the nation's sense of identity, its fashion trends, its charitable causes and its perceptions of black women and their families.

So, even though we might not have a woman in the White House as our 44th president, we have an African American, and this is truly an incredible feat for the United States of America. My country, tis of thee, please do the favor of recognizing the gravity of all these feats, and let freedom ring.

At the Crossroads: An Examination & Analysis of Women's Political Images on the National Stage

2009-01-20T18:43:00.000-08:00

Mary Beth Leidman, Jaclyn M. Emershaw, and Sarah Tourtellotte recently compiled data on photographs of currently serving women Senators and Governors. They were seeking to discover the physical attributes shared by these elected women (hair color, body type, etc.).

Can you guess which obvious physical patterns emerged from the study? (I'm not telling! The answer is at the bottom of page 3).

Here is the abstract of the study:

However the 2008 Presidential election has turned out, it was an epic moment for women in national politics. Senator Hillary Clinton's competitiveness in the Presidential Primaries was at the epicenter of gender political studies during the Presidential Primaries season. There are lingering questions concerning why she did not triumph given her experience, savvy and general background. This study concerns itself with the projection of image for women in politics. It endeavors to develop a methodology which could be replicated and examines the idea of whether or not successful image can be codified and act as a predictor of electability for women in national or executive level state politics.

The study can be downloaded here.

Despite the study findings, I can spot several physical similarities among the women of the 110th Senate. Can you?

Michelle Obama and her "Fashion Fireworks"

2009-01-20T11:03:00.001-08:00

In a recent article I came across on the internet in a British newspaper, the Daily Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/fashionnews/4298199/Michelle-Obama-inauguration-fact-file.html , Michelle Obama's fashion was adressed and her style was stated as "promises as First Lady fashion fireworks." Her black and white dress worn during her husband Obama's victory speech was either "loved or hated" according to the Los Angeles Times. She has brought a new sense of style and is standing out with her fashion and "proved that unlike many other first ladies, she does not intend to fade into the background"

'She's taken the idea of what a first ladyshould be and turned it on its head,' says J. Crew creative director Jenna Lyons. 'Before Michelle Obama, everyone had the idea that you had to be suited up and running with the crowd to be taken seriously. It's fabulous to see her on the cover of a magazine in a hot pink dress. She's not afraid to step out in something unusual.'

This "unusual" look is turning out for the better, because according to the Los Angeles times shes is percieved somewhat as a role model now. Michelle Obamas perceived as a "American-led democratization of fashion that has revolutionized the way the world dresses by making designer names available in Target and JCPenney." From the Los Angeles Times I found that there is even a fashion fan site for Michelle Obama.

She has made a statement to the US by how she dresses, that she is here to bring something new to the White House. Maybe something to go along with Obama's motto of change.

Letters From My Father

2009-01-19T20:05:00.000-08:00

While watching CNN the other morning, I noticed an interesting piece on an internationally published letter from President Barack Obama to his two daughters Sasha and Malia. The entire letter, published on January 14th in Parade magazine, can be found here on the publication's website. In short, Obama expresses his belief in the advantages and responsibilities associated with being an American, outlining his reasons for "[taking] our family on this journey" and proclaiming his deep love and appreciation for both of his children.

The message is sincere and heartwarming, but I have to question the necessity of publicizing these sentimental affects in one of America's most widely read newspapers. Clearly Obama's letter is addressed more directly to the American people as a whole than simply to 7-year-old Sasha and 10-year-old Malia. I suppose it makes sense to charm the public with such a touching demonstration of his fatherly capabilities, but at the same time I can't help but remember all of the criticism faced by Sarah Palin as she embarked on her own journey to the White House, family in tow.

In September, ABC News reported on the many disapproving mothers who bitterly disputed Palin's ability to effectively raise a family while serving as vice president. It seems that in an age when so many women have proven the possibility of balancing work and home life, such disparagement would be less harsh.

In comparison, Obama has faced incredibly little interrogation in regards to his abilities as a father. His hyper-publicized letter is a prime example of the media's delight with the idea of the president as Father of the Year. While I don't at all doubt that Barack Obama is a genuinely good parent, it seems natural to doubt his ability to be at his daughters' side throughout the next four years, as Sarah Palin was seemingly expected to do. Moreover, Palin was only running for the office of vice president, while Obama has been elected to the office of commander-in-chief itself. With an even busier agenda than Palin, Obama's comparatively celebrated parenting makes it clear that there are still some serious double standards at play in presidential politics.

It was just Martin Luther King Jr Day: Let's discuss race in the election.

2009-01-19T18:10:00.000-08:00

Even though our seminar is technically about gender in the presidential election, I think the issue of race is just as important to bring to the table. I found a great article by Michael A. Fletcher online at Washingtonpost.com regarding Obama being African American. It states that Obama did not call attention to the issue of race for most of his campaign, but that now that he is the President, he can talk more about how his racial identity can bring the country together. In speaking with The Washington Post about the fact that he, as an African American, is going to be President of the United States, Obama said, "I mean, that's a radical thing. It changes how black children look at themselves. It also chances how white children look at black children. And I wouldn't underestimate the force of that."

As a white person I could not be happier that we finally have a black President, and it is so difficult to imagine those who are resentful of this accomplishment. That sad fact goes to show that we have much more growing to do as a country before everyone will be able to look at others in the same way. Unfortunately we will not see that day for a long time, but I have hope that we'll get there eventually. This election will be one that we tell our future children and grandchildren about, and if this was just the spark of a wave of political diversity, then there will be many more elections like this to come. In Obama's inauguration speech he did bring up race, and I thought that to be very important. Though we don't want to think he was elected because of his color, it is still such an accomplishment to those who have endured discrimination in this country over the years and I think he truly reached out to those people with that part of his speech.

In the article I mentioned earlier, however, it stated that the fact that Obama is half-black raises questions as to whether he is "black enough." This is so racist in itself, and just because Obama's mother and grandparents (in the picture above) are white does mean this isn't still an accomplishment for the African American race, something in which they should have pride. After this point, the article began touching on the thought that since Obama is half-black, he is a "good compromise person;" he can feel and relate to the dilemmas of more than one race. I think this to be a strange assumption because anyone can be a "good compromise person," no matter his or her race.

This article is interesting to me because it is discussing the different racial issues that have come up regarding Obama and I would never have thought of them this way. I know that race is significant, but I do not think that it determines one's character or ability to run the country. The fact that people are seriously discussing that issue goes to show it will take some time for this country to reach complete satisfaction with equality. Michael Strautmanis, who has worked with Obama on his Senate staff and will be one of his White House aides, thinks and comments that Obama "just looks at people who would be divided by race and naturally sees what they have in common." He says that Obama "is so comfortable in his own skin that he makes you comfortable in your skin, so you stop thinking about the things that would divide you." This quote really stuck out to me, and I believe this is exactly what he need in a President. I am so thrilled for the era of Obama and I am hopeful for our country in the years to come.

Satire is not just for Sarah

2009-01-19T15:00:00.000-08:00

http://www.pantsdown.wild.net.au/vote1.jpg

In a recent interview, Sarah Palin credits the loss of the 2008 presidential election in part to Tina Fey’s Saturday Night Live sketches and her interview with Katie Curric. This idea is debatable in its own right, but begs the question, how much does satire and "electoral guerilla theatre" play into the public’s opinion? Does satire really work to mold the public's opinion of a person? Personally I find this to be a bit far fetched, but to Palin's credit, precedent does exist. One such example is the October 1989 election for Austrialian Parliament.

In 1996 a lower working class woman from a small town in Queensland by the name of Pauline Hanson was elected to represent the Oxley seat. Despite being expelled from her party shortly before the election due to some anti-Aboriginal comments quoted in a local paper, she won the seat, and quickly gained support as a leader for the far right. Her anti-Asian and anti-Aboriginal views resulted in the creation of her own party known as the “One Nation Party,” which quickly gained followers.

As Hanson's support grew, her values were thoroughly questioned, including many allegations of racism and xenophobia. While she insists that she is not racist, her views take the form of “cultural racism”, and while these setiments gave her followers, they also created enemies

One such person was a man by the name of Simon Hunt. When Hanson was up for reelection, Hunt legally changed his name to Pauline Pantsdown and got himself on the ballot. Besides wearing Hanson’s clothing and taking on her accent, Pantdown used political satire to attack Hanson. His first attack took the form of a song known as “I’m a Backdoor Man,” which, once released, soared to the top of charts. It was being played all over the nation, and because Hanson was such a well-known figure, the nation quickly learned of Pantsdown’s cause.

“Instead of dealing directly with Hanson’s white supremacism, he [Hunt] used her argumentative methods and her actual (digitized and rearranged) voice to make Hanson’s unwilling mouth advocate gay supremacy.”

In retaliation, Hanson and her party filed a defamation suit, and despite public requests, no radio stations would pick up the song.

Unfortunately for Hanson, the Party hurt themselves when they sued Pantsdown, as they demonstrated to the country that they were only supporters of free speech in certain cases. Knowing that he was supported, Pantsdown launched another attack, using Hanson’s own words to create a new song, entitled “I Don’t Like It.”

“While its satirical method is simpler, “I Don’t Like It” is more technically complicated than “Backdoor Man.” It actually creates new words from different Hanson syllables; for example, “San Francisco” was pieced together from four different words.”

Because the song was not using analogy, and therefore was less obviously damaging to her campaign, the One Nation Party largely ignored the attack, and the song was able to play on the radio. In fact, it because so popular and because One Nation did not sue, Pantdown’s friends and supporters banned together, and created a music video, allowing for a new dimension to the song.

After a long campaign from both Hanson and Pantsdown, the election came, and Hanson was defeated. She had spent so long fighting against Pantsdown’s attacks, that she was not able to focus on her campaign, a mistake that eventually lead to her downfall. Of the other candidates, some felt that the parodies were a good campaign tool, while others were frustrated because Pantsdown made the election into something of a joke. Nevertheless, most agreed that it was because of Hunt that Hanson lost the election.

I do not know if the Palin and McCain campaign was adversely affected by Fey or Curric, but the introduction of satire into the public political domain will certainly grow, and only time will tell where it takes us.

You can download the full article written by UC Davis Professor Lawrence M. Bogad here.

Barack Obama as unisex?

2009-01-16T17:29:00.000-08:00

Download Frank Rudy Cooper's article, forthcoming in the Denver Law Review, here.

The abstract follows:

People often talk about the significance of Barack Obama's status as our first black President. During the 2008 Presidential campaign, however, a newspaper columnist declared, "If Bill Clinton was once considered America's first black president, Obama may one day be viewed as our first woman president." That statement epitomized a large media discourse on Obama's femininity. In this essay, I thus ask how Obama will influence people's understandings of the implications of both race and gender.

To do so, I explicate and apply insights from the fields of identity performance theory, critical race theory, and masculinities studies. With respect to race, the essay confirms my prior theory of "bipolar black masculinity." That is, the media tends to represent black men as either the completely threatening and race-affirming Bad Black Man or the completely comforting and assimilationist Good Black Man. For Obama, this meant he had to avoid the stereotype of the angry black man. Meanwhile, though, the association of the Presidency with the hegemonic form of masculinity presented difficulties for Obama. He was regularly called upon to be more aggressive in responding to attacks and more masculine in general. As a result, Obama could not be too masculine because that would have triggered the Bad Black Man stereotype but he could not be too feminine because that would have looked unpresidential.

Obama solved that dilemma by adopting a "unisex" style. He was a candidate who was designed to be suitable to either gender. I believe Obama's unisex performance on the world's biggest stage suggests that we are all more free to perform our race and our gender as we see fit than we had previously believed.

Doonesbury compares Bush to Palin

2009-01-16T06:53:00.000-08:00

See yesterday's cartoon here.

Maybe we are as hard on male politicians (some of them, anyway) as we are on their female counterparts. But wait, who's getting the worst of it -- Palin or Bush--in this comparison?

Gender Roles: The Mother

2009-01-14T20:15:00.001-08:00

While stumbling across the internet, I found this website: www.teenmomsforpalin.com. At first it looked like another site in support of Sarah Palin, but upon closer inspection it turned out to be a typical satire site, ironically supporting Palin for all the wrong reasons. While quotes like "Because Women Have Suffraged Long Enough" were intended to make the audience laugh, they also brought up the role motherhood had to play in the election. Note: I know this issue has already been addressed in this blog, but I thought I might try to take a stab at it.

Hillary Clinton made history by being a woman running for president, but one of the many criticisms she received was that she was not feminine enough. Going along with this theme, it could be determined that with her lack of femininity she also didn't fulfill the gender role of mother, and if she didn't act like enough of a mom, then she wouldn't appeal as a mother figure to the country.

Picture from www.gov.state.ak.us
Sarah Palin took the opposite approach during the campaign: she largely depended on her role as a mother to earn votes for her party, constantly referring to herself as a "hockey mom," as well as calling upon her experience raising a family as if it were something to put on her resumé. Palin's progeny were on display immediately after she was announced as the VP nominee, attracting many camera shots during the Republican National Convention. Even though Hillary Clinton does have a daughter, Chelsea did not receive nearly the same amount of press time as the Palin kids, as Hillary didn't use her experience as a mom to assure the people of this country that she could also mother them.

The idea of having a matriarchy was (and still is) novel, but also distracts from the importance of having the person elected to the presidency be the best one for the job, not simply male or female. But elections are long and people can only talk about the economy or Iraq for so long, and so "relatability" becomes a key factor in who people will vote for. When Hillary didn't use her motherhood to define herself, she may have lost votes, and because Sarah Palin did the opposite, she may have earned votes. Either way, this election brought up the issue of women having to be stuck in certain gender roles, and highlights the distance women still must cover in order to escape them.

Race versus Gender

2009-01-14T08:07:00.000-08:00

I just found a news article on Politico, a great news site for those interested in politics. The title of the article is "In politics, does race trump gender?"

Here is an excerpt from the article:

How come Roland Burris has had such an easy time getting to the U.S. Senate while Caroline Kennedy has had such a hard time? Could it be that the race card trumps the gender card in U.S. politics? Well, yes. It could be.

The article makes an interesting argument about how easy Roland Burris, the Senator-designate from Illinois, made his case to win the fight against congressional Democrats who had refused to seat him in the Senate. Burris was appointed by scandaled-tainted Illinois Governor Blago. Because Blago ignored warnings against taking such an action the Senate Democratic leadership threatened not to seat any successor. If sworn in today, Burris will officially take over President-elect Obama's seat.

In contrast, the author claims how difficult a time Caroline Kennedy is having in obtaining Hillary's seat. Kennedy has publicly announced that she is interested in Hillary's seat and even did a tour in New York a few weeks ago. Unlike Burris, who would be the sole African American in the US Senate, Kennedy cannot use the claim of being the only woman in the Senate to her benefit, because there are plenty of women Senators.

It's a great article and the author does make some interesting arguments (i.e. The Senate is 17% women, while women compose of 51% of the United States)

A helpful resource about Hillary Rodham Clinton

2009-01-14T06:04:00.000-08:00

See the New York Times interactive feature here, with links to video clips about different stages of her life.

A new academic article on our seminar topic!

2009-01-12T11:55:00.000-08:00

I saw this posted on ssrn.com. The article is by Quinetta Roberson and Gregory Scott Parks. Here's the abstract:

Scholars, and even the presidential candidates, have described the 2008 election as an extended interview process for a high-ranking job. Following that characterization of the Presidential race, questions about sexism and gender bias along the campaign trail implicate the law. Title VII protects individuals from sex bias in the workplace. And while modern conceptions of how such bias actually operates, largely drawn from social and cognitive psychology, aids legal decision-makers in determining whether such bias indeed took place in any particular case, greater insight into the intersection of psychology and the law is needed. Here, we explore the role of sexism and implicit (subconscious) gender bias in the Presidential race through the lens of Title VII. Further, we buttresses the proposition put forth by a growing body of legal scholars that the role of implicit attitudes in decision-making has significant implications for Title VII jurisprudence.

The full article is not posted for downloading, but I see on their author page that Roberson and Parks have also written about Michelle Obama.

Carefully Constructed: Michelle Obama as the Next Jacqueline Kennedy?

2009-01-08T21:49:00.000-08:00

There's a piece in the Style Section of the New York Times today about Michelle Obama's wardrobe, entitled U.S. Fashion’s One-Woman Bailout?

The article quotes Hamish Bowles, Vogue Editor and Curator of Jacqueline Kennedy: The White House Years, an art exhibition of Jackie's clothing.

In 2002, I was an intern at the Corcoran Gallery of Art. During my internship, the blockbuster Jacqueline Kennedy exhibition was on display at the museum. Because my office was located on the first floor, at the rear of the building, I walked through the exhibition several times a day for several months. I probably saw the beloved inaugural gala dress 250 times.

Jacqueline Kennedy's clothing was extraordinary--one of a kind pieces created by some of the greatest designers in history, including Oleg Cassini, Gabrielle Chanel, and Christian Dior. Jackie's 1962 Christmas dress, a deep pink silk radzimir piece by Hubert de Givenchy, had such sophisticated twists in the back it required a lady's maid to tie Jackie into it. Many of her dresses had skillfully accomplished, hand sewn bead work or embroidery.

While I certainly admire Michelle Obama's style, I am not entirely convinced that Obama is the new Jacqueline Kennedy. Sure, I can agree that Michelle Obama exudes some of the same sophistication as Jackie, but somehow I don't see Obama's off-the-rack J. Crew sweater sets making it into a museum of fine art.

Some year-end rumination about gender and the election

2009-01-04T16:14:00.000-08:00

I just saw these over at blogher.com.

One post is titled "Feminism and Gender in 2008: The Good, the Bad and the Election" and is by Suzanne Reisman.

The other is under the headline "Politics: We Always End up Talking about Hillary, Don't We?"

They both provide some food for thought.

Parallels between Caroline Kennedy and Sarah Palin?

2008-12-31T08:43:00.000-08:00

One thing that has stuck in my head from Caroline Kennedy's early statements about her informal candidacy for the soon-to-be-vacant U.S. Senate seat for NY regards her credentials to hold that post. Kennedy gave this response a couple of weeks ago regarding her qualifications:

“I’ve written books on the Constitution and the importance of individual participation. And I’ve raised my family. I think I really could help bring change to Washington.”

Read the full story here.

One reason this comment has lingered for me is that it is so similar -- the parenting/mothering part, anyway -- to Sarah Palin's presentation of her credentials to become U.S. Vice President. While stumping on the campaign trail, she frequently played up her experiences raising five children. Here's the video of her self-identification as a hockey mom at the Republican National Convention. While Republicans tended to valorize Palin's motherhood, Democrats tended to downplay its relevance, if not outright scoff at it. (Of course, Palin's critics also had some things to say about the quality of her parenting).

In sorting through my own thoughts about the relevance of motherhood to the role of politician (or, for that matter, any work outside the home) I recalled this op-ed piece in the New York Times on Mother's Day, 2005 (memorable for me as my first Mother's Day as a mother). Katherine Ellison's piece was titled "This is Your Brain on Motherhood," and it asserted that having children can improve your intelligence. She explained how the human brain creates cells on an ongoing basis and that the cells that get used are more likely to survive. Because parenting often provides emotional, challenging, and novel experiences, those neurons get exercised. Ellison writes:

Children constantly drag their parents into challenging, novel situations, be it talking a 4-year-old out of a backseat meltdown on the Interstate or figuring out a third-grade homework assignment to make a model of a black hole in space.

* * *

[Children] fail to thrive unless we anticipate their needs, work our empathy muscles, adjust our schedules and endure their relentless testing. In the process, if we're lucky, we may realize that just this kind of grueling work - with our children, or even with others who could simply use some help - is precisely what makes us grow, acquire wisdom and become more fully human.

So, Ellison argues, we should see a mother's brain (and presumably a father's, too, if he's engaged with the full range of parenting tasks and experiences) as an asset rather than a handicap.

Does Ellison help convince you that raising children is relevant experience for one seeking public office? As a related matter, it is surely also worth considering how we view people who have never married or never had children. (Read Gail Collins recent column, "One Singular Sensation," here). Don't we sometimes see the absence of a spouse and children as a negative factor? Are women and men equally damned if they do, damned if they don't when it comes to being married? to having children?

Whatever relevance you assign to it, mothering roles are not the only experience shared by Palin and Kennedy. Another similarity is now being revealed, and it is the subject of an AP story by Jennifer Peltz today. Here's the lede:

If Caroline Kennedy had, you know, only known. Tracking the would-be New York senator's verbal tics has become a political parlor game in the days since she gave her first round of in-depth interviews, even spawning a hip-hop-style mash-up online blending her "you knows" with President-elect Barack Obama's "uhs."

Peltz goes on to report that one video on YouTube counts 30 "you knows" in 147 seconds of Kennedy excerpts. The other YouTube video referred to is here.

Remember how Palin was roundly and soundly criticized for her accent and use of language. Among those who got in on the act were Judith Warner, Roger Cohen, Maureen Dowd, and many others.

I have queried elsewhere whether all of this criticism of how Palin communicates is sexist. After all, various Presidents have spoken using colloquialisms (a wonderful example is here), and some have had (oh no!) Southern accents. Now I'm rethinking whether the criticism of Palin was more about gender or more about class. After all, no one doubts Kennedy's elite pedigree and education (Harvard and Columbia), yet she makes some of the same verbal blunders that Palin did--and she's being criticized for it.

The election is over, but talk of sexism persists in relation to the open U.S. Senate seat for NY

2008-12-18T07:59:00.000-08:00

Caroline Kennedy formally requested this week that NY Governor David Paterson consider her for the U.S. Senate seat for that state, the seat that will open when Hillary Rodham Clinton resigns to become Secretary of State. (Photo Jean-Pierre Muller/Getty Images).

Here is the NYT story. Kennedy had only just put herself forward for consideration when commentators started throwing around words like "sexism" and "nepotism." Here's what Nicholas Kristof had to say yesterday in his blog:

Caroline Kennedy strikes me as a very impressive woman with all the right priorities, such as education. But I also find it unseemly and undemocratic that she seems to have vaulted to the top of the Senate list by virtue of who her dad was. * * * Isn’t that sexist?

I'm not sure how it is sexist . . . unless he is drawing some analogy to McCain's selection of Palin --which many argued was just because Palin was female. Also, there is the argument that since Hillary Rodham Clinton has held the seat, it has become a "woman's seat" and should be filled by another woman.

Kristof continues in a way that implicitly acknowledges the latter argument by saying that choosing Kennedy would be "disrespectful" of other female NY politicians with more experience and public service. He then again asserts sexism:

Isn’t it sexist to rush to support a woman because of her father, while ignoring other women who have earned their own substantial credentials in their own careers in Congress?

I appreciate his acknowledging the fine work of congresswomen and other female politicians from NY, but I don't know that it's sexist to support a woman with a famous father when, as Kristof himself acknowledges, various political dynasties in our nation's history have anointed sons. The Bushes are a fine example.

Don't miss readers comments on Kristof's post. More than one notes that if an "ism" is at play, it's nepotism, not sexism.

In her column today, Gail Collins also takes up the "fairness question." She begins by observing that New York is taking Caroline seriously and suggests it is with good reason. Collins notes Kennedy's extraordinary success as a fundraiser, while also distinguishing between the good causes for which Kennedy has raised money in the past and the distinct challenge of political fundraising. She also views Kennedy as having other important political skills, saying, "it's easy to imagine Kennedy doing a Hillary-like 'listening tour,' having round-table discussions about the dairy compact or broadband access."

Collins acknowledges that picking Kennedy may not be "fair," but then life rarely is. Collins seems a bit more positive than Kristof about the prospect and potential of Caroline Kennedy as U.S. Senator. And, hmmm, Collins doesn't mention sexism, perhaps because she does not see it as a force or issue in Paterson's decision.

An academic study of "Gender's Role in the 2008 Presidential Campaign"

2008-12-15T05:55:00.000-08:00

Here is the abstract, which I just saw on ssrn.com:

Scholars, and even the presidential candidates, have described the 2008 election as an extended interview process for a high-ranking job. Following that characterization of the Presidential race, questions about sexism and gender bias along the campaign trail implicate the law. Title VII protects individuals from sex bias in the workplace. And while modern conceptions of how such bias actually operates, largely drawn from social and cognitive psychology, aids legal decision-makers in determining whether such bias indeed took place in any particular case, greater insight into the intersection of psychology and the law is needed. Here, we explore the role of sexism and implicit (subconscious) gender bias in the Presidential race through the lens of Title VII. Further, we buttresses the proposition put forth by a growing body of legal scholars that the role of implicit attitudes in decision-making has significant implications for Title VII jurisprudence.

Download the full paper by Quinetta Robertson and Gregory Scott Parks here.

The latest installment of Doonesbury with the Sarah Palin Action Doll

2008-11-27T14:02:00.000-08:00

This is the one from Nov. 26, 2008.

View others here. Does making it an "action" doll keep it from being sexist? And where is the "action" anyway? I just learned about this series and am catching up on it, but I'm not sure what the Palin doll does . . . .

Advice pours in for Michelle Obama

2008-11-24T05:50:00.000-08:00

According to Rachel Swarns' story in the New York Times, the advice is coming from around the world, including some from Cherie Blair, who proffered hers in her regular column for The Times (London). Like French President Nicolas Sarkozy's wife, Carla Bruni, Blair continued to work while her husband was the leader of the United Kingdom. (Of course, they have very different careers: Blair is a senior barrister; Bruni is a singer). Blair wrote in her column:

You have to learn to take the back seat, not just in public, but in private . . . . When your spouse is late to put the kids to bed, or for dinner, or your plans for the weekend are turned upside down again, you simply have to accept that he had something more important to do. * * * It is something of an irony that in these days of pushing for equality those of us married to our political leaders have to put their own ambitions on hold while their spouses are in office and keep their views to themselves. I, at least, had my career. That is not an option for Michelle Obama.

I have recently recalled here Hillary's 1992 adjustment to becoming first lady. Swarns' story informs us that Hillary is the only first lady prior to Michelle Obama to have an active career until shortly before her husband became President. The only other first lady to have an advanced degree was Laura Bush, and I believe that degree was in the rather lower profile subject of library science.

Also of great interest for purposes of our seminar on gender's role in the 2008 election is the observation that Michelle Obama became more popular (or at least more "celebrated" by the media) once she quit her job and fully embraced the role of "mom-in-chief."

Leslie Morgan Steiner, editor of “Mommy Wars,” an anthology of essays (Random House, 2006), argued on the NPR program “Tell Me More” that Mrs. Obama had been “put in a box” and was only celebrated in the news media after she decided “to put her family first.”

In the online magazine Salon, Rebecca Traister bemoaned what she described as the “momification of Michelle Obama,” criticizing the news media’s focus on Mrs. Obama’s search for schools for her two young daughters, her fashion sense and her pledge that her No. 1 job is “to be Mom.”

Traister laments the lack of "curiosity about how Michelle will adjust to the loss of her own private, very successful, very high-profile and very independent identity." Leaving work that one enjoys is a huge adjustment, and Ms. Obama's last job was a $300K/year Vice Presidency at the University of Chicago Medical Center. Nevertheless, as one commentator points out, unlike most women who leave work to be a trailing spouse, Ms. Obama's career won't suffer long-term consequences. She will be highly sought after for law firm partnerships and other roles as soon as his Presidency ends.

Steinem on HRC and Palin

2008-11-22T20:34:00.000-08:00

Gloria Steinem wrote a couple of high profile op-ed pieces over the course of the election. Here are excerpts from two -- one about HRC and one about Sarah Palin.

This appeared on January 8, 2008, after Hillary lost Iowa and before she won New Hampshire. It was titled, "Women are Never Front-runners," and it cleverly juxtaposed female gender with some of Obama's biographical details to make the point that Obama's credentials might be subject to greater scrutiny and skepticism were he a woman. Here are the first few paragraphs:

THE woman in question became a lawyer after some years as a community organizer, married a corporate lawyer and is the mother of two little girls, ages 9 and 6. Herself the daughter of a white American mother and a black African father — in this race-conscious country, she is considered black — she served as a state legislator for eight years, and became an inspirational voice for national unity.

Be honest: Do you think this is the biography of someone who could be elected to the United States Senate?

Steinem says that if you answered "no," you are hardly alone. She goes on to call gender "probably the most restricting force in American life." She notes a study which found that the United States "polarizes gender roles more than the average democracy."

The second Steinem piece appeared in the Los Angeles Times after Sarah Palin was chosen as McCain's running mate. It is titled "Wrong woman, wrong message." After labeling John McCain the "real culprit," Steinem argues that he chose Palin to curry favor with "right-wing ideologues." She continues:

Palin's value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions . . .

Gloria Steinem, long-time editor of Ms. magazine, is a so-called second-generation feminist who is famous for saying, "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle." Do you see any inconsistencies in the positions she takes in these two editorials?

Barack Obama as parent: Obsession with the Obama girls and a family's personal transition

2008-11-22T15:31:00.000-08:00

We've just learned that the Obama girls, Malia (10) and Sasha (7), will attend Sidwell Friends School when they move to Washington, DC, and take up residence in the White House in the coming weeks. Read the story here. This news came after what I found to be a nauseating amount of news attention to the fact that all of the prestigious DC schools were courting the Obama girls. See Rachel Swarns story from the NYT Style pages here. Indeed, interest in Michelle, the girls, and -- of course--the rock star himself, seems to be reaching a fever pitch, which is understandable, I suppose.

I feel sorry for their loss of privacy as they make this transition and we know that their lives will never again be the same. A recent NYT story by Peter Baker takes up this topic:

Life for the newly chosen president and his family has changed forever. Even the constraints and security of the campaign trail do not compare to the bubble that has enveloped him in the 10 days since his election. Renegade, as the Secret Service calls him, now lives within the strict limits that come with the most powerful office on the planet.

A photo accompanying the story shows the Obama girls getting out of an SUV, backpacks in hand, under the watchful eye of the Secret Service. President-Elect Obama is not pictured, but the caption suggests he is in the SUV and involved in dropping the girls off for school.

You can read another report on the Obama family's transition, by Jodi Kantor, here.

Sasha and Malia are the youngest children since John and Caroline Kennedy to have been raised in the White House. Chelsea Clinton, who also attended Sidwell Friends, was a young teen when Bill Clinton became President in 1992. So, it will be interesting to see how Mr. Obama is depicted as father in the coming weeks and months. I recall one voter during the primary season suggesting that, with young children at home, this was not the time for Obama to be seeking the Presidency. Indeed, with the economy falling apart at home (and abroad!) and two wars ongoing, the man is going to be seriously challenged to find time to stay involved with his children.

What women are saying about Hillary's new role

2008-11-22T12:56:00.000-08:00

Don't miss Jodi Kantor's story in the New York Times here. I particularly like the parts that focus on being one's own boss versus working for, well, the most powerful man in the world. Of course the parts that speak to her power and influence, whichever role she chooses, are also very heartening. Here are some excerpts:

As [HRC] pondered this week whether to trade her hard-won independence and elected office for a job working for a more powerful man, mothers and schoolteachers and law partners mulled in tandem with her.

* * *

As news spread on Friday evening that Mrs. Clinton had decided to accept the job, so did a basic consensus: the assignment was probably a triumph for Mrs. Clinton, if a costly one.

This part about (some) women relating to HRC and her experiences as a professional woman really resonates with me. That is, I am definitely one of the women who relates, both to showing emotion in the workplace and to accumulated sexist slights!

Throughout Mrs. Clinton’s presidential run, women across the country saw in her a mirror of their own career fortunes: when she teared up just before the New Hampshire primary that she was expected to lose, they remembered their own workplace humiliations, and when she lost the Democratic nomination, many saw it as an accumulation of all-too-familiar sexist slights.

The story is well worth a read for the sense it conveys of Hillary's past, present and future. Kantor summarizes what she calls Clinton's "feminist triumph" by tracking where she's been. In short, the decade reflects the adage, "you've come a long way, baby." A decade ago, Hillary was a first lady whose hairstyles were fodder for comedians. Now, however, she is poised to become the "world's top diplomat." Plus, working for a President is a whole different ballgame than being married to one.

Kantor's report features lots of thought-provoking quotes. Gloria Steinem, who lauds Hillary's decision to take the Secretary of State job, is quoted as saying, “The question of whether one has one’s own political power or goes to work for someone else is not only a feminist question” I guess it may be "not only" a feminist question, but I think it certainly is a "feminist question." I guess I am unsure that anything about Hillary can, after all these years, not be a "feminist question."

I am heartened by Kantor's conclusion that Clinton "is such an esteemed figure, no one will see her as a mere emissary." Certainly, I am delighted for Hillary, though I would also have been pleased had she chosen to stay in the Senate and continue to work on health care reform.

As a related matter, I wrote this post last week on my feminist legal theory blog. It discusses Hillary's then-prospects to become Secretary of State, as well as changing perceptions of her over the years since Bill Clinton ran for President.

Have women really made gains in politics?

2008-11-21T12:27:00.000-08:00

Well, Governor Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York appear poised to accept cabinet positions in the Obama administration. See the news reports here and here. These appointments are certainly good news for women, but this will not be the first cabinet to include at least two women.

So, a headline from UC Davis news service today took me by surprise. It reads: "Women's Gains in Politics Not Seen in Board Rooms, CEO Offices," and you can read the full story here. The part that surprised me was that women are perceived as having made gains in politics, presumably recently. Really? Did the 2008 race for the President really change anything? We've had a woman as VP nominee before. We've had women run for President before, though none have come as close to the nomination as Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The lack of women in executive suites, on the other hand, is hardly news at all. Nevertheless, here are some highlights from the article, which features data from the recent UC Davis Study of California Women Business Leaders.

Half of California's 400 largest public companies have no women in top executive offices, according to a study reported today by University of California, Davis, researchers. Almost half do not have a woman on the board of directors. Nearly a third -- including household names McAfee, Quicksilver and Hansen Natural -- do not have a woman in either a top executive post or on the governing board.

The fourth annual UC Davis Study of California Women Business Leaders found that only 13 of California's 400 largest public companies have a woman CEO. Overall, women hold just 10.9 percent of board seats and executive positions -- insignificant progress from 2007, when the figure was 10.4 percent, and from 2006 and 2005, when it was 10.2 percent.

"Time and time again, studies prove that businesses with women in leadership positions thrive. In our current economic situation, California's companies can't afford to ignore the talents of women," said Rosario Marin, secretary of the California State and Consumer Services Agency and a former U.S. treasurer. "It's time to stop focusing on our women leaders' pantsuits or hairstyles and start placing value on how these women are making their companies more efficient and effective -- and get that leadership in place at companies across our state."