Oh, Fickle Young Love...

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

Who'd run the best daycare?

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.

1. 36.38% First lady Michelle Obama's
2. 58.83% Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's
3. 2.58% Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's
4. 2.21% House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's

Strategically Taking The Beaten Path

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?

The Portrayals of Michelle Obama as First Lady

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.

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

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?

A comparative perspective on mothers in politics

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 Desire for More Women in Science

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.

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

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.

Introducing The Esteemed Authoress, Sarah Palin

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?

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

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.

Gender Roles: The Mother

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.