No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined.
- US Supreme Court

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

momhood

Apparently, I am not alone in "not being a feminist". From City Journal:
The large majority of women—surveys have put the number at somewhere around 75 percent—shy away from calling themselves feminists, even while supporting some movement goals like equal pay. The primary reason for their coyness: feminism’s ambivalence at best, and hostility at worst, toward motherhood and marriage. The refuseniks may or may not remember that Betty Friedan described full-time motherhood as a “waste of human self” and home as a “comfortable concentration camp.” They may or may not be able to quote Steinem on fish and bicycles. But on some level they understand that the framework of establishment feminism has motherhood, and often marriage, as the menacing 300-pound security guard whom men have hired to stand in the way of women’s achievement. Palin represents a red-state version of feminism that completely deconstructs this framework.
The debate is, in my mind, clearly linked to motherhood:
central to Palin’s red-state appeal is her earthy embrace of motherhood. She differs from mainstream feminists in that her sexuality and fecundity are not in tension with her achievement and power.
But unlike the writer of this article, I don't agree that these "woman concerns" are trivial, unlike the important things men vote on and about.
Still, whatever the appeal of red-state feminism, it should bring no comfort to anyone in favor of a more mature political culture. Red staters share with their blue-state counterparts a tendency to sentimentalize and trivialize politics.
It is not "sentimental" or "trivial" to want a mom in the White House. Right now, moms are ignored by our government. Women are not protected, represented, or taken care of. Women with children are too likely to be living in poverty. In every aspect of the economy and the law, we are vulnerable. That may not seem like a big deal to a woman whose chosen career likely puts her well above average in both income and real-world network connections - but for the majority of women, life will become significantly better when moms are represented at all levels of government.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

According to http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/us/politics/08baby.html?sq=palin%20children&st=cse&scp=9&pagewanted=all, "She [Palin] assured them [the reporters to whom she broke the news of her latest pregnancy] she would not take much time off: she had returned to work the day after giving birth to Piper." I hope she doesn't expect the rest of us to be Supermom. (Seriously, is this normal behavior?)

"a woman whose chosen career likely puts her well above average in both income and real-world network connections" -- that's Palin. I wouldn't count on her to identify with the majority of women. Is a comparison to Clarence Thomas inappropriate?