Rachel Larimore, at Slate’s Double X, asked about the primary wins last night, “Where is the rah-rah sisterhood?”
The overriding theme of Tuesday night’s primary coverage was that it was a big night for female politicians. But there is a noticeable dearth of rah-rah sisterhood going on (though the National Review is pretty excited).
She further noted that the only talk amongst the Left, and feminists in particular, regarding this big night for conservative women was rather nasty comments about said women and lamenting that they were conservatives. Icky businesswomen, to boot! One even asked, “Do you still cheer if the ceiling is crashed by two conservative businesswomen?”
Rachel Larimore makes great points, as always, but I differ from her slightly in that I don’t really want the wins framed as a Year of the Woman kind of thing. They didn’t win because they are women. They won for the people that they are and for the real world experience that they bring. In Whitman’s, Fiorina’s and Haley’s cases, for instance, they have actually, you know, made a payroll as opposed to living off the public sector their whole lives. Having run businesses themselves, they understand how they work, in practice and not just in theory.
However, I don’t think any woman must like them just because they are women. That plays right into old school identity politics and we need to be done with that. What I will not stand for, though, is outright sexism used to diminish these women, as is happening today with Sarah Palin. Again.
Of further concern to me is that a big part of last night’s primary wins was that Sarah Palin had endorsed most of the winners, indicating that she does, in fact, wield quite a bit of power and has great pull with large segments of the population. Not everyone has to like Sarah Palin, but even those who don’t, should respect her, if only for the fact that she’s changed the national debate at least twice sheerly through her own Facebook postings. She is one of the best spokespeople we have right now. She pulls no punches and talks straight.
So, what is the story circulating among the lefty blogs and now worming its way into traditional media regarding Sarah Palin today? Not the success of the candidates she endorsed, but, rather, her breasts. That’s right. The big question of the day, first promulgated by the always inane Wonkette, is whether or not Sarah Palin had breast implants. I suppose we should just be grateful that it’s not incessant investigation of her uterus again, although I’m sure Andrew “I’ve finally lost my already weak grasp on sanity” Sullivan will work that in somehow. Normally, I’d disregard such nonsense, but I question the timing, as does Tabitha Hale over at Right Wing News:
I would have ignored this if it were any other day. Today, however, happens to be the day after Palin showed how much pull her primary endorsements really do have. Her (mostly female) candidates won across the country, the largest being the Carly Fiorina win in the California Senate race. Disagree with her or not, she has influence, and it’s foolish to pretend that she is anything but a force to be reckoned with politically.
Exactly. That is the real point. It’s what they always do to conservative women, especially ones who have strong political pull and to whom people listen. They attempt to diminish them and turn them into a caricature of some airhead bimbo. You can spot the leftist bias regarding Sarah Palin usually within a first sentence or two of an article: “former beauty queen” will be used. The AP even referred to her as “a telegenic conservative” when she was first picked as McCain’s running mate. Get it? He picked her because she’s pretty!
Ridiculous implications like that and like this new “story” disguised as mere curiosity are fully intended to not only ridicule, but to demean and diminish Sarah Palin as a person. To turn her into a caricature and a non-entity. It is an attempt to say “Those primary wins? Nothing to see here, move along. See? You can’t take her seriously? She’s just a pretty face and a great rack!”
Much like Newsweek did in their story on the Conservative Women’s List. I’ll await Newsweek‘s condemnation of this story. I’d hold my breath, but I fear I’d end up passing out. See, their “curiosity” and faux concern for conservative women earlier this week was also meant as a way to demean and diminish us. It is feminist hypocrisy at its most epic level. It’s not only that they claim to be For The Women, when we know that is not true. It’s also that they actively seek to harm and subjugate women with whom they disagree.
Well, it isn’t working any longer. Sarah Palin herself, and the power her voice still has, is proof of that. By the way, President Obama, that brings me to a tip for you. If you want to learn how to “kick some ass,” look to Palin and the candidates she endorsed. You’re welcome!