is it unsisterly to think that Sarah Palin is horrid and the worst possible example of a woman in power

[beforesunrise]

ok, I used to think that as women we ought to support other women to almost unreasonable levels. i was totally for Hillary despite Obama's star appeal.... but then came Sarah Palin. i abhor her and everything she stands for. i am incredibly disgusted by the level of PC that prevents people from stating the obvious, ie that she is an incredibly BAD mother and she gives women a bad name.. i mean WTF, going back to work after 3 DAYS of giving birth, exposing your pregnant 17 yo to national attentionand not being there for her while she needs you most... she keeps banging on about being a hockey mom but having delivered 5 children is not the same thing about being a good mum. she is also incredibly, scarily unqualified for the job. i cannot find one ounce of feminist feeling for her... and it makes me question my beliefs!

I would completely agree with dittany, except for the significant fact that Sarah Palin's female, PTA Mom, all-american right-wing gal is precisely why she was chosen, and as such, makes that an issue on the table. It's incredibly frustrating, and shouldn't be so, but the GOP knew it would be one of the main talking points.

And, interestingly enough, I'm now seeing quite a few of my right-wing american friends coming out in criticism of her, saying she's not really conservative enough (yeah, that's going to roast a lefty's head, I'll bet ) because she's not proposing to be a SAHM.

I think she is an absolutely mind-blowing clever choice, and I'm fascinated by the fact that the left-wing viewpoint is struggling to focus on the policy disagreements and can't help falling into the trap of talking about her gender/parenting ad infinitum.

Personally I've decided after some thought that I still wouldn't vote for the republican ticket if I was a US citizen, but I do admire the political skill that, like it or not, knows how to appeal to a vast section of the voting American public.

Ach, but what would I know, being a dimwitted creationist pro-lifer...

I think, if they had given it more thought that Condoleeza Rice would have been a better choice. She certainly has the experience and it was very ballsy of her to show up in Iraq.

Choosing Palin hasn't taken the wind out of Obama's sails. In fact it actually brought in more financial backing...surprisingly at that.
It has however taken the spotlight off MaCain with all the drama about her family and past. That wasn't something the Republican party wanted. MaCain needs to pull the spotlight back on himself and less on her now. He is the one running for President but it seems that what he thought wasn't exactly what he got.
I find it amusing how many men I've talked to only have comments about her that are, "she's bonkers, but is easy on the eyes". Some of her media artlicles are about how pretty she is.

I actually have a question - one that perhaps the American posters on this board can enlighten me on.
What was the RP trying to achieve by putting SP up for VP? This is not as obvious a question as it might initially seem. Clearly being a relatively unknown/'hockey mum'/moosehunter/attractive woman etc etc has added enough controversy and pizzaz to the RP campaign to ensure that all eyes are now on them (just as the Obama/Clinton stoush had the world transfixed on the DP for so long) but more importantly, her hard right policies are obviously a ploy to attract those right of centre conservatives who may be wary of McCain's more liberal version of republicanism. But what are they worried about - that those right centered conservatives won't vote at all? I'm sure they aren't concerned that they will vote Democrat instead? Can people who hold such strong ethical/moral/social views be so politically apathetic? This is more of a question on American society than anything - coming from someone who lives in a country with compulsory voting. No apathy allowed.
I guess what I am trying to get at is this - shouldn't the choice of VP be aimed at convincing swinging voters to vote for them? Wouldn't a swinging voter (who is less likely to be far right wing, hence the possibility of them voting democrat and thus 'swinging') be less likely than ever to vote republican now? Or is this all just cult of the personality?

Well you are quite right, that is the idea of the VP. So Joe Biden was picked to appeal to blue collar workers that Obama wasn't doing well at attracting (they tended to vote for Hillary) and to balance the inexperience of Obama (Biden has served six terms in the Senate and chairs two important committees there).

It is not yet entirely clear why Sarah Palin was selected, except that McCain liked her reforming efforts as governor, she is young, and he couldn't choose his first two picks because they weren't pro-life. She has now overshadowed him, which is not usually what VPs do (might be one of the reasons why Obama didn't pick Clinton). I cannot see this ticket appealing to independents/democrats more than McCain already did, in fact I would have thought she would be a positive hindrance. But personality and charisma do play a key role in the elections here, so who knows.

I don't want her to be VP because, as a pro-choice, anti death penalty, atheist in favour of gun control, I disagree with some of her fundamental beliefs. I suspect Sarah Palin would find me equally obectionable!
I am very concerned at the covert sexism at work which slates her for actively pursuing a high profile career whilst being a mother. I thought the whole point of the feminist movement was to give us all the freedom to make the choices we feel are right for us, whether that's as a working mum, SAHM or governor of the state of Alaska. Obama has a young family and I have yet to hear anyone question his commitment to them because he wants to be President.
I am unnerved by the attention given to her very young daughter. She's 17 and pregnant with parents who won't hear of abortion and are insistent she marries the (frankly terrified looking) boy she had sex with. Poor girl. How long do you give that marriage?

Tinto, I can only give my viewpoint of what seems to be going on. So please forgive if I have left out something that others seem to feel important.
Obama at first seemed to be a long shot...lately, he seems to be neck and neck with MaCain...still in the lead for the Presidency though.
Obama has been pushing "change" that is needed. MaCain pulled out the SP card. At first this seemed to be the overwhelming tide turner, at first.
She is young, pretty, etc.
Now the personal, background stuff is coming out. It almost seems (and they are still wondering about this) that MaCain didn't research her enough before she was asked. He hadn't actually talked to her until right before he asked.
So everyone is wondering, just how much did they really know about her before? In a logical way, they couldn't have known much or all this would have been out there beforehand...not surfacing now.
It makes one wonder why indeed. I still think they could have asked Condoleeza Rice and she would have made a better choice.
Only the MaCain party knows for sure I guess. I think, if they had it to do over again...maybe they would have considered more candidates?
From what the media (MSN) has been saying is that MaCain chose her to bring in women voters (and whatever other they can) as his own "change" to counter Obama's "change". It rather looks to backfire though.

Exception to the norm is right - and I have a pretty good idea that history is re-written quite often with you Xenia, especially when it comes to the 'supermum' role - all far too consistent and rhetorical. I know real life and psychology is much more complex. That's what I mnean about taking all your dogmatic statements with a pinch of salt. I think there is defo a bit of attempted myth building in them and hope nobody would take them so personally as to make they feel deficient in some way

Is a "Hockey mom" the equivalent of a "Chavvy mum" over here?

i have been thinking about this a lot overnight (waking baby, you see). my motivation for op was a genuine puzzlement at the strength of my feelings against SP which go against my post-feminist beliefs (whatever that means!)... on the back of this conversation i realise i have a lot of reckoning and redefining to do wrt the latter... i still can't help the fact that i intensely dislike SP, but i can see that perhaps it's for all the wrong reasons!

beforesunrise - don't feel that you have to support Sarah Palin just because she's a woman. Do you think many men support politicians just because they are men? Of course not: when heavyweight female politicians come along, they get plenty of male support. Margaret Thatcher is great example.

But think hard about the reasons why you dislike Sarah Palin. There are many things about her you may find objectionable, but which of those will actually have an impact on her policy and hence the way Americans lead their lives? And would you, were you an American, like or dislike that impact?

Hockey/Soccer mom isn't really chav. It's more middle class, have SUV, make cookies, take kids to ballet, soccer. Recipes at dawn - that sort of thing.

I hate Sarah Palin. I hate what she stands for and I hate it that if I hate her, I have to justify it.

If she didn't exist, you'd have to make her up. Female with a child in the military, and a child with SN.

Not voting McCain.

the scariest thing about her is that what I see as her extremist views on abortion etc seem to have mass appeal in America
ditto creationism
actually don't care about her being a woman or not-such views would be equally worrying in a man

I have no truck with anyone who thinks women shouldn't have free access to abortion and that it is OK to marry off pregnant 17 year olds.

"But think hard about the reasons why you dislike Sarah Palin."

If you dislike her because of her hypocrisy about her pronouncements about parenting vs her explicit choices, is that so bad?

Maybe, as mothers, most of us are especially atuned to notice the discrepancies there. Maybe men will notice more that Cameron rides a bike rather than any of his parenting techniques - but they have still been out there for discusasion, it's just that women have chosen to discuss one thing while men choose to discuss another.

Lets not make the mistake in thinking that just becasue we don't chose to discuss what men find interesting, that it must therefore be of no interest.

I just want to examine this carefully, if possible, as the shouts of sexism seem a bit knee jerk and premature. I have a hunch it's not sexism at all - and crying foul (sexist) before an analyis has taken place stops any meaningful development.

Smelling 'sexist' is not the same as something actually being sexist. I think our feminist trigger fingers need to be a bit less itchy on this issue.

Wow, now I feel like a proper grown up, baby on the way and discussing politics.

I don't really care that Sarah Palin is a woman, I don't agree with a lot of what she stands for, but the same could quite easily be said of George Bush and I wouldn't have voted for him either.

As for her relationship with her family, I think I would question anyone looking to encourage their children into marriage so early regardless of sex, race or religion. The daughter and potential son in law need support to make their own choices not to make one that suits their parents career.

I may dislike her hypocrisy over her parenting choices, but it is a fairly minor misdemeanour, to my mind, in comparison with her political leanings which I find truly frightening.

But then, as another poster said, Sarah Palin doesn't seem to put much faith in reason, logic or science. Her hypocrisy is probably just symptomatic of her general lack of attention to fact and data.

I was bemused at the comment about the baby being passed from lap to lap and sleeping through the din. The one thing that warmed my heart in this whole affair, was the sight of Bristol Palin cuddling that gorgeous little baby in such a maternal way. And there is absolutely no 'side' to that comment - I just thought it was nice

Message withdrawn

Re: feminist argument. Being a feminist means one has the ability to choose not based on sex.

I don't think Palin is hypocritical at all. Just don't like her political views.

Thanks Bloss - that's interesting. So SP is about encouraging voter turn out rather than persuading swinging voters. Makes sense to me. The rest is embellishment and showmanship in my opinion. But that does seem to be a big part of American politics!

The sexism is so many commentators criticising a mother of five working and returning quickly to work once a baby was born and I am a mother of five who returned to work quickly after I gave birth so obviously there are some parallels there. They criticise that in women that they would not criticise in men.

Her political views are a different matter. Americans seem to get the politicians they deserve. What's the proportion of Americans who believe the world was created in 7 days and that baby dinosaurs joined sheep and goats in Noah's Ark? it's a truly incredibly high sum. Pity we lost the war of independence. They would have done better remaining our colony.

xenia - am not sure sexist is the right word. Based on this logic, then it's also sexist that a woman gets maternity benefits (up to 39 weeks) and a man (father) gets 2 weeks. Not sexist. Just that the roles are different.

Am sure glad though that there are constitutional guarantees in place such as church and state, and separation of executive and judiciary.

I don't like Palin, but if you look at her beliefs, are they any different than any other Republican presidents? And some Democrats (as some believe in the death penalty).