Skip to main content.
October 2nd, 2008

Just imagine: a woman in the White House who’s proud to call herself a feminist

From the CBS interview:

Katie Couric: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Sarah Palin: I do. I’m a feminist who believes in equal rights and I believe that women certainly today have every opportunity that a man has to succeed and to try to do it all anyway. And I’m very, very thankful that I’ve been brought up in a family where gender hasn’t been an issue. You know, I’ve been expected to do everything growing up that the boys were doing. We were out chopping wood and you’re out hunting and fishing and filling our freezer with good wild Alaskan game to feed our family. So it kinda started with that. With just that expectation that the boys and the girls in my community were expected to do the same and accomplish the same. That’s just been instilled in me.

Couric: What is your definition of a feminist?

Palin: Someone who believes in equal rights. Someone who would not stand for oppression against women.

I agree, Gov. Palin. That’s how I define a feminist too.

I would love to have a woman in the White House who calls herself a feminist. I would love to have that role model for our daughters.

By the way, can’t resist pointing out the irony of feminists rejecting Sarah Palin — a self-described feminist who is unashamed of her work and ambitions — and lauding Michelle Obama, a woman who appeared at the Democratic Convention in full Stepford Wife mode and who won’t even call herself a feminist:

So is she a feminist? “You know, I’m not that into labels,” Michelle Obama said in the interview. “So probably, if you laid out a feminist agenda, I would probably agree with a large portion of it,” she said. “I wouldn’t identify as a feminist just like I probably wouldn’t identify as a liberal or a progressive.”

Posted by Violet in Election 2008, Godbags, Sarah Palin

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 2nd, 2008 at 5:08 am EST and is filed under Election 2008, Godbags, Sarah Palin. You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

32 Responses to “Just imagine: a woman in the White House who’s proud to call herself a feminist”

  1. Briar says:

    I too have been appalled by the willingness of “feminists” to resort to misogyny when opposing another woman. It was in full flood against Hillary Clinton. No surprise to find it in full flood against Governor Palin. Combined with outrageous classism of the first order. I may find many of her views repulsive, but not the fact that she is a woman, a feminist and a member of the class that works, and doesn’t call itself “creative” (presumably a mealy mouthed alternative to middle class and working in the media). We’ve had it here - see the constant tone of attacks on John Prescott, our deputy Prime Minister, who from the start was sneered at because he hadn’t been to university but had worked as a purser on board a ship after he left school. Oh, so hilarious - he didn’t even talk proper, darlings!

  2. kenoshaMarge says:

    But, but, Sarah Palin can’t be a feminist, she’s not a liberal. She’s not even a Democrat.

    Thus do the slavering hordes respond. Sarah Palin is a woman who agrees with most of what feminists agree. But that is not enough. You have to agree 100%. This is why women’s rights never gain the momentum needed to succeed. Because women hold other women in contempt for not sharing ALL their views.

    I fear, I believe, that it will always be so. Because partisanship is so much easier than rational thinking.

  3. PhilosopherP says:

    Feminism has an image problem — no doubt. The divisions within feminism don’t help… but, they are real and they ought to be handled. The fact that Palin has made choices liberal feminists don’t agree with is their problem, not her’s.

    One of my students wrote “feminism is ruining philosophy” — oh, if only we had that much power!

  4. Kiuku says:

    Violet,

    I would love it if YOU could interview Governor Palin!

  5. InsightAnalytical-GRL says:

    I respect Sarah Palin. She is NOT what Axelrod and the Obama campaign, enabled by the media, have painted her…it’s a deliberate attempt to destroy her…I hope she does well against Biden, who gave us Clarence Thomas and demeaned Anita Hill!!

    FYI, more info on the Obama crowd…

    By request….Part 2 of Grail Guardian’s primer on Barack Obama’s associates is UP….greatly expanded list for reference now!!!

    Part 2–The Lineup: A Who’s Who of The Associates of Barack Obama

  6. cellocat says:

    Wow, I hadn’t seen that quote of Michelle Obama’s. I desperately want to say snarky things, but will contain myself.

  7. votermom says:

    If spousal roles are a clue, Michelle Obama certainly seems to be more subservient to her husband than Sarah Palin is. Michelle brought Barack to meet her prospective boss so that Barack could decide if he would let her take the job. Michelle has been on record saying she was disapppointed at how little time Barack has for the kids, and felt resentful that it was all on her.
    Sarah Palin’s husband, on the other hand,adjusts his schedule (he works weekly shifts) so he can take care of the kids when Sarah is full time in politics.
    The Obamas talk the talk, but the Palins walk the walk.

  8. BG, Florida says:

    If this world has any justice left in it..may Palin beat the s### out of goofy biden tonight.

  9. CoolAunt says:

    Astute observations and good points, votermom.

  10. myiq2xu says:

    I knew “liberal” was a dirty word, but when did being in favor of gender equality become a bad thing that Democrats are ashamed of?

  11. julia says:

    I can not open the newspaper or turn on the local radio without hearing her dissed, humiliated, reading letters by women who hate her. Hey - this sounds like what I wrote 4 months ago about Hillary.

  12. octogalore says:

    If Michelle had said “I agree with the general tenet of feminism that women and men are equal, but I do not identify with the movement because I’m concerned about its inclusion of women of color,” I would understand — if not completely agree that abandoning the term makes sense, but would acknowledge it as being not my place to question. That is not what she appears to be saying here — she appears to be simply pandering to the general unpopularity of the “F” word to widen her appeal.

    Similarly, Michelle made a comment suggesting Hillary couldn’t manage her own house (ie, Bill’s cheating) and therefore couldn’t manage the White House. That seems to me to back up her not actually being a feminist. Because of Bill’s or John Edwards’ failures, Hillary and presumably Elizabeth are tarred? If association with imperfect men makes one unworthy, that implicates many women of all colors and income brackets. Not a qualification for Feminist Hall of Fame, IMO.

  13. slythwolf says:

    To be honest, Palin espouses some views that scream “post-feminist” to me. Right in the quote you’ve posted:

    I believe that women certainly today have every opportunity that a man has to succeed

    I’d be very interested to know why the hell she believes that, because it’s factually incorrect. Women do not have every opportunity that men have to succeed.

    I’ve said before that she reminds me very strongly of some of my close female friends. For those who don’t know me, I’m in my mid-twenties; my friends are what are often described in radical feminist circles as “fun feminists”. They’ll tell you all about how they don’t believe that women should be oppressed, and they think everyone should be equal, but many of them will say that we already are equal, and all feminism is necessary for is to continue to police that boundary and keep us equal. They’ll also tell you all kinds of patriarchal bullshit is empowering.

    I respect Palin. I think she’s intelligent and competent and she seems to be really good at her job. I even like her, on a gut level. And I’m impressed and proud that a self-identified feminist is running on a major party ticket for Vice President of the United States. But I would be even happier to see a radical feminist running, with a chance of winning, for President.

  14. thebewilderness says:

    That was what struck me also. The post feminist position she seems to espouse.
    I am more inclined to support those who walk the walk rather than those who only talk the talk.
    But then I’m a women’s libber, so what would I know about such things.

  15. donna darko says:

    It’s nitpicking to me. If you look at the whole quote.

  16. soopermouse says:

    was watching some clips on her last night before the debate. I liked the fact that she insisted that these are HER beliefs, and that she avoided in any way to say that she wanted to impose them upon anyone else.
    Very good points about Michelle Obama’s Stepfordwifeness. So,a SAHM ( which is what she is now) who doesn’t identify as feminist and made repeated sexist attacks on other women is in the eyes of these people better than the woman who went to be Governor with 4 kids and had the 5th on the job?
    Someone sure fucked up on that feminist thing. But maybe there is a “must like Michelle Obama” directive I never found.

  17. simply wondered says:

    i’m happy to admit that (from limited exposure: reading the incredibly balanced(!) uk press and the comments here) my instinct is to not like palin as it is to not like mccain. but i want to see people who oppose her attack her policies (and attack what her policies are, not policies they have made up for her). and yes it is attck - sadly politics is adversarial and one of the thing is like about hill is that she can attack when needed.

    here in uk, the tone yesterday about the (then)forthcoming palin - biden interview was ‘wait for the car crash’ and it never happened. the view i heard was that biden claimed victory but the idea that palin could have lost the election last night was scotched. maybe we are a bit more balanced - possibly the impact of being thousands of miles away.

  18. simply wondered says:

    sorry - the above is badly proofed. think - write edit, dimbo!

  19. Violet says:

    I believe that women certainly today have every opportunity that a man has to succeed

    I’d be very interested to know why the hell she believes that, because it’s factually incorrect. Women do not have every opportunity that men have to succeed.

    I’m just going to repeat what I said in the other comment thread: I don’t think she literally meant what you think she’s saying. If you read her remarks or watch her interviews, she of course acknowledges that there are still barriers and issues. I heard this as her saying, as women do in colloquial speech, “nowadays we can do anything a man can do” — that sort of statement.

    This may be a question of colloquial speech, because I instantly recognized her phrase as common idiom, at least among the women I know. I didn’t even blink over it. “We can do anything” actually means “we should be able to do anything” or “we ought to be given the opportunity to do anything.” It comes across as a statement of power and an assertion of our rights.

  20. octogalore says:

    soopermouse: “maybe there is a “must like Michelle Obama” directive I never found”

    Yes, there is. I didn’t either, but I’d never admit that because, of course, it would be completely misconstrued. Or mis-spun.

    Somehow, we’re still at the point that there are women we can like and women we can’t. And we are rewarded by other women by joining guys, or surpassing them, in non-substantive sexist smear attacks on women in the latter category.

    Sorry, that’s not feminism, it’s recess.

  21. soopermouse says:

    I’d call that a failure, but that is maybe just me, Octogalore. Here’s the thing: I don’t think we should support each and every woman because of her gender. By doing that, in my opinion, we insult and stereotype all women by assuming all women all the same. All humans are human beings, all humans are individuals, so they all should be treated based on their individual beliefs and behaviours. That is my credo, YMMV.

    Look at it the other way: which woman model fdo you want to see on your TV screens come January? The Stepford wife or the elected official?

  22. octogalore says:

    Soopermouse — I agree with all of that, not sure on what grounds you feel my comment didn’t?

  23. CoolAunt says:

    Why do I think it’s the Obamabats that need to wake up and not the disenfranchised Democratic women?

    The president can’t do diddly-squat without the approval of the House of Reps. Vote a split ticket in ‘08 and then push for HRC in ‘12.

  24. slythwolf says:

    This may be a question of colloquial speech, because I instantly recognized her phrase as common idiom, at least among the women I know. I didn’t even blink over it. “We can do anything” actually means “we should be able to do anything” or “we ought to be given the opportunity to do anything.” It comes across as a statement of power and an assertion of our rights.

    I see what you’re saying, but to me it comes across as glossing over all the misogyny and sexism and related badness that is still going on. I hear it from my best friend all the time, and I love her but she doesn’t get it yet. So that’s how it reads to me.

  25. Suzie says:

    I’ve been thinking how this reminds me of the BPW (Business & Professional Women). There are (and have been) lots of women who want equal rights under the law, and equal opportunities to compete in business, but they aren’t radical feminists by any stretch. Some, in fact, are Republicans.

    I think it’s a huge step forward to have a Republican woman on a presidential ticket saying she’s a feminist … even though I disagree on a lot of her policies.

  26. betsyfromtexas says:

    Sarah STILL looks like a feminist to me. And doggone it, she sure showed up old Joey, too! I’m sure glad that I can think for myself. The MSM can kiss my ass. I’m going to vote my gender, thanks to Sarah. And here’s to all women, of every stripe, doing the same!

  27. octogalore says:

    “But I would be even happier to see a radical feminist running, with a chance of winning, for President.”

    I agree with Suzie that it’s rare where women prioritize rising in the current power system (whether in the public or private sector) are radical feminists. Many schools of radical feminism, despite their other merits, have themes of downward mobility and association of guilt with success. The priority appears to be revolution rather than subversion, whereas women who achieve in the current power system must prioritize subversion.

    Liberal feminists, whether of the fiscally + socially liberal or the fiscally conservative + socially liberal (like me) variety, and also some Republican women, tend to be less bothered by ideas that success means selling out. There’s a sense that success is necessary, along with grassroots efforts, to create any kind of change.

    The women in the “running, with a chance of winning” category will be more likely to come from the latter group than the radical feminist group.

  28. soopermouse says:

    Octo: that was not my intention. Remember: English is not my native language, sometimes nuancs may escape me.

  29. Val says:

    Heh! My grandmother was a diehard member of BPW… [unfortunately my grandfather substituted rude epithets for each of those initials] But she was bringin’ home the bacon for the last two decades of their marriage, after he was disabled by pulmonary disease…

  30. Sis says:

    It was kind of confusing. I do know lots of women who think women are able to do anything now and negatively judge women who fail at that, for whatever reason. Poverty, children, illness, race. Husbands who cheat on them and how they handled that. Until I hear differently from Palin, I’m going to wonder if she is like several feminists I worked with in the ’70s, who were stunned over the betrayal of their academic male colleagues and the system, when those women couldn’t move beyond being PhD sessional lecturers, brilliant hard working young women, while the tenured donkeys brayed, and their young male colleagues reaped the rewards of chauvinism and misogyny. Those women were stunned to find out they were women. As far as the system and their collegues were concerned no amount of education was going to change that. Some people still think that way.

    I saw Biden’s emotion on an AP news clip of the debate, which opened with a critique of Palin’s hair and clothing.

    Biden, choking on tears (high fives in the back office) said he knows what it’s like to raise a family alone (something like that). But he doesn’t. As a man, of ANY class or race, he has had an army of women to support him in a way women can never count on.

    Not ordinary women, and not women in politics. Not Palin, and not Hillary.

    Women watching that debate are going to weep for his pain and vote his ticket. They are not going to bash him because he didn’t give up his career back then. He can do anything.

  31. soopermouse says:

    there is also the little known fact that Biden has been unfairly smearing the driver that was part of that accident for decades. Seems he has used the loss to gain political capital for a while now. Just saying.
    And yeah, what Sis said. Single father with nanny and housekeeper is not the same as single mother, even if she has nany and housekeeper herself.

  32. roofingbird says:

    You know, I wonder if Michelle considers herself a “womanist” and identifies feminism as a “white label? That would be consistent with Black Liberation Theology.

Leave a Reply

Enter the code that you see in the image