This is what a conservative feminist looks like
I’m a feminist. I’m also a liberal. The two are not synonymous.
There have always been women who are feminists without being liberals or leftists. That’s because feminism is bigger and broader than our existing American political distinctions. It is entirely possible to be a feminist — to believe in and advocate for women’s equality — and also believe in the classic conservative ideology of small government, big business, and so forth.
I don’t agree with conservative feminists on that stuff; I never have. I also don’t agree with those pro-life feminists who believe that personhood starts in the womb; I never have. But I’ve always known that such feminists exist. In fact, I know quite a few of them personally.
It is amusing to me that some of my readers think I’ve changed because I’m acknowledging that someone like Sarah Palin can be a feminist. I haven’t changed at all. I’ve been a feminist all my life, and I’ve sung my feminist song to everyone from small-town Southern conservatives to big-city liberals to outright Marxists. I know lots of different kinds of feminists, lots of different ways of being feminist.
It’s actually a bit of a surprise to me that so many young feminists really think that Women’s Liberation — what a grand term that was! — is the sole property of the left. There are reasons for that, of course, having to do with the institutionalization of establishment feminism and the narrowing focus of feminist activism.
But I’ve been a feminist since before that happened. I’ve been a feminist since the Second Wave, when the women’s movement in this country was at its peak. I’ve written about this before, and I feel sometimes like Homer singing of a forgotten age that my listeners can’t imagine. Feminism was strong then precisely because it wasn’t confined to the left. It was a spirit of rebellion — sometimes overt, often covert — that ran right through this country, touching women in all walks of life.
The most radical and visible of the Women’s Lib demonstrators were leftists, of course, but they were just the bleeding edge. A social revolution takes root only when it has depth, when the bleeding edge is backed up by a deep broad hinterland of middle-of-the-roaders and conservatives, all negotiating their own levels of commitment and change. Ironically, perhaps, we know that feminism is strongest when we see the most conservative women embracing aspects of it.
And word to the youngsters: you don’t grow a feminist revolution by telling those middle-of-the-roaders and conservatives that they don’t get to join because they aren’t pure enough. Aren’t as hip as you are, aren’t sufficiently on board with the whole program. Especially not when you yourself are patriarchy-complicit in a thousand ways — as are we all.
That’s more of a prologue than I intended to write. The subject of this post is a speech given by Sarah Palin on women’s rights. I’m a liberal; she’s a conservative. I don’t agree with her about taxes or social programs (”spreading the wealth” sounds pretty damn good to me). I don’t agree with her on all the nuts and bolts of how we get to equality. But I absolutely acknowledge that she, like me, wants to get there.
I’m still looking for a video of the entire speech Video is here! Just got it in email:
And here’s a rough partial transcript:
See below for time codes and verbates
VERBATES:ENDORSEMENTS:
“Today I have another question that is especially for the women in this audience and all across our great country. Its–are you ready to break the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America? (cheers).“It is such an honor for me today to have up here on stage some very independent, very courageous, very accomplished women and I am so honored to get to introduce you to these women who have broken a few glass ceilings of their own and I ask you gals to stand up here as I introduce you.
17:00:35 “First, Prameela Bartholomeusz a small business owner and a member of the Democratic National Platform Committee. She’s with us today. (Cheers.) It is my honor to have with us also Linda Klinge the former Oregon president and now Vice-President of the National Organization of Women. She’s with us here today and Shelly Mandell President of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization of Women here with us today and Lynn Rothschild you may have seen her on television a whole lot lately. She is a member of the Democratic Platform Committee. She is with us here today and Elaine Lafferty a former editor in chief of Ms. magazine they are here today to endorse the McCain-Palin campaign.
“We’re honored. We are proud and I thank them for their confidence, for their support and especially for their courage. Thank you so much. Thank you thank you.
17:02:20 “Our opponents think that they have the women’s vote all locked up which is a little presumptuous. Little presumptuous since only our side has a woman on the ticket. We won’t ignore any of the men in the audience but again this is for the women in the audience here. When it came time for choosing somehow Barack Obama just couldn’t bring himself to pick the woman who got 18 million votes in his primary and that seems to be too familiar a story isn’t it? How it is for so many American women that the qualifications are there, but for some reason the promotion never comes. There is always some long explanation for why they got passed over or some unseen barrier, some excuse and that’s just one of the things I so admire about John McCain he is not someone who makes excuses.
HRC NOT VETTED/ONLY TWO FEMALE CANDIDATES ON A TICKET:
17:03:13 “You’ve got to ask yourself why was Senator Hillary Clinton not even vetted by the Obama campaign? Why did it take 24 years, an entire generation from the time Geraldine Ferraro made her pioneering bid until the next time that a woman was asked to join a national ticket. In the long history of our country 74 people have held the position of President or Vice-President and why have the major parties given America only two chances to even consider a woman for either office? 88 years after women gained the right to vote and 83 years after Nellie Tayloe Ross of Wyoming became the first woman governor in our great nation and 60 years after Margaret Chase Smith was elected to the Senate this glass ceiling it–it is still there, but it’s about time that we shattered that glass ceiling once and for all. (Cheers.)17:04:40 “See-see–see there is a difference–there is a difference between what Barack Obama says and what he does and his primary opponent wasn’t the first one to notice this.
BHO EQUAL PAY:
“Out on the stump he talks a good game about equal pay for equal work, but according to the Senate pay roll records women on his own staff get just 83 cents for every dollar that the men get. That’s 9,000 dollars less every year than he pays the guys.17:06 “Does he think that the women aren’t working as hard? Does he think that they are 17 percent less productive? And Barack Obama cant say that this is just the way that its always been done around the Capitol, because I know one senator who actually does pay equal wages for equal work, Sen. John McCain.
“See this is just another reason why American women, Democrat, Republican, independent, should not just let Barack Obama take their votes for granted. And let me give you a few more reasons, starting with his plan to, as he puts it, spread the wealth around. That is how our opponent defended his so called tax cut to Joe the plumber the other day. Or Wendy the plumber’s daughter, there you go. Now this spreading the wealth around really is just a scheme for income distribution. Joe didn’t buy it. Joe the plumber, he would have none of that. He called him on it. In fact he said that he sure thought that sounded like socialism. Joe the plumber.
WOMEN SMALL BUSINESSES/BHO TAX PLAN:
17:07:52 “And the rest of us shouldn’t buy it either, especially the millions of women in America who own small businesses. Women start as many new businesses as men start, and they are entrepreneurs, trying to make a better life for themselves and for their families. And trying to make payroll for their employees. They’re women, just like Erma Aggier (sp) is her name, she owns a restaurant close by. She dreamed for years of owning her own restaurant and she made it just a year ago. Erma, she owns the La Madonna Mexican Restaurant, right here in Las Vegas. She employs 20 people.17:08:33 “And she’s exactly the kind of small business owner whose taxes would go way up under the Obama tax plan. And the healthcare fines and the mandates that our opponent would impose aren’t gonna help her much either. They’re gonna force her to let employees go if they are too high and they could even put her out of business. And our opponent thinks he’s got problems with Joe the Plumber, well, he should talk to Erma the restaurant owner, because she’s voting for John McCain too.
17:09:19 “The working women of this country, those who work inside the home and outside of the home, they’re overlooked by politicians in Washington and Barack Obama hasn’t given us a single reason to believe that he would be any better. A company’s balance sheet tallies up just the same whether it’s a man who owns the business or a women (sic). And women want the same opportunities as men. And they’re entitled to the same rewards.
17:09:50 “See, the point here, the point here is that women would suffer just as much from the massive tax increase that Sen. Obama proposes. And you know, there are a lot of families in this country with no father present. And when we make laws in Washington, those laws need to understand that, they need to serve the mothers who are taking care of their families.
17:10:13 “I’ve been very, very blessed to have a husband who’s supported me along the way. He’s a great dad who doesn’t disappear at bath time or run from diaper duty, and I appreciate that. But a lot of women have it much, much harder than I’ve had it. And they need child care, which today can cost some families a third of their household budget. And they need reforms in labor laws that allow greater flexibility in the workplace, including more tele-commuting. And they need a tax code that doesn’t penalize working families. (applause)
“They need health care that the family can take with them when they move or change jobs. And they need better choices in retirement plans, and worker retraining when things get tough. Women also need equal pay for equal work, and not just be a talking point. (applause)
17:11:30 “Really, it is that simple. It’s a matter of fundamental fairness — fairness in this country. And to make all this happen, working mothers need an advocate, and they will have one when this working mother is working for all of you in the White House. (applause)
TITLE IX:
17:11:50 “When I was a kid, Congress passed a law that’s come to be known as Title IX. And that law allowed millions of girls to play sports. And over time, and over time, that opened more than just the doors to the gymnasium. Along with other reforms, Title IX helped us to see ourselves and our futures a different way. Women of my generation were allowed finally to make more of our own choices with education, with career, and I have never forgotten that we owe that opportunity to women, to feminists who came before us. We were allowed to be participants instead of just spectators on the achievements of others.“And I was lucky to have a lot of support at home, too. Now among the many things that I owe my parents is one simple lesson, and that was this is America and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity. The belief in equal opportunity is not just the cause of feminists, it’s the creed of our country-equal opportunity.
HELPING WOMEN AROUND THE WORLD:
17:13:30 “And if I’m given the honor of serving you in the White House, I intend to advance that creed in our own nation and beyond because across the world, there are still places where women are subjugated and persecuted as they were in Afghanistan, places where they’re bullied and brutalized and murdered in honor killings, places where women are sold like commodities in the nightmare world of the sex trade, and places where baby girls are unwelcome as a matter of state policy and their mothers are forced to have abortions. Now no one person, no one leader, can bring an end to all of those ills, to all of the injustices inflicted upon women, but I can promise you this, if I am elected, these women, too, will have an advocate and a defender in the 47th vice president of the United States.”
59 Responses to “This is what a conservative feminist looks like”
-
yttik says:
Beautiful post! Thank you.
October 22nd, 2008 at 5:07 pm EST -
Lisa says:
THANK YOU VIOLET!
I was just having this conversation with my husband yesterday. I have been trying to have this conversation on the Feminist Law Professors website for weeks… useless to say anything there.
My favorite paragraph:“And word to the youngsters: you don’t grow a feminist revolution by telling those middle-of-the-roaders and conservatives that they don’t get to join because they aren’t pure enough. Aren’t as hip as you are, aren’t sufficiently on board with the whole program. Especially not when you yourself are patriarchy-complicit in a thousand ways — as are we all.”
A great big “YOU BETCHA!!”
-
Cyn says:
Violet, you are on fire. Thank you from one of the old ladies.
-
Cyn says:
Oh, and I forgot to say how excited I was to come across her rally. The moment I saw all of those great women in the front row, I knew we were in for a landmark speech.
I also think the story about the cost of her wardrobe was planted in the news in anticipation of Palin’s speech. I am sure the DNC had prior knowledge of Lady Lynn, et al, attending this event.
-
pacific-cali says:
What an excellent post - thank you.
As a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-animal rights, FISCAL CONSERVATIVE and FEMINIST, I know I don’t fit into anyone’s repressive partisan ideology.
Thank you for making the point that we don’t all have to think exactly alike to have something to contribute to the advancement of feminism.
-
Alwaysthinking says:
Hurray for Palin’s direct response! As I said elsewhere, I like the gleam in her eye and her fiery courage whether I agree with her on everything or not. Her fundamentals are right on target here.
For many years, I have gone to lunch regularly and celebrated a Christmas lunch with a group of long-time former women co-workers. It’s safe to say we are all feminists. We do not all vote alike and we have different views on the alleged “pro-life” and “pro-choice” positions.
[By the way, I was their "boss," although I do not like that term. I can also remember getting a call from a man for a reference on a staff member who had left. In those days we were expected to be honest (though nice) about referrals. (The lawyers have changed all of that.) The guy didn't like my answers, so he asked me if he could talk to the "man" in charge. I wasn't quick enough to be smart alec, but I can think of some choice retorts now.]
-
tinfoil hattie says:
I disagree that Palin’s a feminist. I think she latched onto the term for this election, because “feminist” was anathema to the Republican Party until they invented the phrase “Liberal Feminist Agenda.”
I also disagree that Obama is a feminist, if indeed anyone has ever made that claim.
-
Violet says:
I think she latched onto the term for this election
Really? You mean years ago when she spoke publicly about being a feminist, she was doing it because she could see into the future and know that in 2008 she would be on the ticket for VP?
If she’s really clairvoyant, I may have to consider voting for her. That’s a valuable skill.
-
lynnerkat says:
Thank you for these wonderful posts. I find it hard to keep my anger in check at work, surrounded by women who are privileged by being well educated and secure in jobs and finances, who constantly engage in sexist talk about Palin. It’s gotten to the point that I leave when they start up. I will never be able to view them in the same way, nor will I be feeling very positive about the feminists of the future.
-
Sharon says:
Violet,
This is a terrific post. I’m a conservative woman who also considers herself a feminist. I get a lot of heat from “real feminists” as being “anti-woman” because I am pro-life.
Your post makes a very important point: we don’t have to all agree on every issue to be concerned about equality for women. There may be (and are) issues where we won’t agree, but there is so much more to being a woman than having a uterus.
Thanks for your great work and keep it up!
-
quixote says:
Great post. Very interesting to hear Palin in her own words. She sounds pretty damn good to me.
If you had told me a year ago that a Republican would sound better to me than most Democrats, I would have wanted to know what you were smoking.
-
Kiuku says:
That’s an awesome speech.
-
Huan says:
saw this in a Palin interview today:
Do you think that we should talk about birth control with our teenage sons and daughters?
Yes. Use me as the example of why you should, even more admittedly. My daughter, of course she is 18 years old, but has really been forced to grow up very quickly now and starting her own family and you know, life has changed so quickly for her. And she is a good and responsible and a very kind hearted young strong woman, and she is going to be just fine. But if we can use this, and if my daughter Bristol can use her story as a kind of teaching tool for others, then so be it. Let us do that.She has evidence very little extreme views regarding reproductive matters.
-
Foxx says:
Feminism is orthogonal to all other movements.
Left vs. right is men fighting with each other. As we have seen in this election, and as we saw the 60s and 70s, the left is as woman-hating as the right. Both of them want women’s subservience to their cause.
The underlying cause of all the ills on the planet is the evolutionarily determined drive of each man to propagate his genes over another man’s. (The sexual mode of reproduction, though mid-term successful, is probably long-term a dead end, as the environment cannot support it.) War, rape, purdah, honor killings, poverty, etc. etc all stem from this dynamic.
Feminism, in opposing this dynamic, is our only hope.
While I acknowledge that pro-life women can have other feminist goals and want to be free and equal in many ways, a pro-life stance is inherently anti-feminist.
Forced pregnancy, that is requiring a woman to carry any pregnancy to term, both 1) denies a woman her bodily integrity and personhood and 2)subordinates her to the male’s demand to propagate his genes.
1) Forced pregnancy (which is the term I want us to use) means that a woman is forced to turn her body over as a life support system to another being. Whether or not the fetus is a person or “life” is irrelevant. A person’s body must not become the property of another being. This is contrary to common law and constitutional principles, but if it were not it should be.
2) It is only when women control if and when we will bear children, that there is any hope of peace or well-being.
Myself, I have little hope. But I do not surrender.
-
song says:
Well I am an androgynist, Dr. Socks, because the word “feminist” has become a source of limiting definitions. An androgynist cannot be defined under the terms of either party. That ’s why I am one.
your friend,
Song
-
Little Isis says:
Dr Violet, I am a young Feminist, and I agree with you.
Sarah Palin is a feminist, and a great one, at that. -
song says:
Hi Little Isis!
“amen”
to your statement Re: Sarah Palin -
octogalore says:
Although I’ve discovered you fairly recently, I did read you before the election coverage got going, and do not think there has been a change in philosophy.
But as another feminist who’s been tagged with that kind of accusation, I know where it comes from. Unlike you, but like pacific-cali, I am fiscally conservative (and like pacific-cali, socially liberal). I’m even OK with progressive taxation — but only up to a point. I do not think NOW is NOL(iberal)W. This is enough, though, for a couple of very good friends to decide I’m now persona non grata, despite the fact that we could have collaborated on pro-feminist goals.
I am dismayed that feminists are increasingly, it seems, eager to partition the already-struggling, less-than-popular movement into smaller “acceptable” pieces. I would not work with socially conservative women on socially conservative goals. But then, they wouldn’t look to me for that. There are (as the New Agenda demonstrates) a multitude of mutually compatible goals. But casting out members for the infraction of disagreement doesn’t help achieve those, only elect a “cool girls” club.
Never having been part of such a club, I’m not mourning the particular women who have chosen to no longer be friends. But I’m disappointed I ever thought they were.
-
sister of ye says:
I’ve never believed that biological theory about men’s drive to propogate their genes. Serioiusly, how the fuck does a male lion know whether offspring are his or not? Lion DNA testing clinics?
The more likely reason male lions kill the existing cubs when joining a pride is that females won’t have sex when they are raising cubs, and the males want the sex and power - in fact, they’ve been known to kill their own offspring to get it.
There are plenty of species where males care for all a family group’s offspring, theirs or not. And there have been plenty of human cultures where paternity isn’t as important as fatherhood - actually nurturing the children of your community.
That “drive to propogate their genes” is just another stupid construct to concoct biological underpinnings for the bad behavior of wanting sex and power at any price, no matter who may get hurt. Knock down one stupid theory, another springs up to take its place.
It’s like behaviors backdated “to the cave man days” - when we have little idea of how early humans lived - that somehow always seem to assert men’s superiority.
-
Kat says:
Oh Violet, thank you. Just, thank you.
Can anyone remember, in recent memory, someone running for a high public office and devoting the bulk of a speech to feminism? Not at an event dedicated to it, but in general, to a general audience, with an understanding that feminism touches everything? Maybe someone has and I don’t know about it. I do know I found this speech extraordinary and moving, though.
I also liked Palin’s remarks on birth control posted above. “Let us do that.”
-
myiq2xu says:
I just want to point out that feminism doesn’t require hating men.
Yes, I do have a penis, but so does approximately half of our species.
-
Violet says:
Feminism has never been about hating men. It’s about dismantling patriarchy. It’s about hating this stupid system.
-
LadyVetinari says:
I partly agree and partly disagree. I don’t think feminism is the “sole property” of the left at all, but there are many conservative ideas that are flat-out incompatible with women’s equality and that I don’t think are subject to reasonable disagreement. That is, I think the only way a feminist can support those ideas is through willful denial. And of course we’re all in denial about somethings, but if you’re in denial about MOST things then no, I can’t call you a feminist.
For the record, I would say Sarah Palin is willfully ignorant about most things, though I appreciate that she wants to be a feminist.
-
Violet says:
What are the “many things” that Sarah Palin believes that make her unqualified to be a feminist? I know about the pro-life (or rather anti-abortion), but what are the other “many things”?
-
Foxx says:
Perhaps “drive to propagate” was the wrong phrase. It doesn’t matter what the man or lion is experiencing or what they think their motivation is. They might want sex and power, they might want to preserve the family honor. Whatever. Any behavior which increases the probability that your genes survive from generation to generation is going to be evolutionarily selected.
-
octogalore says:
LadyVetinari, I am a little confused about what you mean by “willful denial.” Now, I do agree that there is denial involved in an anti-choice position, although I think it’s denial about the issue of life and what it means as opposed to straight denial that women are equal. But, when you say “in denial about MOST things,” what do you mean by MOST things? Do you mean: most things clearly dealing with women’s rights (which hopefully is what you do mean)? Or, do you mean: most LIBERAL things? Or do you mean most things that you personaly agree with? Those are three different concepts.
-
myiq2xu says:
Violet:
I agree with you about dismantling patriarchy. But like the left/right Democrat-Republican political arena, too many people get caught up in hating and demonizing.
There’s an old saying “hate the sin, not the sinner” but I’m cool with hating the sinners as long as the innocent don’t get hated too.
-
slythwolf says:
I have no problem with men as long as they don’t try to tell me how to do feminism.
And, god dammit, this shit is starting to make me consider voting for McCain. I really like Palin. She keeps reminding me of my best friend, who I would absolutely trust to run the country, therefore…
-
Lisa says:
I am pro-choice, but this paragraph just doesn’t ring true.
Quoted from above:1) Forced pregnancy (which is the term I want us to use) means that a woman is forced to turn her body over as a life support system to another being. Whether or not the fetus is a person or “life” is irrelevant. A person’s body must not become the property of another being. This is contrary to common law and constitutional principles, but if it were not it should be.
That sounds true until you have children- forced or not- you ARE turning your body over to another human being. That is part of what made women so powerful thousands of years ago- that we are the gateway and the givers of life. To deny this is to deny part of your own womanhood.
I don’t know the percentage, but I bet a good number of women in this country are pro-life. If you exclude them as irrelevent to women’s causes then you are hurting us all.
-
madamab says:
Violet,
I am typing with tears in my eyes. I am so tired of people I love and respect telling me that this woman is out of her league against Joe Biden. She gets it, she really gets it.
She is 100% right about Obama and Biden. They do not care about womens’ issues AT ALL. In fact, when Obama was asked about whether or not he’d pledge to balance his cabinet equally among women and men, he said “no.”
I can’t believe the small-mindedness of people who would actually claim that she is not a feminist. Fuck them and the high horse they rode in on.
I believe she truly will be an advocate for feminist issues in the White House. Barack Obama and Joe Biden could not care less about us. I don’t know how they could have made that more clear than by NOT picking Hillary Clinton for Vice President.
I have a newfound rule, along with the 30% Solution. It goes like this:
Never vote for people who hate you.
Sorry, O’Biden. It’s McPalin for me.
-
votermom says:
I’m an immigrant from a 90% Catholic country, and there are many feminists there. In fact we have elected TWO women presidents. Both, like all our presidents, are pro-life. (Catholic country, remember). The number one feminist issue there is violence against and exploitation of women.
Feminists in the USA have allowed men to on both sides to use Roe v Wade as a leash to keep their power limited. -
tinfoil hattie says:
I agree with ladyvetinari. Well said.
Benefiting greatly from feminism and calling yourself a feminist does not make you a feminist, especially if you work actively against things that women need or that benefit women. Should Palin be treated to sexist attacks? Hell, no. Is she being completely marginalized by the left, including some feminist websites, just because she’s a conservative woman? Absolutely. But I think reasonable people can disagree on whether or not she’s a feminist.
I also agree with her absolute right and duty to work toward the things she believes in. I don’t like many of the things she believes in. So what? I don’t agree with most of the shit politicians work toward.
-
tinfoil hattie says:
Also, I’d like to add: excellent point about no DEMOCRATIC candidates even discussing feminism.
And, most of my objections to Palin aren’t about her feminism or non-feminism. I’m willing to just disagree about it, and if there were a feminist’s club I would not vote her out. She certainly is at least USING the f-word.
Most of my disagreements with Palin are my disagreements with conservative viewpoints. I think the left could reasonably argue against her conservative viewpoints without having to debate endlessly whether she’s a feminist or Phyllis Schlafly. For crying out loud.
-
Lisa says:
Abortion is a struggle for any woman, whether she is pro-choice or pro-life. It is a decision that women absolutely have a right to make for themselves- no matter what they decide. But it is a hard decision, and one a woman will live with for the rest of her life. We will NEVER all agree on this issue.
Patriarchy uses abortion rights like a steak they throw to a room full of hungry dogs. While we all chase single mindedly after that one piece of steak and fight over it like rabid dogs, they go about the business of making all the other decisions for us. We are not going to get the rights that we want until enough of us realize that the piece of steak isn’t the only thing in the room.
A woman’s right to her own body is at the basis of the argument. There are other ways to come at this issue. We can all agree that rape is wrong, that human trafficking is wrong. These are both issues about a woman’s right to her own body. Why are they less important than abortion?
Sarah Palin spoke passionately about ending crimes against women around the world. Aren’t you supporting a woman’s right to her own body by doing this?
I am pro choice, BUT I believe wholeheartedly that we can’t make the fight for women’s rights completely about abortion choices. We have to find common ground and stand together in order to move forward for ALL women.
-
Pat Johnson says:
I became a feminist when I was told that my brother would be able to go to college but that the expense would be wasted on me since I was expected to marry and raise a family.
That was enough for me to consider that yes indeed we live in a man’s world.
-
Kat says:
I agree with Lisa. That speech above is the most powerful feminist statement I’ve heard a politician give at a non-targeted event since… well, I’m still trying to think of other examples. I would have no problem calling Palin a feminist and this speech makes me wonder why I wouldn’t, actually. I also appreciate making the global connections.
And now, for something entirely similar:
http://paganpower.wordpress.co.....rehension/
NYC Museum Exhibit ‘Pokes Fun’ at Palin
Visitors can don a fake-fur vest and hold a cardboard rifle to pose with the vice-presidential candidate and her daughter.
-
Level Best says:
Violet, your blog has been a heartening and exciting reaction to the gross sexism this election has exposed. I am daring to look forward to a coalition of feminists of all stripes to work on women’s goals. No more of this “purer than thou” parsing–let’s unite!
-
Foxx says:
Lisa, it is precisely because pregnancy is turning your body over to another being that it must not be forced. It must be the woman’s choice to do so. To force women to bear children against our will is slavery.
I did not find abortion a difficult choice at all and it has not haunted me. Many other women feel the same. It was completely clear to me that it was my absolute right, even though it was illegal at the time.
I do not see feminist efforts focussed on abortion to the detriment of other issues. Feminists work on many issues.
What I do see here and elsewhere recently is a tendency to compromise on this basic issue, which is fundamental to women’s personhood, in fact to our very status as human beings rather than instruments for bearing children. To many men in many places around the world, women are not human.
I will work with any woman committed to a particular feminist goal, but if we surrender our commitment to owning our own bodies, we surrender everything.
-
Hazel Stone says:
Sharon, being “pro-life” IS anti-woman. Do I own my body? As a conservative, you must be pretty enamored of property rights. Do I own my body or not?
-
Lisa says:
Foxx, I am not saying abortion haunts women, or should for that matter.
I am willing to compromise about this particular issue at this particular time. Why?
1. We have already won this battle. Why keep hounding it? We have the right to an abortion. If we didn’t I wouldn’t be willing to elect a pro-life candidate, but I am not going to base all my decisions on fear.
2. This argument cannot CANNOT be won. There will never come that moment when you can convince every woman in this country that pro-choice is the right choice.
3. I don’t think we would get so upset about every single woman running for office holding our particular positions if there were just tons of them running around. As long as we hyper focus on every single woman, we won’t get ANY. There isn’t going to ever be a perfect candidate.
-
Violet says:
I personally consider the anti-choice stance effectively anti-woman, because that’s how the cookie crumbles no matter what your intentions. But I recognize that feminists can hold unfeminist views on particular issues but still, overall, be feminists.
That’s because most feminists are like that. Most feminists believe or practice at least one thing that I consider antithetical to women’s rights.
And I am frankly tired of people like Nadine Strossen and the pimps who run SWOP being lauded as great feminists while women who oppose abortion but are pro-woman in every other respect are vilified and ostracized.
-
Anna Belle says:
Read this this morning and wanted to comment, but was out of time. Well this certainly explains the renewed attacks, which focus on such ridiculous nonsense as her wardrobe and traveling with children. She’s nakedly appealing to first and second wave inclinations in women. Good for her. We to unite as much as we can against the open misogyny and sexism on display this year and every year.
-
madamab says:
Folks, there is no evidence that Sarah Palin would use government to impose her views on abortion onto anyone else. Furthermore, she has not made any moves to do so in her tenure as governor of Alaska.
Abortion is a personal decision. It should not be political in ANY WAY. The procedure is legal, and has been legal for decades. Sarah Palin may believe Roe v. Wade should be overturned, but she has made no commitment to doing so should she become Vice President. And even if it should be overturned, she would still leave the decision up to the citizens of Alaska, rather than unilaterally banning abortion in her state.
Are we really going to penalize her for her personal beliefs, while excusing Barack Obama, who cheated, lied and smeared in order to prevent Hillary Clinton from being the first woman President?
I think that’s the definition of cognitive dissonance.
-
sam says:
To force women to bear children against our will is slavery.
I’m about to try out an untested theory sparked by the above comment, so please understand that as the context.
The word slavery brought to my mind the fact that most 3rd wavers are actually all-right with sexual slavery so long as ‘harm reduction’ practices are put in place. Teaching children in SE Asian brothels to say “Please use a condom” in several European languages was a harm reduction practice that enabled sexual slavery.
The story goes: “Sure Cambodian sex workers often experience rape, mutilation, and disease in brothels, but if we try to help them out of the brothels then pimps will hurt them more AND they will have no income at all. Therefore, harm reduction instead of harm elimination is the best course of action in the current patriarchal landscape.”
86% of Cambodian prostitutes want out and only 14% say they want to continue being prostitutes. I don’t know what percentage of women have had abortions they regretted more than not, but suffice to say there is some not-insignificant percentage of women who became pro-life after experiencing abortion themselves.
Isn’t Sarah Palin’s stance on abortion similar to the 3rd wave feminist strategy of harm reduction utilized against other populations of at-risk women?
In an ideal world no one woman would get pregnant if she didn’t want to, but in the current patriarchal landscape that’s as impossible as stopping pimps from retaliating against exit-seeking slaves. Since there’s no way to stop men (or parents, or employers, etc.) from pushing women to abort when they don’t really want to, and because there is a minority of women who regret their abortions, then Palin’s practical policy stance on pregnant women is in alignment with the 3rd wave feminist harm reduction stance for prostituted women.
-
m Andrea says:
Excellent post and awesome comments!
http://www.politico.com/news/s.....14829.html
Just 14 percent of the stories about John McCain, from the conventions through the final presidential debate, were positive in tone, according to a study released today, while nearly 60 percent were negative — the least favorable coverage of any of the four candidates on the two tickets.
The study, by The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism, a nonpartisan journalism watchdog organization, examined 2,412 stories from 43 newspapers and cable news shows in the six-week period beginning just after the conventions and ending with the final presidential debate.
-
m Andrea says:
I know it’s impossible to save all the sexism and lies in one place, but Violet makes a nice Grand Central so here’s more:
http://www.time.com/time/natio.....-2,00.html
The Times is reporting that the messiah’s mother “is not like other women”. They also erroniously claim she moved to Hawaii after it became a state.
I had to stop reading at that point.
-
Beth H. says:
As Foxx wrote “it is precisely because pregnancy is turning your body over to another being that it must not be forced. It must be the woman’s choice to do so. To force women to bear children against our will is slavery.”
We do have a choice without resorting to abortion — we can choose (except in the case of rape) to have sexual intercourse and accept that even if we use contraception there is a risk of pregnancy. That said — even though I am pro-life I am also am pro-choice. As a libertarian — I don’t think the government should be telling me what to do. However, I can’t deny that a fetus, at least after week 20, is a person. I held my 38 week old fetus — a boy — in my arms after he was stillborn. I can’t deny that he was a person. I would like to work to decrease the number of abortions by methods other than making it illegal.
So, I also agree with the many comments that the abortion issue is divisive and holding us back in working on other feminist issues.
-
slythwolf says:
1. We have already won this battle. Why keep hounding it? We have the right to an abortion.
You tell that to the poor women in states where there is only one abortion provider, or to the teenage women in states where doctors have to notify their parents first.
I am on food stamps. I live in a state where, as a poor woman, I have to choose between the Medicaid that covers birth control and the Medicaid that covers everything else; I can’t be on both at the same time. I don’t want to have children, ever. There may come a time when I need to go on that other Medicaid because I’m ill and want to survive; there may come a time when I can’t get my birth control any more because for damn sure I can’t afford to pay for it out of pocket. And I may need an abortion. I am lucky in that my family would probably help pay for it, and my husband would support my decision and drive me in our car to wherever I would have to go to have it performed (because for damn sure I can’t get an abortion in my home county). Many women don’t have supportive husbands and families. Many women don’t have cars. And many women can’t come up with the cash to pay for this essential aspect of women’s health care.
Rich women have the right to get abortions in this country. Poor women, as always, are screwed.
Now, I am the first to tell people that Sarah Palin, while pro-life, has made no attempt to enforce her views legally. And in this respect, like so many others, she reminds me of my best friend, who considers herself pro-choice only because she doesn’t believe she has the right to make that decision for another woman, even though she would wish, if I were to have an abortion, that I would tell her I had had a miscarriage. So I respect Sarah Palin and would be totally comfortable with her as Vice President.
But to say that the battle for abortion rights is already won can only come from a place of privileged ignorance.
-
Lisa says:
slythwolf my absolute favorite thing about this site is the exchange of ideas between women actively trying to help the cause of women in this country. I love the amount of respect that each shows for the other. I don’t think it is appropriate or fair to say that I am privileged or ignorant.
I am from the midwest and grew up in a very poor family. I had an abortion at 17 and didn’t tell my parents. I was acosted outside of the planned parenthood where my abortion took place by pro-lifers. I filed a suit against them and had to go testify in court against them.
I agree that women have it really bad in this country. I agree that the medical situation sucks big time, and the people that suffer most are the poor, and especially poor women.
All the more reason to get more women in office.
-
Lisa says:
Slythwolf, also the things you are talking about- the constraints on abortion- don’t come from Roe Vs. Wade. They come from the individual state governments. More women need to be involved in government at the state levels as well. Even a liberal male isn’t going to stick his neck out for a cause like this- it won’t mean enough to him. Women are going to have to be elected to form a big enough support group to change these laws.
The battle for abortion rights is already won at the national level. There is nothing more that can be done to make it better at that level.
-
Lisa says:
Also, while I am at it… Roe Vs. Wade is a flawed legal finding according to lawyers. There are enough conservative judges already to overturn it if they wanted to. I can’t remember where I can find a link, but Chief Justice Roberts got very testy when asked about overturning Roe V. Wade and said it is the established law of the land and they weren’t going to revisit the ruling- period.
ALSO, EVEN IF Roe V. Wade was overturned, it would become a state by state decision as to whether abortions were legal or not. It seems like your problems lie with your state government Slythwolf, and you might be better served by campaigning for pro-choice women in your state government. It sounds like with the difficulty you would have getting an abortion there now, it would only get worse.
Palin said that if Roe V. Wade were overturned she would leave it up to the people of Alaska to decide for themselves. This just shows that deciding a candidate based on their own personal beliefs isn’t NECESSARILY the best way to serve your interests.
-
desert dawg says:
Too bad she doesn’t consider herself one, like last night to Brian Williams, when she hemmed and hawed when asked if she were a feminist and said , “I don’t want to be branded.”
Great feminist, huh? Or not.
-
Lisa says:
She called herself a feminist in the interview with Katie Couric:
When asked if she considered herself a feminist, Palin said, “I do. I’m a feminist who, uh, believes in equal rights and I believe that women certainly have every opportunity that a man has to succeed, and to try and do it all, anyway.”
-
slythwolf says:
The battle for abortion rights is already won at the national level. There is nothing more that can be done to make it better at that level.
Really? How about getting rid of the bullshit about late-term abortions? Or, in fact, requiring states to provide free abortions to poor women.
You might want to pay attention to the fact that I wasn’t talking about Roe. I never even mentioned it.
-
Violet says:
Sam, I’m not sure I’m seeing the analogy you’ve laid out. I do actually consider the anti-abortion stance analogous to the pro-pornstitution stance, but in a pragmatic way: for me they’re analogous because they’re both, in my view, unfeminist, woman-harming stances that nonetheless some feminists insist on embracing. It’s an unresolvable argument. I’ve had it with pro-porn/pro-prostitution feminists and with anti-abortion feminists for decades now it seems. My approach is just to recognize that these are issues on which we disagree fundamentally, and the best we can do is just acknowledge that and try to work together on the things we do agree on.
What I often wish we could recreate is the environment we had within the movement in the 70s, when women could argue with each other passionately about these things — yet still know all the time that it was an intra-feminist argument, that we were all feminists.
-
sam says:
It may well be a flawed theory, but let’s chat some more if it’s all right with you.
The end result isn’t where I’m looking, and I agree anti-abortion and pro-pornstitution stances both ultimately hurt women. I’m looking more at the similarities in thought processes undergirding where they land politically- less than their ideal world but what they’re willing to settle for. I’m seeking for what thirdwave feminists might have in common philosophically with anti-abortion feminists.
Think of how anti-choice feminists may feel when they hear, “No woman should face having a pregnancy she can’t afford financially or emotionally.” I believe the words contained in the quotes point to safe abortions on demand as the best course of action for women, but I also recognize that our society is far from attaining this goal. Anti-choice feminists also recognize our society’s lack of mother support (economic coercion into abortion) and either they know or are themselves one of a minority of women and girls who felt coerced by others into abortions they didn’t want. Their politics is based off the concept of protecting first the minority of women who regret their abortions.
Now, think of how pro-pornstitution feminists may feel when they hear, “All women’s sexuality should be hers to freely give, not extorted by men for her right to live.” I believe that points to the best course of action as denying men opportunities to economically demand sex, but I also recognize that our society is far from this goal. Pro-pornstitution feminists also recognize our society’s lack of support for women (economic coercion into prostitution) and either they know or are themselves a minority of women and girls who say they want to keep prostituting. Their politics is based off the concept of protecting first the minority of women who choose prostitution.
Harm reduction is a vague term, and since I have never for a day in my life been anti-choice, I can only ponder if anti-choice feminists view their position as the practical harm reducing one in an imperfect world.
-
m Andrea says:
Sam, no offence, but I think you’re giving some people in both camps more credit then they deserve. By their own actions, attitudes, and comments, it is obvious some anti-choice women truly do not care what happens to the poor woman who is forced to care for a child she did not want.
It is also obvious that some pro-prostitution women truly believe “women are different from men”, “like being graded on their appearance first and ability second” and “really don’t mind getting paid for something they would do anyway”.
In haste to find a common ground with those of opposing opinions, a nice polite well-brainwashed girl has a tendancy to believe that it is her duty to give up something prior to the negotiation process before the other party has even expressed any interest in exhanging “tokens of good faith”. A sharp negotiator, one who has been the victim of countless historical and present atrocities, realizes that the onus is on the representive of the domineering party to offer a “token of good faith” first. A sharp negotiator will not even walk into the bargaining room until that no-strings-attached offer is on the table.
Until that happens, the only obligation the historically oppressed negotiator has is to wax eloquently about the need for reconcilation. Perhaps to think about racism or sexism in terms of negotiation is terrifying and those affected have my sympathies, but to frame the issue in such a way also helps clarify strategic errors.
-
Yanni Znaio says:
slythwolf says:
I have no problem with men as long as they don’t try to tell me how to do feminism.
And, god dammit, this shit is starting to make me consider voting for McCain. I really like Palin. She keeps reminding me of my best friend, who I would absolutely trust to run the country, therefore…
October 23rd, 2008 at 5:11 am EST
Tell you the truth, between you, me, Dr. Socks and the fencepost, I’d trust Palin to run the country hands down before McCain.
-
SD says:
The word slavery brought to my mind the fact that most 3rd wavers are actually all-right with sexual slavery so long as ‘harm reduction’ practices are put in place. Teaching children in SE Asian brothels to say “Please use a condom” in several European languages was a harm reduction practice that enabled sexual slavery.
As someone who has actually lived in Cambodia and worked with Cambodian sex workers, you need to stop objectifying these women. Your inflammatory language is misleading.
Firstly, only 8% of the clientèle at brothels are sex tourists.
Secondly, sexual abuse of minors is taken very seriously. There are convictions almost every day. There are of course girls who are abused and raped but it is not the majority. Most children are trafficked to beg rather than for sexual purposes.
Thirdly, Cambodian sex workers have spoken out before about what they want. They want harm reduction methods and training for other work. Well the NGOs and the UN in Cambodia have programmes to get women out of sex work.
While they are working in the sex trade, they want harm reduction - condoms, police protection etc
I find it in very poor taste to deny these women voices to make a point about feminism in the west.
