"God, it's predictable. I can only assume Palin was one of those women who thought she was the exception, the special one that didn't need feminism, just can-do conservative bootstraps to pull herself up with. She was the one who didn't need to "play the victim." And she was perfectly willing to sell out all other women who weren't as special as she is, because there can only be one token woman, anywhere, anytime.
Sucks for her to find out she's not special after all, she's just a slut in a towel that can be blamed and shamed like the rest of us, so the McCain boys can slink away, untarnished by their own cataclysmic mistakes."
You might be wondering about the towel comment. Well apparently Palin once greeted campaign members wearing only a towel. No wonder she lost the election for McCain.
4 comments:
campbell brown has a nice diatribe on this as well.
as for the first dog...apparently one of the kids has allergies and the human society people really annoy me sometimes...i love my dog, but my dog is not a person...there are a lot of homeless children too...maybe the obamas should also adopt a foster baby
I agree with you and Flea. I think that Sarah Palin may even have attracted some of the voter base so scapegoating her is really low. I think that this is a good example of what so frequently happens to an individual from a non-dominant demographic in politics.
This is part of why Obama's victory is so sweet. Because he wasn't a demographic. We elected an inspirational and brilliant politician...who is black. And I think that is a big deal, that so many people were able to see past demographics. I'm glad that the first African American person in the whitehouse is going to be the president and not the vice president for exactly this reason.
So, I got in this argument/discussion with mom the other day,and in reading your blog and comments posted, I am reminded again. I think part of this country's notion of equality resides in color blind politics, of seeing everyone as the same on the inside, despite the color of skin, gender distinction, political affiliation, etc. I think this kind of humanism is, in large part, the reason we celebrate Obama as such an historic presidential choice.
But so often, this politics of seeing everyone as the same, becomes a way to again efface difference, to celebrate "common" values that often quickly revert to white, male, mid-upper class values on which this country was founded.
I think it is important instead to name difference but to detach reading difference from deviseness. I think it is important to acknowledge that Obama is not "just like us" or "happens to be mixed-race" or even that he "transcends race."
Part of what makes him an historic choice is his blackness. And despite the fact that I disagree with her politics, it is part of what would have made Sarah Palin an historic vice presidential choice. I guess I just feel uneasy about the language used to describe Obama's victory.
My mom says that in her classroom she doesnt "see" color, but this troubles me because I think we can better understand where a person is coming from and what they can bring to various conversations by making an attempt to see their color, their embodied experience. I think we should always try to increase the experiences that are decipherable to us, not assimilate everyone into a common "human" experience--I struggle to believe that such common experience exists without being oppressive to many.
I'm rambling, but I guess it boils down to acknowledging difference, and making coalitions across difference, or pretending that such difference does not exist or can be erased. I am still trying to figure out the specific ways this translates to the country's reception of Obama. Thoughts?
SP
I think you are wrestling with the tension in the world...difference exists, but we are uncomfortable with it, so we try to connect based on sameness and feel alienated instead...an so on...we want justice and grace...
Post a Comment