The Palin Candidacy (9/9/08)

You would have had to be living on Mars to be unaware of all the political controversy swirling around the competency of Sarah Palin, John McCain’s choice to be his Vice President. Depending on your point of view, or your party or presidential preference, the Palin choice either shows the “genius” of McCain, so described by Texas Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, or, as stated by Democratic pundits, McCain is no “maverick” because he caved to the right wing zealots.

But does the choice of Palin indicate that conservatives have changed their ideas about women’s role? Hard core conservatives have long promoted sex stereotyping, and vehemently declared that mothers should stay home to raise their children. Phyllis Schlafly, the leading and symbolic opponent of the Equal Rights Amendment, wrote in a 1982 Illinois Commission on the Status of Women Report: “We recommend that educational, social, governmental, and financial incentives be provided to reinforce the traditional sex-stereotype that mothers should care for their own babies, even if that choice involves financial and career sacrifice, even if it means putting aside a professional or business career for a decade.” Later, Schlafly added that “pay equity should mean giving job preference to a father.” But Schlafly’s position, and that of her followers 26 years ago,-- that mothers should stay home—appears to have flipped.

A September 1, 2008 New York Times article points out that religious conservatives, including Schlafly, have praised Palin, saying that her large family of 5 children, including a 4-month old baby with special needs, will enhance, not detract from, Palin as a Vice President. Schlafly is quoted in that article saying: “It changes your life and gives you a different perspective on the world. People who don’t have children or who have only one or two are kind of overwhelmed at the notion of five children. I think a hard-working, well-organized CEO type can handle it very well.” Palin, proud to be a right winger, clearly has rejected the traditional role of stay-at-home mother, and conservatives are thrilled with her decision. Decades ago, conservatives would have asked if Palin would be able to nurse the baby and if the spotlight on her pregnant, un-wed teenage daughter was best for the family. Now they call those questions sexist.

In the 1982 Commission report, Schlafly fretted that feminists wanted to expand options for women and show them in nontraditional roles such as coal miners and show men as househusbands. She opposed the ERA because it “would compel the drafting of women and their assignment to military combat…and that a constitutional amendment mandating equality of rights between the sexes …including the military is unacceptable.” Does Schlafly now admit that her prejudices against women in the military and in combat have proven to be wrong? That women, many of whom are mothers, have served bravely and honorably and deserve our praise?

For decades conservatives have chastised women who combined career and parenting. Do they now agree with feminists--that women, like men, can do both? Do they understand that disagreement with Palin’s political opinions and dispute about the depth and value of her experience are not sexist, and that the same questions would be asked if Palin were a man? Her supporters have rallied around her right to be non-traditional. Do they really want to eradicate sexism? Or is this just a hypocritical ploy, narrowly confined, to promote Palin? It’s time for conservatives to prove they are not sexists and they support gender equity. It’s time for them to call for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which simply states, “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex.”

- Judith Kohler

Commentaries Home