As long as everyone else is putting in his or her two-cents
worth on Sarah Palin, here’s mine: the placement of a strong,
no-victim, conservative woman on a presidential ticket is the best
opportunity I’ve ever seen to counter (or kill) that demeaning old
feminist shibboleth, “women’s issues.” I ask you why, when
Americans long ago did away with the patronizing concept of
“women’s work” — a term once applied to chores considered beneath
the dignity or interest of men — do we accept the equally
condescending concept of “women’s issues,” and employ it in every
election?
Perhaps for two reasons. First, because this patronizing notion
that is the bedrock of radical feminism has been embraced by
candidates, politicians, and lawmakers of both parties, and second,
I’m sorry to say, because many women act as unwitting participants
in their own denigration by knowing little of policy and politics.
Thus, rather than guide women to a higher understanding, the
“women’s issues” approach applies the “soft bigotry of low
expectations” (to borrow from George W. Bush) to half the
population. Well, Gov. Palin can change all that.
Just last week Michelle Obama took part in a “women’s
conference” at which feminists came to speak about “the issues
women care about.” You can bet they were not talking about economic
policy and national defense. Their conversations undoubtedly
followed the feminist establishment’s tired old list of “Key
Issues” which includes “Abortion and Reproductive Rights,
Affirmative Action, Economic Equity and Sexual Harassment,
Electoral Politics, Fighting the Right, Global Feminism, Lesbian
Rights, Media Activism, Racial and Ethnic Diversity, Violence
against Women, Women in the Military and Women-Friendly
Workplace.”
And there has been talk of Gov. Palin taking part in a similar
festival of Self, The Oprah Winfrey Show, which divides
its shows into categories such as “Spirit” (“Know Yourself,” “Body
Image”); “Style” (“Fashion,” “Hair”); or “Relationships”
(“Couples,” “Dating”). Not quite the setting for serious policy
talk, so perhaps it’s a good thing that Oprah nixed the idea.
I hate to see my own sex tolerate isolation and disdain. We
first permit the assumption that since we cannot look beyond
ourselves and our own interest, only self-absorbed topics can make
the list of “issues women care about.” Second — and by our own
fault — it is presumed that women’s interests and insights are so
narrow that we must leave to men such political issues as military
readiness, foreign relations, national security, economic and
monetary policy, foreign trade, immigration, judicial activism,
deregulation, taxes and other matters.
What nonsense! All issues are “women’s issues” — as
Sarah Palin surely knows — because all public policy positions and
the laws or actions that result affect all citizens and set the
course of the country. Take tax policy. Any plan to lessen or
increase the burden of taxes has a profound effect on women as
workers, business owners and taxpayers; and more importantly, as
citizens of a nation deciding whether its economic future will
prefer a taxing government or individual initiative. Or take
national and global security. Is victory over radical Islamic
terrorism of no interest to generally risk-averse women? And is
America’s ability to lead globally and defend liberty not critical
to all of us? Sarah is here to remind us that it is.
In the end, it is up to women to see themselves and be seen by
others as citizens, and not as a self-interested subculture. We
must learn more and be known to care about the effects of all
public policy not only on ourselves and our families, but also on
our country, states, and communities. It is up to women themselves
to reject the condescension and move beyond “women’s issues” into
the real world.
And to that end, we’re in luck. Every time this competent and
optimistic warrior takes the stump or gives an interview, she shows
us what it looks like to swap gender for citizen and
really talk policy. So lead the way, Governor — and
please, stay away from Oprah.
