Gloria Steinem on Sarah Palin

[Mom to Aly]

This was an op-ed in the Sept 4th LA Times from Gloria Steinem:

Palin: wrong woman, wrong message

 

 

 

 

By Gloria Steinem

 

 

September 4, 2008

 

 

 

 

Here's the good news: Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women -- and to many men too -- who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the "white-male-only" sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

 

 

 

But here is even better news: It won't work. This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere. It's not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It's about baking a new pie.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gloria Steinem is an author, feminist

[Parrothead]

...someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine.

As someone living in Maine I can honestly be thankful the McCain didn't pick Snowe.

 

She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality.

 

Just a bit of a blanket statement about women. I've never been able to get behind Steinem and the feminist agenda even when I was working.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Thank you for posting that. I had not seen it and look forward to sharing it with my daughter and MIL.

[Tracey in TX]

UGH. I get irritated even seeing the radical feminist's name. I couldn't even finish the article.

[cathmom]

I can't stand it when anyone claims to know what "most Americans" or "most women" want or support! I know many women who have the same views Palin does. I was always laughing when dh and I watched the talk shows because they kept saying that my demographic was where Hillary was strong, and I would never vote for her.

[Mom to Aly]

Well, basically everything Palin stands for is the opposite of what I believe, and Hillary was completely what I believe, although I was still for Obama. Palin is about as wrong, to me, as they come.

[cathmom]

Right, Mom to Aly! But you know that there are women who feel the opposite, and it seems like Steinem doesn't know that (or she thinks there's maybe one).

[hsmamainva]

Thanks for posting this!!!

 

And, Mom to Aly, I completely agree with you!!!! I was sooo hoping for Hillary...even as VP! I still haven't gotten over it yet.

 

Therefore, I haven't jumped on the Obama bandwagon.

 

I still want to see some debates. Memorized, written down beforehand, speeches don't do anything for me. I want to see them "think on their feet", as it were.

[Phred]

clap clap clap clap...

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

There is much with which I agree and very much with which I disagree in this article.

 

This statement caught my eye "approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions." I know the point she is trying to prove, but that statement is illogical, which irritates me. Programs don't cause unwanted pregnancies or diseases.

[1cat2ferrets]

Thanks so very much for posting that article!!

I can't vote for someone who kills animals from helicopters, or kills animals period.

She certainly isn't what people thinks she is.

 

Thanks again for opening our eyes!

[Mom to Aly]

There is much with which I agree and very much with which I disagree in this article.

 

This statement caught my eye "approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions." I know the point she is trying to prove, but that statement is illogical, which irritates me. Programs don't cause unwanted pregnancies or diseases.

 

No, of course they don't, and I thought that was not a great statement--but her point is clear--not teaching children about safe sex, and having them not stay abstinent, is dangerous, on so many levels.

 

And, yes, she does not seem to know the whole female population--only the population she wants to know. She is a bit too much of a feminist for me on many issues--but on this, I found her right on target!

[Elaine]

 

And, yes, she does not seem to know the whole female population--only the population she wants to know.

 

It seems the same could be said of Gloria Steinem. I find her views repulsive.

[Jenny in Atl]

It seems the same could be said of Gloria Steinem. I find her views repulsive.

 

You may not like her (I'm not a big fan either) but ladies like her made it possible for women like us to choose whether to stay home or work outside the house. They have fought for our rights to vote, to become more of an equal partner in all aspects of our lives. It was not long ago when women were only teachers and nurses. Many of you are saying people aren't listening to Palin just because they don't like her, but aren't you doing the same?

[Phred]

There is much with which I agree and very much with which I disagree in this article.

 

This statement caught my eye "approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions." I know the point she is trying to prove, but that statement is illogical, which irritates me. Programs don't cause unwanted pregnancies or diseases.

Sadly, eight years of these programs has resulted in one out of four teenage girls having an STD and teen pregnancy rates in the US being the highest of any industrialized nation. There is a direct correlation between the two. Abstinence-only doesn't work.

[PariSarah]

McCain's pick was not intended to attract Clinton supporters, and it probably won't.

 

Also the part about true feminism being less about the advancement of particular women than about bringing justice to women in general. That was good, too.

[Alice]

My own personal views are closer to Palin than Steinem, although I definitely disagree with Palin on some things. I think the problem with this article is that it implies that Palin is the "wrong woman" because of her beliefs. It's fine to say, hey I disagree with her stance on abortion or gays or guns or the environment or whatever but I felt like this article was more saying that in order for a woman to be worthy of a VP nomination her views had to more in line with what Steinem feels a woman should believe. I acknowledge what Steinem and others in her generation did for women and for easing my own path to a career, etc. But I get tired of feminists either saying or implying that somehow women who don't fit their idea of what women should do and believe are somehow lesser....isn't it possible that Sarah Palin has her own mind and her own beliefs and isn't just a pawn or puppet of the vast right wing conspiracy? Instead of "Wrong Woman, Wrong Message"...I think just "Wrong Message" should be enough.

 

I was briefly in a women's studies program in college and I finally left the program. I left for multiple reasons but one of the main reasons was that I just got tired of always being the only person in the room who didn't swallow the Kool-Aid. I was tired of comments like "well, clearly since we're all pro-choice" and then having to raise my hand and explain yet again that no, we weren't.

 

Anyway...that's just my soap-box, stepping down now. :001_huh:

 

 

 

 

 

Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.

 

I found this quote interesting, but I couldn't find anything to substatiate it in my brief researching on the Internet. Is this really a campaign platform of Obama's? I would be impressed for that and fully agree with it...

[cathmom]

I believe there is no "safe sex".

[LizzyBee]

 

I defend her right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me.

 

 

Likewise, I defend Gloria Steinem's right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me.

[Twinmom]

Likewise, I defend Gloria Steinem's right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me.

 

:lol:

[Elaine]

My own personal views are closer to Palin than Steinem, although I definitely disagree with Palin on some things. I think the problem with this article is that it implies that Palin is the "wrong woman" because of her beliefs. It's fine to say, hey I disagree with her stance on abortion or gays or guns or the environment or whatever but I felt like this article was more saying that in order for a woman to be worthy of a VP nomination her views had to more in line with what Steinem feels a woman should believe. I acknowledge what Steinem and others in her generation did for women and for easing my own path to a career, etc. But I get tired of feminists either saying or implying that somehow women who don't fit their idea of what women should do and believe are somehow lesser....isn't it possible that Sarah Palin has her own mind and her own beliefs and isn't just a pawn or puppet of the vast right wing conspiracy? Instead of "Wrong Woman, Wrong Message"...I think just "Wrong Message" should be enough.

 

I was briefly in a women's studies program in college and I finally left the program. I left for multiple reasons but one of the main reasons was that I just got tired of always being the only person in the room who didn't swallow the Kool-Aid. I was tired of comments like "well, clearly since we're all pro-choice" and then having to raise my hand and explain yet again that no, we weren't.

 

Anyway...that's just my soap-box, stepping down now. :001_huh:

 

 

 

 

I found this quote interesting, but I couldn't find anything to substatiate it in my brief researching on the Internet. Is this really a campaign platform of Obama's? I would be impressed for that and fully agree with it...

 

 

OK, this is a great post! Well said, Alice.:D

[Elaine]

Likewise, I defend Gloria Steinem's right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me.

 

So many great posts, so little rep!:001_smile:

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Some interesting numbers to add to the discussion.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/palin.women/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080903/pl_afp/usvotewomen

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/2-new-polls-palin-pick-no_b_123019.html

[Mom to Aly]

It seems the same could be said of Gloria Steinem. I find her views repulsive.

Ummm, I was talking about Gloria Steinem... :001_smile:--of course not all women see it her way, nor do they see it Palin's way. I just hope more see it Steinem's way, I really do.

[Country Girl]

My own personal views are closer to Palin than Steinem, although I definitely disagree with Palin on some things. I think the problem with this article is that it implies that Palin is the "wrong woman" because of her beliefs. It's fine to say, hey I disagree with her stance on abortion or gays or guns or the environment or whatever but I felt like this article was more saying that in order for a woman to be worthy of a VP nomination her views had to more in line with what Steinem feels a woman should believe. I acknowledge what Steinem and others in her generation did for women and for easing my own path to a career, etc. But I get tired of feminists either saying or implying that somehow women who don't fit their idea of what women should do and believe are somehow lesser....isn't it possible that Sarah Palin has her own mind and her own beliefs and isn't just a pawn or puppet of the vast right wing conspiracy? Instead of "Wrong Woman, Wrong Message"...I think just "Wrong Message" should be enough.

 

I was briefly in a women's studies program in college and I finally left the program. I left for multiple reasons but one of the main reasons was that I just got tired of always being the only person in the room who didn't swallow the Kool-Aid. I was tired of comments like "well, clearly since we're all pro-choice" and then having to raise my hand and explain yet again that no, we weren't.

 

Anyway...that's just my soap-box, stepping down now. :001_huh:

 

 

 

Alice,

 

Great post. Thanks for voicing so clearly what I was thinking but never could have expressed.

[Jenny in Atl]

My own personal views are closer to Palin than Steinem, although I definitely disagree with Palin on some things. I think the problem with this article is that it implies that Palin is the "wrong woman" because of her beliefs. It's fine to say, hey I disagree with her stance on abortion or gays or guns or the environment or whatever but I felt like this article was more saying that in order for a woman to be worthy of a VP nomination her views had to more in line with what Steinem feels a woman should believe. I acknowledge what Steinem and others in her generation did for women and for easing my own path to a career, etc. But I get tired of feminists either saying or implying that somehow women who don't fit their idea of what women should do and believe are somehow lesser....isn't it possible that Sarah Palin has her own mind and her own beliefs and isn't just a pawn or puppet of the vast right wing conspiracy? Instead of "Wrong Woman, Wrong Message"...I think just "Wrong Message" should be enough.

 

I was briefly in a women's studies program in college and I finally left the program. I left for multiple reasons but one of the main reasons was that I just got tired of always being the only person in the room who didn't swallow the Kool-Aid. I was tired of comments like "well, clearly since we're all pro-choice" and then having to raise my hand and explain yet again that no, we weren't.

 

Anyway...that's just my soap-box, stepping down now. :001_huh:

 

 

 

 

I found this quote interesting, but I couldn't find anything to substatiate it in my brief researching on the Internet. Is this really a campaign platform of Obama's? I would be impressed for that and fully agree with it...

:iagree:

 

I think it would have been a much more interesting article if it had focused more on why McCain skipped over other conservative women with much more impressive careers and experience. I still feel Palin was picked for her looks and her self-described pit bull personality vs. even her views (those were a bonus for the base). I see this on the other side too, Obama is pretty and smooth, but like many, I would rather have seen him in action for a while before having to make so important a choice.

 

Honestly, I could not find a single candidate, on either ticket, I really liked. With every election, both local and national, I say to myself... are these really the best this country has to offer?

[Mom to Aly]

Alice, to what you said:

 

 

 

"Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children."

 

"I found this quote interesting, but I couldn't find anything to substatiate it in my brief researching on the Internet. Is this really a campaign platform of Obama's? I would be impressed for that and fully agree with it..."

 

Sorry, don't know how to quote the quote yet--but I am surprised you couldn't find anything on this, because Obama has been talking about this for a long time. He feels this is essential, and what is missing in a lot of homes, especially homes where young people are getting mixed up with crime, drugs, etc, and is calling for men to become more involved at home, and especially with their children. This is one of his "pet" projects! And Biden is on board, as well.

 

I've read and heard some of his speeches on this, and he is really empassioned about it! Wonderful to see!

[PariSarah]

I still feel Palin was picked for her looks and her self-described pit bull personality vs. even her views (those were a bonus for the base).

 

Yeah, I can see the looks part, but . . . well, I think her politics were a pretty significant part of why she was chosen. Or rather, I think her politics signal what McCain was trying to accomplish with his pick. Snowe or Hutchison would have been a ploy for the center. Palin is a blatant appeal to his party base.

 

He doesn't want Steinem to vote for him. That's why he didn't pick Snowe or Hutchison. (Not that Steinem would have voted for him if he had.) He wants the same people that fell for Bush's "compassionate conservatism" remark to vote for him. He's saying, "Look! You can be Conservative (with a capital onservative) and progressive at the same time!"

[SFP]

"It’s the courage to raise a child that makes you a father.â€

 

And you can listen to the speech at YouTube.

[Alice]

Sorry, don't know how to quote the quote yet--but I am surprised you couldn't find anything on this, because Obama has been talking about this for a long time. He feels this is essential, and what is missing in a lot of homes, especially homes where young people are getting mixed up with crime, drugs, etc, and is calling for men to become more involved at home, and especially with their children. This is one of his "pet" projects! And Biden is on board, as well.

 

I've read and heard some of his speeches on this, and he is really empassioned about it! Wonderful to see!

 

 

I think I mis-read what Steinem meant. I thought she was implying that Obama and Biden are specifically talking about men staying at home while women work...about more men becoming SAHDs. I went back and read it and I can see that I probably just added that in my head. :D My dh stays home part-time with our kids so the thought of that being a topic in the campaign was interesting to me....

 

I did go and read Obama's Father's Day Speech and see that he is passionate about fathers being involved in their children's lives. That's certainly a good thing that I would agree with. I didn't see any other speeches specifically on this topic but I didn't do an exhaustive search of his speeches and I'm sure there are others where he talks about this as it appears to be an issue close to his heart.

[Marie in Oh]

That article made me ill.

[PariSarah]

This is one of his "pet" projects! And Biden is on board, as well.

I've read and heard some of his speeches on this, and he is really empassioned about it! Wonderful to see!

 

Is he proposing any sorts of programs or initiatives or anything? What sort of structural changes is he imagining will help encourage this?

 

It strikes me as a hard sort of thing to work on, except by example. But I'd love to hear what sort of systemic approach he'd take to encouraging fathers to spend more time with their kids.

 

ETA: Ah! I had the same misunderstanding Alice had. :D I guess we would be the two women to jump on this!! :lol: Still interested in what he has to say about the more mundane version though--how might he go about making systemic or structural changes that give dads a reason to be more involved in domestic life.

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

Sadly, eight years of these programs has resulted in one out of four teenage girls having an STD and teen pregnancy rates in the US being the highest of any industrialized nation. There is a direct correlation between the two. Abstinence-only doesn't work.

 

Well, in my opinion, correlation does not equal causation. If *abstinence* doesn't prevent pregnancy or STD's, well then nothing can. ;)

 

IMO, again, abstinence is the only safe sex.

 

That is only common sense.

 

I believe that society, peers, the media, and lack of parental guidance, have more to do with any current problems than any school program. I don't believe school programs have that much power and influence over kids.

[Soph the vet]

That article made me ill.

:iagree:Steinhem and visceral response go hand in hand for me. Please don't speak for me, Gloria!

[Jennifer3141]

Well, basically everything Palin stands for is the opposite of what I believe, and Hillary was completely what I believe, although I was still for Obama. Palin is about as wrong, to me, as they come.

 

:iagree:

 

I think you're pretty neat. :)

 

Jen

[Mama Lynx]

There is much with which I agree and very much with which I disagree in this article.

 

This statement caught my eye "approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions." I know the point she is trying to prove, but that statement is illogical, which irritates me. Programs don't cause unwanted pregnancies or diseases.

 

Right.

 

And, um, golly gee ... even if my community does only offer abstinence only programs, there's nothing in the world stopping ME from educating my sons and buying them birth control.

[Elaine]

Right.

 

And, um, golly gee ... even if my community does only offer abstinence only programs, there's nothing in the world stopping ME from educating my sons and buying them birth control.

 

Do you mean take personal responsibilty?? Oh, my! What a concept.;)

[Jenny in Atl]

Right.

 

And, um, golly gee ... even if my community does only offer abstinence only programs, there's nothing in the world stopping ME from educating my sons and buying them birth control.

 

Well, as long as the far right CC don't gain control and out law birth control. Hopefully it will never come to that, but it was not long ago when it was very hard to come by.

[hsmamainva]

Like it or not, it's women like Gloria Steinem, and others like her, that have enabled a woman (in this case Sarah Palin) to be on the ticket as a Vice Presidental candidate in the first place.

 

Gloria Steinem is a pioneer and, for that, she should at least be respected.

[Aggie]

".....are these really the best this country has to offer?"

 

No, Jenny, I don't believe so. The way our primaries are set up leaves a little to be desired, imo. Though there are probably no statistics, I feel democrats voted for McCain because all 3 democrat candidates were acceptable. And republicans voted in the democrat primaries trying to get the nominee that McCain could beat.

 

This is all speculation as I have absolutely nothing to prove it, but I've not met one republican who voted for McCain. If the primary process could be corrected somehow, I think we would see the best of the best running for president.

 

Unfortunately, I don't have a solution. Yet. :)

 

Aggie

[Jennifer3141]

That latest rep was me, Kelly. I wrote too fast to sign it. lol

 

Jen

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Right.

 

And, um, golly gee ... even if my community does only offer abstinence only programs, there's nothing in the world stopping ME from educating my sons and buying them birth control.

 

True, probably nothing stopping you, nothing stopping me either. But what if you didn't have the money for birth control? Is protected sex only a right that belongs to those who can afford it?

[PiCO]

I believe there is no "safe sex".

 

Actually, they don't use this term any more. My dd in public school is taking health this year- they are doing abstinence and pregnancy/disease prevention. They do show the kids how to use condoms. BUT- they don't call it "safe sex" because sex is never 100% safe.

 

None of the information is going to be new for my daughter, except for actually putting a condom on something. Also, she said they are having good conversations- she feels comfortable asking questions that arise.

[LG Gone Wild]

Well, as long as the far right CC don't gain control and out law birth control. Hopefully it will never come to that, but it was not long ago when it was very hard to come by.

 

 

That is completely unfair. Why would they ban something they use? Even if some don't agree with it and don't use it, don't assume they will get rid of it.

[Mrs Mungo]

That is completely unfair. Why would they ban something they use? Even if some don't agree with it and don't use it, don't assume they will get rid of it.

 

Oh, that's not true at all.

 

NYT story on this issue

 

The proposal defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.â€

 

Conservatives believe that preventing a blastocyst from implanting in the uterus is the same as an abortion. Combination birth control pills, IUDs and other types of birth control do in part (it is believed) prevent the implantation of a blastocyst in the uterus. I firmly believe if given an inch an this issue they will take a mile and we'll be limited in our birth control options.

[LG Gone Wild]

Oh, that's not true at all.

 

NYT story on this issue

 

 

 

Conservatives believe that preventing a blastocyst from implanting in the uterus is the same as an abortion. Combination birth control pills, IUDs and other types of birth control do in part (it is believed) prevent the implantation of a blastocyst in the uterus. I firmly believe if given an inch an this issue they will take a mile and we'll be limited in our birth control options.

 

That is a definition of life issue, that's true. That life begins at conception and those methods mention is destroying a life that has already been created.

 

It's also true that conservatives use condoms, pills, diaphrams and other methods. And they aren't going against their principles to do so.

[nakitty]

Oh, that's not true at all.

 

NYT story on this issue

 

 

 

Conservatives believe that preventing a blastocyst from implanting in the uterus is the same as an abortion. Combination birth control pills, IUDs and other types of birth control do in part (it is believed) prevent the implantation of a blastocyst in the uterus. I firmly believe if given an inch an this issue they will take a mile and we'll be limited in our birth control options.

 

Precisely!

 

And furthermore...I have to say...I am quite disgusted by a lot of what I am reading here.... seriously? If it weren't for Gloria Steinem and women like her.... we women wouldn't have the RIGHT to VOTE, the RIGHT to a COLLEGE EDUCATION, the RIGHT to OWN LAND, or the RIGHT to CONTROL OUR ABILITY TO REPRODUCE......and we are STILL fighting for EQUAL WAGES......... your lack of empathy to the women's movement is a slap in the faces of those that have lost much in order to attain freedoms for YOU! I have no patience for ignorant women (especially women) that complain about the women's movement while content to bask in the freedoms that the fight has entitled them.... I find it completely intolerable. :glare:

[SnowWhite]

True, probably nothing stopping you, nothing stopping me either. But what if you didn't have the money for birth control? Is protected sex only a right that belongs to those who can afford it?

 

I have posted before, and I am sure I will post again about this fact...

 

Planned Parenthood still has clinics in every county in my area, and as far as I know, they're still having to throw away "expired" condoms because people don't take them and use them. (That was the case when I was a client... as a fast food working newlywed).

 

Eight years of GWB has not closed them down, and it was a Clinton eight years at the time I am remembering.

 

IMO the cause of teen pregnancy and STDs (attribute to lack of condom use if you like) is the popular culture's painting of sex as "something everyone does" and unprotected sex as "something you do if you're in a committed relationship". Then there's the idea in many men's mind that if their girlfriend gets knocked up, "well she'd better get that taken care of."

 

Back when I was close with young teenage girls, they all *knew* how to prevent pregnancy, it was getting the young boyfriends to wear the things that was a problem. So they all ran over to the PP clinic to get their pills... which weren't going to prevent any STDs.

[nakitty]

That is a definition of life issue, that's true. That life begins at conception and those methods mention is destroying a life that has already been created.

 

It's also true that conservatives use condoms, pills, diaphrams and other methods. And they aren't going against their principles to do so.

 

Was this a mis-type? Did you mean that they ARE going against their principles?

[hsmamainva]

Precisely!

 

And furthermore...I have to say...I am quite disgusted by a lot of what I am reading here.... seriously? If it weren't for Gloria Steinem and women like her.... we women wouldn't have the RIGHT to VOTE, the RIGHT to a COLLEGE EDUCATION, the RIGHT to OWN LAND, or the RIGHT to CONTROL OUR ABILITY TO REPRODUCE......and we are STILL fighting for EQUAL WAGES......... your lack of empathy to the women's movement is a slap in the faces of those that have lost much in order to attain freedoms for YOU! I have no patience for ignorant women (especially women) that complain about the women's movement while content to bask in the freedoms that the fight has entitled them.... I find it completely intolerable. :glare:

 

You go, girl!!! Tell it like it is!!! :iagree: