I'm glad they're strongly setting the record straight.

Although I'm still lost as to how a president of a NOW chapter can say what she did about Palin.

That's just insidious. I think she totally realized what she was doing. If I were a member of her organization I would call for some sort of censure. If you aren't representing your organization, why are you making a public statement? The media should have left out her affiliation completely. Without it, she wouldn't be worth mentioning (to the media). When was the last time you saw a segment run on "a random woman in California supports Palin"?
You don't see those things. She played her affiliation and got exactly what she expected. I'm so glad that feministing runs the whole story.

Did anyone else catch this link buried in the CA Now page?

"This in fact is not the case." --> http://www.canow.org/canoworg/2008/09/why-sarah-palin.html
"Sarah Palin has made openly racist statements." --> http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%2525e2%252580%25259cracist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%2525e2%252580%25259d/

I've some how not stumbled across this yet. I'm not sure "LA Progressive" is a credible source, nor do I really like the concept of quoting a quasi-anonymous waitress who overheard things in restaurants.

But, if you saw last night's Daily Show, it does seem that racism is alive and well in Alaska.

Cheers,
-SPiHC

Yes, thanks Feministing for explaining the whole story here because I would've been pissed beyond all hell to hear that NOW was endorsing Palin. I'm still incredibly pissed however to hear that the president of the LA chapter of NOW is endorsing Palin. WTF is that?!?! I'm sorry, but if you're the president of NOW you cannot endorse a candidate like Palin even if you're claiming to do so as an "individual." It's like being the president of PETA (I know we don't like them but just using an example) and then going on tv to talk about how much you love to wear fur coats! It's not okay simply because that one time you weren't technically representing PETA. Ridiculous. She should step down.

OK, my dumbfuck threshold has officially broken. Is the rest of the world not already laughing hard enough at the US for having such a moron on the presidential ticket?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/03/sarah.palin.debate.feminism

Is she in on something the rest of us aren't aware of? Because all I see is someone who's pretty indifferent when it comes to legislation.

My pet rock looks more like a feminist than Sarah Palin.

wow,...

and I was wondering what all the women's organizations have been doing in my city (LA).

You might have more catcalls and street harassment on the east coast, but feminism is just barely staying alive here on the west coast.

I wonder how much she was paid for her endorsement.

I am a member of CA NOW and I am pissed. I am also a chapter president and cannot believe the inappropriateness of her actions...now I feel like I have to do damage control.

I don't get how someone who devotes so much of their time to a feminist organization can possibly justify this. It almost feels like she's getting paid off or something. Feminism is not about getting one woman as high as she can go, it's about what's best for women in general. A quick look at Palin's track record (which is WORSE than McCain's) on women's rights immediately tells you she is not the one who can achieve this.

And I can tell you that putting an incompetent woman in the White House will do our cause no favor. When a middle aged, white guy screws up in office, he's just a bad politician or perhaps it gets generalized to his whole party. When a woman messes up, she somehow represents her entire gender's ability to lead. Equal treatment should mean equal scrutiny and Sarah Palin (let alone McCain who she seems to be ignoring and would actually be PRESIDENT) doesn't pass the test.

Hopefully Shelley Mandell won't be the LA NOW president for long. I understand that people are allowed to hold private views, but it seems that her presence on stage at the Palin rally was solely due to her position in NOW. It was deceptive and betrayed other members of LA NOW.

Ms. Mandell:

A uterus does not make you a feminist.

Insinuating that it does insults feminist women that do not have them and feminist men who obviously do not.

Feminism is the idea that all human beings have rights. Palin clearly does not think this, as her policy record and public statements show. She is not a feminist. End of story.

I am a CA NOW member and I'm annoyed. I know Shelly was a supporter of Clinton. I guess she's just one of those old school "feminists" who believe that a woman in the white house is more important than the position and actions of the person in the white house. That's not equality, therefore that's not feminism.

"Though Mandell started her speech with the disclaimer that she was speaking as an individual and not for NOW, it's not a shock that the media picked up on the story as a NOW president endorsing Palin. (And I would imagine she knew that.)"

I'm not sure how to feel about this. While she almost certainly did know her statement would be spun as "NOW endorses Palin", she has a right to her (ridiculous) opinions as an individual and she gave a proper disclaimer.

Soldiers are rightly allowed to protest the war while acknowledging they ARE soldiers, as long as they stipulate that they speak as individuals. Their opinions are usually spun as "ARMY OFFICER SAYS IRAQ A FAILURE", etc. I doubt anyone here would say soldiers should not be allowed to voice their individual opinions at public events.

I'm a CA NOW member too, and CA NOW is working their ass off to make sure that members and feminists nationwide know that Shelly Mandell was not speaking for NOW in any capacity.

She used her title in the introduction, and it's very understandable that people picked that up as "Los Angeles NOW" or "California NOW" supporting Palin. She could have simply said she was a 30-year feminist activist, but that wouldn't have gotten her up on that stage. It was the NOW name that got her the publicity she wanted. That to me shows that she misused her position.

Katie, you're army officer analogy does not hold water. It would be different if Ms. Mandell was just a member of NOW, then your analogy would make sense, but she's the president of the LA chapter. That's why I made my analogy about the PETA president loving to wear fur coats, I think that puts it in a better perspective.

I'm so heart broken. I'm a member of NOW Illinois and I just donated money to help with the campaign. "This is what a feminist looks like."????? WHAT??? I'm so disappointed. This is completely unfair.

I am also a chapter president of CANOW. I have sat on their board for over 6 years. Anyone who has been in the organization knows that LANOW is a rogue chapter of the organization. The chapter is funded through memberships in the LA area but they don't even hold meetings. Shelly Mandell has put herself in charge of the chapter for years. They have not followed bylaws or shown a single bit of feminism. This latest move by Mandell is dusgusting. All pleas to the National level by members and chapters in California have been ignored. If you or anyone you know has a membership with LANOW, call the National Office of NOW and ask that the membership be reassigned to Hollywood or another local chapter. Or better yet, demand a meeting and take control of the LANOW chapter. Stage a coup!

CANOW members who have a real investment and real service in the organization have been slapped in the face with this late move by Mandell. No one I serve with would ever endorse Palin for VP. Her policies are completely anti-feminist.

@ llevinson
That's nice that you think your analogy is better, but I respectfully disagree.

PETA is resolutely anti-fur as part of their organization ideology. NOW is not anti-Republican. The president of a democratic organization can publicly disagree with the majority of the organization's members... might make them unpopular and get them voted out next time. Still, Republican NOW leader isn't necessarily incompatible NOW any more than an anti-Iraq soldier incompatible with the military.

I think Shelly Mandell's endorsement of Palin at a Republican event was a tacky, improper use of her title, she has a right to blather on about her misguided views in public.

I hope like AllFiredUp suggested, all the members choose to elect a new president. If Mandell is a lame leader, she shouldn't be in charge no matter what her personal views.

Whoops- poor phrasing on my part.

By 'democratic', I meant executives-voted-in-by-members, not feminism-and-freedom-supporting Democratic.

Katie, the part of ideology was not where I was disagreeing with you, but if you want to use that I can as well. Palin is anti-woman. NOW's ideology is equality for all. So promoting someone that is anti-woman is going against the ideology.

Dear AllFiredUp,

Then isn't the real problem with national NOW that they have "allowed" somebody like Mandell to go on so long supposedly misrepresenting them? Where is the accountability here? She and her allies must have some support in the national organization to have remained around this long. I have always had issues with the mainstream, upper middle class, American-centric, white hetero streak in national NOW (which I know many of you in NOW chapters do not represent), but this is over the top that she has been allowed to fester for so long in NOW ranks.

Also, I would like to see Mandell's reasoning (a more detailed one) for supporting Palin, in her own words, or by someone like yourself who obviously has her number.

@llevinso

You and I clearly agree that Palin is anti-equality and not a feminist. Shelley Mandell doesn't think so. Unfortunately, she's got a very low standard for "caring about women". That's my subjective opinion.

You, I, and Shelley Mandell have the right to express our subjective personal opinions in public forums. I'm simply saying that having/expressing an opinion incongruent with the majority opinion of a group you lead does not necessarily mean you betrayed your group or your group's ideology.

All us liberals have to be careful not to fall into the trap of demanding total conformity. That'd make us.... about as misguided as Shelley Mandell.

"Sarah Palin, a woman who will fight for women's rights" ...to pay for their own rape kits.

Going through her feminist bona fides -- the International Women's Year, the Equal Rights Amendment, Geraldine Ferraro...
Would it be bad manners to draw Ms. Mandell's attention to how the last two of these worked out?

"Sarah Palin, a woman who will fight for women's rights" ...to pay for their own rape kits.

Going through her feminist bona fides -- the International Women's Year, the Equal Rights Amendment, Geraldine Ferraro...
Would it be bad manners to draw Ms. Mandell's attention to how the last two of these worked out?

The LA NOW chapter president seems to think that any woman is better than no woman. Sarah Palin is the antithesis of feminist philosophy and she panders to the faction that believes a woman's rights are secondary to a man's rights. As the leader of a feminist organization, she should be ashamed of herself.

Katie, I agree with you that everyone has the right to their own opinion. I have some friends that love Palin (I completely disagree but whatever) and they are entitled to think what they want. As is Ms. Mandell. However, as the president of the LA chapter of NOW it is wrong of her to do something like this. I am not saying she must conform to my beliefs, but if she's in charge of an organization that holds a certain ideology and then does something like campaign for someone with a completely opposite ideology she should step down as the head of that organization. Those two things just don't work together.

Katie, I agree with you that everyone has the right to their own opinion. I have some friends that love Palin (I completely disagree but whatever) and they are entitled to think what they want. As is Ms. Mandell. However, as the president of the LA chapter of NOW it is wrong of her to do something like this. I am not saying she must conform to my beliefs, but if she's in charge of an organization that holds a certain ideology and then does something like campaign for someone with a completely opposite ideology she should step down as the head of that organization. Those two things just don't work together.

Whoops, sorry for the double post!

Nice to see feminists are so open minded to differing views among other women. I'm glad to see the Liberal tyranny on this could be breaking.

This is not the first time L.A. NOW has experienced controversy. Anyone remember when Tammy Bruce was president of that?? Wasn't she also ousted president of that for things she said against progressive feminists?? There is something going on with the L.A. chapter of NOW that nobody seems to be paying attention to.

This was bound to happen. The state and national NOW offices have been warned for years that Shelly was running a chapter that promoted her private agenda (self-aggrandizement), rather than the aims of feminism. This chapter is a joke and NOW has become a joke in LA and California in large part because of it. This chapter doesn't actually engage in any feminist activities of an educational or political nature. It doesn't mobilize feminists. It doesn't introduce young women to the aims of feminism or mentor them. It doesn't even hold or advertise regular meetings. Its elections are a complete farce. They are not publicized to the general NOW membership in LA and there has been no leadership turnover because of it for about a decade. The election rules, to the degree they are abided by, have been crafted entirely to close out a wide group of NOW members and to keep those few members who meet privately with each other in power. Over the course of the past ten years, Shelly has chased away every well-meaning young woman who wanted to actually do feminist work in favor of a few who would continue to enable her in her effort to hang on to her personal soap box, from which she speaks on political issues mainly in order to get attention, no matter how shocking the things are that she says/needs to do in order to get this attention. I can't believe that those of us who care about NOW and feminism are being put in the position of demanding Shelly's resignation from the LA NOW Presidency because she doesn't even hold this position legitimately!

Ladydog,

In a word, yes. And I hope National NOW reads this.

Just so you know, there were THREE CA NOW chapter presidents protesting Palin at the event in Costa MEsa, CA. And a fourth, from Southern CA, was at a Hillary Clinton event. A NOW chapter presdient introducing Palin was shocking, disturbing and many, many NOW women are working on what can be done, should be done, must be done.
An short piece on this and my videos of the protest are on my site at http://onlinewithzoe.com