I'm sure most of you have seen the news that Sarah Palin has been appearing with "a small group of high-profile feminists," including Oregon NOW Vice President Linda Klinge and former Ms. magazine editor Elaine Lafferty. (More about that later.)
Rather than focusing on who or what is or isn't feminist, let's just step back and look at the policies Palin stands for. Not the talking points or labels. Let's examine what she's actually saying on the stump this week:
Palin went on to suggest Obama discriminated against women employees in his own Senate office, as opposed to GOP presidential nominee John McCain."There is a difference between what Barack Obama says and what he does," she declared. "Out on the stump, he talks about things like equal pay for equal work, but according to Senate records, women on his staff get just 83 cents for every dollar that the men get. What is with that? Does he think that the women aren't working as hard? Does he think they're 17 percent less productive?"
"I know one senator who does pay women equal pay," she added, referring to McCain
It's completely fair to call out Barack Obama for not having more women at the highest (and highest-paid) levels of his campaign. I grant that (and have linked to this point before). BUT beyond the anecdote about their campaign staffs, Palin declines to mention that McCain voted against the Paycheck Fairness Act, and supports the right of businesses to discriminate on the basis of gender. This has a much greater impact on American women than what he pays his own staff.
Instead, she said if elected she would pursue policies such as flexibility in labor laws so women could engage in more telecommuting and would push for a tax code "that doesn't penalize working families.""Working mothers need an advocate, and they will have one when this working mother is working for all of you," she said, as the crowd cheered.
...Except that, again, her running mate has supported paid family leave in theory, but not in practice. Obama has pledged to expand the Family and Medical Leave Act, while McCain...
In the transcript, McCain's team proposes not one new program geared towards work life. As mentioned, he supported the original FMLA bill but does not advocate its expansion or that FML be paid. He does not support employer mandates on sick leave or time off. McCain's camp advises "creation of a Commission on Workplace Flexibility and Choice. The idea would be to get a bipartisan set of workers, small and large employers, laborers, academics and they would sit down and look at the issues...
No new laws. No expansion of existing law. Just a bunch of people "looking at the issue." It allows the McCain campaign to say they care without actually doing anything for working parents.
Palin also went on to shout-out feminist success Title IX:
Palin said that she had benefited from Title IX, and for women of her generation, "Over time, that opened more than doors to just the gymnasium. It allowed us to view ourselves, and our futures, in a different way."
But much like equal pay, she's on the ticket with a guy who thinks it's awesome if universities want to voluntarily fund women's athletics, but he doesn't want to penalize the ones who don't. Same situation as equal pay: Yes, it's a good thing. No, I don't want to enforce it. In other words, more empty, co-opted feminist rhetoric.
Also, mentions of reproductive rights were conspicuously absent.
Knowing all this, I have to pause when I see women on stage behind Palin who are familiar with these issues. How many articles did Lafferty edit at Ms. about equal pay, Title IX, and family leave? So I went searching to see if I could find some insight into Lafferty's politics, in the pre-Palin era. In a 2003 interview with USA Today, after she was named editor of Ms., Lafferty cited a recent poll that found 56% of women identified as feminists:
"I thought that was a stunning number, considering what has been done to that word," Lafferty says. "The right wing has attacked any women who support equality. They've tried to take that word and make it something it is not. That 56% of women have seen through that is terrific.
Emphasis mine. Way to join up with the people who have taken the word "equality" and tried to make it something it's not. Or, more accurately, tried to make it mean nothing at all.
Related:
Note to mainstream media: Sarah Palin is NOT a feminist
McCain, Palin, and working mothers
While Mayor, Sarah Palin Charged Rape Victims for their Own Justice
Sarah Palin and the meaning of choice
Sarah Palin
And check out this post from Amie Newman, which also takes apart Palin's stump speech.
UPDATE: Ms. publisher Eleanor Smeal on what the McCain campaign doesn't get about feminism.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Parsing Palin's empty "feminist" rhetoric.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/9998
She hasn't once mentioned the high rates of sexual assault in the military. Maybe her son can explain the situation to her.
Does that count as some type of discrimination against women employees? I wonder why she hasn't brought that up.
As feminists we really don't have a strategy on how to handle this co-optation. It leaves our values quite vulnerable.
Did Obama ever offer any kind of explanation for that salary discrepancy?
nice post, ann.
it is really sad to see former feminists co-opted into more famous, well-paid anti-feminists. reminds me of that chapter in "backlash" where faludi investigates famous anti-feminists, and nearly all of them were at one time feminist but slowly became outspoken opponents.
This clearly raises the question: how much does McCain pay his staffers in his Senate office, and is there a difference between that and his male employees?
Someone out there has this information.
Addendum to first comment:
I just took a serious look at the Post article. Obama's staff needs to be looking at more than overall averages for pay here -- claiming that the women's average is high for McCain "because he has more women in senior positions" is not a good use of statistics. You should be comparing position-by-position. Do the senior men make as much as the senior women on average?
It makes me so angry and feel so betrayed when prominent feminist figures support people and causes so obviously anti-feminist in the name of feminism.
They are granting permission to label policies and people who hurt women "feminist." That's NOT okay.
I support women's choice to support whoever or whatever they want. But don't fucking confuse that feminist CHOICE by calling what is chosen feminist. Because it this case it couldn't be farther from it.
salaries for Hill staffers are all publicly available here: http://www.legistorm.com/browse_by_senator.html
More data from the same website:
http://www.legistorm.com/member/76/Sen_Barack_Obama/37/salary_title_id/asc.html
You can see a list of staffers' salaries organized by job description.
You'll get an idea of how experienced the staffers are if you click on their names. There doesn't seem to be a pay discrepancy when you look at time on the job.
saying that obama pays the women on his staff 83 cents to the dollar of men completely leaves out the fact that he has more men in the senior, higher pay positions. women and men in the same positions actually are getting paid the same amount.
it's like saying women doctors are paid less after looking at a sample of doctors where most of the interns are women, and most of the older doctors are men. They're not the same positions.
I never said Obama paid women -- of equal seniority -- less than men. But I DO think it's fair to criticize Obama for not having many women in senior positions on his campaign.
Another discussion:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lindsey-horvath/the-future-of-feminism_b_136932.html
The actions of these NOW leaders are unconscionable. Quite an abandonment of the recognized feminist agenda and the women and girls it represents.
I'm growing ever more disappointed with female leaders who do not support, protect, defend feminism and what it truly means for women and girls. What are we offering young women today? That biology alone constitutes feminism?
While I'm absolutely pro-Obama, I think most of the comments so far have let him off the hook a bit too easily. Saying "Oh, but women at the same level are paid the same as men" fails to look a little deeper. WHY are there more men at higher, better-paid positions? Plenty of companies with sexist hiring/promotion practices pay men and women the same wages for the same work but promote or hire significantly fewer women for upper level positions. Classic glass ceiling. There may be plenty of good arguments as to why Obama's senior staff is composed more heavily of men (including arguments that look at greater societal pressures and the US political scene in general), but it's simply blind to dismiss it as simply as some have.
Yes, absolutely, what Lisa said.
Megan at Jezebel just put up a post further explaining the pay discrepancy within the Obama campaign/staff.
Anyway, I have been feeling so sick about the GOP's use of feminist language - which it once demonized - to bash and berate women who aren't voting for McCain/Palin. They go out of their way to offend women and then they're indignant when we're offended and won't vote for them!
@ LinzND04:
Yes, but luckily they are few and far between. I am a NOW member myself and don't know of any who are abusing their leadership that way. I was Indiana state treasurer for NOW a few years back, and my mom has been IN NOW president for many years. I am now an IL NOW member. I also network with the MN NOW president, a couple NOW regional directors, and some from the national board, who are all fantastic. So I have a decent NOW network, and there is really no one like that. This article is the first one I've ever heard mentioning that. I would hate that one article referencing one individual to give NOW a bad rap because it is simply not representative of NOW at all. In fact, if you go to their website, the LA NOW president is clearly not aligned with NOW's issues and does not, or should not, represent the organization. Here are NOW's priority issues for those who aren't aware:
Advancing Reproductive Freedom
Promoting Diversity & Ending Racism
Stopping Violence Against Women
Winning Lesbian Rights
Achieving Constitutional Equality
Ensuring Economic Justice
Perhaps she feels she is championing the second issue, but obviously she is ignoring the rest. I just wanted to comment on this topic, because I didn't want any readers to get the wrong idea about NOW. It is a fantastic organization!
Of course, I understand the basic point being made about some self-proclaimed feminists going against the movement, but that's been around for a looooong time! Really, nothing new there. In fact, I disagree with Horvath even validating the terms second wave and third wave, because they are terms used to create a divide in the movement and should not be given any credit. Feminists all want the same things, even if we disagree on the how. That's my two cents, anyway.
The idea of these feminist leaders pushing for Palin is upsetting and baffling. I feel as though some second-wave feminists feel like we just need to get some woman, any woman in office, or we will lose our opportunity. But how can they overlook the fact that nearly everything the McCain/Palin ticket stands for is counter to feminist ideals? These women have fought long and hard only to trade in the ideals for one EXTREMELY poor token woman in a leadership position. It doesn't make me so much angry as it makes me sad. In all the years of fighting they've never seen a woman make it this close to the top. When Hillary was defeated in the primaries they saw their opportunity devastated, but when McCain nominated Sarah Palin they saw a ray of hope. At the end of the day they may get a woman in a top office, but we'll be left with an administration that believes women's fight should have ended with the right to vote. One woman in a high office is worth crippling the fight for equal pay, reproductive rights, better health care, acceptance of non-traditional gender roles, and all of those ways in which women are often silently burdened?
As a member of Oregon NOW, I'd also like to ask Linda Klinge (who is the current vice president and former president) to take a look at this page http://www.oregonnow.org/issues.html. I would like to know how she sleeps at night with that cognitive dissonance.
Why are Linda Klinge and Elaine Lafferty seen with Palin?
GOOOWD I HATE Palin!
I opened Feministing.com as I do everyday. I found this piece about feminism, NOW and the LEFT. Sarah Palin is not a feminist, frankly I am both tired and bored with discussing that but it appears that this conversation is widening and standing on the brink of muddying a stong proud movement seeking justice for all genders.
As you can see in this video, there are some "high-profile feminists" standing behind the GOP VP Nominee. If it was just one really angry woman, who was feeling betrayed because the Dems did not nominate a woman for president, we could just name it and watch her implode; however this is a bevy of titled women who are stepping up to re-define feminism.
continued at http://onlinewithzoe.com
Hey people, turns out the Horvath article is incorrect:
NOW Corrects News Reports Regarding Vice Presidential Endorsement
October 21, 2008
It was incorrectly reported tonight that the Los Angeles Chapter of NOW had endorsed Gov. Sarah Palin's bid for vice president. The National Organization for Women PAC has endorsed Barack Obama and Joe Biden. No chapter of NOW has made a contrary endorsement.
I really hope people have not started to believe differently about NOW. This is my worry about posting unvalidated information. And again, I continue to express my disapproval of the terms second wave and third wave. I don't want to divide our movement. We are all working for the same things; there may be individual differences but I just don't see the generalization implied here that twenty-something feminists (approximate age groups here) want different things than fifty-something feminists. I just don't see what this accomplishes. I hope we can all come together as feminists and just go out to accomplish what we all want: social and political equality.
Did Obama ever offer any kind of explanation for that salary discrepancy?
In cases like salary discrepancies, LegiStorm is the place online where you can get the answers. It is a website that tracks how the Congress staffs are spending public money. Their databases include information on Congressional salaries, travel, financials and information on the latest happenings on the House and Senate floors and committees. It remains as the only place on the web where you can find congressional staff salaries. Whether you’re researching who’s breaking the bank or who’s making peanuts, whether you are negotiating a pay raise or figuring out who’s buying drinks after work, LegiStorm is the only place online where you can get the answers. LegiStorm may be too hard for certain people to weather. The only people protesting it so far are the people whose information is posted, and doubtless they would get a personal loan to quash LegiStorm and go back to their secrecy.