WOMEN, WORK, FAMILIES
The Palin punditry
September 15, 2008
There has been so much not to like about the treatment of women during this political campaign that you might think the recent round of Sarah Palin punditry should come as no surprise. But the selection of the Republicans' first female candidate for vice president has reignited debates over the "woman issue" at leadership levels, debates that are applicable to professional as well as political contexts.
One controversy involves a variation on the question that often surfaces in disputes over affirmative action and gender preferences. Is this a case of undeserved tokenism? To many former Clinton supporters and pro-choice Republicans, the notion that "any vagina will do" to galvanize women's support seems insulting, misguided or both. Others appear equally incensed that someone with as little national or foreign policy experience should make it on to the ticket because of sex. And a third group, typified by former Chief Executive Officer Carly Fiorina, seem intent on interpreting any challenge to Palin's qualifications as itself evidence of sexism.
Everyone should get a grip. The selection of political nominees has always been at least partly about demographics and surely a bump for gender is no less offensive than other forms of balance that parties have traditionally sought. If the question to beneficiaries of affirmative action is: "How does it feel to get a position because you are a woman?," the answer should be: "Much better than not getting it because I am a woman." But special treatment should extend only so far. No woman's qualifications should get a pass because of chromosomes. "Sexism" is a fair description of a placard telling Hillary Clinton to "Iron my socks." It is not sexist to ask whether being governor of a state close to Russia counts as foreign policy experience.
A second cluster of controversies is whether someone like Palin, a mother of five with a special-needs child, could, or should, devote the time necessary for such a demanding job. On her nationally syndicated radio show, Dr. Laura Schlessinger wondered why the Republicans "couldn't find one competent adult female with grown children." In blogs, letters to the editor and articles on the "mommy wars," critics have lambasted the "raw ambition" that propelled Palin back to work days after childbirth and led her to place her unwed pregnant daughter under a national spotlight.
Such criticism often reflects the double standard and double bind that have long kept women out of leadership positions. Whatever balance they strike, working mothers can be found lacking as parents or professionals, and sometimes both. They are not "committed to their careers" or are not "putting family first." Yet for centuries, men with small children have held leadership positions without facing similar criticism. For them, large families provide a photogenic field day.
When asked how women could solve the work/family conflict, Gloria Steinem once responded, "Women can't until men are asking that question too." The issue regarding Palin should not be whether she can hold national office without shortchanging her family. That's her decision to make, and she is not running for mother of the year. The relevant question is what position she takes on policies that will enable Americans of either sex to balance work and family. Where does she stand on paid parental leave, affordable quality childcare, elder assistance and equal pay for equal work?
A final issue that Palin's candidacy raises is the tension between family privacy and family values. In the wake of news about the pregnancy of their 17-year-old daughter, the Palins issued a press release saying: "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby." And they asked the media to "respect her privacy." To many supporters, that should have ended the matter.
But the difficulty is that Palin herself is on record as opposing choice for others with unplanned pregnancies, even victims of rape and incest. Under her preferred policies, the government would not respect Bristol's privacy or her decision. Palin is also on record in opposing birth control education that might avoid the difficult choices that adolescent pregnancy usually presents. According to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, fewer than 40% of teen mothers graduate from high school. Most end up with low-wage jobs and limited opportunities. Bristol Palin should be off limits to the press, but the policies that affect the life choices of those like her should be part of our national debate.
History teaches that putting a woman in power does not necessarily empower women. For those who care about gender equity, what matters most in choosing leaders is not their gender but their agenda.
Deborah L. Rhode is the E.W. McFarland Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and director of its Center on the Legal Profession.
Most Popular Headlines
- 'Legal armada' sets sail against Toyota
- Plaintiffs' firms mount mass attack on Toyota
- New public law school at U. Mass. Dartmouth approved
- D.C. lawyer will defend Chicago's gun law before Supreme Court
- Winning the battle for lateral partners
- Spotlight on Laterals
- CSX chases plaintiff firm over asbestos
- Controversy deepens over corporate rights, Citizens United
- Chicago market for laterals picking up
- Former Lehman Bros. top lawyer takes GC slot at AIG
