Sarah Palin and Caroline Kennedy Aren't Victims of Glass Ceilings, There is Something Wrong with the Floor.

In this morning's Washington Post, discussing the recent political experiences of Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Caroline Kennedy, Anne Kornblut asks whether a glass ceiling still exists for women in politics.

Like Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sarah Palin before her, Kennedy illustrated what some say is an enduring double standard in the handling of ambitious female office-seekers. Even as more women step forward as contenders for premier political jobs, observers say, few seem able to get there.

There is a major problem with suggesting that there is a glass ceiling holding women back from being appointed to the Senate. One, Hillary Clinton already won that seat. Two, Kirsten Gillibrand, a woman, is being appointed by Governor Paterson to succeed Clinton. If there truly is a glass ceiling holding women back, then Gillibrand must have one hell of an operatic voice to cause that ceiling to shatter.

Kornblut is not the first to make this assertion. In fact, in an interview with John Ziegler, Sarah Palin herself wondered how the media would handle Caroline Kennedy and the implications for what that would say about how the media dealt with her:

"I've been interested to see how Caroline Kennedy will be handled and if she will be handled with kid gloves or if she will be under such a microscope. ... It's going to be interesting to see how that plays out and I think that as we watch that we will perhaps be able to prove that there is a class issue here also that was such a factor in the scrutiny of my candidacy versus, say, the scrutiny of what her candidacy may be."

Palin assumed that Kennedy would get the royal treatment from the media and that this would prove a more global theme regarding media elitism against herself and by proxy the average Joe the American.

Palin was wrong, though. The media's treatment of her was not classism. Kennedy was skewered in the media and was criticized for many of the same faults Palin exhibited: unpreparedness and confusion of thought and position. Kornblut was also wrong though. Women in general are not being held back from the Senate. Caroline Kennedy was being held back from the Senate. Women are not unelectable as a vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin was unelectable.

That is not to suggest that there are no issues with the way women are viewed in public life. It is just that looking at the glass ceiling is the wrong issue to examine.

There is a difficult ceiling to break through for public office. That ceiling stopped both Palin and Kennedy. That is not the problem, though. In fact, that is a good thing. They needed to be blocked. Both Palin and Kennedy were obviously unprepared for the offices each sought. Had a ceiling not stopped them, we would have more serious social issues to deal with.

However, there is still a problem and an implicit sexism in the handling of these women. It is not that the ceiling for them was too thick, but that the floors on which they stood to reach those ceilings were shoddily built on rickety foundations. The sexism is not that they were stopped from achieving their high ideals of public office, rather it is the very fact that they even got as close to these positions as they did.

This is, to slightly alter the phrase, the subtle sexism of low expectations. I am glad that both Kennedy and Palin were stopped by a ceiling, but I am saddened that with their unimpressive command of the issues, they were so easily propped up in the rafters. As long as the Sarah Palins and Caroline Kennedys continue to get this close, the subtle sexism of low expectations will continue to hound our society.

So forget the ceiling, and let's do something about fixing the floor.

Comments

[bobbynorwich]

Compared to her trashing by the media, Palin asserted that Kennedy's treatment with "kid gloves" would prove its "class bias" against her. Looks like she was as dead wrong as, say...., a moose running from a helicopter.

[Oxonian2001]

I agree with Etan. Both were ultiimately undone by their lack of preparation. Similarly, Hillary, who was originally the frontrunner in the primaries, was not foiled by sexism but rather by her inept campaign staff: a problem, btw, also shared by McCain. (Btw, this is not to deny that the media's sniping at her appearance was not sexist.) Btw, if Palin or C. Kennedy were men or minorities for that matter, they wouldn't have lasted as long as they did.

Let's face it, gross ignorance in her interviews and debate as well as general inarticulacy did Palin in. As for Caroline, so little was known about her political ideas. That--coupled with her rather scant legal and legislative experience--was enough to derail her; never mind her inability to communicate effectively in her interviews. I'm guessing that she is more intelligent than Palin as she was wise enough to support Obama. But that's about it.

Allegations of sexism should not be tossed around lightly: especially when there are still far too many women who are either unjustly passed over for promotion or underpaid. Attention paid to those who are obviously not qualified for their jobs is a real slap in the face to intelligent, hardworking women everywhere.

[MHT73]

Caroline Kennedy may not have direct legislative experience, but she is smart and well-read, and she would have been compassionate and fair.
A more important story about Sarah Palin’s competence – allowing Native American villages to freeze and starve - can be found by following these links:
http://www.themudflats.net/2009/01/24/the-story-from-emmonak/
http://www.thetundradrums.com/news/show/4610

[ailbhe]

Any man with Kennedy's sparse cv would have been laughed out of the country for expecting job as Senator. This is a woman who has never even held a full time job!

If she was an 'ordinary' citizen, she would never even have been considered regardless of gender.

There are far more qualified, dedicated, hardworking, proven individuals of both genders, from all races and socioeconomic backgrounds that deserve this job. The people deserve to be represented by the best.

Being rich, white and connected should not entitle you to political power, she was not ousted for being a woman.

[WorldGoneWild]

Etan, you are right on point! Kennedy and Palin were unprepared and confused in thought.

In politics, a woman has to come out swinging in front of the cameras to be taken seriously. Remember when Hillary said the Monica Lewinsky scandal was due to a right-wing conspiracy? The heat she took afterwards was tremendous but Hillary showed everyone that she had the brains and the toughness to take on the male dominated political machine.

Both Palin and Kennedy failed to sell themselves in the blood sport of politics and in politics, there is no mercy or second chances.

[devans00]

"sexism of low expectations"

Nice way to put it.

Sometimes when a woman is presented for a high profile position, I find myself holding my breath. Waiting to see if her obvious unqualification will be embarrassing. Hoping her obvious badassness will knock off socks.

[benne]

Terrific piece. Yes, we don't want to talk about tokenism, anymore, something discussed widely in the 1970s. Sarah Palin seemed to be a token appointment. That says nothing about what she may or may not earn through campaigning in the future.

[learnsomething]

I think it was because Caroline is a Kennedy is why she was treated so badly. For some reason people are scared to of the Kennedy's. They try to block them from office all the time. I have notice that over the years.

I remember when one of Caroline's cousins was thinking of running for office, and his attackers couldn't find anything negative on him, so they went all the way back to his kindergarten years and used something he did in kindergarten against him.

[learnsomething]

Media, please stop insulting Caroline.

[prodemdss]

PLEASE don't compare one woman with another, Palin with Kennedy? looks?? I don't think so, fellow writers. Palin should never have been there in the first place, big mistake and a very scary one. New appointee to the Senate? Obviously, another decision on opposite ends of the scale. C. Kennedy? Personal, leave her alone, her time will come if she wants to, she will go for whatever destiny awaits her. Women are making our mark everyday, just maybe the wrong ones sometimes end up in the news. I am so SICK of Sarah Palin, I wish she would just stick to her own business, personal, defensive, whatever, she does not belong in any limelight.








I

[pistoo]

I find it extremelly insulting to put Sarah Palin in the same sentance with Caroline Kennedy.
Mrs Kennedy is an educated woman , very involved in cultral matters in new York, Washington, and has written a number of books. She has travelled from childhood around the world, belongs to a caring family her aunt started the handicapped Olympics etc., one of her uncles was in charge of Peace Corp and an Ambassador to France. To compare her to Sarah palin, who is an expert at killing Moos is really very insulting. They don't speak the same language.
Pistoo.

[AlwaysaLiberal]

Yes this article invalidates itself because of that very thing. Can people please stop insulting Caroline Kennedy? She never did anything to deserve it and it's over now! Stop treating this woman like a dog. Palin was treated better!

[DemNY]

Let''s not get crazy. I think Sarah Palin was treated almost worse, or at least as bad, as HRC.

Caroline Kennedy got off easy in my opinion. Both HRC and SP, suffered a whole lot more.

[Gould123]

The media was shameless against Kennedy! I hate them all! Now we have a thing for Senate!

[meko]

The reason Peggy Noonan gave (privately, she thought) for Palin's nomination seems to be the same reason behind Kennedy's push for governor - they were "going with the narrative."

Every time a woman's candidacy is put forth with the argument that "experience doesn't matter" because she's going to be on a weaker footing than her competitor. If she uses her family status as a qualification, her family will face intense scrutiny. When people say, "vote for me based on my voting record" they expect people to look at those votes and understand that those votes will be questioned. When you run for office and say that being a great mom is what makes you qualified, be prepared to have the quality of your parenting questioned and the behavior of your kids scrutinized.

The congresswomen who were considered for the NY senate seat were both mothers. But they ran for public office based on their public achievements. That's why they were taken more seriously.

[zenobiadarcy]

Just to clarify my statement about Kennedy. Not debating whether or not she should have been chosen, especially if others were more qualified, but she certainly has proven in her education, experiences, and her works of charity that if she were she would not be equal to a Palin. Palin having been elected as mayor and governor is frightening and one would think those who are aware of her obvious lack of qualifications to be a vice-president would admit the error made and squash any speculation that she could ever be president of this country. Too bad she cannot stand back and take a look at things and see this ridiculousness but that inability is what makes Palin her charming self.

[deosil]

I am thinking though, if Kennedy had the grace to drop out, shouldnt Palin be on the same bus.
GEEZ, Sarah, get OFF THE STAGE,,,,,

[zenobiadarcy]

Not debating whether or not Caroline Kennedy was qualified to be appointed as Senator but to compare her unpreparedness to Sarah Palin's is ludicrous. Sarah Palin proved, in her several lengthy interviews and the debate, not to mention just generally answering a question, that she is not even qualified to be a governor. Caroline Kennedy may have had a poor showing but she was so briefly scrutinized that what was learned did not betray any lack of knowledge. She cannot be judged on these brief interviews. The problem with the choice of Palin was probably based on an assumptions that a mayor and governor would be able to discuss current events and crisis. Palin was so concerned that Kennedy would be treated with more respect because of class when she should be marveling at the fact that an ignorant person with seemingly no interest in the world beyond the spot where she can see Russia from her house would be elected as a mayor or a governor. Caroline Kennedy, with the name Kennedy, and the education to successfully peformed the duties of a Senator was the one treated with undeserved disrespect.

[TwentyCharactersLong]

The problem with Caroline Kennedy is that we knew almost nothing about her(except for the song "Sweet Caroline"). I don't know her competence, but she does, you know, need, you know, a speech coach.

The problem with Sarah Palin is that there's no there there.

[meko]

Very pithy.

[Margo Arrowsmith]

We do know Caroline Kennedy's competence. Anyone who has ever worked with her marvel at how good she is. We can read her books. Those who sat on the VP selection committee with her talk about little but how astute she is, what a hard worker.

While the post makes some good points to compare these two women is both an insult to women and to competent people.

[AlwaysaLiberal]

I understand the problem people had with Caroline Kennedy, what I don't understand is the vicious attacks that were constantly launched against her by people like Jane Hamsher. Just go to her site and read what she was writing. It's not necessary and she went out of her way to be mean and nasty to someone who didn't deserve it! If I didn't know better I would have thought Hamsher wanted the seat for herself!