|
||
Showdown in St. Louis: Gender vs. Agenda
Tomorrow night, eyes will be glued to TV sets across the nation for the Biden-Palin political showdown. Though historic in its own right, the debate will not be a political first: in 1984, Geraldine Ferraro became the first woman candidate to hold her own in a vice presidential debate against then-VP George Bush. At the time, I was an eager first-term Councilmember-at-Large in Des Moines, and I channeled my enthusiasm for the historic face-off into quite the neighborhood debate watch party.
Everyone made a big deal of presidential politics in Iowa; as the traditional site of the first caucuses that tend to shape the road to the presidency, our interest in national politics was strong. Yet for this debate, the attraction was overwhelming -- the first woman to appear on a major party ticket would be "on trial" against a long-term, and very seasoned, opponent: the vice president of the United States. So we took the night on with fanfare, and I rented a sizable hall with a movie screen, inviting my constituents to watch history being made up close, large and personal.
Over two decades have past since that historic night, but Ferraro's considerations at that time were the same as Palin's will be when she takes the stage tomorrow evening: the evaluation of both her opponent and herself on the issue of who could best assume the presidency if something happened to their respective running mates; the need to attract those who were going to vote for the ticket based on the vice presidential selection; and the careful negotiation of her dual identities as candidate and woman. The latter was perhaps the most important for Ferraro, and may be for Palin as well: could she stand "toe to toe" with the vice president of the United Sates (or in Palin's case, an esteemed veteran senator) and hold her own?
The issues to which Ferraro had to speak were eerily similar to the ones confronting us today. What would her party do about the national deficit? How would they protect industrial jobs while protecting the environment? And on the international level, where did she stand in terms of diplomacy in the Middle East and Nicaragua and the popular call for a mutually verifiable nuclear arms freeze with Russia? While "bailout" was not a term in question, the differences between Democrats and Republicans on economic policies loomed large in regard to tax and budget policies that would be fair to the poor, the middle class, and minorities.
The stakes were high indeed -- not just for Ferraro the contender or for the Democratic party, but for Ferraro the woman candidate. When she told columnist Ellen Goodman that she felt she could not make a mistake, she said it was because "It's not just for me, it's for every one of us. To show that we're as good as--" "As good as men..." Ellen knowingly interjected.
That evening, the tension in the large Des Moines hall was palpable: we all knew that when it came to scrutiny around gender, Ferraro was right.
The big screen turned out to be an excellent cinematic choice: as the debate progressed, Ferraro did better and better, and seeing Bush's face up close, we were afforded a revealing view that many television viewers were not as he became visibly shaken. It seemed that the Vice President had underestimated this highly experienced congresswoman and former Queens district attorney, who could handle herself under pressure while maintaining a strong command of the issues. As I watched Ferraro's performance with increasing optimism, I turned to my best friend Lois Braverman, now the President of the Ackerman Institute here in New York City, who was analyzing it from a very different perspective.
"A woman can't make a man look this bad and survive," she whispered.
I looked at her quizzically, not wanting to concede any of my inner optimism, and kept watching and enjoying Ferraro shine on the big screen.
At the close of the Ferraro-Bush debate, I stepped to the platform at the front of the room, and with complete and utter confidence -- ignoring Lois's gendered perspective -- announced that we would now see how the press responded to this amazing piece of history.
Imagine my disheartened surprise when the anchors began to weigh in. I am pretty sure that Tom Brokaw was the first to announce that Bush had won -- and as the other male anchors followed in chorus, "Bush has won the debate!", my fellow Iowans watched my jaw drop in shock.
My own sense of reality began to crack. What I had watched with my own eyes and heard with my own ears was denied by every male with authority on every network across America. And so despite encouragement to stay in Iowa and shoot for governor or congresswoman, I instead left the next year to see if I could help my state from New York as head of the Ms. Foundation for Women. It was then that I began to realize that to really see women in power, and collectively admit when they had equaled or bested a man, we would have to work to change the very fabric of American culture. We would have to change the way people thought about women, and our understanding of what a leader really looks like.
The world has changed greatly in the past 24 years. I think that if that debate were held today, Ferraro would have been declared the winner. But I don't think that our national way of dealing with gender has evolved to the point where it won't be a lurking presence on stage tomorrow in St. Louis. Just as Ferraro before her, Palin will have to tend to the issues, as all candidates must and should. Yet her gender will be as much a factor as her agenda, as is always the case when women are underrepresented in the halls of power.
I don't think we are yet at any reverse point where you can't make a woman look bad and survive. What I do know is that gender issues are alive and well, and that it is up to the press and to us -- as voters and media consumers -- to give thoughtful and diligent attention to the ways in which gender is influencing our discussions and opinions. When we tune into the debate tomorrow night, let's pay attention to the agendas at play, not the genders which deliver them.
Follow Marie Wilson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/twhp
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
What are you saying? That Palin is a dummy but if she looks bad its because she is a WOMAN, not because she is dumb?
What was the point of the whole article. Sure there are times, perhaps like with Ferraro, although after seeing her distasteful and racist attacks against Obama I would think that the men knew best, when women are not treated fairly - but to suggest that if at all Sarah Palin gets a bad review tonight has ANYTHING with being a woman is absolutely RIDICULOUS!
Sarah Palin, if she were called MACK, would be as stupid as a man, as she is as a woman!
careful negotiation of her dual identities as candidate and woman
-----
Hillary Clinton's campaign put this to rest. She didn't lose because of gender (entirely) but because she ran a flawed campaign.
I saw the Ferraro-Bush debate and I don't recall the details. But the "verdict" on the debate might not completely rest with gender. At the recent debate-like event conducted by the church in Texas I was astounded that the talking heads thought McCain won. Obama gave answers with some depth while McCain evaded answering a large fraction of the questions. McCain inserted anecdotes and off-topic statements; he mugged & joked for the audience, and he used simplistic one-liners. Astoundingly, some commentators gave McCain points for his anecdotes even though they did not address the question asked.
In tonight's debate Palin's gender may complicate matters for Biden more than for her. A male version of Palin might be skewered without the spinners trying to make it look like someone is ganging up on a woman.
Have some hard liquor ready for this one.
Geraldine Ferraro really pissed me off during the primaries with her ignorant statements. But I was around during her historic run as the Demorcratic VP nominee. And I can honestly say that Sarah Palin is no Geraldine Ferraro. If John McCain loses this election, one of the main reasons will be his obvious poor judgement in choosing her for his running mate.
Gwen Ifill is a great choice for the McCain team to have made. Everyone who watches the News Hour knows that Ms. Ifill is one of the most gentle interviewers in the business. She also has the best poker-face of the bunch.
I think Katie Couric did a great job but I could see in Ms. Couric's facial expression her dismay and disbelief in what she was hearing. No one will see that in Ms. Ifill tonight and that will be to Governor Palin's advantage.
Sure, there is the gender issue, but more important are the ISSUES issue. And one of the VP candidates is far more able to talk about, think about, and help solve those issues. Enough kid gloves w/the gender card; no one has shied away from Obama because of the race card (nor should they).
Follow the issues by following the language. Print out a set of cards and play bipartisan bingo as the candidates follow the pat catchphrases they've come to love.
VP Bingo cards link didn't come through:
http://www.theweeklymeat.com/the_weekly_meat/2008/10/bipartisan-bing.html
Palin faces the dual challenge of being a candidate and completely unqualified. She is no Geraldine Ferraro.
The nomination of Palin merely expresses what Republicans have been telling us for years: Ignorance is a good thing, there's no need for knowledge. Palin is the female persona of the blessing of limited thinking ability.
I remember thinking back in 1984 that of the 4 candidates (Reagan, Bush, Mondale, Ferraro) Ferraro was far and away the smartest one of the pack.
Feminist defenders of Palin are like African American defenders of Justice Thomas - who voted with the majority in the case that virtually repealed Brown v. Board of Education. Attitudes do need to change, but they change in response to history, and history is made through action, not expection nor suspicion.
Why not question that the moderator, Gwen Ifill, of the upcoming Biden-Palin debate is pro-Obama. She wrote a book that praises Obama, obviously she will try her best to make Palin look bad in the debate Why couldn't the moderator be more fair and bi-partisan?
Why not make fun of Joe Biden, who thinks FDR was President in 1929, and thinks paying more taxes is patriotic?
She did not write a book that praises Obama. She wrote a historical book that discusses a phenomenon in this country -- a new cadre of young, black politicians. Because Obama is one of them, and the most famous and influential, the publishers (not Ifill) decided to market the book by using his name in the title.
Ifill is a seasoned "reporter." You must remember those people. Neutral journalists who report on the events that matter in the world today without editorial or letting anyone know their personal opinions, biases or party affiliations. I know that the usual Fox crowd is unfamiliar with that concept, but true reporters still exist. She is one of the best of them.
The McCain camp chose Ifill - so they could lie about bias, just as you are doing now. "Obama Nation" was a book about Obama, so it must support him, huh?
Why not make fun of Rush drones who are bitter because their politics have led America to the brink of disaster?
Here is a good example of people believing what they want to believe, regardless of the facts.
-Both campaigns must agree on the moderator. Obviously McCain doesn't have a problem with Ifill or he would have asked for someone else. Experienced campaigners always try to plant storyline seeds in case they need them in the future. ie. Ifill is in the tank for Obama, Women journalists are extra harsh on Palin. So IF Palin is terrible they can immediately switch the storyline from the obvious 'she did terrible because she is terrible' to something less harmful to the campaign, 'she did terrible because Ifill wants her to be terrible'. Luckily for McCain, he can always rely on people that 'call' themselves patriots to water these seeds no matter how much they have to twist logic to do it.
-Don't the taxes you pay go to the wages of the soldiers you send off to war. Don't they feed their families and take care of them when they come back wounded? Don't they pay for the cops that patrol your streets and the firemen that save your house? Don't they build the schools that educate your kids? What exactly is unpatriotic about paying taxes?
Just imagine the media frenzy and negativity Sarah Palin would get if she refuses to take part in this debate because of the black woman moderator, who supports obama.
The truth is the moderator should be bi-partisan. IF you were a referee of a match between your home town and an another, you would knowingly or unknowingly be biased in favor of your town. It makes a lot more sense if the moderator were bi-partisan. Think about it.
Government is corruptible, everyone knows that. Why would you favor bigger government, giving them more control of the people? Increased taxes are a result of bigger government.
The number one issue is the ECONOMY. Everyone knows that taxes are a disincentive. With our economy getting worse, please tell me how exactly increasing taxes would help economic growth?
Businesses do not want higher taxes just like the rest of America. It is a lot easier for them to relocate to a lower tax jurisdiction to remain globally competitive, taking American Jobs with them. Another example would be Obama's plan of almost doubling the capital gains tax, which would hurt retirees who are not able to work whilst forcing capital to flow out of the country to lower tax jurisdictions.
All Biden needs to do is at the beginning of the debate is look over at Palin and say "gee you really do look like Tina Fey" It will get a huge laugh and take the tension out of the room!
Biden has the opportunity to teach McCain a lesson in class. When dealing with a young upstart opponent you don't belittle them by refusing to look at them and grumbling into the podium.
Obama did well in the debate but he wasn't as good as McCain was bad.
http://thetruthburns.wordpress.com/2008/09/27/a-generational-debate/
Biden should just sit back and let her babble out enough rope to hang herself. Luckily for her the rope she spins will be completely without substance.
To quote a west wing episode, let bartlet be bartlet. Anyone afraid that Biden is being coached too much - don't be so hard on her, be aggresive, explain your experience, attack mccain.
Why must the Republicans stick by Palin, when you know THEY KNOW in their heart of hearts that she is wrong for the country. Palin will lose. Oh, Oasis' new album DIG OUT YOUR SOUL is coming out soon. Yay!
Marie ---
I'm male, so I understand that our POVs are somewhat different, but I consider it almost an insult to Geraldine Ferraro to compare her to Sarah Palin.
As you say, Ferraro was darn good in her debate, and the "liberal" press called it for Bush.
Tomorrow, we all know that if Palin manages not to electrocute herself on her wire, the "liberal" press will call it at least a draw.
I'm afraid I won't see that as progress for women, but rather as another peculiar example of the favoritism of the "liberal" press for non-liberal candidates.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
