Friday, September 12, 2008

What's Right and What's Feminist

I have recently begun a paid internship with a feminist organization. That's right, I'm no longer unemployed. Still uninsured but who really cares about me....

As I was saying, I have recently begun a paid internship with a media-based feminist organization. Part of my daily responsibilities is to go through all of the organization's (general) e-mails, most of which are comments in response to news briefs the organization puts out to its subscribers. Many of them salute the work of this organization, some are trying to promote their own work, and then there is a fairly substantial amount who write to voice their disappointment at this organization for being a feminist media organization and yet still bashing Sarah Palin.

I stick to my beliefs fully and I expect others to do the same. Which is why a large part of me sympathizes with these commentators. As a feminist, media-oriented organization, what are our goals? Sarah Palin, for all of her faults, is a woman in a position of extreme power and media-attention. She is the first woman to be a nominee for a GOP presidental position. Whatever the motives behind her selection and no matter how much she may or may not be qualified for her proposed position, she is still a woman in an incredible place. Without really thinking about it, you could say that she is a breakthrough for women. No Hillary Clinton, who really earned her position in politics, but she's still there none the less.

As a feminist organization, where does that leave you? Ok, Palin doesn't support abortion at all, for any reason, but she does still consider herself a feminist. Why, I'm not sure, but she apparently does. And even if she didn't, she's still a woman. What does a feminist say to this? How does a feminist organization deal with the fact that our country's first female Vice President does not agree with its values? Do you not support her because you tend to be a liberal organization (as many feminist organizations do and many feminists are) and she is very conservative? Do you shun her because her values are not the same as yours? If you do, aren't you going against the very fiber of your beliefs?

This is surely a very troubling spot to find oneself, as a feminist, in. I am all for women's rights but have never waved the feminist flag too much myself, so I have the pleasure of not being faced with this problem. Plus, I am a single person, allowed as many opinions and hypocrisies as I please. But as an organization...with a motto....with a code of ethics....with RULES....what do you do? Support a woman in that position simply because she's a woman--the organizational way to approach the issue-- or shun her because, despite her gender, she just does not believe in the same things as you do--a much more individualistic way to approach the issue.

This is a sticky subject indeed and, to be honest, I can't help but nod my head to those e-mails I read shaming us for our anti-Palin actions.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

But Palin is a politician running for office and no matter what her sex, ethnicity, religion, etc., has to be judged on what she stands for. If she is against the goals and beliefs of the organization, it has every right to criticize her despite her being a woman. Is an African-American wrong to criticize Obama? Is a Jew wrong to disagree with Joe Lieberman?

Palin is the GOP's pit bull yet they have cleverly set up a situation where attacking this woman with so-called traditional American family values in any way is somehow sexist and unfair. No one should buy into that!

Barefoot and Pregnant in the Kitchen said...

I see what you're saying but I guess my point is this...where do you draw the line between sticking to your guns as an organization and defending your personal moral values? As the titles suggests...what's right and what's feminist?
Any individual woman has the right to criticize what they don't see as right, but should a feminist organization stay quiet about it? This is where I get lost.

Anonymous said...

I really don't see the problem. Again, should the NAACP not criticize Clarence Thomas, one of the most conservative justices, because he's African-American? Think about this: Until a member of a minority or oppressed group is able to be criticized for his or her positions or actions, he or she hasn't really broken through the glass ceiling.

Barefoot and Pregnant in the Kitchen said...

First I just want to say that I agree with you, but I must play Devil's advocate.
We are criticizing her for her positions...and her actions. How dare she run as VP when she's completely unqualified and ravaged with family issues.

Barefoot and Pregnant in the Kitchen said...

Here's an interesting take on this issue:
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Story?id=5736716&page=1

Anonymous said...

Since Oprah hasn't had Biden on her show, then she should not be obligated to have Palin on her show. People keep comparing Obama to Palin, but Obama is running for president. I hate the way that anyone who attacks Palin is charged with sexism. Just like anyone who attacks Israel's policies is automatically an anti-Semite.

Anonymous said...

hi nibs!

I think that regardless of what type of private parts she has, Palin's views are completely terrifying and offensive. Especially to women. I can think of nothing more offensive to women then supporting her just because she was needed to make the McCain ticket more interesting.

Love the blog! hope NJ is treating you well!

Michelle

Anonymous said...

First, I am not a "feminist" and I'm not "political" by any stretch of the imagination, in fact, I am apolitical... But as for Sarah Palin... Women should be proud of her for achieving a nomination for Vice President. Period. If they don't like what she stands for, you don't have to vote for her, but be proud of her as a woman breaking new ground. I agree with the Annon poster, that even if you're a lover of dogs, you can still dislike a pit bull... Well, she said black, obama, etc., but same theory...

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the idea that "women's rights" are defined by a limited set of beliefs is in and of itself polarizing and self-destructive...

Think what you will of Hillary, she fought to get where she did, whereas Palin seems to have simply stepped in _____ .