
The World Deferring to Palin
Last week at the end of the RNC I wrote that it was too soon to think clearly about the conventions but that Sarah Palin had initially stuck out in my mind the most. I think I also wrote that on some level it was exciting to see a woman in the race again. Well both impressions remain true, in a sense. Sarah Palin has provided nothing but excitement, though in a be careful what you wish for sort of way, and she continues to be what I recall most clearly about either convention, increasingly so actually, but mostly in a the hangover is getting worse instead of better sort of way.
How long she will dominate the conversation is another question. At the moment she seems to be simultaneously occupying all the empty post-conventions air space and pressing every button available. Arguably more so than Hillary ever did. My facebook page is on fire with groups like "Women Against Sarah Palin" (they say they've had 55,000 responses) and "Hillary Clinton Supporters for Sarah Palin" (29 members), not to mention the constant stream of updates, and "wall" arguments. Hillary may have borne the brunt of this year's sexism after-shocks (or feminism's "bloody aftermath" as my friend Melissa Lafsky likes to refer to it) but in a sense she has always been a very recognizable stereotype: the over-achieving plain Jane, the wronged wife, the "femi-nazi"; she fit many second-wave feminist caricatures to a tee. There would be no cookie baking recipe from Hillary, thank-you very much. When Hillary teared up this last January in New Hampshire, she was alternately lauded and abused for showing her softer side. Cut to this past week: No one can imagine Sarah Palin being raked over the coals for tearing up, can they? No one can imagine Sarah Palin not having a cookie recipe. And yet she hunts! And marathons! And governs! And campaigns with a babe in her arms. Actually, I'm not entirely sure anyone could have imagined her period prior to two weeks ago — somehow she is managing to mesh a whole slew of female stereotypes into one, and the world is predictably exploding over it. The homepage of the NYT has been chalked full of Palin as a woman/mother analysis, whilst the McCain camp is throwing around accusations of sexism as though they were balls at batting practice.
Currently, however, what I happen to find most frightening about Palin, and the greatest cause for concern in terms of her actually serving as VP, is her refusal to talk to the press. At the moment she has agreed to one interview with Charlie Gibson, but beyond that McCain's camp has indicated that she will only speak to reporters if they show "deference." [http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/television/rick_davis_on_mccain_campaigns_media_approach_with_palin_93793.asp] Could there be a more loaded or chilling word choice? It is the very heart of the role of the press in a democracy not show undue deference. It's as though Palin is attempting to wield the fact she's a woman and a mother (with a complicated family) in the same way the Bush administration wielded 9/11, i.e., "In times like these people have to watch what they say and watch what they do." [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0CE4D91F3AF93BA1575AC0A9679C8B63] It's as though the press should also be required to open the door for for her and doff their hats. That said for the time being it seems to be working -- she's still got everyone marching to her beat with no end in sight. The irony? Even Maureen Dowd is fantasizing [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/opinion/07dowd.html] about what would have happened if Obama had picked Hillary. -- 09/10/08