It seems Clinton and Palin are being compared time and again. This video from cnn.com looks at both sides and asks women why they support who they do (Clinton or Palin). The conclusion I draw from this particular piece is that for some, just being a woman certainly doesn't earn you the female vote. But being a politician, wife, and mother and exuding femininity while doing it is something that (some) women respect.
Similiarly, being black, doesn't automatically earn Obama the black vote.
2 comments:
I think the country is headed in the right direction as far as more women attaining high political office is concerned. Like their male conterparts, women candidates are likely to have all kinds of different political philosophies which will appeal to different groups. How "feminine" a candidate dresses or acts, however, is a sexist and demeaning assessment and should not be a consideration when considering the merits of a candidate for office.
I think we would be able to make a fair assessment of a feminine politician verses a non feminine politician, if we had two female politicians who were seen as equally experienced. I think we are seeing time and time again that Palin and Clinton are not on equal footing. So it's hard to come to a conclusion about which is more effective or more sought after when the scales are not balanced to begin with.
Post a Comment