The fake feminism of Sarah Palin

[alp227]

by Jessica Valenti

Sarah Palin sure is dropping the f-bomb a lot lately.

In a widely noted speech this month to the Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion-rights group, Palin invoked the words "feminism" and "feminist" no less than a dozen times. She called for a "pro-woman sisterhood" and addressed the "sisters" in the audience. If it weren't for the regular references to gun rights, you might have thought you were listening to Gloria Steinem.

If this rhetoric seems uncharacteristic of the former governor of Alaska, that's because it is. When running for vice president in 2008, Palin flip-flopped on the feminist question, telling CBS's Katie Couric that she is one, but later telling NBC's Brian Williams, "I'm not going to label myself anything."

Today, however, Palin is happily adopting the feminist label. She's throwing support behind "mama grizzly" candidates, describing the large number of women in the "tea party" as evidence of a "mom awakening" and preaching girl power on her Facebook page.

It's not a realization of the importance of women's rights that's inspired the change. It's strategy. Palin's sisterly speechifying is part of a larger conservative move to woo women by appropriating feminist language. Just as consumer culture tries to sell "Girls Gone Wild"-style sexism as "empowerment," conservatives are trying to sell anti-women policies shrouded in pro-women rhetoric.

--snip--

When members of the conservative Independent Women's Forum argue against efforts to address pay inequity, they say the salary gap is a result of women's informed choices -- motherhood, for example -- and that claims of discrimination turn women into victims. Conservatives have realized that women respond to seemingly feminist arguments.

But, of course, Palin isn't a feminist -- not in the slightest. What she calls "the emerging conservative feminist identity" isn't the product of a political movement or a fight for social justice.

It isn't a structural analysis of patriarchal norms, power dynamics or systemic inequities. It's an empty rallying call to other women who are as disdainful of or apathetic to women's rights as Palin herself: women who want to make abortion and emergency contraception illegal and who fight same-sex marriage rights. As Kate Harding wrote on Jezebel.com: "What comes next? 'Phyllis Schlafly feminism?' 'Patriarchal feminism?' 'He-Man Woman Hater Feminism?' "

Given that so-called conservative feminists don't support women's rights, how can they paint their movement as pro-woman? Why are they not being laughed out of the room?

Easy: They preempt criticism of their lack of bona fides by aligning themselves with a history that most women are proud of -- the fight for suffrage. They claim they're the real feminists, as Palin did in her speech lauding the Susan B. Anthony List for "returning the women's movement back to its original roots." (She wasn't talking about voting rights; she was referring to the debated notion that first-wave feminists were antiabortion.)

It may seem odd to argue that for women to make progress, they should ground their movement in the past -- but it's appropriate, given the beliefs of conservative "feminists." They don't want to move forward; instead they knock 1960s-era feminism as hooey while claiming to support equality. In her book "Going Rogue," for example, Palin writes that she doesn't agree with "the radical mantras of that early feminist era, but reasoned arguments for equal opportunity definitely resonated with me."

Of course, by dismissing the past 40 years of feminism, women such as Palin disparage the very movement that made it possible for them to be public figures.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/28/AR2010052802263_pf.html

Jessica Valenti is the author of "The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession With Virginity Is Hurting Young Women" and the founder of Feministing.com. She has written previously for Outlook on women's rights in the United States and on virginity.

My take: Yep, this conservative feminism thing is one big bleepin' sham...basically it's hypocritical apologetics for patriarchy. And Valenti was spot-on with the "Girls Gone Wild" analogy. I'd also equate African-American rappers who use the N-word/gangsta lyrics/street culture as "empowerment" with the black conservatives who proudly suck it up to Whitey (remember that black preacher who once said "if the KKK opposes gay marriage I would ride with them"?)

[barbtries]

1. great article

[livetohike]

2. Excellent - thanks for posting this

:hi: Since Todd Palin controls everything his wife does, including interfering with her job as Governor, I can't see how she could even consider herself a feminist. But in Palin world, up is down. :eyes:

[brewens]

3. I wondered if she may have been contemplating abortion

with Trig? That would be one explanation of her behavior. Strange that someone with the beliefs she claims to have, would want to hide a pregnancy.

[Chulanowa]

4. I was unaware that "Girls Gone Wild" was trying to sell itself as empowerment

Seriously, I always figured it was reveling in its own misogyny.

Anyway, people like Palin basically believe that since a woman should be subordinate to man, it is "feminist" to support that "ordained role" because to do otherwise upsets "god's order" or something. Thus they feel they are protecting women from god's wrath, and that by kowtowing to men, women can avoid any sort of "punishment" from those men, leading to harmony that's supposedly good for everyone. It's very 1950's.

But don't get too self-righteous. There's a pretty prevalent feminist "scam" on the left, too. Ever run across a self-proclaimed feminist, who is certain that all other women are stupid beasts who must be led around by the feminist in question, and her "enlightened" compatriots? I see it with alarming regularity here on DU, the whole "you don't know what's good for you, so you should do what I say is good for you"

[Berry Cool]

6. No, I never see that kind of feminist on DU.

I do sometimes see the kind that urges other women to question some of the choices they made to think about whether they were actually made out of a free and conscious "choice" or as a result of subtle and not-so-subtle social pressures of which they may not previously have been aware. However, it's good and healthy for all of us to examine the decisions we make in life to determine how many of them reflect our true free will and how many of them are more reflective of society's expectations of us--as women or as anything else--than of true choice.

I hear a lot about "choice feminism" these days. That's fine, but before women engage in what they call "choice feminism," I think it's good for them to make sure they truly have a choice. And that men have the same choices.

[Greenpeach]

5. Good article...

Thanks.

[andypandanc]

7. Don't take Palin lightly

Good information here. I cannot take Palin lightly because I laughed when people said GWB would become president and suffered monetarily the next 8 years through his reign. Keeping up to date with what Palin is saying is a good thing. Thank you.

[skepticscott]

10. GWB had a father who was also president

and he himself was already solidly entrenched in the good old boys network before he ran. Palin has no such advantages, she's even dumber than Shrub, and she would be running for the nomination of an inherently sexist party. Trust me, she will crash and burn before the primaries are even over, and will ironically blame the media for her failure, when they are the only reason she isn't back being a hicktown mayor.

[madamesilverspurs]

8. Spewage is as spewage does.

-

[Bert]

9. I said it before

and I am going to say it again. Palin is the antithesis of feminism, a person who benefits from the works of others, susan b anthony not to mention hillary clinton, who has no goal other than to undo the work that made her appearance possible while taking in as much cash as possible. She is in no way a feminist but is instead someone who is concerned about her own power and doesent waste time with intangibles like principles. Everything about her is to appeal to patriarchy, she is the female equivalent of an 'uncle tom'.

I will say I do not worry about her being elected after what she has done as far as dropping the governorship and spouting nonsense, she is in no way laying a political foundation, politics was never more than a way to get a shitload of money for her, and she dropped it the exact minute she found out she could make more money by dropping out and selling the image of herself, which is just that, an image and no substance at all.