Sarah Palin has dismissed Gloria Steinem’s brand of feminism as very passé. Steinem has argued that Palin and Bachmann sold out the women’s movement. Palin pretty much dismissed Steinem by saying that she was so yesterday. Are Bachmann and Palin even feminists or do they want to be? I would say no. However they can reap the rewards from the feminist movement. Perhaps that is what it was all about.
Steinem was was feted at a luncheon on Wednesday in celebration of the HBO documentary about her life, Gloria: In Her Own Words according to New York Magazine:
Steinem elaborated. “I can testify, the very same things people were telling me 30 or 40 years ago — it’s against nature, you can’t do this, my wife is not interested — all these [people] are now saying, well, feminism used to be necessary, but it’s not anymore. That is the new form of obstruction. And, of course, it’s accompanied by the other natural thing that happens if you have a big social justice movement: You make jobs for people who sell it out. So we have Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, who are on my list of ‘the women only a man could love.'”
Palin was interviewed on the subject by Fox commentator Megyn Kelly. According to Mediaite.com:
Kelly then brought up criticisms from feminist icon Gloria Steinem, who argued that Palin and Bachmann had “sold out the women’s movement” and made their careers on being women “only a man could love.” Palin, unfazed, argued that Steinem seemed to have missed the train on 21st century feminism– which, without either the previous statements semi-supporting the Newsweekcover or her subsequent explanation, would have made for a laughable headline, at best. But Palin actually backed up her claims with some substance, as a career woman who had risen to international recognition against the odds herself. “I think Gloria Steinem has evidently had her day… it’s over, it’s very passe,” she said of her comments. As women who “desire to serve something greater than self,” (and in this she recruited Kelly herself), “we are the women’s movement; we are illustrating equality.” Palin gave her predecessor credit for “adding some healthy debate back in the day,” but concluded that her opinion nowadays was moot, as “she does not share our views of women being able to do much more than she gives us credit for.”
At face value, it’s hard to disagree with Palin’s statement: that it’s “healthy” to see candidates vetted equally, and any evaluation of their efficacy as political icons that stems exclusively from an acknowledgment that their genitalia is the minority in politics, in 2011, should be “passé.” A woman running for office, one imagines, would much rather be lauded and smeared on their statements and political merits as harshly as any man would, and given what we’re seeing with Rick Perry, Rep. Bachmann would have an uphill battle arguing she’s getting it worse than anyone else.
Palin didn’t quite give Steinem the devil’s due. I will be the first one to agree with Palin that Steinem is somewhat passé. Good grief, Steinem is now 77 years old. She was politically active in the 1960’s and 70’s. Much has changed. However, what Palin needed to acknowledge is that those she now considers passé were the gun runners of the day. The Steinems of the world paved the way for the Palins and Bachmanns of today’s times. Neither woman would be running for president and Palin surely couldn’t have paraded her unwed pregnant daughter out on stage with her when she ran for vice president. Had Palin been transposed back in time to be a contemporary of Steinem, she and her daughter would have both been run out of town on a rail.l That is how much America has changed.
Hillary Clinton is not the same generation as Gloria Steinem either. While Palin and to a lesser degree, Bachmann, continue to play the victim at every opportunity, no one even looked embarrassed when they made ugly remarks about Hillary’s thighs or Chelsea. The Clinton women were fair game. Hillary hasn’t had a walk in the park.
Gloria Steinem was truly a trail-blazer for modern women. She can pretty much say what she wants. She paid her dues. The rest of us should really only be saying one thing: Thank you. 
My advice to Palin: say “Gloria Steinem!?….is she still around?”
A woman only a man could love…..is that supposed to sound unusual somehow?
Not sure. I wondered the same thing. I don’t know anything about her history in ‘that department.’
I can see why Palin might not be too fond of Steinem:
Hah!. Steinem tosses a nasty barb at Palin and Bachmann, and Palin is expected to give Steinem her “due”? Well, Steinem DID get her “due” on that one. No matter what anyone thinks of their respective ideologies or political beliefs, we have had a trio of women, Palin, Bachmann, and Clinton, pounding away at the ultimate glass ceiling in the past few years in what is still in many ways a man’s world. For the love of Mike, Palin got to the governor’s chair in Alaska by putting the male old guard from both parties on the floor for the count! And she didn’t need any male coattails to do it. You would think that Steinem would be smart enough to look at that and recognize the positive results of her own initial work. Or, was the “feminist movement” only for certain women who meet Steinem’s ideological approval list?
Let’s see, how do I say this….had it not been for some of those Gloria Steinem types, many different things wouldn’t be possible for Bachmann and Palin.
What you are saying, Wolverine, would be similar to dissing MLK and his contemporaries.
Many things just wouldn’t be possible. I give Hillary some credit too, even though she is younger than Steinem by quite a bit.
No one says Palin or anyone else has to like or agree with Steinem–just acknowledge that she did not get to where she is now in a vacuum. Someone paved the way for her. Her trail was already blazed.
Clinton is a different generation from Palin and Bachmann and a different generation from Steinem. Clinton did some paving of her own but she was not part of the alpha feminist generation, nor was I.
At some point I should have paid some homage to Geraldine Ferrarro. She made much of this possible through her efforts. Now that lady took some real grief and she handled it quite well.
Sarah Palin should sit down and watch a few episodes of Mad Men if she wants to see what Gloria Steinem’s generation faced. Without their (Steinem’s and other feminists’) hard work, Palin would be a mere coffee-fetcher in some office. But none of this is new info on Palin – she’s self-centered, poorly prepared, and not ready for high office. She’s good entertainment and as long as she has the old geezers still slobbering away after her, she’ll rake in the bucks. The same guys who made fun of Hillary’s ankles, adore Sarah. And they’re not admiring her intellect. Hee hee – Mad Men Redux.
Palin should wish she would look as hot as Steinem does now in 20 – 30 years.
Steinem – was for gender equality, female independence, female self-determination….
Sara Palin & Bachmann – Submission to their husbands, anti-female-self-determination, pro-old female role of mother/wife as the ONLY venue….
Yeah that “new” feminism really has me sold.
Some advice – just because a person has a vagina doesn’t mean they are a feminist or respect another woman’s individuality, self-determination and right to live without sexual discrimination in the workplace.
I remember reading about some old harpie in Kansas a few years ago who ran for state senate who campaigned women should not have the right to vote (a supporter of teh repeal of the 19th ammendment) and should have the only job of being a wife and mother. However she excluded herself from those standards obviously in running FOR OFFICE. I see the same ilk here with Bachmann and Palin.
The thing they have in common is a vagina – and as such they use it to “prove” they are for women.
No dice in my book…..
Bachmann should go home and cook dinner for her husband, and Palin should go home and try and raise the kids she has. But apparantly THOSE standards are beneath them, but good enough for everyone else to be mandatory.
Steinem is 100% spot on when she says they are the ANTI-woman’s movement.
Feminism mad it okay to parade our pregnant 17 year olds daughters around freely? I thought that was due to our slow moral decline and an example of why social issues are soooo important?
Oh, that’s right, it was HER daughter so it was okay? So tell me, if Obama’s black teenage daugher was pregnant at the time of the election it would have been okay? Somehow I think there would have been a different spin on that.
Palin makes my head spin with her hypocrisy….most parents would not have made the same choice. Most good Governors don’t resign on the 4TH OF JULY to further their personal ambitions…why this woman is feted and respected is beyond my comprehension. As a woman, a mother and a politician.
She’s making a pile of money off a lot of people.
Palin’s admonishment of Obama for taking a vacation is hilarious! This from a person who took a vacation from half of her governorship!
Yes, Steinem was one of those who paved the way for future generations of women, just as MLK did for Blacks. The problem we have developed, in my opinion, is that we have since wandered into a double standard of sorts. When a society which claims a set of democratic ideals finds itself in a position of having left certain defined segments of that society behind in terms of education, opportunity, and the like, whether that segment can be classified by race or gender or whatever, it is the obligation of the society to raise all boats regardless of individual politics or ideology. I posit that “Equal opportunity” is a phrase which demands 100% compliance and good will apart from political beliefs.
What we seem to be engaged in on far too many occasions is a parsing of that phrase based on our own ideological or political bias. In such a situation, a liberal Justice Thurgood Marshall becomes a hero and a conservative Justice Clarence Thomas becomes an Uncle Tom. A liberal Nancy Pelosi becomes a feminist heroine and a conservative Sarah Palin becomes an object of derision and ad hominem attacks aimed at her personal life and beliefs. Put the ideological shoe on the other foot, switch it around, and the other side is prone to commit the same sins. This is an American group sin, I would say.
It is quite fair to engage in reasoned and civil criticism of anyone’s political views or political ideology. That is politics pure and simple. But when we try to make a nasty case against someone who has overcome the generalizations and discrimination of the past and is trying to take advantage of new opportunities presented and then anchor that case on ideology or politics, that becomes the totalitarian way. That is the way of ideological extremism: You either believe the way I do and toe the line or you are a piece of crap who will get no respect from me. You have no place in the game, so get the Hell out of here.
I have had differences with Hillary Clinton on political philosophy all across the board, although I am ready to admit that I think she has done a good job at State. I have been impressed that she, at a certain point, was able to break away from her husband’s political coattails and become solidly her own person. For me it is no longer “Bill and Hillary.” It is “Hillary” plain and simple. And, believe me, I would bite my tongue before I would ever suggest that the woman go home and bake cookies because I do not agree with her politically or because I do not approve of her personal or political actions. Nor would I say that to Pelosi or any other liberal woman, not matter the differences of opinion.
Wolverine, I think the right is just as guilty of what you just described as the left–erhaps even more so currently.
As a young woman, I always felt Gloria Steinem was a little over the top for my tastes. However, I am wise enough to know what it was like before she came on the scene and forced America to take a long look at gender inequality. Often the trailblazers have to go above and beyond to get everyone’s attention.
My comment on this thread was more about Palin not realizing she is an ant on the elephant’s bum in this fight. She has done and is doing what would have never been possible if she were the age she is now coming along in Steinem’s time. No one has to be an extreme feminist to to have the same rights as our brothers in pants nowadays. I sure wouldn’t like being compared to Phyllis Schlafly though. I don’t blame Palin for being angry over that comparison.
Younger women seem to forget that most of the dues were paid by women my age and older. All too often when it comes to recognizing rights that haven’t always been there, younger folks just act like they are entitled. Those wars were waged on the backs of others. A little appreciation goes a long ways.
“And, believe me, I would bite my tongue before I would ever suggest that the woman go home and bake cookies because I do not agree with her politically or because I do not approve of her personal or political actions. Nor would I say that to Pelosi or any other liberal woman, not matter the differences of opinion.”
Well, since they seem to think women, and advocate for such, should take a 2nd place to her husband, have a better place in the home and are advocating for a lesser role for women in society – perhaps they should take tehir advice and apply it to trhemselves. Who’s raising Palin’s kids while she is on tour? She being the Pitt Bull with lipstick – who is taking the mommy role she advocates so much for women? And Bachmann??? She takes orders from her husband and is a follower of an evangelical movement that advocates a woman be 2nd to and take orders from a man….yet she is…..doing anything BUT that.
So yeah, they should go home, raise their kids and take orders if they think and PROMOTE what they believe…
What is good for the GOOSE….
“Younger women seem to forget that most of the dues were paid by women my age and older. All too often when it comes to recognizing rights that haven’t always been there, younger folks just act like they are entitled. Those wars were waged on the backs of others. A little appreciation goes a long ways.”
Like when women were not allowed to have their own credit card – let alone a bank account without a man’s signature? When women needed their husband’s approval to get their tubes tied? When women needed a man’s signature on a lease ofr an apartment or any sort of property purchase????
And that was the 1950’s the “golden age” conservatives wish to return us to – like Palin and Bachmann – where the ONLY opportunities for women that were acceptable were: mommy, wife, nun or grandmother….and needed a man’s hand to “guide them” through life. As for the “elites” one went to college not to get her BA/BS…but her MRS…..
Perhaps, NMB, they (Palin, Bachmann, et al) are advocating for choice in the matter of the role of a woman in society. Those who wish to assume a traditional role based on religion or personal philosophy or whatever ought to be able to do so without getting slammed and dissed for it by those who may have chosen an opposite path. And don’t try to tell me that this hasn’t happened in our contemporary society. I posit that this wagging of a reproving finger was one of the more dislikeable aspects of the extremist faction of the women’s liberation movement: You are either with us, sister, or you are nothing but a toady in your male-dominated world.
On the other hand, both Palin and Bachmann, by their very careers, have shown that they have opted for playing in the big leagues on an equal basis with the males of the species. And they have tried to balance that with the retention of a strong family life. More power to them and to any woman who opts for that, no matter her political beliefs. I don’t see why anyone would have a problem of free choice for women in this matter. Nor do I see why giving women such a choice in our free society should generate the kind of ultra-personalized vitriol I am seeing. In 2011 I can hardly believe that I am see insulting implications that husbands are pulling the strings and directing the show like modern Svengalis? Shall I then start throwing out accusations that Nancy Pelosi’s husband is the one really pulling the puppet strings on the floor of Congress?
Finally, you ask who is taking care of Palin’s kids while she is engaged in the political arena. I recall some who raised the same question about Chelsea Clinton. In neither case did I think it was anyone’s business but that of Sarah and Hillary and their respective husbands as equal partners in a family unit.
Did I miss the memo that said Nancy Pelosi’s husband was an evangelical? Did Nancy P. say that she defered to her husband? I know you conservatives hate, hate, hate Nancy Pelosi. Maybe you’d better examine whether that hatred is rooted in her being a woman and being in the position that she is.
Choice? I hope you’re advocating true choice for women – including control over their reproductive rights.
@Wolverine
“are advocating for choice in the matter of the role of a woman in society. Those who wish to assume a traditional role based on religion or personal philosophy or whatever ought to be able to do so without getting slammed and dissed for it by those who may have chosen an opposite path. And don’t try to tell me that this hasn’t happened in our contemporary society. ”
Never will I say it has. On the contrary I remember growing up being told to be a stay at home mom was conunterproductive. However, circumstances have put me in THAT position beyond my control and the work I do is no lesser than that of my husband – for if we both worked my salary would go to child care and extra-care for my son who is special-needs – leaving me withn working to pay for others to care for my children.
I am aware of my status but also wish not to remain house-bound as they get older – for I have a need to so things outside of the domestic sphere that do not concern kids or housework.
That being said, I am thankful for my forewomen who forged ahead and stated that a woman is not only worth her housework and child rearing alone. A woman has much to offer outside the home and family. What Palin and BAchmann advocate is a RETURN to that confinig space that advoactes a woman is worth more than she realizes by staying at home and being SOLELY of that of family and marraige.
I have nothing against anyone who is a stay at home mom by choice or by religion. They are living the lives they think best. But *I* will not conform to that and nor should any other woman accept that as her raison d’ etre.
What we see with Bachamnn and Palin is a reversal of the feminist era…where one’s “traditional” duty should be the standard for all. I advocate for NEITHER extreme and allow a woman to have a choice between the two – as well as a MAN. If a man is the lesser breadwinner than his wife HE should have the chance to stay home. What is good for the goose….
But alas, our “conservative” society does not condone such and would rather see a productive woman stay home while a man does the rest.,..be it by “biblical” principals or mere sexism.
And the question of childcare goes the same for Palin and Clinton (back then). But Hillary wasn’t calling for more women to stay home and fill their “traditional” 1950’s social mores.
Good God, what you don’t get back when you just throw out a hypothetical “what if” on the other side of the equation. Censored, is your own anti-conservative bias so deep that you would accuse me of hating Pelosi just because she is woman? Man, I don’t even hate her at all. Agree in no way with her politics; but somehow that seems to translate to “hate” in your world. And then that word “evangelical” gots thrown out there like it was a new form of the Bubonic plague tossed over your fence and into your yard. Come on, man, you want to have an honest exchange of views or just another shouting match?
NMB — I agree with almost everything you said in your last post with only an exception here and there. The personal circumstances you describe would give you my 100% personal support in any choice you make or feel you have to make. Moreover, I am in full agreement with you that, while a woman at home has an extremely valuable role to play in society, it is a blessing for this nation that we have arrived at a point where a woman can also decide to go out into the larger world and make a significant mark sans many of the roadblocks which used to be in her path. In my opinion, honoring both decisions equally ought to be the standard. Dictating choice in this matter to any woman ought to be a no-no — a point where I myself part company with some of the more extreme religious bodies. In fact, I take personal pride in having had a reputation as being a manager who pushed his female staffers as hard as he could to be competitive and to move up, promising everything I could do to bolster their career progress if they gave me their best on the job. Funniest darn thing. One of them actually surpassed me in rank eventually — sort of like a colonel watching his subordinate make flag rank while the colonel is still the same old colonel. Great memory for me — and a point of pride.
Where I disagree is when you opine that Palin and Bachmann are seeking a return to the traditional female role as the predominant one. Their own status serves to belie that theory. As does the fact that there are lot more conservative women coming into the political arena. Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of the concept. If there is anything which strikes me in this, it is a call for a return to traditional moral values, not a call for a return to the old social/work status of the female population. I think the emphasis is on both parents taking a strong, pro-activist stance in the area of morals, whether the mother is stay-at-home or in the working world. You do not have to agree with the defintion of those moral values (although I think we could all come to agreement on many of them) in order to recognize that this is a plea for standards and not a call to send mama back to the kitchen and the bedroom.
I think from my own extensive genealogical studies there is also some misunderstanding of the “old days” — at least the Greatest Generation and even before that. Both sides of our family are very conservative (Catholic and Protestant); and I will tell you that very many of those women, while they might have taken time off here and there when the kids were very young, worked many years outside the home and were vital in helping to bring home the bacon. And those on our Midwest farms worked just as darn hard as their husbands or even harder because of double duty, making most family farms a partnership of shared effort. I have prepared many a family bio sheet in which the space for “Occupation” under the distaff side was as long as that of the husband — and often more varied. Yes, indeed, that glass ceiling was always there; but those women worked like Hell at whatever they could get. In many cases the early death of a husband left them with a business or a farm to run, and they ran it as well or better than their husband had. Those were no wall flowers or shrinking violets, I will tell you.
@Wolverine
Chelsea Clinton was an adult when Hillary was on the campaign trail for herself. She didn’t need child care.
Before that, Hillary was no different than any other wife who supported her husband, like Laura Bush. No one mentioned her and the Bush twins.
There are many folks who would argue that for most women, there is still a glass ceiling, especially in regards to pay. However, I digress.
My only real point here is that Palin and Bachmann are able to be where they are today because of the efforts of early pioneers like Steinem. Steinem couldn’t have done what she was able to achieve taking the position that Palin or Bachmann have taken.
I don’t even necessarily agree with Steinem. I think each of us had to find their own path. Mine own was certainly no where near as “liberated” as Steinem. She would have probably jabbed at me also. But I realize it is beause of her life time achievements that I got to do much of my own thing sans ‘permission.’
Moon, I think the remarks about Chelsea referred to a previous period when her father was governor and her mother was working at the Rose law firm. The carping of this kind against Bill Clinton was not all that widespread as I recall, but it was a part of the package of ammo tossed at him in the first White House campaign. Total BS, of course;and nobody’s business but their own. But this kind of stuff now seems to be embedded in our politics all across the spectrum.
@Wolverine and it should not be, for the most part. I feel unless kids are dragged out as spectacles, then there should be a hands off policy as far as politicians kids go.