Apparatchicks

Quick hit- Sarah Palin and feminism

September 3, 2008 · No Comments

I have another piece up in my campus newspaper about Sarah Palin and faux feminists like her. An excerpt-

Perhaps the nomination of Palin is a good thing because it allows me to clear up a few misconceptions about feminism. Contrary to anti-feminist propaganda, the movement has never been about elevating women’s rights above men. Moreover, feminism is not about promoting equality between the sexes. In fact, the movement seeks to guarantee only equal opportunity and access for women – there’s a difference between the two.

Read the whole thing here.

-Indira

→ No CommentsCategories: Election '08 · Feminism · Hillary Clinton · Republican hypocrisy

Defending Hillary

August 31, 2008 · No Comments

I wrote a piece for my campus newspaper about Hillary Clinton and her convention speech Tuesday. Much of it is recycled from previous blog posts (yeah, I’m busy!) but here’s an excerpt:

After Clinton’s prolonged presence in the primaries, her speech Tuesday night simply acknowledged her historic candidacy. And ultimately, this was the overarching message of her speech. Clinton didn’t devolve into a predictable lamentation about the state of women’s affairs Wednesday. Instead, she was hopeful and generous – a fitting end to a candidacy that has, indeed, helped shatter the highest glass ceiling of all.

Go read the whole thing!

-Indira

→ No CommentsCategories: Election '08 · Feminism · Hillary Clinton

Faux feminism

August 31, 2008 · No Comments

The news that no one’s waited for is finally here- Sen. John McCain has picked Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate. Thanks to the relative anonymity of Palin, media outlets are devoting a great deal of time to her, effectively pushing Obama’s historic acceptance speech out of the limelight. Wall Street Journal, a “serious” and “respectable” media publication, just dedicated an entire feature to Palin’s workout routine. And let the sexism begin!

One of the more interesting points emerging about Palin is that she’s a self-professed “feminist.” Feminists for Life, a rabidly anti-choice group, claims that Palin has been a member of the organization since 2006. Now, if you look through the FFL website, some parts clearly resonate with me- the group rejects violence and discrimination against women. Where the organization differs from feminists like me is their stance on abortion. Republican women (and men) have appropriated the word “choice,” casting it as some sort of catchall phrase for abortion. In reality, “choice” has less to do with abortion and more to do with giving women the tools to make their own reproductive decisions. If one considers reproductive rights to be a bundle of rights, then abortion is merely a tool, alongside adoption and contraception. This brings me to an issue I often struggle with: can a feminist be pro-life?

I’m the leader of a feminist group on campus but I’m hardly the authority on the movement. Nevertheless, in my experience, feminists have focused far too many of their efforts on abortion rights. This bothers me largely because, to this day, abortion makes me uncomfortable. Now, before my feminist card is revoked, let me explain where I’m coming from. In many ways, I consider myself “pro-life.” Heck, I used to be anti-abortion. Thankfully, my political views have evolved over the years but to this day, I don’t support the death penalty, euthanasia, offensive or defensive wars. Some small part of me still wonders if abortion amounts to murder and this makes me feel awful. I often reserve harsh words for pro- “lifers” but underneath the sarcasm and anger, I feel guilt. Not because abortion “stops a beating heart” but because we can never be sure.

Despite this, I’m still pro-choice only because the movement offers real alternatives to abortion. It’s why I’ve worked with organizations like Planned Parenthood (which I dislike but that’s another post) and Campaign for Healthy Families- because these groups care about decreasing abortions. While folks like Palin equate abortion with murder and engage in harmful rhetoric, pro-choice organizations are actually taking steps to prevent unwanted pregnancies through the promotion of contraception use and comprehensive sex education. So, yes, I’m pro-life but only if we choose to expand the meaning of that phrase.

Feminism, like reproductive rights, has often been misrepresented by conservatives and the choice of Palin as V.P. is a perfect example. Republicans promote harmful anti-woman policies (like unequal pay and decreased reproductive rights) with the help of strong women like Sarah Palin and Carly Fiorina. They think that feminists (and women, in general) vote with their ovaries, not their brains. Remember when Sen. Hillary Clinton “cried” at a campaign stop in New Hampshire and Bill Kristol attributed her victory in the state primary to women feeling sorry for her. I’m not sure if Republicans are really this stupid but it doesn’t matter. Feminists don’t appreciate the condescension and will see McCain for what he really is.

-Indira

→ No CommentsCategories: Feminism · Reproductive Justice

Why I love Bill Clinton

August 30, 2008 · No Comments

If you haven’t already seen fmr. President Bill Clinton’s speech at the DNC, you have to watch it. I haven’t exactly been a fan of his aggresive posturing on the campaign trail (and his need to upstage Hillary), but he more than made up for it. Just wow.

→ No CommentsCategories: Bill Clinton · Election '08 · Politics

Hillary is at it again.

August 24, 2008 · No Comments

God, it looks like Sen. Hillary Clinton just cannot catch a break these days. After Sen. Obama announced that Sen. Joe Biden would be his running mate, it was revealed that Clinton wasn’t even vetted. This comes after Obama praised Clinton’s qualifications, claiming that she “would be on anybody’s short list.” Apparently, that excludes him. Whatever. I see the reasons against picking Clinton and I’m not exactly complaining about Biden- considering the circumstances, I think he’s a fine choice. However, this Clinton-bashing just needs to stop. Just today, I watched a Meet The Press segment where Chuck Todd, NBC analyst, talked about a new poll that indicated a large number of undecided voters were Clinton supporters- 48%, to be exact. You can see how this fits into the narrative about Clinton supporters as bitter souls who are just determined to tear up the Democratic party. Small problem, though. The numbers just don’t add up. The poll in question, conducted August 15-18 by the Wall Street Journal and NBC news, indicates that just 52% of Sen. Hillary Clinton’s supporters would vote for Sen. Barack Obama. However, an August 19-22 Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 70 percent of Clinton supporters backed Obama. One poll gets more traction than the other because it’s so much easier to grasp. That’s why you won’t hear any news stories about how Obama’s backers have given Clinton just $430,000 in the two months since he asked them to help pay off her campaign debt. On the other hand, Clinton donors have given Obama more than $3 million in the same period. Of course, it doesn’t help that Obama has been totally unwilling to defend Clinton from the ridiculous attacks. And Sen. John McCain is trying to cash in, as well. His latest ad just smacks of opportunism.

McCain’s sentiments have sadly been echoed by some Democrats, as well. This notion that criticising Obama weakened him and made him more vulnerable is a line adopted by many. And how do we respond to this? After all, part of the trouble with Republicans today is their complete unwillingness to criticize President Bush. Why should Democrats fall into this trap, as well? Today, Sen. Clinton released a statement dismissing the idea that she wasn’t backing Obama. What gets me is that she actually had to release such a statement, as if her actions haven’t demonstrated anything but total support.

-Indira

→ No CommentsCategories: Barack Obama · Election '08 · Hillary Clinton · Stupidity

Get over it, Hillary!

August 14, 2008 · 1 Comment

We’d been hearing rumors about this for some time but it’s finally confirmed- Sen. Clinton’s name will be put in nomination during the Dem. Convention. I’m not one to unduly praise Sen. Obama but this was a good move on his campaign’s part. For months, Clinton supporters have been attacked by various Democrats- they’ve been called bitter, angry, racist, uneducated and xenophobic. Little surprise then that these 18 million supporters wanted their voice represented on the national stage. And yet, again all the bullshit about how Hillary supporters are tearing up the party is being replayed. Maureen Dowd’s mind-numbingly stupid column from two days ago could basically be distilled into a shared sentiment- “how dare that bitch not know her place?” The question of what Hillary really wants is a symptom of how Democrats treated her. You see, we ridiculed and mocked her during the primaries and when it was done, we scratched our heads and wondered what Hillary stood for. The thing is, her positions have always been clear, unlike her opponent who has displayed a tendency to waver on key issues- FISA, anyone? Hillary has also been very consistent in her pledge to ensure that her supporters were respected- both by the media and Obama. As for the unity bit, Hillary has been unequivocal in her support for Obama and to imply otherwise is just patently dishonest. If only we could say the same thing about the Obama campaign. Just today, it was reported that Rep. Charlie Rangel (D- N.Y.) had been denied a speaking role at the Convention. Rangel, an early Hillary supporter, undoubtedly wanted the chance to criticize Obama and offer praise for Clinton, right? Right?

Rangel surrogates approached Obama staffers this week about the possibility of securing him a slot at the podium, making the case that it would showcase reconciliation between the nominee and Hillary Rodham Clinton’s African-American supporters.

How selfish of those bitter Clinton supporters.

-Indira

→ 1 CommentCategories: Barack Obama · Election '08 · Hillary Clinton · Politics