If this doesn't scream sexist thinking to you, maybe you should clean out your ears. McCain picks Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his VP pick because she's a woman, hoping to court the undecided-PUMA-esque female vote. Because any woman is just as good as any other! Clinton, Palin, they've all got vaginas. So what's the difference?
I find it so offensive, but also a little scary. What if it works? My dad doesn't think it will. "But she's anti-choice!" he says. He's a bit out of touch. PLENTY of women are anti-choice. The logic baffles, I know, but it's true.
Why else would he pick her? She's less experienced than Obama. McCain railed on Obama for his lack of experience. She has a son going to Iraq, chose not to abort a baby with Downs' Syndrome (which she would never do ANYWAY, she doesn't believe in abortion even in cases of rape and incest...so why is she being commended as heroic?), and is likable and non-threatening.
McCain's pandering, which they all do, but someone aptly said that his new name should be Wilmer Pander-ama.
What do you think? Some moderate-to-conservative women are so offended by this essentialist attempt to nab their vote that they don't want to vote for McCain anymore. Still, the Right loves self-loathing "minorities". Just look at Alan Keyes.
No comments:
Post a Comment