Comments on: Pondering Palin

By: Dallas

Dallas — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 01:55:14 +0000

Kris,

I absolutely agree and I wasn’t trying to say that she shouldn’t run because she has small children. If she and her husband can provide a loving, supportive family for them while being VP then fantastic. And clearly there’s a double standard here although I actually have found myself wondering what it must be like right now for Obama’s youngest daughter. Beyond quality family time – what does it feel like to have a father who is so famous and so busy in a legitimately important way? How does she feel about demanding time from him – entitled? or possibly guilty?

I wonder if it makes sense in any way to make the argument that a persons parenting skills could reflect on their leadership skills. If so, what does Palin’s choice to put her daughter in the spotlight at such a tumultuous time of her life say about her ability to lead in a way that is respectful of the people of this country?

I don’t know if that’s even a valid question to ask, but it could be an interesting one.

By: Kris

Kris — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 23:30:22 +0000

I’m afraid that the idea that young children should be a reason why one shouldn’t seek office bothers me. Senator Obama has children, too, and yes he has fewer and they’re older (but still young children, the older is about ten, right?), but the office he’s seeking has considerably more duties. It seems to go back to the belief that even people who would never question the idea that a woman should have the free choice to work or be a housewife sometimes hold: that once she does decide to have children, one parent should not have a full time job. As the daughter of two parents who worked full time her whole life, I have come to the conclusion that as long as children are well cared for and know their parents love them, it doesn’t matter very much if a lot of that caring for is being done by a wider support system of family, babysitters, and daycare. Unfortunately not as much of that is going to be a familial support network if Palin becomes VP, since they’ll be moving almost as far from home as they can get while staying in the country, but no children are going to be neglected because there’s nobody to take care of them. People moving away from family due to jobs isn’t exactly unheard of in the non-political world, and yet they make due. If the question is “is she going to get to spend enough time with her young children that they won’t feel emotionally distant from their mother,” then what’s the cut-off age for that? Surely teenagers and even grown children of presidents and vice presidents have also spent less time with their parents because of the office, and emotional connection isn’t something that doesn’t need to exist after a certain age, the way children need less practical taking-care-of as they age.

I do feel sorry for Bristol, her fiance/the father-to-be, and their eventual child, if Gov. Palin becomes VP and has even less time to spare to be Grandma than as Governor, but I feel sorry for *any* parents who don’t have a full compliment of local grandparents (or some other relatives whose work schedules might vary with that of the parents) in the picture who can help out. I know that having three of them around, and the two of whom were a set being very enthusiastic, must have helped my parents a lot.

I don’t think that “she shouldn’t be VP because she has young children” is a valid argument. I *do* think that any positions of hers which make life difficult for working women with young children should be called into question on the grounds that she’s a woman with young children who is seeking the second highest office in the land and currently holds the highest office in her state. I think that her pro-abstinence-only sex-ed views should be questioned on the grounds that it clearly didn’t have the desired result in her family. Conflicts between her family life and her political views are fair game. Her family life itself shouldn’t be.

By: secondlastwish

secondlastwish — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:40:48 +0000

I think I would be more afraid of Palin on the ticket if it were the husband who would carry the baby all the time. That would rock my little world a little more than just the presence of a woman on a major presidential ticket.

I admit, I’m much more interested in this election than anything political in a long time. At least these clowns have got me interested. :)

By: Dallas

Dallas — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 12:21:10 +0000

You bring up an excellent point. In fact, Rudy Giulianni tried to make that point last night when he accused the media of being sexist by saying that no one would ever question a male’s ability to raise children and be VP.

But maybe they should! You’re right that we don’t expect men to be as involved with raising their children as women are. I’m intimately familiar with the evangelical gender roles making up Palin’s marriage and I would be very surprised to find her husband not only stepping up, but having the experience needed (from helping with previous children) to raise a 5 month old with special needs and help his daughter parent her young child.

If her husband is planning on and has the ability to be the type of support that his daughter needs, then that’s great. But, as you said, there are still some issues with this whole situation that upset me.

By: secondlastwish

secondlastwish — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:55:53 +0000

Just to be devil’s advocate – because I’m definitely not feeling the McCain/Palin ticket – where is Palin’s husband’s role in all this? Why can’t he be the one who helps the teen daughter and the new baby? I think if Sarah Palin were male, these issues wouldn’t come up. People would just assume that the mother would be the one taking on these family roles.

(I get it though because it’s easiest to use fundamentalist logic to dismantle a fundamentalist’s choices. I’m just sayin’.)

I like your take on the impact of choice in this situation. I hadn’t really thought about it with that framework.