I have written ad nauseum and seemingly ad infinitum since Palin's VP nomination that it's still ugly sexism when directed at conservative women. David Letterman's "jokes" about Palin's daughters — which, as Rachel Sklar pointed out today, Barack Obama suggested people stop doing last September — struck me last week as pathetic and gross. Just because he said it was supposedly about Bristol — you know, 'cause she's obviously "slutty" or something — doesn't make it ok. Just because you don't like Sarah Palin or think she's using it to score political points with her base doesn't excuse the jokes in retrospect. On this point, Anna and I vociferously disagree — I think it's pretty easy to defend Sarah Palin because I don't want those jokes told about the Obama girls; because I've commented repeatedly on how shitty it was when Rush Limbaugh and John McCain made them about Chelsea Clinton; and because I come from a family and a background where you just don't stand for people insulting your family or your friends. Maybe she's playing it up — she is, after all, a politician and every politician is going to try for a homer on an easy pitch like Letterman handed her — and maybe she's pissed (the fact that Todd Palin said anything after months of basically being told to keep his trap shut is, to me, telling) that Letterman went there, sexually with her daughters. Either way, I still think it's gross and indefensible.

According to Hess, she and I apparently have far more in common with conservative columnist (and, full disclosure, former Glamocracy colleague) Amanda Carpenter than we do with the Huffington Post's liberal Katharine Zaleski. Having "worked" with Carpenter, that's a phrase I honestly never expected to write. Hess writes:

Carpenter, of course, took Palin's side, arguing that the comment was unacceptable, and further, that Sarah Palin had bolstered her women's issues cred by taking a stand over the comments. "It's hard for women in general when accusations like this are made, dirty jokes and things. There's always a conflict of-do you turn your head, or do you make a statement about it and push back? And even when you make a statement, you're accused of manufacturing outrage," Carpenter said.

Which, of course, is what many people accused her of doing when she showed outrage at the "joke." Carpenter added that quite a lot of women — i.e., those Middle America soccer moms that voted for Obama that the GOP would like to feel alienated from the Democratic party — were happy to see Palin stand up and say it wasn't right. And that I don't doubt.

Hess breaks down Zaleski's argument like this:

1. Obama's girls are off-limits, but Palin's are fair game: "If she really wants to make this an issue, she won't make this about herself and her family all the time, her family who she persistently trots out there, and her daughter who she made a statement about on Thursday."

Read: "Some girls deserve it."

2. Palin started it by making comments about Barack Obama (who is also off-limits), which is why her daughter especially deserves it. "She stood there and watched people as they screamed ‘kill him' at Obama and ‘terrorist.'"

Read: "She was asking for it."

3. "I challenge people like Sarah Palin, like people you talk to on Fox News, to really condemn the language that's greater, this really reprehensible language, that's not just about Bristol Palin but that's about hate speech that's basically leading to actions which happened on Wednesday. That's what's disgusting."

Read: "Rape is not a real problem. You're exaggerating."

4. Letterman claims he had intended to make the joke about Bristol Palin, and we take David Letterman at his word.

Read: "Officer, I didn't know she was under 18."

So, basically, because some people said stuff about Obama at a rally six months ago and because Palin allows her daughters to be photographed and interviewed, Willow and Bristol Palin's sexuality is not off-limits; a news organization over which Palin has no control says worse things; and entertainer David Letterman's word that he didn't mean it like that is better than Palin's word that she was offended. Great.

And if that's not all bad enough that the situation makes too many of us look like hypocrites about sexism and statutory rape and gives the conservative movement a reason to say that, it also gave Obama-hating P.U.M.A. Amy Siskind yet another opportunity to bloviate about her self-serving, self-aggrandizing bullshit "4th Wave" of feminism that ignores all the issues the feminist movement has embraced except the end of sexism, sort of. It also ignores Katha Pollit's great historical analysis that shows the whole idea of "waves" is misapplied and kind of bullshit anyway.

How Sarah Palin Confuses Liberals Into Arguing Against Feminism [Washington City Paper]

Related: Pet Peeves [Charitini]
Todd Palin Is the Man for America Now [Esquire]
Letterman Quietly Ushers in the Next Wave of Feminism [Huffington Post]
Amber Waves of Blame [The Nation]

Earlier: Sarah Palin Thinks Letterman's Jokes About Her Looks Are Pathetic
Palins, David Letterman Continue To Take (Sometimes Cheap) Shots
Why Is It So Difficult To Defend Sarah Palin?
Sarah Palin: Feminist? Victim Of Sexist Smears? Or All Or None Of The Above?
Please, People: Stop Making Me Defend Sarah Palin
Which Came First: The Objectification Of Sarah Palin, Or The Mistrust In Her Competence?
Playboy On Conservative Women: "Castration Has Begun To Look Appealing"
Who You Calling A Bad Feminist?
White House Council On Women And Girls Is Subject Of Criticism
http://jezebel.com/5129341/feminists-miffed-at-hillary+hating-ms-magazine

Within 24 hours, I snapped and replied to some unwitting e-mailer that I found the comments disgusting and that what we really needed to think about was who we were trying to convince — and what we were trying to convince those people of. Well, if the polls that show women flocking to the McCain ticket and the response she's engendering from conservatives is any sign, we've convinced some people of one thing — that many feminists are feminist only to other feminists.

Now, naturally, few of these conservatives are exactly noted feminists themselves, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist (or a Wasilla mayor) to smell an opportunity to marginalize feminists or point out hypocrisies obvious enough to drive a wedge between liberal feminists and the very women that many of us have been trying to convince to vote for Barack Obama. Take Michelle Malkin, for example — hardly the kind of opinionated conservabloggier that I tend to agree with. Last week, she pointed out the opprobrium that rained down upon Sarah Palin's head for working late into her pregnancy, returning to work early and staying in a demanding job while parenting a special-needs child. She also pointed out that plenty of it came from female journalists who themselves have children and extremely demanding careers. Of course, she called them hacks and water-carriers for Obama, but that's Malkin for you — and it doesn't make her point less valid or accessible to the women that Obama needs on his side.

Then there's noted feminist scholar Jonah Goldberg, who manages to decry sexism and feminist hypocrisy even as he compares feminists to "stuck pigs" and says that one might resemble "a childless feminist who looks like a Bulgarian weightlifter in drag." But, he also hits up Gloria Steinem's OpEd, Cintra Wilson's screed and professor/columnist Wendy Doniger's truly offensive statement that Palin's "greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman." Because, really, there's no better way to win over independent women voters than to question their gender because of their political or religious beliefs. Women on the left should not be denying one another's womanhood because of disagreements about abortion and religion anymore than we should be allowing men like Rush Limbaugh to decide who is or is not a feminist. The problem with Goldberg's piece is not his glaringly offensive stereotypes and generalizations about feminists, it's that he can say all kinds of offensive things about mannish, childless women and it's still only barely as shocking as a feminist saying a person cannot be a Republican and a woman at the same time. And the latter bit is the only thing that's going to get a lot of traction in Central Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado and Michigan among the women that have swung every election for the last two decades.

Libertarian Cathy Young (who really could never annoy me as much as Goldberg or Malkin) writes a far more reasoned and compelling piece today in the Wall Street Journal asking why feminists hate Sarah Palin seemingly beyond reason. She hits some of the same shock quotes as Goldberg before her (and me before him, actually) and says that, from her perspective, Palin's "pro-life feminism [and] small-government, individualist feminism" is more attractive than a kind of feminism that requires government intervention to achieve equality. That's the kind of argument that will play well with independent women voter. It also makes its point about the feminist "hatred" of Palin without reverting to stereotypes about looks and doesn't dismiss the notion that choice is a concern for American women. This is far, far more convincing to the people that need to be convinced — you know, those 30-40 percent of voters in the middle — than arguing that Sarah Palin isn't "really" a woman.

Finally, even Elle's political blogger, Lucy Morrow Caldwell, gets in on the action, chastising South Carolina Democratic Party chairwoman Carol Fowler for saying that Palin's "primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion" (even as she mucks up Fowler's position in the party). Caldwell also says that no one ever suggested about Obama that "his race was the only reason he'd become a candidate in the first place," a statement that is not entirely true, as Geraldine Ferraro no doubt remembers. But few people are going to take the time to point out these inaccuracies in the politics blog of a fashion magazine, and the issue of feminists "bashing" Palin for gendered reasons allows Caldwell to gloss over the part where she herself would be "more cautious [than Palin] on certain foreign policy fronts" in favor of hitting up the mean, mean feminists.

It's not like I don't understand where the anger is coming from. I have heard often enough from liberal women that they don't understand how women can even be Republican...without, of course, ever actually asking one and listening to the answer. I also understand that, in the absence of comprehensive public record of Palin's stances on issues like pay equity or government-funded childcare, it's easy enough to attribute McCain's (bad) stances on those issues to her, especially since, as his running mate, they in effect are her new stances on those issues — and it's easy to conflate hating her positions with hating her as a person. For many women, she seems to be trying to have it both ways, to trumpet her family values and her careerism in a way that Republicans have often bashed other women for doing.

But, most of all, I think the attacks are coming from a place of insecurity that Palin (and all that comes with her) might soften the McCain campaign enough for him to triumph in November. And so if we rail against her, if we play the game of politics by their supposed rules and castigate her for the things conservatives have castigated liberal women for for decades (see: Hillary Clinton) then maybe they won't vote for her and him. The problem is that each party stands by its own hypocrites (see: Congressmen John Mutha and Jim Moran on the left and Senators David Vitter and Larry Craig on the right), so all we're doing by bashing her is inspiring a defense by her ideological compatriots and re-branding feminism as something that defends only liberal women against bias (and that denies a woman's womanliness if she dares to disagree politically, which is straight out of the Republican play book). That's not my feminism and that's not my idea of equality — and, for a lot of moderate women, it's not theirs either.

Polls Show Big Shift To McCain Among White Women [Reuters]
Is Sarah Palin a Feminist? Friday Feminist Fuck NO. [Feministing]
Sisterhood of the Protected Female Liberal Journalists [Michelle Malkin]
Feminist Army Aims Its Canons at Palin [National Review]
All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others [Newsweek]
Why Feminists Hate Sarah Palin [Wall Street Journal]
Right Angles [Elle]
S.C. Dem Chair: Palin Primary Qualification Is She Hasn't Had An Abortion [Politico]
Ferraro’s Obama Remarks Become Talk of Campaign [NY Times]

Because, you see, then came Cintra Wilson's piece in Salon today, and, oh boy, let me count the sexist and/or just plain offensive smears. No, really, let me count 'em!

1. "fuckable"
2. "Christian Stepford wife"
3. "she is their hardcore pornographic centerfold spread"
4. "Sarah Palin is a bit comical, like one of those cutthroat Texas cheerleader stage moms."
5. The part where she compares electing Sarah Palin to allowing child-rapist Warren Jeffs to babysit her kids.
6. The part where electing Palin "is akin to ideological brain rape."
7. "this Republican blowup doll"
8. The part where electing a Republican woman into office equals "women being downgraded to second-class, three-holed chattel."
9. "the self-abnegating, submissive female Uncle Tommies"
10. "she has done everything but volunteer for her own circumcision."
11. "She tacitly promises a roll backward into old-fashioned sexual roles" (despite being a breadwinner and the more powerful spouse).
12. "We must regard Sarah Palin as the Carmella Soprano of the GOP — an enabling wife of organized crime"
13. Being a female Republican is performing an "ideological lap dance" for men.
14. "Sarah Palin is the White House [Playboy] bunny."
15. "Here's an It Girl vice president who is easy on the eyes."
16. "She's like a grown-up version of Mary Ann from 'Gilligan's Island.'"
17. "Women, even if they are vice president, can always look pretty, worship their husbands in the fear of God and never, ever resist invasions from unwanted sperm."
18. "Sarah Palin and her virtual burqa..."
19. "She's such a power-mad, backwater beauty-pageant casualty..."

So, to summarize: according to Wilson, despite being the governor of a state and a candidate for Vice President, Sarah Palin is, basically, a too-pretty Republican bimbo too stupid to realize she's being played by men, completely subservient to her husband and the men of the Republican party with few independent thoughts of her own who is unwillingly impregnated by her husband but too submissive to resist. Um, ugh? Just because she disagrees with feminists doesn't give us the right to forego our (supposedly) strongly-held beliefs about the inappropriateness of sexism.

I know plenty of Republican women who understand everything I have — or anyone else has — to say about choice or social justice or pay equity and still vote Republican. They vote Republican because they have strongly-held and often (I know this might be shocking) well-researched beliefs about everything from taxes to defense to choice issues. And I respect their right to hold those beliefs and vote those beliefs without resorting to calling them "stupid cunts" or anything else because I don't actually believe that they are stupid or cunts. I believe that they are wrong on those issues, but they're not ill-informed or tools of some nebulous patriarchal conspiracy.

So, look, I really, really want to talk about the issues I disagree with Sarah Palin on. I want to talk about her shifting position on earmarks; about how she hasn't said a word about most of the issues facing the country today; about whether 8 years as mayor of Wasilla and 2 as governor of Alaska prepared her to lead this country; about the firing scandals; about the appropriateness of airplane-assisted wolf hunts. There are lots and lots of things I want to talk about and want to rip into her about and even some good points in the midst of Wilson's sexist and disgusting hyperbole that need to be made about Sarah Palin. But I first want to stop shouting into the darkness about how sexism doesn't just hurt women when it's directed at liberal women. Being sexist to Sarah Palin hurts us by reinforcing stereotypes about women and by allowing conservatives to point fingers at us and call us hypocrites.

By assuming she's a Republican because she's too stupid to know better, we're driving the Reagan Democrats and centrist Republicans and conservative independent voters into McCain's arms, because no one wants to vote for the candidate that makes them feel stupid. This is how George Bush won two elections and this is the genius of Karl Rove's strategies — he doesn't ever make those people vote for him, he gets us to do it for him. So, stop with this shit, please. Let's try assuming Sarah Palin is a capable, intelligent politician with whom we disagree and start disagreeing with her as a politician.

Why Aren't Women Furious About Sarah Palin? [Salon]