Election Reflection #5: Did Sexism Prevail in 2008?

sex⋅ism : discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; esp., such discrimination directed against women; attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender.

For my final election reflection piece, I am going to dissect one of the more damaging subtexts of the 2008 election: the often blatant sexism that prevailed during the campaigns of Democratic nominee, Sen. Hillary Clinton, and GOP Vice-Presidential pick, Gov. Sarah Palin.

Both women came from completely different political points of view. Both women presented themselves in completely opposite ways on the national political stage. But, both women experienced the wrath of a society seemingly afraid to see a woman in power.

On one hand, you had Sen. Clinton, a well-seasoned politician who almost understood too well how to deflect her femininity in order to compete with the boys club. On the other hand, you had Gov. Palin who seemed almost too naive in supporting another white-haired man for President and believing she was doing women a favor in their fight for equality.

While there has been no lack of critique, analysis and conversation about how sexism played a role in both Sen. Clinton and Gov. Sarah Palin's campaigns, one thing that has not been well-identified is the resolution of how society will proceed and one day elect a female commander-in-chief.

Vivian Gornick writes a similar reflection in the LA Times on Sunday:

It is, I think, safe to say that the question of equality for women, each and every time around, has opened a Pandora's box of fear, hope and confusion that is existential in its very nature and has made its resolution even more recalcitrant than the matter of equality for people of color. In short: Behind the idea that it is natural for women to take an equal part in the world-making enterprise lies an internal self-division -- a conflict of social will -- that, at this moment, is far from clarified. Someday, perhaps, it will be, but today is not that day.

Sadly, Gornick is right in a lot of ways. We are at a crossroads in the women's movement today. Even by electing a progressive candidate such as Barack Obama, who truly supports women's rights, there is still much to be desired in terms of advancing the trajectory for women in politics.

So here are my basic solutions to get the conversation started. Feel free to add your own:

• We need to redefine what a woman in power looks like. We need to be able to see a woman in power as dynamic, feminine, motherly, powerful, intellectual, who is able to protect, defend and earn the respect of world leaders.

• We need to always take a stand against sexist remarks. Just as you wouldn't tolerate blatant racism, make sure to say "No" to sexism. Say "No" when someone earns a laugh at the expense of the female identity. Say "No" when someone decides that it is okay to denigrate any person based on gender.

• We need to help vulnerable communities where women are routinely treated as second class citizens. We need to reach out to those who need our help now more than ever: women in poverty, female sex workers, female immigrants, women with AIDs, women who have been raped, and women who are victims of human trafficking, domestic violence and incest.

If we want to be able to elect a woman to the highest office in the country, we need to start with the women who are the in the most vulnerable positions. Perhaps then, when women are respected from the bottom of society up to the top, then our country will be ready to accept female leadership with all it's dynamic possibilities.