Ladies Choice

Today I’m going to venture into dangerous territory…assessing women in politics. It is no secret that women in politics are judged far differently and more harshly than men on their appearance and mannerisms, and much of the harshest criticism often comes from other women. I remember Katharine Harris, Florida’s secretary of state in the 2000 recount, being vilified by women for the color of her lipstick and Hillary Clinton being goofed on by women of both parties for her pantsuit schedule. If a man made any of these comments, he would be correctly vilified as sexist. Women made the bulk of these remarks and guess what? They’re still sexist.

But judging people by appearance is something we all do in our material- and youth-obsessed society, so if you’re running for public office (which has been called “show business for ugly people”) appearance and mannerisms are fair game. The college-educated women I work with remain incredulous at how Sarah Palin, after another vapid debate performance last week, remains popular and draws big crowds. There are numerous reasons for this, but the unfortunate but most realistic answer is that she is attractive – with good hair and a fine sense of style (again, according to the women I work with). There has been far more interoffice discussion on why she doesn’t wear her hair down than on her policies or verbal faux pas.

This morning I read on Andrew Sullivan how part of her appeal may be the “cocktail waitress” aspect. At the debate she winked at me a few times and used the aw-shucks, you’re-darn-tootin’ speak straight out of Fargo. Sullivan wondered if she was trying to flirt with Biden or the audience. I doubt Palin was flirting with anyone, although many women certainly flirt everywhere from work to bars to get what they may want or need. But I do not doubt that the GOP is using her to rally both the base and some wayward and not-too-bright men that see an attractive woman and lose much of their good sense and judgment. I also believe that she is somewhat symbolic of our culture – where looking good and repeating carefully screened, canned answers is more important than answering tough questions.

Maybe many educated and smart women are threatened and fascinated by Palin at the same time. Perhaps she’s as deep as a puddle, but at least she looks good doing what she does. While she comes across as more feminine than, say, Hillary Clinton, does that mean that Hillary Clinton lost because she wasn’t feminine enough? Would Hillary have done better if she ditched the pantsuit for the dresses Palin wears? I don’t know, but remember how appearance is far more important than substance today, and how fast people form opinions on all of us based on how we look.

Hillary tried playing the gender card a little bit and it backfired. The reason it did was because she always came across as an equal to the men she ran against, and that is the right way to do it. Think of all the amazing female politicians we have– from Kay Bailey Hutchison, Condoleeza Rice and Barbara Boxer to pioneers like Margaret Thatcher and Ann Richards. They never cried sexism when they didn’t get their way. They never let their appearance get in the way of their accomplishments or let people judge them by their looks. And I’m sure they never winked during a debate.