genderdine ferraro
by Sandra Kinne
Published: March 12, 2008
When I was in 2nd grade, I wrote an essay on the presidential election and who I’d vote for. My essay won a school contest, got published in the community paper and led to me reading in front of a bunch of parents at some event.
It was probably my first public speaking event, and I learned a lesson in humiliation. No, not because it was my first public speaking event. No, the humiliation came years later when I remembered my essay was about why I’d vote for Ronald Reagan. Yes, that Ronald Reagan.
My rationale for voting for Reagan was because his wife, Nancy, had an anti-drugs platform, “Just Say No,” and that’s what I wrote about; I’d vote for Reagan because of his wife’s agenda. I wouldn’t vote for Walter Mondale, I remember writing, because his wife’s platform was to better fund public arts. The 7-year-old me couldn’t figure out why Mrs. Mondale would want to give more money for construction paper, finger paint and play-doh. Her platform meant nothing the way an anti-drug campaign with a catchy slogan and great D.A.R.E. T-shirt did.
As I grew older and wiser, I realized what a bunch of crock Reagan and the “war on drugs” were, how important the public arts are (and exactly what the public arts are, for that matter) and why picking a president because of his/her spouse is lame. (Unless your spouse is Bill Clinton, and then there are legitimate reasons for a voter to consider your marriage in her choice of candidates, but I digress.)
Even at 7-years-old I was quite the little feminist. Obviously, I knew where my true support rested; my choice of presidential candidate was based on the women’s roles. Yet, with Geraldine Ferraro running as Mondale’s choice for Vice-President, the first viable woman to have a chance at the executive branch, I didn’t write in support of her.
In hindsight, I am surprised I didn’t support Ferraro when I had the chance. Of course, I can chalk all this up to the fact I lived on Fort Polk, a major Army base in Louisiana, and it was it was 1984; we were still in the throes of the Cold War, when Reagan was God. That, and I was 7-years-old and in the second grade. I also wanted to be a truck-driving, first-base playing ballerina and thought green and black camouflage makeup made great eye shadow. What did I know?
Over the years, through my anti-patriarchal rants in high school, through my women’s studies courses in college and my coming to terms with not supporting Hillary, Ferraro has come to be symbolic for me. She represents the progress women made in U.S. politics. She represents someone who earned her own way up the political ladder and didn’t get there on the coattails of a father or husband who preceded her. She represents the first real hope women had at the executive branch.
Sure, there were others before her, but she was the first on a major ticket and, even if for a day or two when Mondale and Reagan were close in the polls, she had the first true shot at getting an elected woman in the White House. True, we still have a ways to go, and to me, it’s no longer a matter of voting for a woman just because she’s a woman, but you try telling that to a 7-year-old.
Ferraro also became a representation of the whimsy hopes and illogical reasoning of youth and the mistakes we make as children. Like, writing an essay supporting Ronald Reagan.
However, the reckless decisions of youth and the errors in essays by 7-year-olds can be excused. The careless comments by a veteran politician are harder to overlook. Ferraro’s comments this week and over the last few months have been as disappointing to me as my 2nd grade essay.
In The Daily Breeze, a local paper in Southern California, Ferraro “accused the media of being sexist and said, ‘If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color), he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.’”
First of all, no. Just no. The country is caught up in a concept of change; of moving beyond typical politics and the ridiculous rancor that has the country taking two steps back for every step forward. In all honesty, only about 50.5% of Democrats are caught up in that concept. The other 49.5% of them support the status quo. But, again, I digress.
Ferraro caused further damage to herself in a follow-up interview with The Daily Breeze: “Racism works in two different directions. I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white. How’s that? … In all honesty, do you think that if he were a white male, there would be a reason for the black community to get excited for a historic first? … Sexism is a bigger problem. It’s OK to be sexist in some people’s minds. It’s not OK to be racist.”
Again, no. Just no. It’s not okay to be sexist nor is it okay to be racist. But people aren’t attacking you because you’re white. They aren’t attacking you because you’re a woman. They’re attacking you because you’re wrong.
Two wrongs don’t make a right, but they do make the playing field equal. This is no more an exciting time for blacks in this country than it is for women in this country. We have two major firsts here, and it’s only taken us 24 years since Mondale picked you to get another woman this close to the White House as an elected official. In fact, there has yet to be a black of either gender on the executive ticket. Even as a woman, I find it hard to believe sexism, an issue Ferraro also raised in January and last November, is still the bigger issue in this year’s campaign.
As I’ve repeatedly said and written, it’s not about race or gender. It’s not about being black or white, male or female, young or old. It’s about the person and their policies. It’s about the individual choice and the power to think for oneself. It’s about who we, as individuals with our own identity, want.
Sure, the parties analyze demographics and identify voters based on typical voting patterns. They market their ads, their message, their tie or pantsuit color based on their target audience. But, just as we don’t buy everything Madison Avenue tries to sell us, we don’t buy everything candidates say. Sometimes, quite often this year, we don’t buy the iphone or Guitar Hero or vote for the person we look like just because everyone else just like us does. Sometimes, more often this year, we actually think for ourselves and make a decision because of the freedom to do so.
It dismays me Ferraro constantly plays the gender card when, in fact, she benefited from being a woman in 1984. Sure, she was qualified to be Vice President but that’s not why Mondale picked her. He picked her as a running mate because she was a woman, and he needed to make the ticket as appealing as possible when running against a popular, incumbent president. Sexism played in her favor in 1984; she can’t say it’s the biggest problem now.
Ferraro’s comments are disappointing, and she needs to take a step back to gain some perspective. She’s still iconic to me, and I still admire her for how close she came. But, just like the 7-year-old me, Ferraro should know better.
-
Jeremy Skinner’s thoughts on Ferraro: “ferraro, hillary’s stooge“
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
