APRIL 21, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size

“Someone had better tell Washington that the pink elephant is on the move!” So crowed Sarah Palin earlier this month at a high-voltage campaign rally for Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann at the Minneapolis Convention Center. While chock-full of the liberal-bashing you’d expect from the dynamic duo, the event also had a weird strain of girl power running through it. The two women entered to country cutie Martina McBride’s “This One’s for the Girls,” and, in introducing Palin, Bachmann gushed about how “drop-dead gorgeous” her sister-in-arms is, both inside and out. Palin, in turn, gave a shout-out to all the courageous Republican ladies fighting to save America from Democratic depravity (with a special nod to Bachmann, of course, for “leading the stampede”); invoked original tough gal Margaret Thatcher; and touted studies showing that “most” of the leaders of the Tea Party movement are women. In a call to arms worthy of EMILY’s List, the former veep candidate told the cheering throngs, “2010 is shaping up to be the year that conservative women stand up to take back the country.”
I don’t know about taking back the country, but a certain breed of fire-breathing pink pachyderm is clearly on the rise. I mean, when you think GOP rock star, who leaps to mind? Eric Cantor? Mitch McConnell? Mitt Romney? Michael Steele? Please. These guys aren’t exactly thrilling the masses or the commentariat. Further toward the edge of the ideological spectrum, male pols like Senator Jim DeMint and Representative Steve King may be fighting the right’s fight, but they’re nowhere close to becoming household names, much less cultural icons. Instead, it’s pugilistic lasses Palin, Bachmann, and, increasingly, Liz Cheney who are channeling—and fueling—the passions of the base with their in-your-face conservatism.
On one level, I find this trend disturbing. On another, I cannot help but be impressed by—and even a bit grateful to—these conservative girls gone wild. Say what you will about their ideology; these angry female fringe-dwellers are arguably doing more than anyone to tear down some of the most tiresome stereotypes about women in politics.
You know what I’m talking about: Every few years someone writes a book, publishes a study, or simply drops a quote suggesting what a kinder, gentler, less competitive, more collaborative, less power-crazed, and fundamentally more ethical place Washington would be if only the gals were in charge. When I was examining this bit of conventional wisdom several years ago, one of my favorite quotes was an admonition from Democratic Senator Barbara Mikulski to Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison: “Civility must start with us.” Former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers pursued a related theme in her 2008 book, Why Women Should Rule the World. (Sample observation by Myers: “Women tend to be better communicators, better listeners, better at forming consensus.”) And, in 2006, then-Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel giddily predicted to The New York Times that scandal-weary voters would sweep a wave of his party’s female candidates into Congress because women represented “clean and change.” It’s difference feminism Beltway style, with a high-minded, virtuous sisterhood bringing conciliation, empathy, and an almost maternal tenderness to the masculine blood sport of U.S. politics.
As gross generalizations go, this is, perhaps, more flattering than the one about women being too soft-hearted and weak-kneed to lead. But it’s still largely B.S. Of course there are differences between the sexes. But women who make it to the top of the political heap arrive with their own glut of ambition, toughness, and arrogance. Mikulski, it bears noting, has been repeatedly voted “meanest” senator in Washingtonian magazine’s annual survey of Hill staffers. And, for those who believe political gals are inherently more easygoing, conciliatory, or forgiving than their male counterparts, I have two words: Hillary Clinton. Two more: Nancy Pelosi.
As more women come to power, the stereotypes are fading. But the process can be maddeningly slow and, more often than not, undramatic. Which is why it’s so electrifying when figures like Palin, Bachmann, and Cheney emerge from the pack to drive the point home. Forget civility and compromise: These ladies stand out for their ability to rant, rave, name-call, finger-point, and peddle the most outrageous distortions in service to their cause. (Death panels anyone?) And none seems burdened by the reluctance to self-promote that so often undermines professional women. Thus far, Cheney is the most reserved of the three. But her politics are just as hard-edged, her partisan attacks are just as vicious, and, in her current incarnation as a TV pundit/candidate-in-training, she has a reputation both for combativeness and for not letting anyone else get a word in edgewise. Talk about your male stereotypes.
It makes perfect sense that hard-right firebrands are commanding center stage in today’s Republican Party. Among Obama-era conservatives, rage is all the rage. But what is it that makes bellicose conservative women in particular so popular? Part of it may be novelty. Confronting a still male-dominated punditocracy, the chat shows are hungry for guests who can break up the parade of boring old white guys in somber suits. Mouthy, telegenic women are like catnip for bookers. More elementally, sex may factor into the equation as well. In 2008, many speculated that Palin’s higher favorables among men had at least a little to do with the fact that Republican guys (including pointy-headed analysts) could not stop talking about how hot she was. Nothing inflames like a beauty queen with a gun.
Admittedly, a pro-life, anti-gay-marriage, creationist beauty queen ranting about death panels is not exactly the feminist ideal. And neither Palin nor Bachmann nor Cheney is likely to wind up on NOW’s list of favored candidates. Still, simply by being themselves—truculent, arrogant, awful—these women give the lie to lingering stereotypes that ultimately serve no one well. Somewhere, Betty Friedan may not be smiling exactly. But she’s almost certainly intrigued.
Michelle Cottle is a senior editor of The New Republic.
19 comments
Has anyone ever claimed that a penis is the indispensable qualification for uncritical self-regard and a burning sense of entitlement unjustly denied?
- ironyroad
April 22, 2010 at 2:18am
"It’s difference feminism Beltway style, with a high-minded, virtuous sisterhood bringing conciliation, empathy, and an almost maternal tenderness to the masculine blood sport of U.S. politics." Where does one find "maternal tenderness" in Elizabeth's policies towards Ireland, Victoria's toward India, or Catherine's toward Poland? One would think Rice and Steele disabused everyone of the notion that gender or race has anything whatsoever to do with the policies or comportment of any member of government or politics.
- TNR.Reader
April 22, 2010 at 5:14am
These women are so disturbing to me for many reasons, but the top of the list is their eagerness to put our young people in harms way in a knee-jerk fashion. Their war rhetoric is the height of posturing and but oh so fashionable with their followers, but individually, I would suspect both would be quite the front line cowards. Palin quit her last job mid-term because the budget process was getting a bit sticky at the tundra ranchero, and Cheney knows quite well that her Dad played the system through the entire Vietnam War with multiple deferments with bogus injury scams.
- eastcane
April 22, 2010 at 5:19am
The short, nasty, truth is that the requirements for being a successful politician, political media star, or leader, all exert stronger filters on personality than do sex or gender. That says nothing about whether women as a group are characteristically different than men as a group. If you select from two bags of marbles for only black and white spheres exactly 1" in diameter, the result set tells you nothing about what else might have been in the bags, other than something about the proportions - all your marbles are still black and white spheres 1" in diameter. Or, to put this in political terms, if your filter is for angry, truth-challenged elephants, you'll get angry, truth-challenged elephants. Some might be pink, some grey, but they'll still all be lousy house guests.
- IowaBeauty
April 22, 2010 at 7:46am
Michelle, your article reminds me of a comment I read many years ago from a feminist. This woman gushed about how encouraging it was that women were committing more murders than in the bad old days and thus constituted a higher percentage of all murderers.
- liberal reformer
April 22, 2010 at 9:17am
I am happy to join Michelle in her grudging admiration for those who break female stereotypes. A further observation: Prominent women fire-breathers on the right, Palin, Cheney, Bachmann, Coulter, Malkin, are not unpleasing to the eye, if one can somehow ignore the bile that spews from their lips. Whereas we liberals are happy to count women such as Janet Reno and Sonia Sotomayor, less blessed in the looks department, among our icons. Is there anything to this, or am I just being selective?
- robertgorton
April 22, 2010 at 9:50am
robertgorton, disregard for personal appearance as a protest against corporate misogyny (think Stepford Wives) used to be a badge of honor among certain lefties a generation ago. Pretty much abandoned since then (although I still hear occasional complaints about "lookism"), but the Palins, Bachmanns and their supporters still think that they are confronting the Weathermen and take pride that their avatars are "hot." (I hear this all the time on the right.)
- timteeter
April 22, 2010 at 10:12am
Eastcane, I bow to no one in my disdain for the Arctic Loon but I do have to say that the comment about her chicken-hawkery is misplaced. Her son is, in fact, in harm's way in Iraq even as we speak. While her bellicose rhetoric may show her lack of self-regard or introspection about what it means to commit young people to combat, she at least stands to suffer a very personal loss that most of us happily do not.
- wildboy
April 22, 2010 at 10:52am
my only objection to these woman is just how truly stupid they are. They might be dispelling a few stereotypes but they are creating an awful new one, that brassy, loud mouthed fem-pols are downright ignorant. Not one of these women shall ever rise above circus freak show entertainment value, they are female Glen Becks. I think it is entirely likely that Hillary Clinton possesses more knowledge and is aware of more facts than all 3 of these women put together. I have no problem admitting that Hillary is smarter, more charismatic, more driven and ambitious than I am, and much more so, but it is the smarter part that matters most to me. Smarter doesn't mean right or better but it is at least a foundation to build on provided you possess some humility. I have not a shadow of a doubt I am much more intelligent than Sarah Palin. Her vanity in defense of stupidity is no virtue. And this is no idle boast, I daresay 98% of the posters at TNR are smarter than her.
- blackton
April 22, 2010 at 10:58am
Yes, blackton, the fatuousness of this Ditzy Trio is what is objectionable.
- liberal reformer
April 22, 2010 at 11:17am
So big deal, women don't have penises, but they can be as big assholes as men. We've come a long way, baby.
- gmodell
April 22, 2010 at 11:39am
"Admittedly, a pro-life, anti-gay-marriage, creationist beauty queen ranting about death panels is not exactly the feminist ideal." The feminist ideal anymore is defined 100% by abortion. Nothing more nothing less. If you support gay marriage, equal pay and every other admirable attribute in a person, but you fail on the abortion question, NOW and most "feminists" considers you subhuman. NOW support of women hinges purely on the traceability of the offenders or victims support for abortion. Sex at work with the boss? No problem if the male boss is a big supporter of abortion.
- seattleeng
April 22, 2010 at 12:03pm
Four words: Hillary Cinton and Nancy Pelosi Each of them breaks the sterotype in a hundred different ways. Each is the line of succession to become POTUS, if required by fate. Nancy Pelosi crashes the sterotypes of the ITALIAN-AMERICAN WOMAN. Just last night I heard two Manhattan professional women carrying on about how "the Catholics have so many rules; what we need on the Supreme Court is a WASP." Wonderful to witness an ITALIAN-AMERICAN woman commanding her troops to advance powerful progressive legislation in the US House of Representatives. No "Soprano's wife" or "Jersey Shore" role for Nancy D' Alesandro Pelosi. Pelosi is the first female Speaker of the House. She is also the first Californian and first Italian-American to hold the post. As Speaker, Pelosi is second in the line of presidential succession, following Vice President Joe Biden, which makes her the highest-ranking female politician in American history. Hillary R. Clinton is an outstanding political leader, wife and First Lady, Senator from New York, mother and Secretary of State. While Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton are running their respective parts of the United States of America, Sara, Michelle and Liz play the role of outsiders, extremists, ultra-patriots. Why should we care whether the Tea Party has a female second string leadershp; sisterhood is evident among the extremists, and the ultras are sexy? The media focus on the hard-right trio of Sara, Michelle and Liz is dispicable.
- LawrenceGulotta
April 22, 2010 at 1:01pm
The job of the fab three is to rehabilitate the Republican brand, not by defending the Bush Administration but by making people forget that it ever happened. Isn't that why the Party nominated McCain, the one-time maverick, and why Palin, with no ties to the Bush Administration or even DC, rather than MCain emerged from the 2008 election as the darling of the Party and front-runner for 2012. It isn't the flu that NIH needs to worry about, it's a national (Republican) epidemic of amnesia.
- rayward
April 22, 2010 at 1:02pm
"The Catholics have so many rules; what we need on the Supreme Court is a WASP." Even though it's barely attributed hearsay, I still vote for this for Quote of the Day.
- wildboy
April 22, 2010 at 3:18pm
My wife considers Linda Hamilton (Terminator movies) and Sigourney Weaver (Alien movies) as the epitomes of proper stars for "chick flicks." However, I am still waiting for the movie where a Terminatress comes back from the future to wreak havoc, though ever so kindly and stylishly in how she does it.
- skahn
April 22, 2010 at 7:53pm
I don't know where the contemporary "myth" came from that somehow if women ruled the roost of DC there would be less acrimony and more consensus. From what I have witnessed in the workplace, women can be far more vindictive and petty when it comes to working with other women. And they tend be, for lack of a better word, assholes (bitches) because they feel like they have to be in order to prove something even if they're wrong. They can see it as a threat to their position. I've experienced it first hand. Some are great and others bad. Genitalia has nothing to do with management skills. That professional women would some how be more kittenish and purr their way into getting that health care bill passed is laughable. In my profession of architecture, which is truly an old, white guy's club, the number of young female architects is growing and rightly so. They're talented, driven and still exhibit the small pettiness that occurs when you get a group of ladies together. It it what it is. Have these contemporary politicians who happen to wear skirts come a long way from having to take a second seat to their male counterparts? Yes. But that wasn't because they were nice or accommodating in the least. I hate to say it but I don't think a Congress full of empowered ladies would be any more productive or less catty than the sausage-fest that currently takes place everyday in the hallowed and hollow halls of D.C.
- singlspeed
April 22, 2010 at 8:58pm
"when you think GOP rock star, who leaps to mind?" Scott Brown, who has the sense to stay off the Tea Party circuit. The Democratic Party depends on women's votes. Camille Paglia in 2008 did an excellent job dissecting the demonization of Sarah Palin by feminists. What an odd post.
- K2K
April 22, 2010 at 11:10pm
As they put these women on a pedestal, the GOP is simultaneously calling on voters to send Congresswoman Betty Sutton "back to the kitchen." I think there are still plenty of feminist issues in the GOP -- this is just opportunism. And that's nothing that Betty Friedan would ever smile about. http://www.punditmom.com
- PunditMom
April 23, 2010 at 10:55am