Women are still pigeon holed!

Isn’t it interesting that the only higher office in the upper echelon of American politics a woman in America can hold is Secretary of State. We do have Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House but of the real offices, President, VP and the like women are only allowed to hold the office of Secretary of State. Allowed is probably a strong word since President and VP are elected by the population our self.

And of course, McCain did try to have a woman VP, Palin, elected with him. Then there was Mondale who had Geraldine Ferraro as a running mate. I did not vote in that election, this was my second huge mistake in my voting career. I hate to admit I actually voted for Nixon in 1972 that was my first big mistake in voting, my first vote and I vote for him, yikes what was I thinking. What can I say I was young in 1972, just a kid really with two small children. What did I know about the rights of women, I had too many personal issues going on to notice even the women’s right movement. For my vindication I did vote for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary. Would not you love to see a ticket with Clinton for president on the Democratic side and Palin for president on the Republican side. That would really give the conservative right apoplexy.

But I digress, now a days, women are relegated to the highest cabinet post, Secretary of State. And would not you know it, Obama is trying to appoint a woman, U.N. Ambassador Dr. Susan Rice, since Hillary Clinton is stepping down. Of course the Republicans are having a hissy fit, trying to throw her under the bus for the killing of the ambassador in Libya. But Obama is holding tough on his probable appointee.

What I find interesting about this is the way Rice is described in the media.

The Republicans and pundits are attacking Rice for her role in Libya and for her politics but what I find interestingly typical is they are attacking her for being a woman expressing male traits. They are attacking her “temperament” calling her all the cherished male traits, too aggressive, or too stubborn.

They gave Condoleezza Rice a pass even though the media constantly spells her first name incorrectly, maybe she was too milk toast to attach and they focus on Clinton’s looks rather than her performance. So Susan Rice is ripe for the picking. Let’s pull the same old tired card, she is too much like a man in expressing what they call aggressiveness when in any man it is call it forcefulness. We want something and we are demanding, men are forthright. Women are all the negative adjectives, bossy, pushy, emotional and men are the positive adjectives, they are forthright, know what they want, know their own minds, a go getter, etc.

It is also written, “since she’s a woman, she’s expected to conform to a particular decorum, in the eyes of people”. Why Why does a woman have to behave a certain way and not a man? Writes Janet Shan of the Hinterland Gazette. Shan goes on to quote Dana Milbank of the Washington Post, stating Rice was accused of shooting first and asking questions later by the very Republicans Rice accused of doing the same thing about Iran. But being a woman it is held to a different standard, albeit a higher standard, but till gender inequality abounds. Thus as Shan points out this “smacks of hypocrisy.”

This quote says it all, “Republicans should ignore Susan Rice’s qualifications … maybe they could also wonder how Rice will perform as Secretary of State and get dinner on the table at a reasonable hour.” This type of inequality of expectations of fellow human beings is exactly what we have been learning about. A woman’s place is not in the kitchen, but in every walk of life on this green earth.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/28/scarborough-to-republicans-start-attacking-susan-rice-for-her-temperament/

http://hinterlandgazette.com/tag/president-obama-slams-john-mccain-on-susan-rice