You may have seen Joe Biden’s statement today that the election of Sarah Palin as VP would be “obviously a backward step for women.” Beldar posted a response to Sen. Biden that is positively devastating:
It’s possible to become so thoroughly saturated with partisan politics that it turns one into a complete moron. Every question, every issue, must be answered in a fashion deemed “correct” and “acceptable” according to the entire spectrum of one’s party’s positions. When carried to extremes, this becomes so ridiculous that it’s actually quite funny, sort of like watching a drunk search for his missing keys only below the lamppost because that’s where the light’s better.I believe in equal opportunity regardless of race. Anyone who shares that belief can take satisfaction from the fact that a major party’s presidential nominee is black. Although I will campaign and vote against him, if he should be elected, I will nevertheless readily acknowledge that to be a historic symbolic event, and one that should provide further satisfaction to all who believe in equal opportunity regardless of race.Someone who denies the corollary of that historic symbolism for Gov. Palin’s potential achievement is not really a believer in equal opportunity regardless of sex. If accomplishment only “counts” when the accomplisher is a “right-thinking” (meaning here, “left-thinking”) woman, that’s just another variety of sexism—a particularly ugly one, because its premise is that a woman’s own decision about her beliefs on the entire remaining range of issues counts for less than a man’s.I say, then, with confidence, and as a committed believer in equal opportunity regardless of sex, and one who absolutely believes his two daughters ought to have the same opportunities as his two sons: If Joe Biden is elected to the vice presidency, that would obviously be a backward step for women.
I agree completely.
I would assume his line of thinking is that the forward step of having a woman elected vice president would be more than offset by the backward step – in his view – of policies being implemented that he thinks are bad for women, such as restricting or banning abortions.
I don’t agree with him, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to interpret his statement to mean that he thinks electing a woman is a bad thing per se, just that he thinks this particular woman would be bad for women in general – due, as he said, to her views.
I agree; but then, I never thought he meant “that he thinks electing a woman is a bad thing per se.” The point, rather, is that this is a case of being so convinced of the rightness of one’s own partisan positions that everything else has to take a back seat. If Sen. Obama wins, I don’t think his policies will truly benefit minority communities in this country–but his election will still clearly be a step forward “that should provide further satisfaction to all who believe in equal opportunity regardless of race.”