The XX Factor: What women really think.



  • « Prev | Main | Next »

    Whole New Ways To Not Get It ...

    Color me baffled. In response to a question about Sarah Palin’s qualification to be president, John McCain talked first about her credentials as a reformer and then moved swiftly to explain that Palin “understands special-needs families. She understands that autism is on the rise, that we've got to find out what's causing it, and we've got to reach out to these families and help them, and give them the help they need as they raise these very special-needs children. She understands that better than almost any American that I know. I'm proud of her.” Later on, he added—again regarding autism—that “Sarah Palin knows about that better than most.” Now, we know Palin has a special-needs child: Her infant son, Trig, has Down Syndrome. So it’s fair to suggest that she understands special-needs families and that—even though it’s not clear what she’s ever done or even proposed doing for them—she might one day be an advocate for them. But I can’t figure out why McCain was coupling Palin with autism, rather than Down Syndrome. Yes, his comment started as a testimonial to her concern for those with special needs, but it came off sounding like he just didn’t know that autism and Down Syndrome are very different. A quick Web search reveals that the main connection between Palin and autism appears to be that, like McCain, parents of autistic kids are blogging hopefully that she will have some special sensitivity to their situation. (Also, it seems Palin has an autistic nephew.)

    As panders go, I am finding this autism gambit baffling. Did McCain just get confused about the fact that Trig has Down Syndrome? Or was he trying for some kind of broad-brush special-needs appeal, only to end up awkwardly implying that all special-needs families are the same? So much so that you can swap out diagnoses and nobody will notice? That same broad brush was slapping around later when, in discussing abortion, he started sneering about the trickiness of allowing exceptions for the mother's health. No nuance here. Just the bold implication that all health exceptions represent some kind of female trickery. Last time I checked, women thought their health was sort of important. Toss in his eye-crossing claim that anyone who supports abortion rights is, by necessity, not going to be qualified to sit on the Supreme Court, and it was time to kiss women voters goodbye. How can a man who can see all the complexity and subtlety in foreign policy and health care reform talk to and about women and families in terms that persistently read like cave drawings?

    McCain really proved tonight that his brand of feminism is frozen in 1960—an artless pander to the mommies tacked onto the claim that he is “proud” of his vice president. It's all reminiscent of the ad men on Mad Men, chivalrous but wrong.

Print This ArticlePRINT Discuss in the FrayDISCUSS
<October 2008>
SMTWTFS
2829301234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930311
2345678
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Syndication