By Jean Bergantini Grillo
With all the hoopla about certain female candidates for national office, and as a female elected official myself, I’ve been wondering: Do we need new ground rules to protect ourselves from the old-style campaigning? Does being a mom or having special family needs immediately trigger a different political playbook?
My answer: Absolutely not.
Fighting for office is fighting for office. If you step into the political arena — male or female — you ought to be able to take a hit, and, when needed, hit back. Politics is a contact sport. Every candidate should expect the usual slings and arrows and, rather than become a “damsel in distress,” women candidates should rejoice that, at last, we’ve reached a point where women candidates are treated as politically equals. Should Sarah Palin be zinged for all her fuzzy responses? You betcha!
However, that doesn’t mean sucker punches are allowed.
As one of two “Female” District Leaders in Lower Manhattan and a huge Hillary Clinton for president supporter, I had more than a passing interest in how Hillary male anatomy jokes received more attention than her universal health care plan. And, while I’m opposed to every political notion Sarah Palin lives and breathes, as a mom, I felt a real “ouch” factor when her children became political fodder.
But, until the V.P. debates last Thursday night, I noted a weird reverse discrimination in all the kudos going to Palin for even attempting an outside job with all those home responsibilities but very little reporting on how Joe Biden left Washington every night to be home with his kids after his wife and daughter’s horrific fatal accident.
In the most moving moment of the night, when Sen. Biden choked up recalling that personal tragedy, he clearly showed that fathers have the same emotional burdens as “Soccer Moms.” But let me be clear: That Biden moment, no matter how moving, was the least interesting to me as a voter. What amazed and thrilled me about his performance was his total, unequivocal command of the issues.
Yes, being a loving parent is clearly a plus. It’s part of my attraction and support for Barack Obama, but it’s way, way down on the list of why I think he would make a superior president and Sen. McCain would not. Family values are simply small potatoes to the bigger picture: Is someone really up for the job?
Giving every candidate a hard look is critical. Questioning, digging, prying, analyzing, whatever the press calls its need to know should be neutral, intense, fair, and free from any constraints artificially erected due to one’s gender.
That said, allowing low blows are bad politics for everyone. Any candidate who slings mud, belittles an opponent or outright lies is a bad candidate and, whatever gender, ought to be rejected by the electorate. Thanks to Palin’s negative speeches, we may now acknowledge Hillary is tough without insisting she must secretly have “balls.” But if Palin is lying through her lipstick she should be called on it. And, she has.
As the McCain pit bull showed recently, nobody should assume a woman candidate can’t be mean or biting when on the attack. On the other hand, that same candidate can’t berate the media or the opposition when they snap back. As more and more polls of female voters show, Palin doesn’t cut it when she falls back on winks and gushes to make up for depth and experience — falling back on lots of cutesy gender stuff while decrying the same insults all women, regardless of party.
As Palin and other female candidates need to know: American campaigning is filled with quips and jibes that either floor you or make you push back. Cheap shots aside, I think it’s a healthy thing to have women candidates hissed and dissed. In this era of 24/7 non-stop coverage, for any woman candidate to insist on some kind of zone of protection would be a complete setback for all women candidates.
Jean Bergantini Grillo is a writer and the Democratic District Leader for Part B of the 66th Assembly District in Lower Manhattan.
