This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon: August 29, 2008- Twenty-four years ago, the barrier-breaking selection of Geraldine Ferraro as the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate was nothing less than electrifying for many women and men – especially those who had worked for a lifetime for women’s rights. This was a moment they thought they might never see.
For her acceptance speech in San Francisco, Ferraro wore white, an echo of the color worn in demonstrations by women’s suffrage advocates decades earlier. Many male delegates gave their floor passes to wives and daughters for that occasion, and they wept and cheered in their elation. Reporters often overuse the word “historic.” This time, we reporters who were there knew it was no overstatement.
Who knew it would be this long before a woman won a spot on the ticket again? Yet the world has changed. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s selection seems unlikely to electrify parts of the electorate in quite the same way Ferraro did. And maybe that’s a sign of progress.
Twenty-four years later, women still represent a relatively small share in the U.S. House, Senate and governorships. But their numbers have grown to a point of critical mass. These days, women candidates have a better chance at being judged individually on their competence and positions rather than dismissed as a group. Yes, Palin’s record will and should be questioned. As long as her challengers and supporters argue the facts rather than appealing to sexist stereotypes or gender loyalties, that will be a sign of progress.
Twenty-four years later, Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine Albright have erased any doubt that women can be tough leaders of America’s foreign policy. This time around, Palin’s capacity to deal with the world will be questioned, just as Obama’s has been. But if this questioning focuses on individual merit rather than assumptions of her incompentence, that will be another sign of progress.
Twenty-four years later, Hillary Clinton has just demonstrated that a woman can indeed compete for the top spot on the ticket. Palin’s selection seems at least in part an attempt to reach out to those Clinton supporters who remain bitter about her loss. Many of these voters are unlikely to agree with Palin's conservative stands. It will be interesting to see whether demography trumps political ideology for their votes.
Will they decide a candidate should be judged primarily on gender rather than individual merit? And if Palin and McCain win for this reason, would that be a sign of progress?