-
sponsorship
While we are on the subject of elderly female pathbreakers, Emily—and before the 30th anniversary of her ascent to the British prime ministership passes—maybe it’s worth reflecting for a minute or two on the career of Margaret Thatcher. Long before Hillary, decades before Sarah, there was, after all, Maggie: The idea that female politicians can run important countries, make tough decisions, get elected and re-elected to office is not actually all that new.
What is extraordinary about Thatcher, in retrospect, is how unimpressed she was by her own groundbreaking role, and yet how feminine she remained while holding what had been, up until then, an exclusively masculine job. She was not a member of the all-male clubs where the Tory party allegedly made its secret decisions, but she didn’t seem to care. She was often the only woman in the room, but didn’t appear to be in the least intimidated. At the same time, nobody ever mistook her for a man. On the contrary, she had, in the words of then-French president Francois Mitterand, “the eyes of Caligula and the lips of Marilyn Monroe.” Gorbachev called her the “Iron Lady.” She was immaculately dressed and coiffed, and never wore trousers. She terrified many of the men who worked for her. Once, she famously snapped across the cabinet table at Nigel Lawson, Chancellor of the Exchequer: “Nigel, get a haircut.”
Though sometimes criticized for not helping other women make it in politics, this is not entirely fair: In fact, Thatcher set the stage for the rise of a whole generation of prominent female politicians. Since her prime ministership, women have run the British foreign office, the Home office, the Northern Ireland office, and many other important parts of the government. In the past decade or so, women broadcasters, political columnists and newspaper editors have become commonplace in the U.K.—more so than in the U.S. I can’t help but think Thatcher’s example had a role in that, too. Because she was a conservative, feminists have never wanted to claim her as a role model, and have never celebrated her achievements. But as time goes on, her premiership looks more revolutionary, not less.
-
sponsorship
Asked if she calls herself a feminist, Sandra Day O'Connor demurred to Deborah Solomon in the New York Times Magazine this weekend. That shouldn't surprise me—O'Connor is a rock-ribbed, ranch-girl Republican, even if she drove the right wing of her party crazy when she was on the bench. Still, her disavowal struck me as one of the more drily amusing examples of women who are pioneering, ball-busting feminist icons but not feminists. Maggie Thatcher comes to mind. Who else—Sarah Palin?
You could try to dismiss SOC's declining of the label as a generational tic brought on by the reflexive (though false) image of bra burning. But it's more likely that Justice O'Connor, ever timely, is giving voice to an enduring reluctance among moderates and conservatives to identify with the political movement to increase opportunities and equity for women, even if that's what their life's work, in fact, stands for. Is this just a tic, nonetheless—actions speak louder than words—or does it matter?
-
sponsorship
Emily, I absolutely agree that the personal and professional have become hopelessly entangled in this election. In her 11th day in the spotlight, Palin has already been compared to movie stars, a TV chef, and an '80s pop star turned reality TV darling. Faster than you can say, "Bitch is the new black," it seems, a new celebrity comparison emerges.
Honestly, the mind reels. A partial list of purported alter egos:
Rachael Ray: The New York Times' David Carr portrayed Palin's relationship to the media as that of "Rachael Ray with a 4x4, who can not only make a meal in under 30 minutes but hunt and kill the main course."
Tina Fey: Apparently, "every American with access to 30 Rock and a blog" sees a resemblance between the VP nominee and NBC's brightest comedian. Seriously?
Audrey Hepburn: Drawn in by Palin's bangs and updo, Ann Althouse compared the self-described "pit bull with lipstick" to the 20th-century icon of elegance personified. A stretch.
Paula Abdul: The New York Post saw Althouse's movie star and raised her an American Idol judge, saying, "Palin won style points for updating from an Audrey Hepburn to a Paula Abdul look" by wearing her hair half-up to give her acceptance speech.
Margaret Thatcher: The one relevant, if not exactly accurate, analogy in the mix. The British press have jumped on the comparison. But isn't it a bit early to see the gravitas of a woman who ran a country for 11 years in the face of a novice candidate? Besides, Hillary Clinton garnered her fair share of comparisons to the "Iron Lady," and drawing a line between Clinton and Palin by way of Thatcher seems to test the laws of geometry.
The other nods to celebrity, though not entirely unflattering, are a distraction with less than two months to go until the election. Margaret Thatcher aside, should we really be thinking of Palin in terms of her inspired tresses or domestic prowess? I don't think so.
-
sponsorship
On the campaign trail, Chelsea Clinton compares her mom to Margaret Thatcher. But can you imagine Thatcher whimpering that it seemed like she always had to go first in debates, and that just wasn't fair? One thinks not, and I was surprised when Hillary Clinton did so last night. In so enthusiastically casting herself as the injured party, she undercuts her central argument about what a rock she is and comes across as more a whiner than a fighter.
Barack Obama had just refused his shot at aggrievement; he said he took her at her word that she didn't know anything about how a photo of him in traditional African garb got leaked to Matt Drudge. Then he briskly moved on. So, it seemed extra small when, after repeatedly extending a back-and-forth on health care, she then complained at length about being asked to go first in answering the next question, about NAFTA. Normally, debaters like to go first, but she tried to make this seem like part of the vast media conspiracy against her:
"Can I just point out that in the last several debates I seem to get the first question all the time, and I don't mind, you know, I'll be happy to field them. But I do find it curious, and if anybody saw Saturday Night Live,'' she said, referring to a skit in which the press is seen waiting Obama hand and foot, "you know, maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow. I just find it kind of curious that I keep getting the first question on all these issues,'' she repeated, throwing her arms up in frustration, "but I'm happy to answer it.'' Just like your mom is happy to sit home in the dark alone, insisting Oh, don't worry about me.
Clinton also tried to stop Brian Williams from cutting to a commercial -- a losing proposition if ever there was one. And she suggested that she would have made her tax returns public by now if she weren't already too overburdened to sleep. When asked if she would release the returns before the Texas and Ohio primaries next Tuesday, she answered, "I can't get it together by then, but I will certainly work to get it together. I'm a little busy right now; I barely have time to sleep.''
She did show 12 kinds of chutzpah, though, in calling out Obama for merely denouncing rather than denouncing and rejecting Louis Farrakhan, who recently endorsed him: She noted that she, by contrast, had made clear during her first Senate race that she would not accept the support of an independent party with a history of anti-Semitism. Which was a bold boast, given that this was around the same time she listened as Yasser Arafat's wife, Suha, accused the Israelis of gassing women and children on a daily basis; after the speech, Clinton rose and kissed Mrs. Arafat on both cheeks.
-
sponsorship
Emily, I’m so glad you offered Paula Radcliffe as a model by which to understand Hillary Clinton, because after years of struggling to comprehend why such a lot of people seem to dislike Hillary so, I finally get it. (She strikes me as more likable than most politicians, though that’s a bit like saying she smells more like dog poop than elephant feces.)
Why? Because I cannot stand Paula Radcliffe. My anti-Paula animus is completely irrational. We’ve never met, and I’m sure we never will. She’s made no statements that offend me and taken no positions that infuriate me. I admire her talent and her single-mindedness. And as someone who loves athletics and who still has a British passport somewhere at the back of a drawer, I’m extra-appreciative of her success. But there’s something about her that drives me up the wall. It’s probably not even her fault. I was in Britain during the 2004 Olympics, and judging from the media coverage, the entire Olympiad was mere background to the women’s marathon, which "our Paula" was favored to win. In the event, as the BBC put it, she ended up “slumped on an Athens pavement, crying bitter tears of pain and frustration.” If I’d had to look at one more image of her “agony,” I’d be crying bitter tears myself.
By the way, your mention of Radcliffe resuming her training schedule just 12 days after giving birth reminded me of a story about Margaret Thatcher taking the bar exam the afternoon after she had twins. It’s one of those anecdotes that’s too good to fact-check, but I just looked it up. According to an interview she gave in 1985, four months passed between giving birth and taking the final exam to become a barrister, but it was seeing the new babies that left her determined to really pursue the law: “I wrote off to Lincoln's Inn for my Finals papers for my Bar Exam which was to take place in December, and I knew that once I had done that and entered pride would make me work hard for it to get them.” (Incidentally, the interview is fascinating and reminded me what an outsider Thatcher was—she was famously a “shopkeeper’s daughter,” but she also grew up in a home without an indoor toilet and was the first person in her family to go to university.)
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?