Monday Morning Misogyny


US News and World Report has a poll up on their website:

If you had a choice of four daycare centers run separately by Michelle Obama, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi, which would you choose for your kids?

How about option E, you can take your sexist poll and shove it? In next week’s edition of sexist polls for dummies, auto-repair shops run by male politicians!

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

33 Comments

  1. Eileen
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    That’s funny, because I had just been thinking how great it would be if Vice President Joe Biden opened up a daycare. I wonder why his name wasn’t included in this list?
    OK, no I don’t.

  2. dormouse
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 9:51 am | Permalink

    What a great thought for Monday mornings. Why motivate myself to go to class and learn foreign languages when all anyone really wants me to do is take care of kids?
    Maybe I’ll stay home and watch TV instead of taking a midterm.

  3. Renee
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    When I wrote about this disgusting little poll one of the things I focused on was the fact that womens labour is devalued. It is certainly wrong to tie us to our biology and assume that we all want to care for children however the fact is that most of the childcare done globally is performed by women and this effects our economic chances.

  4. AlmostAmanda
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 10:16 am | Permalink

    Oddly enough, of all the major candidates in the last race, Joe Biden is the only one I could imagine running a daycare. He’s the only one who seems cuddly, silly, and flexible enough to handle the day-to-day craziness of managing a bunch of little ones. Plus, with her background in education, Jill would probably be willing to offer him some tips on how to focus the curriculum.
    Obama and Hillary are both a little too stiff and serious. I don’t think they could deal with having to be gentle in the face of so much childish chaos. Huckabee wouldn’t even try because “caring for children is clearly women’s work.” McCain would bore the children to death with tales of his maverickiness – if hecould pry himself away from hitting on the moms and female co-workers. And Palin would use the children as an opportunity to get herself in front of a camera, then ignore them as she spoke about the evils of the liberal media elite.

  5. Rachel_in_WY
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    Exactly! I vote for Joe.

  6. Sarah
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    Yeah, this was my Facebook status rant for day or two…

  7. Entomology Girl
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 10:33 am | Permalink

    Wow, I didn’t know Michelle Obama was white.

  8. Blitzgal
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    For crying out loud, we judge male politicians by who we want to “have a beer with” and women by how well they would care for our children? It just blows my mind how ingrained this crap is in our society. Too many people just don’t even think about it.

  9. cherylboberyl
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    I agree! I think i would also let John Edwards take care of my kid. i have no idea why though…

  10. tiny_blue_dinosaur
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    I don’t know…have you seen that photograph of Obama on the bumper cars ride with Sasha? Pretty darn cute. :-)

  11. Sleepy
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    I would not choose any politician to watch my children OR fix my car. But any of them can feel free to come and scrub my toilet! LOL

  12. cantabrigian
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:26 am | Permalink

    that’s infuriating. I just sent a comment to US News and World Report; you can do so too, at: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/usinfo/infomain.htm

  13. AlmostAmanda
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    True, but as a parent and a teacher I’ve found it’s always easier to deal with my own two kids than a large group of muchkins with very diverse personalities and needs – especially when everyone is just getting to know one another. I think he’d struggle with finding the right balance between too calm and too harsh in dealing with things when they got out of hand. I’d give him and Hillary a week before they both threw up their hands and walked out.

  14. AlmostAmanda
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!!!
    I would also consider letting them take a stab at my laundry mountain.

  15. Tsunade
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    Oh my god. Obama and Clinton would have made me CRY as a little girl. I was so sensitive.

  16. The Law Fairy
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    To be fair, I think I could imagine Huckabee being great with kids. Problem is, that would make it that much easier to indoctrinate them, which makes him the very worst choice.
    I constantly marvel at how such an indescribably affable, pleasant, likable guy could be so absolutely nucking futs on the inside. I want SO BADLY to be in love with Mike Huckabee. If only he would just give up the crazy.

  17. Kat
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    And we also judge the women politicians by who we’d want to get fashion advice from.

  18. BornSlippy
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    Considering that almost all of the state-funded, education-focused, youth summer camps I attended growing up in Arkansas had to close because of budget cuts by the Huckabee administration, and the few that managed to keep their doors open were constantly being threatened with closure if they didn’t stop doing things like telling gay and atheist kids that it was okay to be gay or atheist, I’d have to disagree.
    Could he run a good health-based after-school program? Sure. But I wouldn’t entrust the care and teaching of my hypothetical kiddos to him for anything else.

  19. aleks
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Joe Biden to fix my car. That’d be an oil change I could believe in.
    Of the choices offered, Nancy Pelosi because I think she’s a grandmother and has a lot of experience. Also if I recall correctly she’s from a huge Catholic family and accustomed to children en masse. Michelle Obama also has obviously done a great job with her kids. Chelsea has turned out pretty well, but I wouldn’t want my kids growing up with any hint of either of her parents’ personality traits. Sarah Palin is far too stupid and self absorbed to be trusted with anything of value, and then there are the guns.

  20. allegra
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    Wow. What morons. And, unsurprisingly, Palin’s ahead at 61%, Obama at 35%, Hillary and Pelosi at 2% each.
    Hey, maybe Palin could run a special anti-birth-control, multi-generational daycare, where the pregnant teenage children could bring their own children.

  21. La_reine
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

    And the parents of any disabled children will be held up on pedestals for not having aborted them….

  22. La_reine
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

    And the parents of any disabled children will be held up on pedestals for not having aborted them….

  23. MelissaL
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    I KNOW! What kind of parents are thinking, wow, yes, please let me have the woman whose own child admits her teachings are unrealistic watch my children!! She is the terrifying choice!!

  24. sly
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 7:12 pm | Permalink

    for what its worth there was a poll during the Bush v. Kerry campaign on who would be more likely to stop & help you fix a flat.
    Its hard to get exercised over this. Its basically asking which politician comes closer to your family values…and in Obama’s own book he makes it clear that Michelle does the vast majority of childrearing.

  25. birch
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 8:24 pm | Permalink

    amen!

  26. Rachel_in_WY
    Posted February 23, 2009 at 11:31 pm | Permalink

    It seems to me that feminists should always get a bit “exercised” when a mainstream news source suggests that female politicians, regardless of their personal and professional accomplishments, are really basically just fancy babysitters underneath it all. It’s pretty sexist to only include females when this kind of question is being asked, as if somehow biology is destiny. Even if the Obamas do follow a “traditional” model, why does that make it OK to reduce her to her abilities as a childcare provider? And just because there was a stupid poll during the last election cycle doesn’t justify continuing the practice.

  27. aleks
    Posted February 24, 2009 at 7:24 am | Permalink

    I’d have said Michelle until that election night black dress with the big paintball splatter on the front.

  28. AlmostAmanda
    Posted February 24, 2009 at 10:17 am | Permalink

    Exactly! I don’t think we’d be so “exercised” if the poll involved all the major candidates (Obama, Clinton, McCain, Huckabee) or the final candidates plus their running mates (Obama, Biden, McCain, Palin), or their spouses (Michelle Obama, Jill Biden, Cindy McCain, Todd Palin). Instead, this poll offers up the First Lady, the Secretary of State, a governor/former VP candidate, and the Speaker of the House. That would have been a silly poll, but not a sexist one.
    The fact is that the good folks at US News decided to come up with this mishmash of people in different political positions for no other reason than the fact that the four all have girly parts – which, of course, makes them perfect for caring for children.
    Why such a mishmash of political positions? Because they all have the ladybits, of course. Therein lies the problem.

  29. AlmostAmanda
    Posted February 24, 2009 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    Oops, those last two sentences in the first paragraph should be reversed, reading:
    That would have been a silly poll, but not a sexist one. Instead, this poll offers up the First Lady, the Secretary of State, a governor/former VP candidate, and the Speaker of the House.
    It’s not my morning.

  30. Danyell
    Posted February 24, 2009 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    Maybe because he sweet, soft, Virginia drawl would be perfect for reading stories!

  31. Danyell
    Posted February 24, 2009 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    Which is always so strange…because normally the guy you want to have a beer with is the LAST guy you’d want running the country. The most crazy, party-ing-est guy you know is probably always “in-between” jobs, getting into fights & begging his significant other to let him come back home.
    A lot of people would want to get drunk with a guy like Bush. CASE IN POINT.

  32. Danyell
    Posted February 24, 2009 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

    We shouldn’t get too upset, because all news network viewer polls are inherent bullshit meant to fill time & space & give people a pseudo-sense of involvement. They’re usually offensive because they’re meant to get a rise out of people and give them something to fight over so they can ignore all of the stuff that really matters and allow the media to further kill brain cells and anything positive about humanity!

  33. e
    Posted February 27, 2009 at 1:05 am | Permalink

    http://www.usnews.com/sections/news/washington-whispers/
    Oh, how charming. They changed the aforementioned sexist poll to ask which of these male politicians we’d want as a babysitter.
    Anyone else think they’re trying to make up for their mistake?

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

207 queries. 1.889 seconds