Will The Real Sexism Please Stand Up?

Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau, left, in a photo posted on Facebook, on the Washington Post website, and on CNN's website.

As a Black woman, spotting racism isn’t necessarily something I keep an eye out for, but it’s usually something that is easily recognizable (let’s say, I have a sixth sense for it). It strikes a dissonant chord in me, forcing me to crinkle up my face and recoil. It’s a reflex about as quick as my reaction to smelling spoiled milk. And, like all other instincts, it kicks in when something is amiss (which, fortunately, hasn’t been too often).

I had always assumed that my ability, as a woman, to spot sexism would be as acute as my sixth sense for racism, but lately I’m wondering if my powers are waning. The source of my doubt can be identified in two recent incidents you’re probably familiar with (if you’ve been following the mainstream media, so far this week).

The first incident I’m referring to is the comment Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell made about President-elect Obama’s newly nominated Secretary of Homeland Security, Governor Janet Napolitano. It wasn’t on the record, and apparently he didn’t even realize the microphone on the lectern he was standing near was still on, but after the National Governor’s Conference Governor Ed Rendell happened to be caught saying:

“Janet’s perfect for that job. Because for that job, you have to have no life. Janet has no family. Perfect. She can devote, literally, 19-20 hours a day to it”

Now, as I’m reading and watching Campbell Brown’s commentary on this (I happen to be addicted to CNN as of late) I see a few interesting points made. The first point being that if Gov. Napolitano were a man, no one would even be concerned about whether or not she has a family. The second point being that this gives women reason to wonder if they are passed over for jobs because they have a family. And, the third point being that single women are thought of as having no life, and thus are expected to work more and take on the burdensome shifts. However, after reading these points, my sexism sense still wasn’t tingling.

Am I out of touch, or is it that women generally do carry more of the burden with regards to making sure that their family is taken care of? With a significant amount of children being raised by single mothers, and more and more women opting to be stay at home moms, is being concerned about a woman’s family really sexist? I could see if we lived in a time where 50% of households were run by single fathers, or stay at home dads, but that’s not the case. Taking care of the family does still fall on women the majority of the time. While it may be closed minded not to be concerned about how males are balancing their family and their work (children need their fathers too), is it really sexist given the way responsibilities are usually doled out? Yes, we should be careful, because women have been passed over for jobs in the past because of their family. However, I could have sworn that it is now illegal for recruiters to ask certain questions pertaining to family just to be sure they aren’t discriminating against women with families. And, with regards to single women being expected to work harder, you’d be hard pressed to convince me that single men don’t have the same problem. Sure some of  them probably get paid more for doing the same job, but that’s another story. In an equal world women can do it all, and men can have babies. Until that time, can’t we deal with realistic concerns, realistically?

The second incident that failed to raise my eyebrows was the one in which President-elect Barack Obama’s cheif speech-writer (and a friend of his) took a few pictures with a cardboard cutout of Senator Hillary Clinton while at a party. One of the pictures shows Obama’s speech-writer, John Favreau, with his arm around the cardboard cutout and his friend holding a beer bottle to the cutout’s mouth. To Favrea’s dismay, this picture wound up on Facebook.com (along with others) before being yanked down. After reading the articles about it and looking at the picture a few times myself, I had to admit that my sexism sense was quiet yet again.

Are these guys really trying to make Clinton out to be a sex object? Is this a “scathing criticism” as some bloggers have suggested? Is Clinton a flip-flopper on the fight against sexism, as Campbell Brown suggests? Or, does she simply realize that guys always look like they’re groping a breast when they take a picture with their arm around a lady? I can’t even count how many pictures I have with guy friends in which they look like they were copping a feel, from the most innocent of situations (graduation pictures), to the most incriminating (nightclub pictures). They say a picture is worth a thousand words. If this one says “sexist” to you, then I have to ask . . . what is sexism? I think my sixth sexism sense is off.

"White Men Who Prefer Black Women" blogger, Classical One, brings up issues regarding racism, sexism, conservative Black women, and Condoleeza Rice's role in the White House.

I was under the impression that sexism was something like protesters showing up at Senator Clinton’s rallies, this past presidential election, just to yell “iron my shirt.” Or, FoxNews anchors calling First Lady-elect Michelle Obama a “baby mama,” as if she were an unwed single mother. Or, as blogger Classical One pointed out in a recent post, how Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has been portrayed as President Bush’s “on the side” woman (I’m certain Cheney would never be portrayed that way). Those examples get my sexism sense in full gear. Not to say there are no other possible ways for someone to be sexist, but in the cases of John Favreau and Governor Rendell, I think people are reading too much into it, and playing the sex card.

John Favreau obviously acts a fool at times, and clearly Gov. Rendell needs to pay attention to his surroundings (at least be aware of the nearby microphone). But, to say that their actions are sexist is a bit of a stretch, in my opinion. Denying the role of women is not going to get us on an even playing field with men. Saying that a woman’s family is not a legitimate concern is like saying someone’s alcoholism is not a legitimate concern when they’re in a bar. God gave us ovaries and estrogen. Face it, for the most part, we are the nurturers. With that being said, if we’re going to combat sexism effectively, it’s time we started asking realistic questions of both sexes. Outrage over a silly photo does not a feminist make.

4 Comments

Comments RSS