So, did you hear? Sarah Palin was a beauty queen. I figured I’d offer a reason why going after her on beauty queen grounds is bad on more than just for its sexism. And due to contractual terms here at EoTAW, I’ll nerd it up for you!
Let’s be clear. It’s sexist. It isn’t analogous to calling Bush a frat boy, both because ‘frat boy’ is understood in response to Bush’s petulant attitudes, and because being in frat alone wasn’t tossed about as a disqualification. It isn’t just about her being a lightweight either, because nothing about her being a lightweight with no political experience has anything to do with her pageant experience in 1984, any more than her being basketball captain in 1984 makes her fit to lead. (And, o Internet bloggers, what were you doing in high school….? Is that more relevant than what you’ve done in the years since?)
It’s pretty much pure sexism: she was attractive, so she must be a bubblehead. It’s a cheap and easy shot. And it’s not a good message to send to young women. Especially following the primary campaign where Clinton’s problem was often described as being too ball-busting, and not feminine enough.
But the hell with worrying about that, we wanna win, right? And, there’s only maybe, like, three PUMAs.
So, the hell with principles. Practically: I don’t think this line of sexist attack is likely to work.*
Consider that as Palin’s background is being presented, she’s pretty much a TV character. She’s one exotic eye color away from a Mary Sue who has it all. Career, husband, looks, children, ambition, whistleblower, disabled son. (The last is straight outta bad high school writing.) People who go up against Mary Sues lose. People who don’t like Mary Sues because they are pretty end up being their best friends by the next episode, won over by Mary Sue’s intelligence and kindness. Or they end up put out the airlock.
The media run on narrative. They don’t want to report the truth; they want to be the ones writing the climactic double episode. Do not be the bad guy in the climactic double episode. The November sweeps will eat you.
So, how to go after Palin? Change the narrative. She’s not there because of her accomplishments.** She’s only there because McCain, like all Republicans, has to take his orders from Friar James and his band of merry eschatons. She’s there because McCain is desperate. McCain, who is 23 years older than her state, hasn’t even bothered to get to know the person who will likely be taking over for him. Etc. Be creative.
*It also feeds into an old line of attack against feminists. We want everyone to be hairy-legged and ugly because we’re not as pretty as conservative women. They can be accomplished and pretty and get men; we can’t, so we’re out to destroy families and high heels.
**I actually don’t think she’s all that underqualified, really. I think what speaks to McCain’s poor judgment is not that he picked a newbie governor, but that he didn’t seem to be concerned with anything about her.

41 comments
August 30, 2008 at 10:22 am
figbash
I think you are absolutely right about the more effective line of attack–it has legs. The beauty queen thing can only go so far and it is certainly not a disqualification.
I am still debating with myself, though, if the beauty queen attack (as it happened in my own head) is necessarily sexist. To me, the equation is not “she was attractive so she must be a bubble head” it is “she was attractive and put time, money, and effort into winning competitions based on her attractiveness so she’s kind of a bubblehead (or was, at least)”.
Judgmental as hell, no doubt, but I’m not entirely sure about sexist.
August 30, 2008 at 10:35 am
dana
Time, money, and effort in high school. In the early 80s. And went to college on the scholarship that came out of it. I think the context is relevant.
But more to the point, it was high school. If Obama or McCain put time, money, and effort into becoming a second-string quarterback or third violin or 16th level mage*, we’d never hear about it as a reason they weren’t serious enough to lead.
(*Well, not in McCain’s case, as I think D&D was invented sometime after he ran for office…)
August 30, 2008 at 10:48 am
figbash
You may be right–except for the mage. i would Totally call the mage a bubblehead.
August 30, 2008 at 10:59 am
John Emerson
I don’t grant that being a small-town mayor is relevant experience, especially since she wasn’t a very good one. Eighteen months as the governor of a small, corrupt state doesn’t weigh very heavily, either, especially since she wasn’t that great a governor either. Especially since she evidently hasn’t been preparing herself for political office all her life.
She doesn’t even seem as qualified as Dubya, if you ask me, and Dubya was just the ceremonial face of a powerful machine and had his dad and his dad’s friends to talk to. AFAIK Palin doesn’t have her own team, so if she were thrust into the Presidency we’d be asking ourselves who had her ear and was running the government.
August 30, 2008 at 11:08 am
JPool
Good analysis, but not nearly nerdy enough (except for what is apparently a Star Trek fanfic reference, which, OK, is like dark matter of nerdiness). I expecting some of that deep encoding of all of this into random “terms” from Aristotle or Kant or Whathaveyou (or maybe that’s just what the philosophy nerds in my corner of the Southeast were like).
I think the Obama campaign already has it right (nice to see): the response to Palin is the same one as the response to McCain. You can say that you’re a maverick and a reformer, but what is it that you’re committed to reforming, how are you planning to carry that out and how far are you willing to take it? The campaign doesn’t need to bring up her limited experience (that’ll get mentioned enough by the media anyway), just hold her to the same standards they’ve already said that they should be held to.
August 30, 2008 at 11:15 am
Matt W
I was under the impression that everyone hated Wesley Crusher. I mean, haaaated him.
(Though if you read on in that strip, the mother liked him. Maybe this is an attempt to appeal to women after all.)
August 30, 2008 at 11:17 am
Matt W
Also, what JPool said about the response — McCain is the big show.
August 30, 2008 at 11:19 am
Walt
This quote demonstrates that Dr. J and I were cheated of our rightful victory in the Veepstakes, just as we were cheated of the 1980 NBA championship:
August 30, 2008 at 11:28 am
Artemis
“his band of merry eschatons”
Best phrase evah to describe the GOP ‘base’!
August 30, 2008 at 11:33 am
dana
Everyone hated Crusher, matt, but not in the world of the show!
Emerson, important difference: she’s VP.
August 30, 2008 at 11:44 am
Charlieford
The bright side is she makes Obama look experienced, and I don’t think the GOP can harp on that anymore. The down side is that this, while clearly a gimmick, is also a Hruska moment. Regular folk will look at her and see someone pretty much like them–sports obsessed, outdoorsy, not especially bright or accomplished, got where she is in large part on her looks, and they’ll say, “Hey, us mediocrities need respect, too!”
August 30, 2008 at 12:39 pm
SEK
She’s not “pretty much a TV character,” she is one.
August 30, 2008 at 12:43 pm
andrew
There’s a very good chance that she’d be a better president than McCain. At least I don’t think she is surrounded by lobbyists and long on record as being in favor of war war war. Maybe this will change.
August 30, 2008 at 12:50 pm
andrew
Also, I don’t get how the Wesley Crusher reference is operating here. (I did watch the show* for a season or two and know who he is.)
*I would nerd things up and write ST:TNG but I’m not under contract. Also, not that much of a nerd.
August 30, 2008 at 2:38 pm
JudasConstant
“It’s pretty much pure sexism: she was attractive, so she must be a bubblehead. It’s a cheap and easy shot.”
While I think you’re on to something there, I think you’re underestimating beauty queens. Have you ever met a pageant girl? Growing up in wealthy areas of Southern Florida, I knew several. They’re overly competitive, phony, and they care about causes just so they can win a prize. Or at least people think that whether or not it’s true. (It’s probably true.)
If Hillary Clinton’s narrative comes from Tracy Flick in Election, Palin’s beauty queen narrative has associations with… Mean Girls? Heathers? Basically she’s the Alpha girl in any high school movie. No one likes to think they’re the Alpha girl, they all associate with the earnest new girl or what have you.
(This is my first comment and it’s filled with conjecture and personal evidence. It also referenced Mean Girls. Please forgive me.)
August 30, 2008 at 3:00 pm
silbey
and I don’t think the GOP can harp on that anymore
When has inconsistency ever stopped the Republicans?
August 30, 2008 at 3:20 pm
blueollie
Actually, the Republicans have used the “beauty queen” label to sell her, so it is fair game to attack them for it.
They (the Republicans) are saying that being a beauty queen is somehow a credential, and to be blunt, it is not.
Also: remember that they are after the disaffected HRC supporters; those who felt that she was “passed over” unfairly for a lesser qualified male.
What about being “passed over” for someone who got onto a ticket based in part on her “beauty queen” credentials?
August 30, 2008 at 4:15 pm
The gift that keeps on giving… « blueollie
[…] Trolls: Oh no, ridiculing the “beauty queen” thing is being “sexist.” Anyone who has had any experience in American politics knew that one was […]
August 30, 2008 at 4:23 pm
urbino
Is anybody using the beauty queen argument? I haven’t seen it.
August 30, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Neddy Merrill
Early polling suggests that men are a lot more supportive of Palin than women are. (Probably an artifact of the the conservative gender imbalance.) K-Lo, however, remains enthused.
August 30, 2008 at 5:41 pm
dana
It’s been popping up here and there, urbino. Along with the vpilf and other stuff.
They (the Republicans) are saying that being a beauty queen is somehow a credential, and to be blunt, it is not.
It isn’t a credential, and they’re not saying it is a reason McCain picked her (leaning on the pro-life, maverick, reach out to Clinton women.) It’s coming out during the media fluffy background stuff.
August 30, 2008 at 6:21 pm
blueollie
The Republicans are using it as part of their selling point:
This is from Newsmax, a right wing magazine that is in lockstep with the RNC.
August 30, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Thoughts worth passing on « My Beautiful Wickedness
[…] 2007 Thoughts worth passing on August 30, 2008, 9:58 pm Filed under: Uncategorized Palin as a Mary Sue. (For those of you who don’t know what a Mary Sue is, here you go) and what that means when a […]
August 30, 2008 at 8:59 pm
JPool
vpilf
ew.
August 30, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Vance Maverick
When I go to video.google.com right now, a Youtube video with the title “Sarah Palin is a” (that acronym) is second from the top, after a report on Hurricane Gustav. Ugh.
August 31, 2008 at 3:55 pm
bitchphd
Way to go, Dana. And thanks.
August 31, 2008 at 4:27 pm
dana
Have you ever met a pageant girl?
The couple of girls I knew were from Wisconsin and Minnesota. Pretty, but really, really normal otherwise. That might be an effect of the region.
SEK, that link is awesome. Madam Alaska Airlock.
August 31, 2008 at 5:10 pm
democommie
Sarah Palin could have played Denise Richardson’s character in “Drop Dead Gorgeous”–now THAT’s a “Beauty Paegant” movie!
I would not criticize a woman for being a contestant in beauty paegants but I think that she is all flash and no substance.
August 31, 2008 at 5:14 pm
bitchphd
I would not criticize a woman for being a contestant in beauty paegants
I well might, as beauty pageants are stupid and sexist. I’d figure that the woman in question had either been silly (or raised by silly people) or sexist.
In this case, though, such criticisms are politically problematic and really kind of beside the point.
August 31, 2008 at 5:43 pm
tongue but no door (dot) net » Blog Archive » Your Links Palin Comparison
[…] Money. But by far the best coverage so far as been by Edge of the American West. There’s this excellent post about the right and the wrong way to go about attacking the choice. Hint: leave the beauty queeen […]
September 1, 2008 at 6:13 am
Martin Wisse
No, being a beauty queen and participating in those things is being sexist.
Thinking it’s good experience for becoming vice president, as McCain seems to, is just downright stupid and deserves to be mocked.
Agonising about whether or not attacking her for having been a beauty queen is timewasting and more stupid than thinking having won a pagaent is good preperation for the White House.
September 2, 2008 at 1:13 am
Noumenon
Beauty pageants may be stupid and sexist, just as football is stupid and reinforces macho norms, however, the kind of people who put their effort into these kind of things are the kind of people who go on to greater accomplishments. They’re the minor leagues for meeting people who will take you to the majors. I respect Palin’s career path.
September 2, 2008 at 11:05 am
Chris Clarke
I worked with a reigning Miss California for a time a few years back. Perfectly normal, sensible, and quite intelligent person who used the pageant money to pay her tuition at UCSF’s med school. After graduating from Stanford with a 3.99 GPA.
September 2, 2008 at 11:17 am
SomeCallMeTim
at UCSF’s med school. After graduating from Stanford with a 3.99 GPA.
Are you trying to make us hate her?
September 2, 2008 at 12:33 pm
dana
Agonising about whether or not attacking her for having been a beauty queen is timewasting and more stupid than thinking having won a pagaent is good preperation for the White House.
Commenting on it, on the other hand, is only third-order stupid and doesn’t waste time at all.
I think beauty pageants are stupid, but like I said, I think it’s at best useless as a line of attack.
September 2, 2008 at 12:46 pm
phoenix complex
It’s true that there are terrifyingly accomplished beauty queens out there, although the Miss Teen South Carolinas (?) may still outnumber them. The stupidity slur really isn’t very useful these days, and may even have been pretty inaccurate in the 80s.
September 2, 2008 at 12:52 pm
dana
I wondered about the relevance of the 1980s to all of this. It seems arguable that a girl today who e.g., a was star basketball player and played music would have a lot more options for gaining college scholarships than her counterpart in 1983, who might have to try to win pageants, and beauty pageants are a lot less popular now than they have been in the past (post JonBenet, etc.) Someone who seeks out beauty pageants now might be in a worse place with respect to sexism than someone doing it in the mid70s.
I don’t know much about the history of pageants, though, and I’ll be damned if McCain’s VP selection makes me research it.
September 3, 2008 at 10:06 am
Chris Clarke
Are you trying to make us hate her?
Just don’t hate her because she’s beautiful.
September 5, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Matt W
A dissenting view. (I’m very uncomfortable with this on normative grounds, because it is sexist, and especially I don’t think that Palin had plastic surgery — though I understand they’re trying to evoke Mean Girls/Clueless there. On descriptive grounds I think she may not be rich enough, although as someone pointed out snowmobiles are expensive. As far as the narrative goes — was her speech sassy or mean? I’m not the best judge.)
September 5, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Matt W
I think I agree with Incontinentia.
February 26, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Can Crusher
It really was sexist there is no doubting that.