Palin, Clinton, Michelle Obama: Double standards for women in politics?

Just how comfortable are we with female leaders? Not at all? Very? Somewhere in between? Judging from the current presidential race, all of the above may apply. While the unprecedented participation of women in the current US presidential race marks monumental progress in the acceptance of women as solid political leaders, media spin and water-cooler buzz may suggest otherwise. If there is one thing we can glean from these mixed messages, it is this: gender is and will continue to be a big issue in the political decision-making process.

When Gloria Steinem brought gender to the fore of debate in a widely discussed New York Times editorial last January, she painted a telling hypothetical picture. Take Obama's past experience, she wrote, and change sexes- Achola Obama as opposed to Barack- and you will come up with a political ticket going nowhere. Regardless of our political leanings, many of us had to admit it was a good point. That, however, was in January.

Now with Sarah Palin, an arguably less experienced and more problematic candidate than the hypothetical Achola Obama in the mix, we must ask once again: just how comfortable are we with female leaders? How will our expectations of a 'female leader' as opposed, simply to a 'leader,' color our ballots this November?

As more and more information trickles in regarding Palin's personal life, I cannot help but wonder— how would we react if she were male? Would the debate surrounding her daughter's teen pregnancy be nearly as vocal? Would her physical beauty be mentioned with such avid frequency?

One aspect in this hypothetical can be nearly certain. If Palin were male, the fact that she recently gave birth to an infant with Down syndrome would most likely be a blip on the radar- a talking point to induce empathy and garner votes rather than a reason not to run for VP. Only one week into her candidacy we have all likely heard the same refrain. Often laced with incredulity, it is this: "How can she think of running for office when she has a baby to take care of?"

In terms of logistics, there is only one answer: Palin can think of running for office in the exact same way a man with an infant can think of running for office. Perhaps she will have to confront some extra decisions, such as whether or not she will have the time or desire to breastfeed during intensive campaigning, but these are not insurmountable obstacles. This however, is not just a question of logistics. It is a question of how we define 'politician' and how we define 'mother' and just how willing we are to let the two cozy up together.

The case of Palin is just one example of the ways our ideas about gender will influence politics in the years to come. Whether we are talking about Hillary Clinton crying during a speech, the fashion choices of Michelle Obama, or the intersections of Palin's personal and professes ional lives, gender is there. It is our job as voters, at the very least, to begin to acknowledge and understand this force in our political consciousness.

by Juliana Sloane

Can Obama save an endangered Endangered Species Act?

Obama’s promise of change can’t come too soon for some of the Bush administration’s most lowly constituents.

After all, humans aren't the only living things subject to our government. But because they can’t vote, can't form an opinion on a campaign platform, our country's four-legged residents are even more vulnerable than we are. In his last months in office, Bush has turned his attention to a humble target often overlooked in the current “going green” craze. Unbeknownst to them, the future of our wild neighbors are the seriously threatened by a recent proposed change to the Endangered Species Act.

Currently, federal agencies are required to consult scientists at the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service to determine the potential impact of proposed projects – such as oil drilling - on threatened species and habitats. The Department of Interior insists that eliminating this consultation would streamline the conservation process. And indeed, the new requirement that projects have a “direct” impact on endangered species in order to be assessed would certainly eliminate many previously regulated projects. However, it would also mean that indirect effects on species and habitat - such as climate change - could not be taken into account when assessing the impact of a proposed project. How convenient, just as the conflict between our climate change and country’s ecological footprint is coming under public scrutiny.

Incredibly, this proposal would allow agencies to determine the impact of their own actions, with no external assessment. That sounds about as effective as asking drivers to voluntarily decide whether their own driving habits contribute to global warming or not! According to former U.S. Forest Service ecologist Robert Mrowka, it’s like “the fox guarding the hen house."

Bush’s last-minute proposition, just months before his departure from office, suggests an assumption that he will be followed by a sympathetic successor. When questioned, McCain had no comment to offer on the proposed revisions. Meanwhile, Obama responded in a manner consistent with his message of change. "This 11th-hour ruling from the Bush administration is highly problematic,” said Obama campaign spokesman Nick Shapiro. "….As president, Senator Obama will fight to maintain the strong protections of the Endangered Species Act and undo this proposal from President Bush."

But will it be too late? For some of our furry neighbors I fear it may be. Exhausted by hours of politics and propaganda, after investigating this legislation for hours I left my computer and stepped out into the warm North Carolina night for a restorative walk. Speaking loudly over the resplendent chorus of thousands of cicadas, katydids, and crickets, I tried to explain to my partner Matt my distress over the politics I’ve been reading about. Suddenly, I broke off in shocked mid-sentence. Just a few feet over my head, a bat glided into an oak branch, cutting off a cicada in mid-chirp. The cicada and the bat fell out of the tree, wrestling in mid air. The cicada squealed shrilly. After a moment’s fierce fight the cicada darted away, too stunned to chirp, and the bat swept sulkily off, in search of perhaps less feisty prey.

Matt and I stared at each other, dazzled. Nature, red in tooth and claw! Suddenly, my frustration fell into perspective. Such moments are, after all, why I do what I do. My hours devoted to dissecting Obama and McCain’s environmental policies are for the sake of my neighbors like this bat: perhaps one of the Gray Bats, Indiana Bats, or Virginia Big-Eared Bats currently endangered in my state. After all, these species, like dozens others, are more threatened even than I by the uncertain future of our government.

by Sadie Kneidel