Madeline Albright on being a female Secretary of State and a diplomat:
“There is a great advantage to being a woman. I think we are better at personal relationships and have the ability to tell it like it is when necessary.”
Sarah Palin on her possible Presidential run:
"Nobody is more qualified really to multitasking and doing all the things you need to do as a president than a woman and as a mom."
These statements are notable for two reasons:
1. Both are clearly sexist, and if made by a men, would immediately be attacked by feminists.
Am I wrong?
If Madeline Albright can claim female dominance in personal relationships and the ability to “tell it like it is when necessary,” would it also be acceptable for Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to claim that men make better generals because they think more strategically than women? Or for Joe Biden to claim that men make better Presidents because they handle pressure more effectively?
And if Sarah Palin can claim that women are better qualified to handle the multitude of duties on the Presidential plate, would it also be acceptable for Mitt Romney to counter with the claim that men forge more effective partnerships because we are less catty and mean?
Of course not.
Yet both Albright and Palin get away with these statements unscathed (and almost unnoticed) because of a second, equally notable reason:
2. Most men don’t give a damn if Madeline Albright, Sarah Plain or anyone else wants to claim female superiority in any realm.
Talk is cheap.