Welcome to a new kind of wife in politics

While speculation about Michelle Obama’s inauguration gown reaches fever pitch (please oh please let it be a minidress covered with red, white and blue paillettes), what’s really important on Tuesday is not what she’ll be putting on but what she’ll be throwing off.

Obama’s administration heralds a new era for women in US government. Not only are we getting Michelle, we are avoiding the hypnotic yet slightly scary presence of Cindy McCain, we are seeing off Laura Bush and we get Hillary Clinton along in the bargain.

Of course, a presidential win for Hillary would have been historic in its own right, but – assuming her confirmation as Secretary of State – we now get two interesting women of two different moulds. One is young, black, clever, and stylish. The other is mature, white, seasoned, and has found a good haircut. Mostly they are independent, intelligent, and visible.

As an American woman I'm relieved that we'll no longer hear the exaltations of feminine qualities that run the gamut from quietly supportive to reserved and acquiescent. Laura Bush has her supporters but a woman who describes herself as a librarian, schoolteacher, mother and wife isn't an inspiring role model. She's a throwback.

Yes, Laura may have been debating George behind the scenes about abortion or poverty, but if her public image doesn't reflect her views and if it hasn’t made a difference in the policies on the street, that’s just pillow talk.

Of course, we must gird ourselves for the next phase. Michelle is young, independent-minded and opinionated. Naturally she’ll get slaughtered. For Hillary, politicians and pundits will take up their favourite brickbats to correct her for being too hard or too soft or too married to Bill.

While I don’t relish the Kabuki theatre of build-them-up-to-tear-them-down routine that’s become our compulsion with the powerful, famous and wealthy, I’m happy the din and roar will be addressing new templates for womanhood and motherhood - the black First Lady who speaks her mind, the ambitious female politician who can play with the big boys.

They demonstrate that you don't have to don an apron or relegate yourself to wifely stereotypes (like that old Hillary quote about staying home and baking cookies) to be a partner or parent these days. It’s time the seen-and-not-heard helpmate is not seen or heard from again.

Update: In response to some posters' comments that this post reads like a slur on the roles of librarian, teacher, mother and wife, I wanted to clarify my post. I have the utmost respect for good teachers - my parents both taught at the primary school and university levels. It goes without saying that any job done well deserves respect, including parenting. I apologise if the post implies otherwise.

But Laura Bush categorising herself in these four roles - roles to which women have historically been restricted - highlights the fact that she defined herself solely in terms of others. That she remained a shadow behind her husband is - I maintain - a disappointment. Yes, the First Lady is an unelected post, but it IS a bully pulpit from which she can change attitudes and sway public opinion about important issues, as many other First Ladies, such as Eleanor Roosevelt and Betty Ford, have.

As for Condoleezza Rice, she is a role model, but her impact was overshadowed by the presidency that George Bush ran. As Stephanie points out below, I don't like Bush, it's true - considering all the damage he's done to America. Apparently a lot of other Americans agree with me.

Comments

[Jean Jones]

The bottom line is that there are different ways of being a successful political wife (or indeed husband - see Thatcher, D) and none of these ways is the only right one. Laura Bush did an excellent job of being one kind. We won't know what sort of president's wife Mrs Obama will be until she becomes one. She may be very different from Mrs Bush but equally successful. Let's wait and see and not, just yet, project onto her our own views about feminism, politics or whatever other bees we may have in our bonnets, shall we? Poor women, both of them. They can't win whatever they do.

[Louise]

Enough gushing already. Michelle Obama got faovurs from her husband when elected to the Senate (remember her pay went up to 350k overnight through grants to the hospital he signed off on).
You say its great cindy mccain isnt in. what about all the tireless work she does for charity overseas but doesnt have the media following her. she is wealthy but does so much for charity - as does Laura Bush. they need credit where credit is due, and not always pushed down by liberals who hate everything that isnt their own way of thinking.

This is liberal media at its best, and i fear its only going to get worse

[Mary]

I hasten to say that the last 'Mary' to leave a comment, at 17 Jan 14:36:41, is not me (I replied to two earlier posts, left by Miriam and Jean). I rather suspect that's not your real name, Mary! Are you another Labour Party plant?

[Laua]

What?! Wow, you must have lots of trouble seeing past the end of that nose of yours.

Michelle Obama is brilliant, literally and figuratively, and I feel certain the US can only benefit from her very considerable talents.

I cannot overstate how excited I am to see the Obamas entering the White House after eight horrible, dark years of Dubya...it's like waking from a fever dream. You opine that "she would do well to keep her mouth shut"...is it claustrophobic in your bunker, or what? You'd do well to take your own toxic advice.

+++++

"Obama is opinionated, biased, resentful, and has not been elected to anything. Therefore she would do well to keep her mouth shut, even if her husband asks her to advise him on state matters."

Posted by: expatriot | 16 Jan 2009 17:44:24

[Mary Brooks]

Michelle Obama is a dignified middle-aged woman. She is not young!!!!

[Mary]

This article is typical of ill- thought out 'logic' and is made worse by the 'Update in response' which patronisingly apologises and then goes on to 'But'.

Remember that saying, 'anything before the 'but' is bullshit'.
Personally I think that applies to the whole article. Throwing in hackneyed supposedly 'feminist' soundbites doesn't do it much good either.

Vaccuous rubbish.

[Deborah]

The consistent, dominating thought that lay at the heart of all racial educational and sociological theories, successive cultural beliefs and observances in American/ European society from as far back as anyone could care to remember; was that even one drop of black blood makes you black.

Barack Obama is the 44th president of a country steeped to the hilt in a history of extremity; and to deny they have made a giant leap forward by trying to undo what centuries of racial ideaology have dictated is disingenious to say the least.

Barack Obama is a black man - and that will not be denied.

[cynthia]

Michelle Obama is an educated, wise woman who CHOSE to raise her own children, and support her husband, their father, and their union as two intelligent people; yin and yang, as our Asian friends might say.

Naturally, she'll be 'slaughtered' by those who think their ninny meanderings matter one jot in the bigger world. Cherie Blair is typical of the have it all monetarily, and lose it all domestically. Son found drunk on a London street. Daughter...say no more.

Only a militant woman would have swum against the tide of dimwit wage slave women who sacrificed their children and their husband...for what? For signing up to the vacuous nonsense of 'having it all'. Having it all for their ego. Losing it all, spiritually.

...at the expense of that priceless thing: love. Love of children. Love of husband. 'The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.'

Gently rocks. Gently rules. Gently enables others. Well done, Michelle.

[Mary]

Well Miriam, you wrote earlier, 'Gordon Brown was elected. I voted for him at my constituency Labour party meeting.' So we know where you're coming from then... Oh dear, how patronising you are. We all remember these things, thanks so much. But the enchanting fact that you and a few of your friends voted for him doesn't change the reality that he was to go to the country (a bigger vote, Miriam) and didn't. Anyway, must I wearily remind you that John Major went to the electorate after a year or so, and that, whilst it's true James Callaghan struggled on, his destination was defeat. Which is where Gordon Brown will take your party, with any luck.

[expatriot]

Obama is opinionated, biased, resentful, and has not been elected to anything. Therefore she would do well to keep her mouth shut, even if her husband asks her to advise him on state matters.

[ruskee]

LKBCPA - too ashamed to put a proper name? 'Another Liberal who thinks she is better than everyone else'? What projectile rubbish. Narcissism and egocentricity in personalities are most ubiquitous on the right wing where 'thinkers' obsess over their own rights and priviledges to the exclusion of others. And what, frankly, is the relevance of the First Mother-in-law living in the White House?? Surely it is refreshing to see a family caring for its own old folk instead of shoving them off to a home. Perhaps you unconsciously find the Obamas too challenging - and they haven't even had a chance to yet demonstrate how they can improve on the superlatively incompetent Bush.

[Alan rTotter]

Michelle Obama's status is entirely dependent on her husband’s career achievement. No one would have heard of her or paid her the slightest attention if her husband were not an eminent politician. A women who is a sort of add-on to an alpha male from whom she derives her status and self esteem is a poor role model for feminists.

[Miriam]

Mary, I think you need to read up on a bit of recent history and understand how things work in this country.

Look up John Major and Jim Callaghan for a start. Another leader of their respective parties resigned whilst they were the Prime Minister. The parties then voted for a new leader under the party rules. This new leader became the Prime Minister and remained so until they lost a general election which did not come immediately. This is totally legitimate and came with little complaint, if any at all, at the time.

The systems for voting in Major and Callaghan within the parties were extremely undemocratic at the time. They are now less so, and anyone who wants to join either party can have some say in the final decision.

Gordon Brown is so popular within the Labour party that no-one could gain enough support to stand against him.

[B]

Sorry this articule is a does a dis service to all women.... I am not a Bush fan but what is wrong with Laura? She is who, she is.

I thought the whole idea of all types of freedom movement was the right to be as you want.

It is ok to dislike Laura's style but to say she is not a role model, is going too far. What makes Michele a better role model?

[Monash]

The First Lady is not a 'post' - it's a condition. Laura Bush and all others bring to this what they bring. If you want to make a real difference, get elected or live in the UK where such 'conditions' can make you Queen or Di.

[carl]

How come President Obama is black when his mother was white?

Americas first mixed race President?

Anyway I thought the skin colour of a President was irrelevant, it is their Political pedigree we should focus on.

Dont forget, that both President Idi Amin of Uganda and President Mugaba of Zimbabwe are black, but their politics was/is far from acceptable.

[Mary]

Jean, you make my point for me when you say, 'Any one of those individuals could become PM if their party chose them as its leader and it then won an election'. Brown has gone to the wire to avoid an election. That's when a new party leader as prime minister changes from being constitutionally in power to being 'unelected' in the eyes of the people.

[Anthony Evans]

My worry is that her husband will 'get slaughtered' - literally.

[Lizzie, New York]

Isabelle raises an amusing point, imagine if we could vote on the First Spouse! Would pols have to get divorced on announcing their candidature then marry the elected spouse on the morning of their inauguration? What happens if a woman wins the presidency and another wins First Spouse, both of them on an anti-gay-marriage platform; would they be obliged to overturn any such policy? Or would the winner of First Spouse be announced the day after POTUS, as the highest-performing candidate of the opposite sex? What would the duties be? "Hold the President's hand in public, bring her/him a cup of tea after important Cabinet meetings, and have sex with her/him at least twice a week"? What qualifications would the public like to see?

And most of all, would the position require Senate confirmation...?

[Malski]

re Alvin comments, to consider women as leaders and the role of their husbands. when Margaret Thatcher was PM of the UK her husband Dennis was very much in the background and not visible for official Government business. When asked about his role in the family, one question was very direct about who wore the trousers, to which Dennis strongly replied that it was HE who wore the trousers....and that he also ironed them!

[maggie thomas]

I am so sick of Obama and Michele already. I even
like them. maybe. 13 covers on Time Mag. Movie.
People are gushing so much I can't even
watch anymore. It is downright creepy.

[LKBCPA]

Let's see: First, she wanted a salary for being first lady. Now, her mother is going to live with them in the White House. Hmmm...
She might get slaughtered as you say, but it won't be because of her race. It will be because of her actions. She is just another liberal who thinks she is better than everyone else.

[Vic Semprini]

Michell Obama, when not controlled by handlers, is a rather pushy and strident person with a pretty big chip on her shoulder. It will be interesting to see if she's unleashed after the inauguration or not.

I don't think she's a terribly good role model, and I don't think the media has done a very good job at all in revealing who she is.

[Jean Jones]

No, the point is that he is an elected MP, like 645 other individuals in the UK. Any one of those individuals could become PM if their party chose them as its leader and it then won an election. None of them would have been voted for by more than about 20,000 people at best (and GB's MAJORITY is 18,216 - that is not the no of people who actually put their cross by his name at the last election; it was more than that). The UK system, in other words, is not like the US one. The PM is not directly elected by the electorate. The original poster was, I believe, making the point that no election had been fought by GB as PM, but that's not the same as saying that nobody voted for him.

[Mary]

'It is not true that nobody voted for Gordon Brown. He is an elected MP and has been since 1983. His current majority is 18,216, which means that in fact rather a lot of people voted for him'

Well, maybe, Jean. But 18,216 isn't many in a country of 60 million. That's the point.