I say "allegedly" because I am yet to see much evidence of this school other than in the imaginations of those who attack feminism, and feminists. But no doubt there are people out there, in the wide world, who think that way.
For me the choice of who to vote for is not just about who they are, but what they stand for, and what they stand against. If they are for a woman's right to choose then I'll vote for them over someone who is against abortion on demand. If they are for reducing user pays in health then they'll get my tick ahead of the person who supports a continuation of a system that underfunds our hospitals and primary health care providers. It's pretty straight forward really.
Which is why I won't vote for a woman who doesn't share even a smidgen of my politics, not when there's a better option on offer.
Had I had a vote in 1990, I wouldn't have voted for National just because of the presence of Jenny Shipley and Ruth Richardson, and the likelihood of getting some women in a National-led cabinet for the first time since the 1950s. In 1996, my first election, I didn't vote Labour just because they had a woman at the helm.* And I certainly wouldn't vote for a conservative Christian candidate for our local community board just because we have some biology in common.
Thus if I had a vote in the forthcoming US presidential race I would not be casting it for McCain and Palin. I abhor the misogynistic attacks on Sarah Palin, as the ex-expat does. And I wouldn't be giving her a pity vote. I'd be voting with my politics, for the candidate most likely to uphold and pursue my values. Which would be the Democrat contender in this particular situation, not the Republican, for all that the latter have put a woman on the podium for the first time in the history of their party while the former chose a man over a woman for their candidacy.
The pro-life thing is a deal-breaker for me, as is Palin's stance on climate change (deny, deny, deny). To think that while she is prepared to uphold the potential lives of fetuses, yet continue executing adults, seems to me not only bizarre but also oddly inconsistent. Her attitudes to sex-education (abstinence only), and the war in Iraq (more please), not to mention the Republican's positions on issues like tax, education and health, mean she would never get my vote. Hugh has a good post up on the politics of McCain's choice, and more detail on the values of this particular Republican ticket.
It could all be academic anyway. Despite what many consider a great speech to the Republican convention, there is already significant betting on when Palin will be dropped as VP nominee.
Hopefully Palin and her political values won't be making it to the White House anytime soon. But I do hope that one day it is routine to have female candidates contesting the presidency, and the vice-presidency, of the USA. If Palin can break some glass ceilings in her own party then she will have done some good.
* Actually I didn't vote Labour at all.