Civil rights matriarch, Rosa Parks is the first woman to lie in honor in the Capitol Rotunda : Washington Post, Oct. 30, 2005
Goodman and Good Sense II
Ellen Goodman has something more to say about women in public life, in leadership roles, in the context of Rosa Parks’ life and death. I agree mostly with what she says (except Condoleeza Rice’s competence) here. The gist of it is that successful women (much more so than men) must be described in terms which go beyond the relevant qualifications in order for them to be accepted in their public roles. A woman’s “other” roles, such as wife, mother, secretary or seamstress are equally important in providing context for her public face – that of a senator, political activist, president of a university or perhaps soon, president of the United States. Most observers of an influential woman, even her supporters, feel the need to qualify her credentials with softening fillers. A woman presenting an unvarnished professional CV, comes off looking as too competent, ambitious and tough – in other words, too much like a man. Is this need to round off the edges, an attempt to make men feel at ease with her or is it aimed at other women? According to Goodman, it may be both.
My own gripe along the same lines: (only questions here, I won’t hazard any answers)
Another group which must be self effacing and “soft edged” to gain acceptance, especially in order to successfully run for elected office are the intelligent, scholarly folks. To convey the honest impression that you may have an intellectual edge over your opponent (or the electorate), may hurt your chances with voters (Re: Gore vs Bush, 2000). Voters want a president they can have a beer with and not a designated driver (paraphrasing Jon Stewart on the Daily Show).
The paucity of scholars and intellectuals among our elected officials is baffling. We would much rather elect Hollywood actors, WWF wrestlers, athletes and coaches than a true blue scholar who, more often than not, is glibly dismissed as an arrogant “pointy head”. The legislature is bristling with lawyers and businessmen – many of them good and smart people, but often too focused on the “bottom line” and “hasty compromises.” Consequently, the collective vision and ethics of the country are being shaped by the popular media, post modernist social commentators and organized religion. Where are the scientists, philosophers, economists and historians in the mix, to elevate the debate and broaden vision? Without clear, concise and rational voices, how do we introduce progressive ideas into the national conversation?
We still have uses for the brainy among us. We just want them to be somewhat invisible – in classrooms and research labs, behind the scenes as advisors, hard at work in NASA and Silicon Valley but not in the hallowed halls of congress or the White House. Why is a culture that worships so adoringly and publicly at the altar of superior wealth and physical perfection, so unnerved when confronted with a “beautiful mind"?
P.S. A smart woman running for elected office therefore, has the doubly onerous burden of having to mask a high I.Q AND highlight her feminine side.
Accidental Blogger 