...to be honest, I do like the degree to which I recognize and can relate to Sarah Palin's family. Theirs is a family much like that of many of my friends, loved ones, and relatives. Of course Bristol and Levi are back together. And of course this is a screw-you to Sarah Palin. So here's an opportunity for me to suggest one of the only enduring truths I've learned from my years of study.
When your child (or friend) breaks up with their significant other: don't shit talk the ex- cause they'll be back together soon enough, and they'll hate you and blame you for driving them apart.
The second part of this rule, "they'll hate you and blame you for driving them apart," will manifest itself in various forms of subtle and not-too subtle swipes in your direction. Most commonly, the former ex- and now back-on again significant other, will be increasingly invited over to the house, or if not your child, will be invited to events where you will be certain to see each other. The purpose is to test you, to confront you with the fact that they were able to overcome whatever petty personal vendetta had led you to your misplaced antagonism in the first place. The fact that your opposition to their relationship, often voiced only after the breakup, was (1) only an attempt to cheer them up by pointing out the ex-'s obvious deficiencies or (2) based on the accurate observation that the ex- was a terrible and inconsiderate partner, is absolutely beside the point. This is time-worn truth.
Celebrity-status does not change the dynamic; rather, it changes the venue. Instead of coming home to find that your daughter and her former ex- have been hanging out in the basement, with the door closed, 'listening to music' and are now going to 'go out'--daring you to even try and punish her!--you get the pleasure of reading all about it in Us Weekly.
Now obviously none of this should be seen as either disqualifying or qualifying for political office (although the fact that Sarah Palin failed to recognize and adhere to this rule raises some questions about her political judgement). But I do think that there is a symbolic component to political leadership: the extent to which we believe our political leaders are immersed in situations that we can relate to indicates to us the extent to which we ourselves are included in the polity. And so I think the candid and clumsy way in which Palin's family assert themselves into the national discourse is not only refreshing, but potentially positive if it works to expand the symbolic scope of our understanding of political belonging in the United States.
But to paraphrase Ice-T, I live in 21st century America. And around here, shit ain't like that. It's real fucked up. Most likely, the symbolic expansion of the polity that Palin represents will be limited to rural whites. Tim Wise puts it well,
White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because “every family has challenges,” even as black and Latino families with similar “challenges” are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.White privilege is when you can call yourself a “fuckin’ redneck,” like Bristol Palin’s boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll “kick their fuckin' ass,” and talk about how you like to “shoot shit” for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.
I think that "everyone" should be "quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because 'every family has challenges.'" I would love if what Wise call's "white privilege" were extended, if it were no longer seen as a privilege but rather as a presumption. But more likely is the non-reflexive double-standard that Wise highlights. The expansion of the understanding of who is a proper and legitimate member of the polity to "families with challenges" should be a cause for celebration; it is more likely, however, to be coupled with an contraction of the symbolic boundaries of the polity, excluding African American, Hispanic, and other stigmatized minority "families with challenges" as capable, responsible, and full citizens.
No comments:
Post a Comment