When are uncomfortable questions fair?

[debgeisler]

Was it appropriate to ask Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann if she would, as president, be submissive to her husband? The question was asked as part of a GOP debate in Iowa and is based on Bachmann's own previous statements.

The question asked by Washington Examiner's Byron York question was prefaced with the back story: "In 2006, when you were running for Congress, you described a moment in your life when your husband said you should study for a degree in tax law. You said you hated the idea. And then you explained, 'But the Lord said, "Be submissive. Wives, you are to be submissive to your husbands."'"

Some folks are calling this an unfair tactic, arguing that it's inappropriate to ask a presidential candidate about statements she made five years ago.

Well, no. It is not unfair. It is not sexist. It is not anti-religion. Yes, it is a hard question, but this woman who seeks to be the first of her gender to lead our nation damned well better figure out where she'll get her marching orders - and then make clear to the general public what that will mean.

Bachmann clarified (sort of), babbling about how wonderful her marriage was, how long it lasted, and then claiming that submission was just the same thing as respect.

(Funny, but (1) I'm not particularly submissive; (2) my husband and I respect each other; and (3) he would never have told me to study something I did not like - because he loves me and we respect each other.)

Members of the GOP are calling the question a religious or sexist attack. It is neither.

The question asked a political candidate to explain something from one of her public speeches. The question asked that she indicate if she is her own woman, or if she will continue to "submit to her husband" (and her husband's will) when she is elected.

Comments

[ann-totusek.livejournal.com]

Having grown up within that tradition, I can say fairly comfortably that in general, that is a command that applies to situations within the home and family. Most strong fundamentalists that I know who may strongly believe that a woman should be submissive to her husband believe that that applies to their personal life only- at work, the boss is the boss. If there is conflict between the husband and the boss, the wife has to make a choice between her job and her marriage (well, "obeying her husband, anyway). The boss doesn't get to run her home life, and her husband doesn't get to run her work life, even if the reason she went into that field was because of her husband's instruction or advice. I strongly suspect that Bachmann's husband didn't _order_ her to do it, but suggested it because he knew her strengths and weaknesses perhaps even better than she does- I know that my husband thinks that I can do things even when I don't think I can, and because of his support and encouragement I succeed at times when I didn't think I could. I think that's the sort of relationship that she's talking about. She submitted, in that sbe took his advice despite her own hesitance because she trusted that he had her best interests at heart, and knew something about her that she did not yet recognize herself.

Would _I_ have done it? Heck no. I probably would have said "Honey, if you want a tax attorney for a wife, divorce me and go marry one. Or hire one. But it's not gonna be me." Though my first question might well have been "Does this mean you're volunteering to pay for the course of study?" Cause I'm mercenary that way. :)

[debgeisler.livejournal.com]

I hope that's what Bachmann means, too. It's not an attitude I understand, since I'm from a family of pretty strong Irish women...although faith-based patriarchy is nothing new to me.

It is important that she be asked questions about things she says so that she can clarify her position. I frankly found nothing objectionable about the question, given the context and her previous statement.

[twilight2000.livejournal.com]

Given her whole submission thing, the real Q is "who the hell would you REALLY be voting for" - and it's completely fair - remember the Q Jack got asked over and over about the Pope? That was FAR less fair.

[debgeisler.livejournal.com]

That was exactly what came to my mind, and I did not believe there was anything unfair in the question. How is asking someone to explain their own words *unfair*?