Starters

Daniel Henninger, writing in today’s WSJ (“What’s So Special About Sarah?”):

For starters, a lot of women voters don't live in New York, Boston, L.A. or San Francisco. Maybe Sarah Palin from Wasilla is a lot closer to the way many women today see themselves than the standard feminist model. Gloria Steinem, one of the many mothers of that ideal, is 74. Sarah Palin is 44. Times change.

Speaking of the aged Ms. Steinem… she has an op-ed today, too. Predictably: “Palin: wrong woman, wrong message.” And here’s a taste of old-line, radical feminism:

McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Palin's value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

Got it, Gloria. It’s ALL about “the patriarchy,” innit? Still. It just pisses off the ol’ feministas when a successful conservative woman makes it. If there was a (D) after Mrs. Palin’s name instead of an (R), there wouldn’t be enough newsprint in these United States to hold all the positive words that would be written about her. Even so, it’s a near-run thing for newsprint today to hold all the negative press from screechers like Ms. Steinem. But let’s not dwell on that. Let’s get back to Mr. Henninger.

I asked a number of women this week to account for Sarah Palin's sudden appeal. Here are the common threads.

The angry woman-as-victim drives them nuts. They hate victimology. As one woman said, "The point is that across the ages women have been doing pretty much what Sarah Palin has been doing: bearing children, feeding families, bringing in an income, working to improve their communities."

Another woman said, "Her story reflects a more normal reality" of active women; "the harder you work, the luckier you get." Hillary Clinton still plays the victim card. Sarah Palin gives off no victim vibes. These women mentioned her grit, determination and character.

They also said the Roe v. Wade litmus test has become too knee-jerk. Simply writing off Sarah Palin as "pro-life" caricatures pregnancy and motherhood.

Let's stipulate that not all "liberal" women share the Roe-dominated test of which women in public life get a pass and which are shunned. But this notion of sisterhood as a rules-based club is the public face of the feminist message, and in politics message is all -- until it no longer makes sense.

Mr. Henninger may be an old, white, male, inside-the-beltway type of political pundit (The Patriarchy!). But I tend to believe he’s more in touch with America’s women than Miz Steinem. At least the sorts of women I know. As ever: YMMV.