My Dearest Darlings, When Sarah Palin stated that the only difference between Pit-Bulls and Hockey Moms was “Lipstick” she apparently opened The Ark of animal metaphors and since then cosmetically enhanced beasts have been rampaging through the American political landscape as now pigs too are adopting the metaphorical lipstick in a bizarre bestial beauty pageant.One would assume Palin’s comment was intended to infer that Hockey Moms were as tenacious as the Pit-Bull though as my previous post on our canine cousins reveals the domesticated dog is a mere shadow of it’s former glory as the wild and wonderful wolf, the modern hound is barely more than an infantile pup, castrated and tamed, imprisoned and entrapped. The Pit-Bull is reliant on mankind for sustenance, a brainless ineffective mutt nothing more than a simulacrum of distant wildness. Tenacious? No! Simply a beast demoted to man’s ‘best-friend’.
Disturbingly Ms Palin’s strategy has troubling connections with a British inclination to politicise the humble dog, The British Bulldog became associated with Winston Churchill during the Second World War and has since been metamorphosed into a right-wing symbol of pure white Britishness. This mindless growling guard dog is seen as a symbolic protector of a nation’s border and preserver of racial heritage. Is a similar trope about to live in an American dog-house?
This disconcerting connection should act as harbinger of doom for the stupefyingly ignorant amongst you who may be inclined to vote for a figure that so recklessly throws loaded symbolic animal metaphors around. Palin’s disregard for the animal kingdom is demonstrated in her taste in home furnishings, a pelt of The Great Bear is utilised as a handy throw on the bag of her office furniture, in this emblematic violation of this magnificent animal Palin states her claim of the world. Wildness is to be tamed, the world is to be controlled and managed. She is a believer that The Earth is a playground for humanity, though only her sort of humanity; one of ‘good old fashioned family values’.
So as pigs resplendent in lipstick crash into Obama and McCain’s lecterns political pundits and retrograde Republicans are suggesting that Obama's " ...you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.." statement is a thinly veiled slur on Sarah Palin, as she out of the four main players in this particular political drama is most likely to adorn the proverbial lipstick! This at best is spin and at worst exploitative propaganda! To your wondrous servant however it seems that Palin has unexpectedly hit a home-run, whilst throwing a cosmetically enhanced grenade into the political arena Palin can quietly move aside whilst the male protagonists tie themselves up in knots desperately trying not to seem like misogynistic dinosaurs.
It appears that the introduction of lipstick in the race for the Whitehouse has created a smoke-screen for the ‘Average American Joe’, once again personality and looks have beguiled and bewildered your limited senses. Idle tittle-tattle is focused on looks, personality and character rather than on the immensely important global issues. Discussions of sexism and misogyny have so far benefited Palin as any criticism of her is able to be interpreted as prejudice though undoubtedly she is a victim of a grossly patriarchal world hence her original mention of lipstick escalating into a diplomatic deviation from policies and strategies. To the cunning this can easily be exploited and I fear this woman is no victim. I your champion of equality do not question that a woman could do a marvellous job on Capitol Hill lipstick or not, however she must be the ‘right’ person for the job. Not, in my opinion a person who would have any political allegiance with the dumfoundingly dire George W Bush.
Much Love as Ever Ms Coco LaVerne x