To post this comment click here:
Otherwise click cancel.
(Could a new mom handle the burdens of being chairwoman of this devastated party? I am not qualified to say. I look forward to Republican women discussing this issue... without me.)
Many chairs have taken a relatively modest sum (especially relative to the cut in pay from other jobs) and many have forsaken a salary entirely to serve. Ultimately, the amount is negotiated with the Executive Committee.
Nobody makes anyone run for this office or any other. The fact that someone's spouse has "a good paycheck" is irrelevant.
There are plenty of people who could be (and be good) chairmen of the Massachusetts Republican State Committee, we have good candidates running. Best of luck to all and may the collective wisdom the State Committee select whoever will be the best for the next two year term.
Then it was like 'oh hey everyone! I can't be party leader anymore ... I'm going to be a mommy! ... Can you guys just clean this mess up and find a new Chairman? K-Thanks' Molon Labe
I remember the first six months of my daughter's life. I could barely stay employed in my day job it was so much work. I don't think we should debate the can-a-new-mom-do-this-job thing - as I said - let's let Republican women debate that specific point. :-)
But Ms. Hughes has a career, is a member of the Quincy city council, and now is a new mom. It is absolutely legitimate to ask her what she sees as the time commitment is for the chairmanship of the MassGOP and if she has the time to do it.
My initial estimation is that she cannot possible have a full-time job, be on the city council, be a new mom, and be MassGOP chair.
To be fair - I think all candidates should have to explain what their existing time commitments are and how much time the chairman's job should be. In the case of Ms. Hughes, it is just that many people know how hard the first several months of life can be for the parents of a baby and they, like I, remember how hard it was to do that and anything else. That might not be totally fair, but it is reality.
I am sure she will have a point of view on the time needed to do the chairman's job and what her level of commitment will be. As long as all candidates are required to answer these questions, this does not have to be unfair to Ms. Hughes.
The fairer argument you make is either asking all the candidates to explain how their family/personal lives make time for the Chairman's position or to not question it at all. Selectively questioning women, or in this case the new mother, smacks of bias that I know you (perhaps I don't know & thus can't say the same about others) do not intend. Kirsten's ability to juggle multiple balls at one time is best left to her & her family. If she were to be chair & neglect her duties then there are remedies for that and somehow I don't think all the time of care & attention to a baby will force such a course of action. After all, I say again, women do it every day.
I will note that I have been contacted via email by a woman who privately expressed her upset at a sexism expressed through Kirsten's being challenged in this thread simply because she is a new mother.
Merry Christmas! I saw your post and couldn't get in to comment but in passing conversations just wanted to offer this thought and feel free to share. Did I walk into a 1920's cigar men's club? If her name were Kevin Hughes, the entire comments section would never have happened. In the spirit of liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I trust every family to make decisions about what their parents do based on the private needs and values of the family. Congrats to the Hughes family and a Merry Christmas to everyone. I hope we can start the 2013 with a much better conversation about women in the party.
Did I walk into a 1920's cigar men's club?
If her name were Kevin Hughes, the entire comments section would never have happened. In the spirit of liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I trust every family to make decisions about what their parents do based on the private needs and values of the family.
Congrats to the Hughes family and a Merry Christmas to everyone. I hope we can start the 2013 with a much better conversation about women in the party.
Kirsten's ability to juggle multiple balls at one time is best left to her & her family.
Her ability to juggle multiple balls is directly relevant to her being Mass GOP chair and thus a concern for all.
In the context of male-female wage disparity we all accept why such a disparity exists. It isn't bias or sexism. Women with children take more time off, or in other words are unable to juggle multiple balls. That truth may be upsetting to some but that's reality.
And "...most women do it every day" sounds nice but it isn't true.
Molon Labe
This girl is in way over her head and she doesn't even know it. She's never run a statewide organization this big in her life. And she has no idea of how much work you have to put in to raise a child as she just had her first.
Right now John Walsh is hoping and praying that the MA GOP Chair is a brand new mom, juggling her dual careers, and city council spot ALONG with the MA GOP chair. He's praying for such a distracted Chairman.
The headline you used is.... "John Philip Hughes..."
So Kirsten didn't take her husband's last name when she got married. (At least she doesn't use it in public. I don't know what her legal name is.)
But regardless, I highly doubt the child will bear the name of the mother instead of the father or some hyphenation. Could it be? I suppose so, but that would be pretty.... uncommon. Her Facebook page only mentions "John Philip" and not a surname.
I was just saying this because it momentarily appeared that the boy had a single mother. ;-)
Ultimately, a relatively minor detail that I fixed in the title as the focus is on welcoming a new life into the world (and certainly, another very, very young Republican!).
This site, like the SC itself, is a place where rumor has too much sway.
I am going to say the next stuff very carefully and I only do it because of the way that women are often treated badly in corporate America and in politics.
This party has a lot of social conservatives like you and I in it - and there are many degrees of just how conservative you are. People like me - and some on the SC, I am sure - would simply see a woman keeping her maiden name and think, "My mom and my wife didn't do that." Then, your headline erroneously - and harmlessly - says that the son will have the mother's maiden name. My first reaction was "what the hell?" That's why I gently asked for the correction. Women cannot afford any such misunderstandings.
This is why, in another comment here, I tried to steer the conversation about her motherhood to safe ground. If we don't do that, the people on the SC who don't think she is conservative enough to lead the party will use her motherhood as a safe proxy to vote against her, regardless of her abilities.
This is very important stuff, Brock. I was a big supporter of Chairwoman Nassour, and I couldn't believe how the men who didn't like her used her sex in their statements against her. Lots of negative comments were "whore" and other things that focused on her being a woman. I was appalled at this, and called them out when it happened.
But ask any average woman, or even Kerry Healy, about how women get treated differently as they rise in corporate America or in politics and they will have many terrible stories to tell you.
I do not want to see Ms. Hughes be a victim of negative whispers that would never happen to a man in her position. Personally, while I have not endorsed her, I was very happy to have a woman in charge of the party before, and I would be glad to see that again.
Yet I know there are old-school men - perhaps like my father - who might easily see their judgment impaired by little things.
So we must be extra careful. That is all.
