So much is being written about the VP candidate Sarah Palin, it is difficult to wade in. As the Chinese say, "the stream is never the same - each time you enter." But I will offer a few observations. For some men and women there is a sense of relief and self-congratulations that they are modern enough to accept a woman in one of the highest offices in the US. “Sure, I understand women can be in positions of power (subtext, I just didn’t like Hillary Clinton, but women are okay). I am open-minded.” Among men who see Palin as a smart addition to the ticket, I find most disturbing the fact that they quickly site her “common womanhood” qualities yet below the surface it quickly moves to how attractive she is. I suppose we used this criterion for Bush and the Presidential candidates in 2000 and 2004. It was “would you want to have a beer with the candidate?” Now the criteria for a woman is “would you want her next to you in bed?” It is a sad statement on our gender bias (can you imagine using that criteria for the male candidates?) The ready acceptance of Sarah Palin by so many is a sad statement about our willingness to drop our standards in order to get a fresh perspective or “a woman” in power. This is what can be wrong about affirmative action. There is no need to drop our standards. There are many remarkable and experienced Republican women who would have been much better candidates. What is most interesting to me as a consumer psychologist and a marketer is how our criterion shifts – as a strong woman, I don’t want us to judge women candidates as a lower on a lower or “easier” set of criteria. We are better than that. We have worked hard to play with the boys; we don’t need a lower bar or a handicap. | 
