In response to a diary on Mitt Romney's wife campaigning, I made a comment that I hoped would generate some discussion. So far no takers, so I'm opening it to a broader audience.
I a nutshell my argument is: the 'title' of First Lady is inherently sexist and, as such, is an obstacle to women advancing in politics.
First of all I put the word 'title' in quotes, because it is not an official title in the way that President of the United States or Attorney General is. It is a title conferred by custom and convention.
And, of course, it is not just a spousal title but one that has no male equivalent. Before very many years pass I expect a married woman will be elected President. What will we call her husband? My guess is that we'll just call him by his name, which suits me just fine.
I can't think of any other instance in our society where we have a quasi-public matrimonial title. The closest analogy is the English crown matrimonial. When a man inherits the crown, his wife automatically becomes queen. This institution has come under stress first by the abdication crisis of 1935 precipitated by the perceived unsuitability of the king's proposed wife to be queen and more recently by the current Prince of Wales's wife who has promised not to take the crown matrimonial because of perceived irregularities in her background.
But going back to the first time the crown passed to a woman (in the 16th century), the crown matrimonial has never been granted to the queen's husband. The rationale is along the lines that a king outranks a queen, and that while a queen can assume dowager status when her husband dies there is no equivalent status for a king.
In any case, when a married woman runs for public office we generally hear very little from or about her husband. (Bill Clinton's campaigning on behalf of Hilary is an exceptional case that doesn't really alter the general point.) That suits me just fine. And I would celebrate if it suddenly became taboo in our political culture for wives to play a major public role in political campaigns.
I don't need to hear from Karen Santorum or Ann Romney to know what to think about their husband's candidacies. And I find it kind of distasteful when a candidate for President assures us (as I think Ronald Reagan did) that his wife would be the second most important person in his Administration.
Tell me what you think.
[UPDATED. 1:32 pm PDT]
The votes are running 2:1 against my thesis. And we have two attestations of 'First Gentleman' in reference to the husband of the governor of Michigan.
3:09 PM PT: With most precincts reporting AP has called the poll on the side that 'First Lady is not inherently sexist'. Proof again, if any were needed, that I'd be a terrible candidate for elective office.
But I loved the comments and have rec'd every one-- even the ones I disagreed with. Thanks for engaging the discussion. I'll still check in to rec and respond to new comments.