Kamala Harris and the Biden administration don't support women—they support leftism

Kamala Harris is the first female Vice President. As a woman, I want to congratulate her, and to be honest, in some regards I do. Clearly, the United States has been slow to adapt to women in politics and as much as I can, politics aside, her accomplishment should be celebrated.

However, I can't really push her politics aside, since she is, in fact, a politician. I wish I could celebrate Kamala more but I can't. I can't because when I look at her record, what she supports, what she's said, and where her party is headed, I don't see a woman who is trying to do good by women, or even, by her country. I see a woman heralded for being a liberal, period.

For starters, true, first-wave feminism would have us celebrate Kamala for her accomplishments, her character, and her ideas, not her sex. Not so. Instead, she is heralded for being the "first female Vice President" in every major outlet from The New York Times to Vogue. There's a fine line between celebrating a woman's accomplishments because she is a "first" and between lauding a person for just being the best they can be. When it comes to sex, it turns out, we don't actually know how to celebrate a woman on her merit: Kamala will always be the first woman, and that already does her and her ideas—even her party—a disservice.

In a similar vein, social media groups are asking women to wear pearls, Kamala's signature look, to support her. This seems fairly innocuous and benign, but the trend has sparked dozens of think pieces lauding the significance of Kamala's pearls. Pearls of all things? Is she Jackie Kennedy? Many politicians have a signature look but I'm not sure I've seen one, like Kamala's, be applauded so quickly. She hasn't even held office yet.  I'm old enough to remember when a red hat with white words, "Make America Great Again," was basically scribble from the devil's spit himself.  From the Smithsonian to Huffington Post, we're pearl-clutching over pearls: Seems a bridge too far already doesn't it?

Kamala's record shouldn't soothe feminists or patriots. GovTrack lists her as the most liberal of all 100 senators and she supported liberal ideas on the campaign trail. "Ms Harris has described herself as a "progressive prosecutor" and "top cop" in her previous roles in California, but her record rankled both liberals and conservatives, the BBC reported. She supports taxpayer-funded abortions and goes so far as to argue they save the lives of lower-income women. This lie, like the wage-gap myth, actually ends up hurting women, more than helping them, as it steeps them in victimhood and wrong choices, rather than encouraging another way to live.

Already, Kamala's achievements, her sex, and even, her skin color, do not appear to be "enough" for the left, another sign that ultra-feminism is actually bad for Americans. It will never be. What do I mean? Vogue featured Kamala on the cover, wearing a pantsuit and smiling. She looked attractive and happy. Turns out, this caused an uproar. At the last minute, Vogue Editor-in-Chief Anna Wintour published a cover different than the one Kamala's team approved. In the photo her team wanted as the cover, Kamala is wearing a powder blue pantsuit and is smiling confidently. Apparently, in the one Wintour chose, "Harris's smile appears unnatural and almost forced—the sort of awkward smile a subject flashes when they’re unsure of how else to pose—and her body language looks similarly uncomfortable."

The backlash was swift.

"Instead, the final cover photo of Kamala Harris for the magazine's print edition was received as underwhelming and, to some, disrespectful. Many say it is a misstep typical to the magazine under the eye of Anna Wintour, who has long faced accusations of racial insensitivity. The social media response toward the Harris photo shoot—which was leaked before the magazine's official announcement—has veered toward incredulity."

Mark my words, this year, you will see more than ever, that politicians who espouse leftist ideology—especially women—demand to be treated not equally, but better than equally. They want entitlement. They want everyone to imitate them with their pearls, write glowing articles about their liberal ideas, and only publish themselves on covers they have previously approved. The left embraces ideas with an insatiable thirst for power that can never be satisfied.

These next four years will produce identity politics to an extreme we've not seen before. Already, identity politics isn't even brave enough to be identity politics. If they were the left could support Kamala and the right could support Nikky Haley, without so much as a skirmish about it, but we're not allowed to do that. There is only one way, supporting a leftist, feminist, woman in her pearls on the cover of Vogue in the Michael Kors pantsuit, or there is being wrong, backward, disrespectful, and unsupportive of women in politics. Unfortunately, Kamala doesn't actually support women, just the women who support her, and the extremist ideas that got her to this position.