Gender, Politics, and the Media

Lucky for me I never watch the Super Bowl, so I won’t have to suffer through CBS’s decision to air an anti-choice Focus on the Family commercial starring Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow and his mom who talks about how her faith guided her choice to carry Tebow to term instead of the abortion she was advised to get.  USA is having a Law & Order SVU marathon that day, right?

Michael Rowe writes on the Huffington Post that beyond Focus on the Family’s message is the hypocrisy in CBS’s decision.  Back in 2004, CBS rejected United Church of Christ ads featuring a gay couple being denied entrance into a church with the tagline:  “Jesus didn’t turn people away.  Neither do we.”  CBS explained that they didn’t want advertising that advocates for an issue of public importance.

Even though I don’t think abortion should be a public issue (my uterus is not open for debate), abortion rights is a public issue like gay rights. Perhaps, 2004 was so long ago that CBS forgot their advertising policies?  Or as Rowe says:

Maybe it all comes down to who can cough up the biggest bucks to push their message on CBS and the other networks, the inclusive church whose message was, “Christ didn’t turn anyone away and neither do we” or the evangelical activist conglomerate whose message is, “We turn people away all the time. Please send money because the liberals and the feminists and the gays are ruining America.”

Yeah, I’m definitely holding out for the SVU marathon.

{ 0 comments }

Dear New York Times, did you actually read the Pew Research Center’s Women, Men, and the Economics of Marriage? I did and I find it funny how the lesson you took away from the report was that it’s so hard for successful women to find a man because men are so worried about feeling emasculated next to smarty-pants women, while I took away a more nuanced understanding of the economic climate, socio-economic class, marriage, and how women are beginning to close the wage and education gap (but they still have a long way to go).

The Times took anecdotal evidence to a whole new level with quotes from a young New York fashion stylist who broke up with her “blue-collar” boyfriend because he supposedly couldn’t handle her career success.

NYT explains:

An analysis of census data to be released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center found that she and countless women like her are victims of a role reversal that is profoundly affecting the pool of potential marriage partners.

Actually, the report didn’t really say anything about all the shitty fish in the sea.  Pew’s report seemed to show that while more women have higher levels of education than men and their wages have significantly increased since 1970, people end up marrying people with similar educational levels.  People with similar educational backgrounds marry and have higher incomes than people with lower levels of education.   I didn’t find any of this particular doomsday scenario:

 Ms. Zielinski, the fashion stylist, said her best friend, a man, told her once: “ ‘You are confident, have good credit, own your own business, travel around the world and are self-sufficient. What man is going to want you?’ He laughed, but I found that pretty depressing.”

The Washington Post did a much better job of synthesizing the study and explaining how things are changing, and that women haven’t completely surpassed men in earnings.  Although, reading this chestnut of a quote affirms my aversion to marriage:

“What’s radically changed is that marriage now is a better deal for men,” said Richard Fry, co-author of the report, published by the Pew Research Center. “Now when men marry, often their spouse works quite a bit. Often she is better-educated than the guy.”

I think it’s a bit nuts to crow about the “rise of the wives” or all these brand spankin’ new sugar mommas.  The fact remains, in the words of the Pew report that:

Sharper growth has enabled women to narrow, but not close, the earnings gap with men.  Median earnings of full-year female workers in 2007 were 71 % of earnings of comparable men, compared with 52 % in 1970.

And this:

It should be noted that men in all education categories still earn more than women.

So NYT, I’m still holding on to the belief that my boyfriend likes me because we share values and experiences and not because I make him feel like a man by earning less.

{ 1 comment }

So, I’m a bit torn on this:  Feministing had a post about the USO putting together care packages of pink camo makeup bags filled with Maybelline products, tampons, Lady Speed Sticks,  facial soap, and Cosmo magazines for women soldiers deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Jill Biden, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and beauty industry people gathered in photo-op splendor to fill the bags o’ tampons and other “lady” stuff.  Feministing had this to say about it:

It’s a whole wink-wink-nudge-nudge moment that tells people even though these women are in the military, they’re still feminine….we promise!

My initial reaction to this was:  What’s so wrong with pink, wearing makeup, and reading Cosmo for the sex secrets you’ve known since eigth grade?  As a self-described feminist who really loves spending her hard-earned money at Sephora, I’m slightly bothered by the implication that being feminine and strong must be mutually exclusive.   You know, I could totally deconstruct what I just said, but my second question was whether these items were practical items women really asked for and not just a way for Maybelline to create a class of veteran consumers.

The original story via the St. Petersburg Times’ website says that the items were packed along with gender neutral items such as toothbrushes, raisins, and beef jerky (really?).  USO spokeswoman Patrice Cameau said her organization was getting tons of requests from female service members for the personal products.

I liked this quote from Navy enlistee Rachel Clayton:

“When I put on makeup in the morning, it gives me some confidence,” she said. “I don’t need it to be a strong woman, but it gives me a boost. If that helps a servicewoman feel better about herself and gives her that extra kick in the rear, then she should be able to do it.”

I’m not sure if stressing the feminine in this sense is the real problem.  Maybe it’s as simple as showing some appreciation to brave women.  Feministing does make the good point that women servicemembers have serious issues to contend with beyond nice eyelashes like rape and sexual harassment.  I hope that Biden and Pelosi are working on ways to eradicate those problems.  In the meantime there are a bunch of organizations that fulfill servicemember requests.  Go to AnySoldier.com,  www.give2thetroops.org, or www.soldiersangels.com if you want to find out how you can put together a care package for a soldier, female or male.

{ 0 comments }

Breast cancer could be to women politicians what the war wound is to men, writes Washington Post White House correspondent Anne Kornblut in her Sunday Post article.  Kornblut’s piece is a preview of her book, Notes from a Cracked Ceiling, which comes out December 29 and recalls lessons learned from the 2008 election that saw Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin’s unsuccessful quests for the White House.

Kornblut’s article discusses the usual themes that arise when a woman runs for office–sexism, traditional gender stereotypes, wacky families, and hemlines–and she details proven tactics like being an expert on the issues, having ideas, and having the  experience that convinces people that you can lead.  Examining what it will take for a woman to finally become president is an important endeavor and Kornblut recognizes the traditional roadblocks and the things that have changed, allowing more women to enter politics and suceed.  But I’m not so sure the breast cancer angle should have been a specific item in Kornblut’s story.  Perhaps it could have been part of another section discussing the importance of having a compelling back story.  Although Kornblut is not recommending that anyone get breast cancer in her effort to win an election, in my mind, putting it in a story about what it might take for a woman to win the White House seems like a tall order.

Women Politicians, Breast Cancer, and Other Great Stories

Kornblut writes that surviving breast cancer may have shown that Homeland Security director Janet Napolitano, Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), and California Senate Candidate Carly Fiorina are tough, resilient, and capable of handling any challenge, but I would argue that these women offer other things that make them viable leaders.  For example, Napolitano earned recognition for expertly managing Arizona when she  was the governor.   The breast cancer aspect seems like such an oddly specific thing to warrant a sub theme on winning an election.  Women leaders with breast cancer is part of a larger trend of women with the disease and let’s not forget that plenty of male politicians have survived cancer.  And having prostate cancer didn’t help Sen. John Kerry win the presidential election in 2004 nor did it make Rudy Giuliani a warmer, more relatable guy.   Successful politicians–male and female–have found ways to reach out and remind people that our life experiences shape who we are.  That’s why Bill Clinton became the Man From Hope and George W. Bush was a recovering alcoholic who eventually found Jesus.  Having survived breast cancer could be just one way a woman politician tells her story. 

The key is, obviously, for women to find the perfect formula; to successfully navigate the political climate (knowing the specific issues, understanding the race); highlight expertise and skill; and have charisma and personality.  Kornblut shows that women have won without chemotherapy.  Women have many other sources of strength from which to draw–Hillary Clinton has earned accolades for her work as a Senator and as a Secretary of State.  As I found in my research and as Kornblut pointed out, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has successfully combined her experience as a mother with a tough political style. 

Wars and Survivors

The discourse of cancer is about battles and survival.   For future women politicians, cancer will not be the only battle they discuss.  Considering the numbers of women participating in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we will most likely see more women like Veterans Affairs Department Assistant Secretary, Tammy Duckworth, running for political office and erasing the idea that war wounds are the sole provenance of men.

{ 0 comments }