Posts Tagged ‘gender’
slow news: too white, too male
slow news – May 28, 2008
An Op-Ed Need for Diverse Voices
By Deborah Howell (Washington Post)
The WP ombudsman, Deborah Howell, points out that of the WP’s 654 op-ed pieces so far this year, 575 were by men, 79 by women, and 80 by minorities. I suppose this is something we’re all aware of, but it is truly startling to see the hard numbers. And, of course, the Washington Post isn’t alone on this one (Nicholas Kristof “nervously” awaits comments about this issue).
For the record, I favor any proposal that might lead to less David Brooks, Thomas Friedman, and Nicholas Kristof.
the sunday reads
I’ve decided to start a new feature here: the sunday reads. Growing up (and in my own family to
day), Sunday has always meant bagels and the Sunday New York Times. It’s a time to sit back and dedicate some time to learning about the world around us. From the Week in Review (which as a pre-literate child I thought was the “Weekend Review”) to the Magazine to Sunday Styles to my beloved Frank Rich, the Sunday Times has much to offer.
In recent years, I’ve discovered that media does exist outside the Times. So, in the sunday reads each week, I will pick out a few key articles that I found significant this Sunday. Apologizes in advance if I end up linking to the entire Week in Review. Here are the inaugural links:
Postfeminism and Other Fairy Tales by Kate Zernike (NYT) – a good story on what appears to be season of growing consciousness about gender.
Five Years by John F. Burns (NYT) – Burns’ broad and inspired look back on our five years (!) in Iraq.
Republicans See Storm Clouds Gathering by Jonathan Weisman (WP) – a discussion of the poor outlook for the GOP this fall. I read this with great glee.
On My Faith and My Church by Barack Obama (Huffington Post) – Senator Obama clears the air about his pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. (See also: The Fox News crew deliberately manipulates the situation an interview with Obama).
Annals of War: Exposure by Philip Gourevitch and Errol Morris (The New Yorker) – The story of Specialist Sabrina Harman, the woman who took the notorious pictures at Abu Graib, gives a new look behind the scenes at AG, told partially through her letters. Written by one of the best journalists around and the documentary filmmaker behind The Fog of War.
Red Baron recast as a German hero by David Smith (The Observer (UK)) – I’ve been interested for a while in the way Germans continue to process their horrific acts during WWII. A new $28 million movie (a lot of money for German films) breaks a taboo by focusing on Manfred von Richthofen, “The Red Baron,” and depicts him as “brilliant and sensitive hero.”
Cuban Players Fled Their Team for an Uncertain Future by Katie Thomas (NYT) – for the non-soccer fans out there, North and Central American national teams are currently competing in their Olympic qualifying tournament (only players under 23 are eligible to play, so no Landon Donovan). As usual, several players have defected from the Cuban team, seeking asylum and better futures in the U.S. This article looks at their hopes and chances for the future.
If any of these stories were interesting to you, please return the favor and leave a link to a good article in the comments!
the political wife
A good article in The Times today about the travails of Silda Wall Spitzer and a brilliant commentary on the same topic by by Samantha Bee of The Daily Show last night.
While I’m not going to dive whole-heartedly into the Spitzer scandal, I will say that it once again brings issues of gender and poli
tics into the spotlight. Of course, we’d expect that they’d already be in the spotlight, what with a female presidential candidate and all. But there seem to be a different set of rules for Hillary Clinton. Yes, she has suffered innumerable unfair criticisms because of her gender (e.g., nasty jibes about her appearance or framing her emotional reactions as gendered behavior). Nonetheless, before Hillary became a candidate, I would have guessed that the American public would have doubted a female candidate on security issues (buying into the stereotype that women aren’t tough or decisive enough). That has not been the case. Of the two Dems, she’s clearly regarded as the tougher one. Together with Bill Clinton, she is a member of a take-no-prisoners political team. The Clintons have always succeeded with a two-for-the-price-of-one sales pitch. Perhaps that kind of framing diffuses concerns about her gender. Or not (see NewSocProf on this).
For whatever reason, HRC is an anomaly. To better understand the way women linked to politics are normally treated, we need to look to Silda Spitzer and Michelle Obama. Both Spitzer and Obama are highly intelligent women and Harvard Law grads (Michelle was a sociology major!). While both have frequently been forced into the role of the attractive and supportive arm piece, they have also gotten into trouble for being independently-minded and making the occasional sarcastic comment, qualities that are often prized in male politicians by the press. It seems the media (and the public?) wants a political wife to be: a strong supporter of her husband, a caring mother to her children, self-deprecating and kindly; outspoken on a singular political issue that affects the hearth and home (say, education); faithful and supportive, if hurt when her husband betrays her. It is important that she be attractive, but not distractingly so. It is better if she looks like a Mom (friendly, a little overweight, a bit wrinkled, knowing). If she’s too attractive, too skinny, or too smart, it suggests an independence that is worrisome in a female political companion. In many ways, Elizabeth Edwards was the ideal political wife; she was often described as “a real woman” who suburban moms could relate to. The press seems less willing to accept a glamorous, independent woman who was also a successful lawyer (and who continued working while having kids).
So, Silda Spitzer had to stand there beside a man who she may still love, but certainly loathes at the moment (and she had to stand next to him again today). She stood there because that is the role that has been carved out for political wives and one played by many others (e.g., Dina Matos McGreevey). While it may be better than the way Rudy Guiliani treated Donna Hanover (the surprise press conference), it is still a humiliating ritual which grants her no opportunity to publicly express her anger and upset, or the legitimate choice to keep the entire situation private. I’m not sure what it will take to change it, except for a generation of political husbands who almost certainly would not accept being pushed into the same position.
***
Somewhat related update: Seriously. This is what it took for New York to get its first black governor? In the midst of these unfortunate circumstances, it is worth recognizing this achievement by David Paterson (who also legally blind).
