Why sexist coverage of women in politics matters
Source: Ms Magazine
By Dustin Harp,
“The first time I met Elizabeth Warren, she had just come home from a walk with her husband and her dog at Fresh Pond, the reservoir near her house in Cambridge, Mass. It was a sunny day in February, a couple of weeks after Warren announced her candidacy for president, and she was wearing a navy North Face jacket and black sneakers with, as usual, rimless glasses and small gold earrings. Her hair had drifted a bit out of place.“
The New York Times‘ recent piece on Democratic presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren began—I’m talking the first paragraph here—with the same damn gender stereotypes that have long plagued women politicians. These stereotypical trappings position women within the family, and as people to be seen, or looked at, rather than heard.
I shouldn’t be surprised. But I sort of am. I’m certainly disappointed. Again.
The article illustrated what is wrong with much of the media coverage of women politicians in just the first three paragraphs. It invoked stereotypes. It reminded us of Warren’s gender before her politics.
It’s typical for news organizations to write stories about women politicians that lead with information about their families, situating them as occupying the “traditional” role of women. For added measure, reporters will remind us, too, that they are heterosexual. Then there’s that second sentence of the article that describes what Warren is wearing—such a cliché for those of us who study women, politics and media. To round out the images of family and fashion, in the third paragraph—after a second mostly about the family dog—the Times offers up an image of Warren in the kitchen. (...)
Years of research, not just in the U.S. but in other parts of the world, shows how women politicians are treated differently from their male counterparts by news media—often assessed for their appearance and clothing and, more often than male politicians, associated with their familial and home status. Male politicians, conversely, are more often talked about in terms of their political achievements, and masculine qualities associated with power.
Click here to read the full article published by Ms Magazine on 16 July 2019.
By Dustin Harp,
“The first time I met Elizabeth Warren, she had just come home from a walk with her husband and her dog at Fresh Pond, the reservoir near her house in Cambridge, Mass. It was a sunny day in February, a couple of weeks after Warren announced her candidacy for president, and she was wearing a navy North Face jacket and black sneakers with, as usual, rimless glasses and small gold earrings. Her hair had drifted a bit out of place.“
The New York Times‘ recent piece on Democratic presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren began—I’m talking the first paragraph here—with the same damn gender stereotypes that have long plagued women politicians. These stereotypical trappings position women within the family, and as people to be seen, or looked at, rather than heard.
I shouldn’t be surprised. But I sort of am. I’m certainly disappointed. Again.
The article illustrated what is wrong with much of the media coverage of women politicians in just the first three paragraphs. It invoked stereotypes. It reminded us of Warren’s gender before her politics.
It’s typical for news organizations to write stories about women politicians that lead with information about their families, situating them as occupying the “traditional” role of women. For added measure, reporters will remind us, too, that they are heterosexual. Then there’s that second sentence of the article that describes what Warren is wearing—such a cliché for those of us who study women, politics and media. To round out the images of family and fashion, in the third paragraph—after a second mostly about the family dog—the Times offers up an image of Warren in the kitchen. (...)
Years of research, not just in the U.S. but in other parts of the world, shows how women politicians are treated differently from their male counterparts by news media—often assessed for their appearance and clothing and, more often than male politicians, associated with their familial and home status. Male politicians, conversely, are more often talked about in terms of their political achievements, and masculine qualities associated with power.
Click here to read the full article published by Ms Magazine on 16 July 2019.