Completely Unnecessary

Okay, look - I’m not one of those people screaming at the media at the moment. I don’t think Clinton lost because of sexist treatment - though it certainly didn’t help.

This blog, however, has been like a treasure trove of unflattering pictures of HRC. See yesterday’s post, por ejemplo.

So, why - why, is this run now?! (And you can click on the pic for a larger version)

“Now, in her diminishment…” she finally gets a good picture?

I don’t want to sound like a feminist conspiracy theorist, but there’s something odd about the lovely words and images poured forth upon a woman who’s finally stopped being too brassy.

I mean, I’ve seen The Philadelphia Story. Katherine Hepburn learns to be ‘yaw’ and then everyone loves her. It’s a great movie.

But there’s also a reason for that.

NY Magazine Table of Contents

Vaguely Related

• Life Without Hillary Clinton
• NYT’s Clinton Must-Read

Here’s the lede to a NYT article run the other day about the media’s potentially sexist treatment of Senator Clinton during her presidental campaign:

Angered by what they consider sexist news coverage of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, many women and erstwhile Clinton supporters are proposing boycotts of the cable networks, putting up videos on a “Media Hall of Shame,” starting a national conversation about sexism and pushing Mrs. Clinton’s rival, Senator Barack Obama, to address the matter.

And here is the picture they ran (and, considering that I saw it on HuffPost today, continue to run):

That is a sloppy screen capture, I apologise. I feel I should also say…

For realz?!?!

Though, I guess what better way to give that extra bit of meta f-you to Clinton than to show a picture of her boobs in the story in which you pretty much of blow off those charges of sexism.

Nice work.

Then again, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann called Katie Couric the “Worst Person in the World” for backing up the Clinton campaign, so I guess there are worse things.

Vaguely Related

• Life Without Hillary Clinton
• Tony Abbott Knows the Lingo

People assume that I’m a Clinton supporter because I’m writing my thesis on her. It took me a long time to make a decision, but I eventually came down on the side of Obama.

With Obama making plans in Iowa for Tuesday night - presumably to claim the nomination - it seems a good time to reflect on the campaign and prospects for the future.

The problem is that I love Hillary Clinton. I think she’d make a great president, which is why it’s been so painful to see her campaign struggle and wildly misjudge the electorate. She undoubtedly faced a hostile press, but seemed unable to stop herself and her surrogates from continually harming her campaign.

Yet, Kate Zernike’s short opening question in her Week in Review piece laid bare the deep sorrow I’ll feel when Clinton seemingly inevitably gives in:

If not her, who?

And how long will we have to wait?

It’s not that I think a woman will necessarily represent me better than a man - just as I resent the media for assuming I am a woman candidate’s natural constituency - but I do sometimes wonder how much of a difference it would make in the lives of American women if we had a woman president.

Might some glass ceilings be shattered? Might some laws about women’s bodies be prevented? Might this never-ending cycle of women as ‘firsts’ be broken so that it stops holding back other women who run for office?

Anyway, looks like we won’t know this year.

But for many women, whether or not they support Mrs. Clinton, the long primary campaign has left them with a question: why would any woman run?

Many feel dispirited by what they see as bias against Mrs. Clinton in the media — the “Fatal Attraction” comparisons and locker-room chortling on television panels.
…
For this reason, [Karen O'Connor] said, she doesn’t expect a serious contender anytime soon. “I think it’s going to be generations.”

Others say Mrs. Clinton had such an unusual combination of experience and name recognition that she might actually raise the bar for women.

In fact, the biggest point of agreement seemed to be that there is no Hillary waiting in the wings.

Except, of course, Hillary.

I find this article almost absurdly depressing. I feel like Clinton and I have both let each other down.

Confidential to Hillary Clinton: If we’re wrong about Obama, you come kick his ass in 2012, okay?

Links:
She Just Might Be President Someday [NYT - Week in Review]
Obama to Return to Iowa, Possibly to Claim Victory [NYT]

Vaguely Related

• NYT’s Clinton Must-Read
• Clinton: The Photographic Evidence of ‘Yaw’

Let’s never have this happen again, k?

Via Wonkette (and others).

Vaguely Related

• NYT’s Clinton Must-Read
• Life Without Hillary Clinton

Fascinating article on Clinton in today’s NYT. Some highlights below in terms of gendered language.

I know a hell of a lot about Hillary Clinton, but there were some really interesting things I’d never heard before. For instance, she’s the one who came up with the term ‘war room’ for the 1992 Clinton campaign strategy team. Incidentally, War Room is an interesting documentary about that time, featuring Carville and Stephanopoulos, who looks all of about 15-years-old in 1992.

“She makes Rocky Balboa look like a pansy,” North Carolina’s governor, Michael F. Easley, said in endorsing her, and a union leader in Portage, Ind., praised her “testicular fortitude.”

This kind of language and pugilistic imagery, however, also evokes the baggage that makes Mrs. Clinton such a provocative political figure. For as much as a willingness to “do what it takes” and “die hard” are marketable commodities in politics, they can also yield to less flattering qualities, plenty of which have been ascribed to her over the years. Just as supporters praise her “toughness” and “tenacity,” critics also describe her as “divisive,” “a dirty fighter” or “willing to do anything to win.”

I’m amazed that they totally leave aside the ‘bitch’ memes that float around her (or expressed on national television by Newt Gingrich’s mom). There are only vague references to troubles with her public persona. ‘Uppity’ is about the closest they get to describing the usual ‘aggressive’, ‘too…’, ‘not enough…’ language that usually turns up.

That’s not true actually - the NYT just has someone else say it:

“To me it showed her brittleness, her coldness, her spoiling for a fight,” said Mr. Cooper, an Obama backer.

Anyway, I think it’s a really interesting article, both in the construction and the content. Especially, as it’s currently running with a flattering picture of Obama and his daughter as a sidebar.

ps - couldn’t hate the gas tax ‘holiday’ more if they were offering to fuel cars with puppies.

Link:
Ruthlessness and Grit Seen in Clinton’s Style [NYT]

Vaguely Related

• Life Without Hillary Clinton
• Clinton, the Pundits and the Math

The Age really stuffed up the other day. See, a new GG’s been appointed in Australia - Queen’s rep, we’re not a republic, it’s a thing - and, get this, she’s a lady.

Yet the Age’s initial article really only managed to gender-tag her in two sentences:

Prominent lawyer, academic and women’s activist Quentin Bryce will replace Major General Michael Jeffery as the Queen’s representative in September.
…
Ms Bryce and her husband, Adjunct Professor Michael Bryce AM AE, have two daughters, three sons and five grandchildren.

The first one isn’t that bad, and they saved the child-tagging for the last sentence. They do manage to give her husband’s honours (AM AE) without noting hers (AC, which is higher), but, overall, a poor showing.

Let’s see if the Herald Sun can do better. (The HS actually ran two articles, both of which are timestamped at 12am, so we’ll look at both):

Article One: First Lady takes G-G reins

KEVIN Rudd has broken with 107 years of tradition by announcing the appointment of Australia’s first female Governor-General.
…
Ms Bryce, 65, is a married mother of five with five grandchildren.

She is a former federal sex discrimination commissioner, law lecturer and a delegate to the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

Ms Bryce’s husband, Adjunct Prof Michael Bryce, is an architect and design expert.

I was unaware that we were referring to a historical pattern of sex discrimination as tradition, so good to know.

The HS also did a much better job of getting the crucial info that she has grown children (and therefore won’t be abandoning them to do this ‘job’ thing) higher up in the story. Description of husband’s profession, check.

That’s pretty good. What else does the HS have to offer?

Woman of substance (and I swear to god this is the lede and opening sentence):

QUENTIN Bryce is a trailblazer in a twinset. Australia’s first female Governor-General has a long record of public service and personal achievement.

Feminist, lawyer, community activist and grandmother, the Governor of Queensland is also a monarchist who believes Australia is well served by its system of government.
…
Ms Bryce was recently recognised by Harper’s Bazaar as one of Australia’s best-dressed women.

She is married to architect and designer Michael Bryce, and the couple have three sons, two daughters and five grandchildren.

Bam! That is some awesome gender-checking. That’s going to be hard to top. But I bet the 2003 Age and HS can do it! I’m sure they described then-appointee GG Michael Jeffery’s appearance, marital status, number of children, position on feminism (or other -isms), and the profession of his wife.

What? They didn’t mention any of those things [the HS article is only available on LexisNexis, so you're going to have to trust me; they mention his wife in an attached Biography]. That’s odd. I wonder why that kind of information wasn’t relevant to his appointment?

You’ll be glad to know, though, that the Canberra Times [also LN] carried an article about Marlena Jeffery the day after the announcement. She had done her husband’s dry cleaning in anticipation, has a ‘terrific smile’ and was looking forward to decorating the family house.

[Note: All articles have reduced Bryce's title - she is currently the Governor of Queensland - from 'Her Excellency' or 'Governor' to 'Ms'. This however, is a consistent Australian convention for both sexes (e.g., Mr Rudd), so I'm not counting it.]

If you feel like reading more, the Daily Telegraph (Sydney’s Murdoch sister to the HS) had comments about Bryce’s breeding and praise from fashionistas.

Links:
Australia to get first female GG [the Age]
First Lady take GG reins [Herald Sun]
Woman of Substance [Herald Sun]
PM names Michael Jeffrey as next GG [the Age]
Why Quentin Bryce is not just your Everage Governor-General [Daily Telegraph]

Vaguely Related

• The Media Introduces Dana Perino!
• Pelosi Reigns, With Hubby’s Approval…

Looks like Chelsea Clinton is all grown up:

The softballs come gently, lobbed by voters who support her mother and are thrilled to see that the awkward duckling of the Clinton administration has become a glamorous swan.

That’s the opening line of a LA Times profile of Clinton daughter turned surrogate. Let see which ‘women politicians in the media’ boxes we can tick:

Her hair is long and highlighted blond. Her black flared jeans are tight, and her gray blazer nips at her small waist. She has a boyfriend, her own apartment and a terrier named Soren. (After the philosopher, Soren Kierkegaard.)

Hair, clothes, and martial status - check!

Mostly, her voice is low, slightly raspy like her dad’s, and curiously monotone.

Tone of voice - check! Though, also curiously, she’s being criticized for not being shrill. That’s new(ish).

…despite her poise occasionally slips into adolescent cadence, ending a statement with a question mark…

Subtle undermining of her competence - check!

Bonus points for checking the Hillary-Clinton-box of extremely unflattering photo!

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a leading political media scholar, said in response to a different LA Times question: ‘I don’t think adult daughters are held to a different standard.’

Yeah, neither do I. And I bet Jamieson is annoyed that she was quoted in a story that reaffirmed so many of the double binds faced by women in the public sphere.

Via Jezebel

Vaguely Related

• Inauspicious Obama Moment
• Tony Abbott Knows the Lingo

Said Mr Abbott today regarding Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard:

I would … suggest that she stop shrieking at us,” Mr Abbott said.

Abbott has every right to be sexist today; Work Choices was given the boot and this blow has obviously upset his delicate nature . (He spent last night talking over people on Insight, but I guess he didn’t get it all out.)

Where else have I heard language like that? Who can guess?

Hillary, her shrill voice much improved and lowered through brutal overstrain, has certainly gained confidence and performance skill on the campaign trail, but I still don’t trust her.

That’s Camilla Paglia on Clinton last week. To be fair, she doesn’t say Clinton shrieks - she leaves that for the National Organization of Women (page 2).

Vaguely Related

• Life Without Hillary Clinton
• Quentin Bryce: Gender-Tagging the New Governor-General

Or, rather, one picture that’s been floating around the Internet for a long time now.
I really just hate this more than I can say (which is why it only gets a thumbnail). It’s racist and sexist at the same time… (and a friend of mine has it on his myspace profile. Boo.)

Who do I stab for this?

Vaguely Related

• The Endorsement You’ve Been Waiting For*
• Some ‘Dialogue’ About Race

Geraldine Ferraro’s back in the news, which is bad news for Camp Clinton.

Yesterday’s money quote:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position,” she continued. “And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

There are, of course, parts of her response that are not included in the media’s quote selection. I believe she’s partly attempting to describe (albeit extremely poorly) the fact that ideas about gender and politics are still very stagnant. Let’s look for example at the headline that The Daily Breeze used in its Ferraro piece:

Geraldine Ferraro lets her emotions do the talking

Do we think that would have been the headline if she had been a man?

So, after some kerfluffle between the two campaigns, Ferraro went back to talk to The Daily Breeze. And, the new quote everyone’s talking about:

“Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let’s address reality and the problems we’re facing in this world, you’re accused of being racist, so you have to shut up,” Ferraro said. “Racism works in two different directions. I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white. How’s that?”

This one can’t be defended quite as much - she was one stronger ground with the gender arguments.

Look, I’m no fan of Ferraro, but, differently worded (especially without the ‘I’m white’ bit), she’s not that far off.

It seems to me - from the hundreds of bookmarks tagged ‘HRC’ and ‘gender’ that I’ve collected over the last few months - that the media treats the issue of gender far differently from that of race.

Not that Obama is getting a free pass because he’s African-American, but that it’s far more acceptable to hit hard on gender than race. For instance, everyone thinks the ‘Hussein’ jabs are slimy (they are), but there’s been far less outcry about the constant discussion (not to mention derision) of Clinton’s appearance. Both of these things are used to undermine the fitness of the candidates to serve as president, yet they are not viewed as equally bad.

American attitudes as they are, the media can’t touch Obama with a ten-foot pole on issues of race. (Remember how well those “is he black enough?” stories went over?) But no one seems to complain about stories questioning HRC’s femininity (or lack thereof), her tearing up (and does this ‘humanize’ her enough to be president or does it hurt her?), and a host of other issues all tied to her gender.

I have no way to test this empirically, but it seems that the media is confronted with two spectacular stories: the first female and the first African-American viable candidates. Since they aren’t allowed to play with the latter, they’re having a field day with the first.

If she loses, Camp Clinton is going to try to spin it as media attacks that lost her the primaries. It won’t be – it’ll be the shoddy campaign she’s put together and the ‘help’ of frenemies like Ferraro.

But there’s no question in my mind that the media is far more willing to throw around gendered terms and stories than ones concerning race. Even if they get spit back in their faces – like some of the comments Chris Matthews has made – the backlash is way less than it’d be if they were racial. It’s the difference between, ‘Booo! You’re a bastard’ and ‘Well, that’s not very nice, is it?’

Ugg, rereading those two quotes it does sound like Ferraro’s just like, ‘Everyone loves him because he’s black.’ But I think she was trying to make a larger point concerning gender and HRC’s experience in the media.

(But… confidential to Hillary Clinton: you need to take her aside and make her stop harming you).

Update: TPM has video of Ferraro on FoxNews tonight. They say she didn’t do Clinton any favors. I think it’s pretty neutral; she makes some good points and then offers to raise money for Obama should he be the nominee… and then threatens him.

Vaguely Related

• NYT’s Clinton Must-Read
• Life Without Hillary Clinton