Femme Political
A Feminist Critique of Politics and Culture
________________________________________________
A Feminist Critique of Politics and Culture
________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
The Hypocrisy of Newsweek Friday, July 23, 2010
South Carolina gubernatorial candidate, Nikki Haley, is featured on the cover of the current Newsweek that includes two whole articles about women in politics (!) But despite decades of research showing that
reporters disproportionately sexualize female
candidates in ways that diminish their candidacies,
even reputable publications like Newsweek continue
this tired trend. My research shows that female
reporters are just as likely as their male counterparts
to discuss female candidates in such damaging terms.
In the current issue of Newsweek, Julia Baird criticizes
the press’ sexualization of female Republican
candidates in (the poorly titled) "Too Hot to Handle."
She correctly notes that “The wisdom has long been that discussions of their sexuality are not just distracting and degrading, but also destructive.” Yet, in the very next article, Arian Campo-Flores’s provides a profile of candidate Haley that is rife with sexualization in "Women on the Verge." Campo-Flores comments on Haley’s snug fitting suit and stiletto heels, describes Haley as “attractive,” and plays with words to be sexually suggestive: “Now she’s the hottest thing in South Carolina politics.” Perhaps Baird could lead a seminar about the political effects of sexism for the entire Newsweek staff.
______________________________________________________________
The Hypocrisy of Newsweek Friday, July 23, 2010
South Carolina gubernatorial candidate, Nikki Haley, is featured on the cover of the current Newsweek that includes two whole articles about women in politics (!) But despite decades of research showing that
reporters disproportionately sexualize female
candidates in ways that diminish their candidacies,
even reputable publications like Newsweek continue
this tired trend. My research shows that female
reporters are just as likely as their male counterparts
to discuss female candidates in such damaging terms.
In the current issue of Newsweek, Julia Baird criticizes
the press’ sexualization of female Republican
candidates in (the poorly titled) "Too Hot to Handle."
She correctly notes that “The wisdom has long been that discussions of their sexuality are not just distracting and degrading, but also destructive.” Yet, in the very next article, Arian Campo-Flores’s provides a profile of candidate Haley that is rife with sexualization in "Women on the Verge." Campo-Flores comments on Haley’s snug fitting suit and stiletto heels, describes Haley as “attractive,” and plays with words to be sexually suggestive: “Now she’s the hottest thing in South Carolina politics.” Perhaps Baird could lead a seminar about the political effects of sexism for the entire Newsweek staff.
______________________________________________________________
Is the Tea Party Racist? Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Barack Obama’s presidency is historic in
many ways, including the biggest loss of
public approval during the first year. I didn’t
ride the Obama waves of “hope” or
experience the crash after drinking too
much Obama Kool-Aid, but I have great
sympathy for him considering that this is
arguably the most hostile presidential
environment in history. He is operating
with antagonistic “new media,” a highly
polarized electorate, and persistent racial
prejudice. I'm focusing on racial prejudice
in this blog post, and this is where the Tea Party comes in.
Obama took office with a 68% approval rating, second only to Kennedy with 72%. Obama’s job approval plummeted to 47% within a year – the largest drop on record. He joins only Ronald Reagan among presidents with approval lower than 50% at the one-year mark, but Reagan fell two points while Obama plunged over twenty points. Post-WWII presidents have enjoyed an average 17% increase in approval during the first year, so Obama’s drop goes against the typical first-year trend of gaining ground.
Obama also holds the record for the most polarized job approval rating on record. In January, 2010, he had a 65-point gap between job approval ratings from Republicans (23%) and Democrats (88%); far larger than Bill Clinton’s 52% partisan gap in approval that enabled the Republican Revolution in 1994.
What accounts for the historical loss of public approval and polarization? Racial fear is one cause. Many white people patted themselves on the back for electing the nation’s first black president, but John McCain would be president if only whites had voted in 2008 (with 55% of the vote). President Obama has been framed in absurd but damaging ways that are linked to his race. According to a recent Harris Interactive poll, 32% of Americans think Obama is Muslim, while 25% believe he was not born in the U.S. One-in-five Americans thinks that President Obama “is doing many things Hitler did.” Political opponents will invariably lob ludicrous claims at presidents, but these frames are actually sticking to Obama whose “blackness” has made him an “other” in the minds of many Americans.
The Tea Party movement is clearly fueled by the notion of Obama as “other.” According to a recent NYTimes/CBS Poll, Tea Partiers are disproportionately wealthy, white, better educated, male, and more likely to describe their economic situation as fairly or very good. These are not the folks affected by the economic downturn. So what is driving their cause? Political Scientist Chris Parker writes that “the tea party is not just about politics and size of government. The data suggests it may also be about race.” In fact, Americans who hold racial resentment are 36% more likely to support the Tea Party than others. Only 35% of Tea Party members believe that black people are hard working, and only 45% think black people are intelligent.
And then there are the Tea Party signs: “Obama’s Plan: White Racism.” “Obama: What you talkin’ about Willis?” A picture of Obama slitting Uncle Sam’s throat. A sign portraying Obama as Steve Urkel. “Congress = Slave Owner/ Taxpayer = nigger,” “Obama’s Tax Laws Enslave Everyone.” And Michele Bachman railed against Obama’s “gangsta government” at a recent Tea Party rally. Of course not all Tea Partiers or Obama critics are racist, but the NAACP is right: it’s disingenuous to argue that racial fear isn’t one of the driving forces of the Tea Party.
Barack Obama’s presidency is historic in
many ways, including the biggest loss of
public approval during the first year. I didn’t
ride the Obama waves of “hope” or
experience the crash after drinking too
much Obama Kool-Aid, but I have great
sympathy for him considering that this is
arguably the most hostile presidential
environment in history. He is operating
with antagonistic “new media,” a highly
polarized electorate, and persistent racial
prejudice. I'm focusing on racial prejudice
in this blog post, and this is where the Tea Party comes in.
Obama took office with a 68% approval rating, second only to Kennedy with 72%. Obama’s job approval plummeted to 47% within a year – the largest drop on record. He joins only Ronald Reagan among presidents with approval lower than 50% at the one-year mark, but Reagan fell two points while Obama plunged over twenty points. Post-WWII presidents have enjoyed an average 17% increase in approval during the first year, so Obama’s drop goes against the typical first-year trend of gaining ground.
Obama also holds the record for the most polarized job approval rating on record. In January, 2010, he had a 65-point gap between job approval ratings from Republicans (23%) and Democrats (88%); far larger than Bill Clinton’s 52% partisan gap in approval that enabled the Republican Revolution in 1994.
What accounts for the historical loss of public approval and polarization? Racial fear is one cause. Many white people patted themselves on the back for electing the nation’s first black president, but John McCain would be president if only whites had voted in 2008 (with 55% of the vote). President Obama has been framed in absurd but damaging ways that are linked to his race. According to a recent Harris Interactive poll, 32% of Americans think Obama is Muslim, while 25% believe he was not born in the U.S. One-in-five Americans thinks that President Obama “is doing many things Hitler did.” Political opponents will invariably lob ludicrous claims at presidents, but these frames are actually sticking to Obama whose “blackness” has made him an “other” in the minds of many Americans.
The Tea Party movement is clearly fueled by the notion of Obama as “other.” According to a recent NYTimes/CBS Poll, Tea Partiers are disproportionately wealthy, white, better educated, male, and more likely to describe their economic situation as fairly or very good. These are not the folks affected by the economic downturn. So what is driving their cause? Political Scientist Chris Parker writes that “the tea party is not just about politics and size of government. The data suggests it may also be about race.” In fact, Americans who hold racial resentment are 36% more likely to support the Tea Party than others. Only 35% of Tea Party members believe that black people are hard working, and only 45% think black people are intelligent.
And then there are the Tea Party signs: “Obama’s Plan: White Racism.” “Obama: What you talkin’ about Willis?” A picture of Obama slitting Uncle Sam’s throat. A sign portraying Obama as Steve Urkel. “Congress = Slave Owner/ Taxpayer = nigger,” “Obama’s Tax Laws Enslave Everyone.” And Michele Bachman railed against Obama’s “gangsta government” at a recent Tea Party rally. Of course not all Tea Partiers or Obama critics are racist, but the NAACP is right: it’s disingenuous to argue that racial fear isn’t one of the driving forces of the Tea Party.
"Sissy Bounce" Sexually Liberating? Saturday, July 24, 2010
I wish I could spend all of my time in New Orleans,
my favorite city in the world, so my friends
are kind enough to send anything they run across
that involves the Crescent City. Two friends
forwarded a recent New York Times article on the
rise of "sissy bounce," a new take on bounce --
an energetic form of rap/hip hop that originated in
New Orleans. "Sissy bounce" refers to a handful
of transgendered/gay rappers, some of whom
perform in drag. Katey Red and Big Freedia, two
of the biggest names in "sissy bounce," are
pictured here.
Like New Orleans itself, the effects of "sissy bounce" are visceral -- raw and invigorating, and its club success surely represents an important interruption in a genre known for its homophobia. Looking beyond its woman-hating name, the mere presence of individuals in "sissy bounce" who challenge norms of masculinity and sexuality in bounce is a move toward gay equity.
But I take exception to Times reporter, Jonathan
Dee's claim that "sissy bounce...creates an
atmosphere of sexual liberation -- for women."
He describes the typical "sissy bounce" scene:
women gathered around the performer, grabbing
their ankles and hoisting their gyrating arses in the
air. Dee deems this sexually liberating because,
he argues, the female attendees are dancing "for Freedia." That may well be the case, but videos and pictures from the Times article also show a constant group of men gathered on the perimeter, leering -- snapping photos, filming, and shining flashlights on the dancer's body parts.
Transgendered/gay rappers spitting arguably mysoginistic lyrics over a sea of throbbing female posteriors while a crowd of men looks on is not sexual liberation. It's the same old tired show where women's sexuality revolves around pleasuring the male gaze.
I wish I could spend all of my time in New Orleans,
my favorite city in the world, so my friends
are kind enough to send anything they run across
that involves the Crescent City. Two friends
forwarded a recent New York Times article on the
rise of "sissy bounce," a new take on bounce --
an energetic form of rap/hip hop that originated in
New Orleans. "Sissy bounce" refers to a handful
of transgendered/gay rappers, some of whom
perform in drag. Katey Red and Big Freedia, two
of the biggest names in "sissy bounce," are
pictured here.
Like New Orleans itself, the effects of "sissy bounce" are visceral -- raw and invigorating, and its club success surely represents an important interruption in a genre known for its homophobia. Looking beyond its woman-hating name, the mere presence of individuals in "sissy bounce" who challenge norms of masculinity and sexuality in bounce is a move toward gay equity.
But I take exception to Times reporter, Jonathan
Dee's claim that "sissy bounce...creates an
atmosphere of sexual liberation -- for women."
He describes the typical "sissy bounce" scene:
women gathered around the performer, grabbing
their ankles and hoisting their gyrating arses in the
air. Dee deems this sexually liberating because,
he argues, the female attendees are dancing "for Freedia." That may well be the case, but videos and pictures from the Times article also show a constant group of men gathered on the perimeter, leering -- snapping photos, filming, and shining flashlights on the dancer's body parts.
Transgendered/gay rappers spitting arguably mysoginistic lyrics over a sea of throbbing female posteriors while a crowd of men looks on is not sexual liberation. It's the same old tired show where women's sexuality revolves around pleasuring the male gaze.
Femme Political has been moved to
www.femmepolitical.wordpress.com!
_____________________________________________________________
www.femmepolitical.wordpress.com!
_____________________________________________________________