Originally Posted By Sport Goofy This is a fascinating discussion in today's Politico. "If a male attorney general and former prosecutor were running against a woman who’d posed nude for Cosmopolitan magazine and whose law practice consisted mainly of real estate closings, would he be the one praying for a squeaker victory? Would she have even gotten elected to the state senate?" <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31680.html" target="_blank">http://www.politico.com/news/s...680.html</a> We have a handful of women at high levels of politics, but there is still a large double-standard in terms of perception. In today's Senate race, there is a lot of criticism of Coakley as a poor campaigner -- but nary a whiff of criticism of her performance as Attorney General or other public service in Massachusetts. Quite to the contrary -- her public approval ratings were above 70% earlier this year. On the flip side, there is lots of praise for Brown's campaigning but not many good things to say about his performance in the state senate. I think gender certainly can explain the disconnects between perception and reality here.
Originally Posted By andyll <<I think gender certainly can explain the disconnects between perception and reality here.>> sorry but I do not buy it. People do not have the ability to judge if a politican does a good job or not. Exhibit A is the number of people that believe Obama caused the recession and current deficit. The public believes anyone that will tell them their taxes will be cut and that government will be smaller.
Originally Posted By Princessjenn5795 A women who posed nude would not get elected to the US Senate right now. No way. I also find it very interesting that the right wing conservatives would scream bloody murder about a liberal candidate that had posed nude but they have nothing to say on the matter when family-values, I-drive-a-truck-so-vote-for-me Brown does it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I think there's no question that such double standards exist. Can you imagine if a woman headed off for several days out of the country, lied about her whereabouts even to her staff, to have an affair out of the country? I think we know exactly what she'd be called. Her political career would be over, over, over. Now, that said, I don't think that Brown's win in Massachusetts can be pinned on sexism/double standards. It has a lot to do with the economy/taxes/healthcare.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Now, that said, I don't think that Brown's win in Massachusetts can be pinned on sexism/double standards. It has a lot to do with the economy/taxes/healthcare. >> I think the economy was the #1 factor. That being said, I got to watch the rhetoric from a local perspective up here. Once Coakley became aggressive in challenging Brown on the issues, the rhetoric turned very nasty towards her. She was described as cold and bitchy. This is the same woman who polled earlier in the year as one of the top Massachusetts notables that people would like to have a beer with. You just can't have an aggressive woman on the campaign trail. The adjectives used to describe an assertive woman are much different than the adjective used to describe an assertive man. I saw the same sort of rhetoric used against Hillary Clinton last year. It's a Catch-22 for women in politics. If they get attacked by an opponent, they can't attack back without disrupting a stereotype of women being pleasant and passive that would somehow appeal to the sensibilities of the public.
