General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHillary Clinton says misogyny played a role in her loss. Research suggests she might be right.
Source: Washington Post, by Amber Phillips
In her first interview since November about November, here's how Hillary Clinton diagnosed her loss to Donald Trump: Certainly, misogyny played a role. I mean, that just has to be admitted. And why and what the underlying reasons were is what I'm trying to parse out myself.
*****
We'll probably never know whether voters' prejudice against a female potential president contributed to Clinton's loss or if it did, to what degree. But we do know that research has clearly demonstrated that voters hold female politicians to a different standard (read: double) from their male counterparts.
As I wrote a month before the presidential election, research from the nonpartisan Barbara Lee Family Foundation, which studies women in politics, found that women can't just be themselves when they run for office. They constantly have to contemplate what their looks, clothes and smile (whether they smile) project to voters, in a way men don't.
Take for instance the foundation's research that voters care whether their female politicians are likable, an attribute that is not something they need from their male political leaders. Among the suggestions the foundation put together for aspiring female politicians to navigate voters' sometimes-confusing expectations of public women:
Don't pose for a head shot. Instead, circulate more-candid, informal photos...
Do share personal anecdotes when explaining why you're passionate about an issue or how you've helped constituents...
Don't take credit all the time for your accomplishments...
Do recognize your hair, makeup and clothes will be scrutinized...
*****
Even before Clinton lost, she was hinting at the outsize role she thought her gender was playing in the election. Two months before the election, she remarked that it's especially tricky for women to come across as both serious and likable.
*****
Read it all at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/08/hillary-clinton-says-misogyny-played-a-role-in-her-loss-research-suggests-she-might-be-right/?utm_term=.e49e47189d6d&wpisrc=nl_most-draw14&wpmm=1
Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)WaPo is Really parsing their words there.
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)DK504
(3,847 posts)" ... why and what the underlying reasons were is what I'm trying to parse out myself.
Me to sister, me to. The double standard list is rather nauseating. Woman hating woman trying to help, never have quite parsed that out myself.
calimary
(80,693 posts)I think that's definitely part of it. The electorate wasn't quite ready to go that far with breaking down barriers, seems to me. I suspect some voters may have felt that we'd just had a black President so "enough was enough with this equality stuff."
BlueMTexpat
(15,349 posts)PatSeg
(46,794 posts)It certainly wasn't the only factor involved, but women in politics are treated much differently than men as a rule.
mythology
(9,527 posts)This sort of study is helpful in bringing out what is true.
nycbos
(6,033 posts)unblock
(51,974 posts)the question is "how much of a role".
that it played "a" role is really beyond dispute.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)And I Just left a thread where DU's woes are blamed on overly sensitive people who are mean to bigots and defend the party.
Unbelievable.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Is ONLY about hurt feelings and not relentless oppression?
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)And yet Skinner's reply was that we should try to "educate people". Frustrating and ineffective here.
brer cat
(24,401 posts)but true. smh
JHan
(10,173 posts)Last edited Sun Apr 9, 2017, 01:47 PM - Edit history (1)
where is this fkery occurring?
(thanks)
Jonny Appleseed
(960 posts)Who woulda thunk? Many more people were willing to admit, thought it socially acceptable and based in logic, to express that they wouldn't vote for her because she was a she; a sentiment largely absent (or at least kept to themselves) from all but the fringes when you replace "woman" with "black".
caroldansen
(725 posts)disappointed that one of the reasons we didnt get the best one for the job, namely Hillary, is because she is a woman. They voted for trump because Hillary is a woman and now we have a totally inexperienced idiot in the white house!
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Many, many suggested they would not vote for Hillary BECAUSE she was a woman.
Some of us tried to convince them it would be alright to vote for Hillary DESPITE her being a woman!
Cattledog
(5,897 posts)"Woman is the nigger of the world."
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)is alive and well in this country?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)But it's a frequent thing on the net.
ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)I suppose it's a way of showing everyone that they are, indeed, misogynistic. Doesn't provide a solution, though.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)them to ignore critical thought while listening and talking about candidates. I was shocked to hear some very liberal people talk about how "they couldn't listen" to Hillary and allow them to see their bias and their minds opened to how little they know her own actual history beyond the shit headlines.
I explained how hearing that struck me as way too familiar as many workplaces were similarly hostile to women in leadership. A light went off for a few. Most who hadn't worked for large companies don't see the way sexism functions in larger groups, and how ideas like being "turned off" were extremely unfair and damaging to women- as well as fucking stupid when you unpack all that it means.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)... they need from their male political leaders. "
The part about being seen as "serious and likable" is something ALL career women have to navigate.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)The attacks on Hillary were most often "personal" and were meant to make her appear "unlikable."
One even suggested she was just "likable enough" - but not as likable as him?
dsc
(52,130 posts)she would have been crucified.
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)Women know this.
No research necessary, but the effort is appreciated.
certainot
(9,090 posts)should be how the fuck did that pos even get close? how could the gop get so dysfunctional and still be close enough to win/steal? to tens of millions, hillarys emails were more important than global warming.
those rust belt and coal belt states are talk radio states and talk radio constantly excuses misogyny and racism to sell republicanism
until dems fix the talk radio problem liberals will continue the useless analysis of politics, blaming various symptoms of allowing 1000 radio stations a free speech free ride- like studying fish without water.
JHan
(10,173 posts)Ilsa
(61,675 posts)T-shirts calling her a cunt or a bitch were prevalent enough.
mzteaze
(448 posts)Consider that this was probably the first presidential election in which the potential FLOTUS for each side were not asked to provide their favorite cookie recipes.
If misogyny doesn't play a part, why wasn't Bill asked to provide his favorite cookie (or any) recipe along side Melania?
FakeNoose
(32,349 posts)They might have asked Chelsea though.
Why do our allies have strong/smart women leaders, who've been elected to office, and we can't do it?
I really believe the media plays a big role in this, but also the major parties can't get over their "boys' club" prejudices either.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,073 posts).
I took a Rutgers-Eagleton Woman and Politics course, and misogyny is rampant.
Trump took a majority of Evangelicals, moreso than the past 5 presidential election cycles. Unlike Obama, who fostered an early and strong outreach to the 43 Million Evangelicals, HRC refused to return calls from various Evangelical magazines and newspapers, and refused contact with various Evangelical leaders. Even so, this does not explain Trump's higher-than-normal vote totals.
While the Christian Right talks a game (not a good one) about having women leaders, the truth is, there is deep-seated resentment to women in power. The following link has enormous information on this topic, as the country's sole university research facility that specializes in Women and Politics.
http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/
Spend a day there and you will be surprised at what you find.
(Note: Now I know I'll get jumped on for mentioning HRC's weak Evangelical outreach program, which was started late in the game, but that's the facts. Search online, because there is a Christian Left that expressed grave concerns that she ignored them. Many of those areas are where the Dems underperformed this past cycle, especially in PA. Her The unborn person doesn t have constitutional rights." comment hurt her. Christianity Today repeatedly reached out to her and was rebuffed. Ruth Graham (Slate Magazine) has a powerful article. Michael Wear, Obamas 2012 Faith Outreach Director said, "simple difference between Obama 's two presidential campaigns and Clinton's 2016 campaign is that Obama asked for the votes of white evangelicals and Clinton did not." Liberal Evangelical leader, Ron Sider a Democrat and the founder of Evangelicals for Social Action said, "I find it dumhfounding and incredibly stupid that the Democratic Party and her campaign didn 't reach out to try to engage a segment of the white evangelical community. Apparently they thought they could win without us." There's a bunch more. )
.
WomenRising2017
(203 posts)It is hypocritical to claim that they were ignored by Hillary Clinton, when they clearly ignored Donald Trump's bigotry.
70,000 bigots do not negate the 66 million who were quite aware of what was at stake.
dsc
(52,130 posts)that should tell you all you need to know about what evangelicals think of women in public office.
anglesphere
(63 posts)When Hillary was running the Republican's were all worried her emails might get into the hands of the Russians.
Now that their man is in, worries about russian spying are "political" and "overblown".
Lokilooney
(322 posts)She lost because we pledge allegiance to the republic, not the democracy and she took the blue wall for granted.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)In the states that cost her the election, the results are measured in the thousands.
In numbers where the "little things" matter - including attitudes towards females and female politicians.
Lokilooney
(322 posts)WI is actually a good example of what went wrong. Most assumed it was a lock and Clinton made one stop during the primary and then largely ignored the state (apparently you have to go back to 1972 to find a major candidate that did not campaign there). Trump made several visits, campaigned unusually hard and won. Same thing could be said for MI, I read somewhere that her campaign ran about 1/10 the canvassers that Kerry did in 04, they thought it was a lock and people were asking why is Trump spending so much time there? Well now they have their answer.
Of course it could be that there was still allot of anti establishment sentiment or the rust belt was spooked by a candidate that was for the TPP before they were against it. Either way people have to stop making up excuses if they don't want to see history repeat itself.
Warpy
(110,908 posts)as some sort of cultural norm instead of a sitcom: the stay at home Mom, the workadaddy who disappeared except at night and on weekends, and the two children (male, of course) who never said any bad words or ditched school or drank beer or smoked anything. While I don't know any who mop the floor or scrub the bathtubs in pearls and heels, the fantasy life holds. They would rather die than think a woman could do the job of president, they like having their lives planned out and no real decisions to have to make.
I don't know what to do about them except hope that damned TV show stops being rerun at some point and the poor dears no longer have a televised rule book to follow. Maybe their daughters will realize they're nuts. Their sons never will, it's been too nice to have an unpaid domestic servant around the house.
Kaleva
(36,146 posts)brer cat
(24,401 posts)And they know it, and they also know they played a role in maintaining the double standard.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)At the end of the linked article:
Bettie
(15,998 posts)Of course it did.
How is this even a question?
jmg257
(11,996 posts)yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)What's the word for people who like females and female candidates?
WomenRising2017
(203 posts)best candidate. 70,000 votes were based in bigotry.