Women and Politics

The recently-released Shriver Report has provided us with the knowledge that women are now half the paid US workforce as well as a jumping-off point to discuss the state of women’s equality in general.

What we know: women have come a long way in the past few decades. We hold a higher percentage of college degrees, diverse jobs, and public offices.

What we also know: our progress has stagnated. And, as Joanne Lipman writes in the New York Times, the measurable progress we’ve made hasn’t translated to progress in our attitudes toward women.

“Certainly, when you look at the numbers, women have made tremendous strides over the past 25 years. But in the process, we lost sight of something important. After focusing for so long on better jobs and higher pay, maybe the best thing — the enduring thing — we can do is make sure respect is part of the equation too.”

Lipman pointed out the atrocious woman-bashing that has ensued in our society at all levels: in politics, media, entertainment, and the internet. Case in point: Martha Coakley being called Ice Queen. Olympia Snowe being called Jezebel.

Why have women gained ground in our workforce but not in our minds? How do we work to address “concrete issues” like health care reform as well as our attitudes toward women; close the wage gap as well as the respect gap?

My usual answer to these kinds of questions is to elect more women to public office. But maybe it’s not that simple this time. Of course, I do think that having more women in positions of power is essential to changing sexist mindsets and implementing policy to erase inequality.

However, as we experience the growing pains of expanding women’s representation in politics, we will inevitably come up against even more misogyny and sexism (read: Rush Limbaugh and Fox News). What we decide to do in the face of these growing pains will determine our fate.

Do we ignore the sexism and keep on truckin’, hoping it goes away on its own? Or do we stand up and say enough is enough? Women are the only demographic for which it is still acceptable to viciously and openly attack in the public sphere. Why do we allow that to continue?

To truly begin to unravel the archaic stereotypes still held about women, it will take all of us speaking out. Otherwise, we will only achieve equality in numbers alone.

Do we want to arrive at the day where we’ve finally achieved gender parity in public office only to still be called Ice Queens and Mean Girls? I know I don’t.

I guess a historic candidacy deserves a historic level of sexism. As potentially the first woman Senator from Massachusetts, Martha Coakley is undoubtedly in for a world of good old fashioned sexism in politics.

And thanks to a Boston Herald columnist, Martha Coakley has already been served her first large helping of it.

Recently, Martha declined to answer a campaign finance question during a press conference. Unfortunately, Boston Herald columnist Lauren Beckam Falcone saw this as an opportunity to hit Martha with sexist rhetoric, calling her an “ice queen” and “mean girl.” And, maybe my favorite, “Mean Martha.”

Does anyone call President Obama names when he declines a reporter’s question? Or even any male politician for that matter?

Aside from the pure absurdity of the use of middle school insults (and Glee phrases?) to describe a Senatorial candidate, perhaps the most disheartening aspect of this attack is that the name-calling is coming from a woman. A woman who tries to use the same sexism she’s employing to draw pity upon the fact that a female reporter was treated “as if she’s invisible.”

I get that a columnist has to be “edgy” and “creative” in their writing…but, Ice Queen, really? Isn’t there a line somewhere between a catchy post and tearing down your own gender?

As Women for Coakley points out, these kinds of incidents don’t just hurt Martha Coakley—they are detrimental to all women. In response to the column, Women for Coakley decided to focus “on the women whom this incident actually hurts: women who have no newspaper column, no press conferences, no voice.” They go on to write that:

This hurts the single mother with no healthcare who needs her viewpoints represented in healthcare debates. This hurts the female office worker who hears men in the next cubicle laughing about the headline and wonders how she can possibly ask to be paid as much as her male colleagues in such an environment. This hurts the female engineer who wonders how she can ask her co-workers to tone down the sexual innuendo of office conversations and the unwelcome comments about her figure without being labeled an “ice queen.” This hurts the idealistic teen girl who is inspired to study government and to someday run for office, but doesn’t know whether our society really accepts powerful women.

Through this column, the Boston Herald and Lauren Beckam Falcone have effectively told women and girls that there is no place for them in elected office because if they run, they’ll be ridiculed. Ridiculed not even for their policy or ideas, but merely for being a woman.

How long will we as a society allow these kinds of archaic sexist insults to continue? Ladies, haven’t we come further than this?