Posts Tagged ‘ma’am’
Fiorina swings at Boxer - let the sexist battles begin
Thanks to Jessica Wakeman at The Frisky for reporting this story! It seems Carly Fiorina, who recently announced her intention to run against Barbara Boxer for her Senate seat in California, has already begun her attacks.
Disappointingly, her first jab at Boxer involves gender and isn’t based on any real issues:
“Barbara Boxer … disrespectfully demanded a Brigadier General refer to her as “Senator” instead of “ma’am” during a recent Senate hearing. I’m sure you’ll agree that Boxer’s arrogance and disrespect for our nation’s military leaders is way out of line.”
Fiorina was referring to the way blown-out-of-proportion “incident” where Sen. Boxer asked to be referred to as Senator instead of Ma’am. I hate to see another woman attacking Boxer for making a perfectly appropriate request, which wouldn’t have been an issue if it had come from a man.
While I should be psyched to see a Senatorial race between two women, it almost makes me want to jump into a hole and pull the hole in after me. I envision the dialogue becoming sexist and, of course, being spun as some kind of “political cat fight” by the media.
I truly hope this won’t be the case. I hope these female candidates will stick to the issues and have an intellectual debate, not sinking to cheap or gender-based attacks. (Especially since Fiorina spoke out against the sexism Palin experienced last election cycle).
But this preliminary comment doesn’t bode well for that scenario. And even if the candidates leave gender alone, we all know the media will be there to make the sexist remarks for everyone. Batten down the hatches, folks—this should be an interesting race.
Sen. Barbara Boxer’s request to be called Senator, not Ma’am, draws unnecessary controversy
Though I almost hate to draw more attention to this story, I think the recent “controversy” over Sen. Barbara Boxer needs to be discussed. Boxer has been slammed for requesting to be referred to as “Senator” as opposed to “Ma’am” during a Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing.
Now, Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh was just following military protocol when addressing Sen. Boxer as “Ma’am.” No biggie, Boxer simply asked that he use her official title, Senator. Had a male Senator made the same request (if he had been called “Sir,” let’s say), it wouldn’t be given a second thought - let alone become a controversy.
However, certain political figures, blogs, and news outlets have attacked Boxer’s request as “dressing down” the officer, having a big ego, being a “loose cannon,” despising the military, an embarrassment, and (putting it nicely) being uppity. The National Republican Senatorial Committee called it disrespectful and even went so far as to collect petition signatures reprimanding Boxer. Really? This is what we’re focusing our time on?
Many have come to the defense of Sen. Boxer, pointing out that her request was respectful and not out of line. And more importantly, Gen. Walsh told Sen. Boxer directly that he wasn’t offended by her request. Blogger Lindsay Beyerstein reminds us that the Senator was questioning someone testifying before her:
It’s irrelevant whether the general was wrong to call her ma’am, or whether Boxer was being polite. It’s not a Senator’s job to be polite when she questions witnesses, that is, unless politeness suits her purposes.
I think this serves as a reminder that, yes - sexism in politics is alive and well. Women face different and greater challenges while running for and serving in office simply because of their gender. They’re openly criticized for things that men never would be, and are forced to defend themselves against often undeserved assault. This can be a difficult hurdle for women to jump while entering or engaging in public life.
Whenever something like this happens, I think we need to ask: would people have the same reaction if she were a man? I think you’ll find the answer is overwhelmingly no.







