Lisa Nuss at Women's eNews is a bit offended at the language used to describe Grandma Mimi Pelosi and "I Ain't No Tammy Wynette" Clinton.
In her first appearance as a formally declared presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton made the case for children's health insurance. During the event she held the hand of a small girl and kids squirmed in the audience.
The maternal atmosphere recalled a similar recent debut by Nancy Pelosi, when she took up the hammer as Speaker of the House surrounded by swarms of children. The day before, the New York Times ran a photo of her hugging a co-worker's child. A week later the San Francisco Chronicle ran a front page picture with Pelosi sitting next to her granddaughter...
While this nurturing emphasis may win Clinton and Pelosi some publicity points no one should think the media response to this is entirely benign or that it doesn't contribute to a public perception gap about which gender is better left in charge of the children and which with the legislative agenda.
After Nancy Pelosi's historic election as Speaker of the House, the Washington Post described her as a "grandmother of five."
The Post didn't refer to her as a "20-year veteran of Congress," which probably had more to do with her election.
Meanwhile, the Post described Harry Reid, the new Senate leader, as the "son of a hard-rock miner" with no mention of Reid's 16 grandchildren.
Nuss goes on to compare the descriptions of Pelosi and Clinton to other male colleagues. The men are typically described by their career choices or other masculine-sounding adjectives, while the women are described by their roles as wives and mothers.
I object to this dichotomy, as well (see here for an example). My problem with Nuss's premise is that the "we love our children and they define us" label is coming directly from Pelosi and Clinton themselves. It isn't merely that the press is describing Pelosi as grandmother of five, but Nancy describes herself this way. There are plenty of press examples of it (see here, here, and here for examples), but mainly the "grandmother of five" shtick is trotted out by Nancy herself (which is why I identify her as "Grandma Mimi").
It is true that identifying oneself by one's family relations is a new tactic in Washington and it will certainly get one noticed. But is it really going to get Hillary elected president if she is seen holding coffee klatches?
I'm not sure. Hillary is in the worst position a woman candidate could be in. She has a well-publicized philandering impeached husband, she insulted cookie-baking moms in America back in 1992 with her "I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas" statement, and sneered at the idea of standing by your man. She came to Washington determined to show an intelligent, career-driven woman could be First Lady, but earned a lot of derision for it.
When she went to the Senate, Clinton has flip-flopped on issues trying to appeal to a variety of constituents from military families to feminists to women and children. Now she wants to convince Americans she's really a nice, smart lady who loves kids. I'm just not sure America will buy it. I think it's insulting to feminists who admire her career and intelligence and it's insulting to Americans with traditional values who don't believe she didn't know about Monica Lewinsky.
In any event, Nuss is right that it's a bit insulting for Pelosi and Clinton to constantly be described as moms and grandmothers. But they brought this on themselves.
|