The media is sexist. We know this. They are a reflection of society-which is sexist. Having said that, could they try a little harder to at least make their sexism slightly accurate? What do I mean? Who really has the cold persona and facade among the female Presidential candidates?
Of course, especially as a Hillary supporter, I understand the amount of sexism she has endured from the media and pundits. I think most of us understand the double standards, lose/lose situations, and unique analyses that women political figures deal with that their male counterparts do not. One thing the media loves to play into, which has seemingly been quite effective in terms of persuading the public, is asking how “likable” candidates are. People like Hillary have been described as “cold,” “inauthentic”, “unlikable” and those are just the G-rated sentiments.
While I disagree with these critiques, I would be more willing to accept them as realistic views if we critiqued men the same way. Which male candidate is likable? Who is just oozing with charisma? Maybe aside from Rubio. The GOP front runner Donald Trump is beyond unlikable. He is a proud, unabashed, bully and chauvinist. And people love him for it! At least the base does. Ok, ok, the base of Republican voters are not the media. BUT, I have still not heard the same concerns over polling and labeling with someone like Trump as I have heard with Hillary. The media, even if they admit Trump is rude or brazen, they will follow up by implying how this is a positive trait to many. No one ever associates being unlikable or mean as a positive for someone like Hillary. Even the more “boring” candidates do not come across as friendly, compassionate, down-to-earth, etc, yet they do not receive the same treatment as Secretary Clinton.
So, if we admit that sexism is at play, why are we not talking about Fiorina? What about her personality? Tone? I personally think all candidates should be judged fairly, but why is the sexist media not pointing out how ice-queen-like Fiorina is? I hate that term, but think it is applicable. When has anyone thought Fiorina had an endearing moment? When she seemed passionate about fetuses in her “debate win” (allegedly) it turns out she was completely lying and trying to manipulate the public. Is that really a good moment for her? When has she let loose? Played with people? Had fun? I literally googled images of “Fiorina with children.” Nothing. Go here and see for yourself.
Hillary, on the other hand, has danced with Ellen, participated in a skit with Jimmy Fallon where she pretended to talk to Donald Trump, and has had many moments where she talks to children, embraces them, and more. She got emotional just recently, talking about her mother’s influence and how she misses her. Not to mention she has actually helped bring things like health care and early childhood education to many kids.
Yet the media keeps trying to push the same tired narrative. Why do people buy into this? Why is it that, even with sexism so pervasive, it seems to be much uglier when Secretary Clinton is involved? Fiorina (and all of the males) are less likable, less down-to-earth, and receive less criticism. This is unfair and should change.