Newspaper Asks Hard Questions: Can a Woman Be Too Hot for Elected Office?

by Pema Levy · 2010-12-09 06:00:00 UTC
Topics:

In an example of political reporting at its best, local St. Louis paper the Riverfront Times recently led its news section with some heavy-hitting reporting: "Sarah Steelman: Hot or Not?"

In all seriousness, a story called "How Hot is Sarah Steelman anyway?" -- a piece judging the attractiveness of potential 2012 Missouri Senate candidate Sarah Steelman -- is a good example of the unequal treatment of political women in the newsroom and our political discourse at large. Inspired by a radio host who called her "hot" but not intelligent, the Riverfront Times ran with the story: "Just how hot is Sarah Steelman? Is she Sarah Palin hot? Nikki Haley hot? Or -- be still our hearts! -- Kirsten Gillibrand hot?"

Reporter Sarah Fenske actually justifies the fact that she's discussing a candidate's looks before launching a call for reader feedback on Steelman's hotness quotient: "​For the record, we don't believe women should be judged on the basis of their looks, or lack thereof...[but] Steelman's looks are clearly gonna be an issue." Okay, it's unfortunate that the political discourse immediately trends towards judging women's looks rather than, rather than discussing their policy positions. But -- tempting as it is to join in the hot-or-not-fun -- here are a few directions the author could have gone in instead:

  • Instead of assessing the opinions and policy positions of potential Missouri Senate candidate Sarah Steelman, pundits are commenting on her looks.

  • Even if everyone else is talking about Sarah Steelman's looks, here is the real low-down on the potential Republican nominee.

  • Potential Senate candidate Sarah Steelman is the latest victim of our sexist political discourse, which judges women based on their looks, rather than their record.

  • As this latest example of sexist punditry demonstrates, female candidates don't get a fair shake -- and the sexist coverage damages their campaigns.

But no, the Riverfront Times had to join in the fun and start demeaning female candidates by eagerly discussing their political fortunes as a function of their looks. Congratulations, you are now part of the problem since studies have shown sexist punditry actually damages women's campaigns. Next time the Riverfront Times faces a similar editorial decision, I hope they take a look at the calendar; it's 2010 for Chrissake.

Tell the Riverfront Times that a female candidate's hotness is not news, but sexism is. Cover men and women equally. I'm getting tired of defending Republican women.

Photo credit: [F]oxymoron

Pema Levy is a journalist living in Washington, DC. She covers women in politics, reproductive rights and policy, and pop culture here at Change.org.

RELATED PETITION

Tell Newspaper: Report on Female Candidates' Positions, NOT Their Looks
SIGN PETITION
160 People
PREVIOUS STORY:
Rally for Girls' Sports Day: How Soccer Brought Out My Inner Feminist
NEXT STORY:
Fox News' Trotta Still Doesn't Get It: I Want Her Rape Apologism Off the Air

COMMENTS (4)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.