Scott Brown: Symbol of Sexism?

Posted by chelseadavison , Jan, 2010 @ 9:14 am

Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts has inspired a lot of heated conversation about liberals vs. conservatives and the future of various agendas, but Jeremy Mayer of the New York Daily News brought up another important issue–sexism. He writes:

To all the post-mortems about the significance of Scott Brown’s shocking Senate victory, I’d like to add one more: Brown’s victory means that sexism is alive and well in American politics. No, Martha Coakley didn’t lose because she is a woman. But had Scott Brown been one, he wouldn’t have won. In the Massachusetts Senate race, we know sexism was there the same way Sherlock Holmes once found a killer; because the dog – in this case, the dog of the media – didn’t bark. Consider: If Coakley had posed nude for Playboy, as Scott Brown did for Cosmopolitan back in 1982, she would have been famous around the country, and not in a good way. Every sentient American would have seen a blurred version of her nude picture. She would have been ridiculed as the “full disclosure candidate.” Leno, Letterman and Conan would have briefly stopped talking about each other to make a bevy of breast jokes. Most likely, she would not have been the nominee in the first place, nor would she have risen to be Attorney General of Massachusetts, with a background like that. Women in politics are still judged by a different set of standards when it comes to appearance and morality. It’s easiest to see the difference when criticism is applied to a female candidate directly, as when some argued that a woman with young children, like Sarah Palin, should not run for high office, while men in the same situation are elected without controversy. Or when a woman’s homeliness becomes an issue in an election, while men ugly enough to stop traffic typically get a free pass. Or when a woman is judged “too attractive” in focus groups, and her campaign urges her to dress less sexily so the voters will think she’s smarter. When these incidents occur, and they do with some frequency, the sexism is obvious. Continue reading his article here…

When I heard about Brown’s nude modeling I found it absurd–not that it happened, but that I had honestly heard nothing about it. It wasn’t until I read an entry on musician Moby’s online journal that I became aware. I think Mayer has a strong point here, especially remembering all of the ridiculous photoshopped images I saw of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin during the last Presidential campaign. Clearly sexism is very much alive, especially in the political realm.

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, Scott Brown, scott brown nude, sexism

67%

33%

RATE

Comments

caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

6 Comments

J. Catapano says – reply to this

To be honest, I don’t think Brown posing nude is Cosmo should have anything to do with his Senate race. Democrats tried to use it against him and hardly anyone glorified it. To say, ‘if Scott Brown were a woman’ is completely absurd. History is history and people have done crazy things. Bear in mind, Bill Clinton was impeached for getting his rocks off with a White House staff member. I’m not saying that there aren’t still double standards between sexes (there are), but I just don’t see what the big deal is. He did a spread in Cosmo over 15 years ago. Who cares? He’s a good lookin’ guy and he did some modeling; he wasn’t blowin’ hobos on the street for nickels. I think the whole thing is being blown way out of proportion. These hypotheticals of if people aren’t who they are just make my blood boil. If he were a she and had twelve fingers and toes, this race would’ve gone much differently! The fact of the matter is Brown ran a better campaign, Coakley took the race for granted, and the voters were looking for a Moderate. That’s what they got.

Note: Also, no one would’ve asked Martha Coakley to pose for a nudie magazine in 1982 ::shudder::.