The sexist double standards hurting Hillary Clinton [View all]

[riversedge]

I think we clearly see the double standard here in gd-p---and by who gets the hides and who does not at times
It is constant--day after day--commentator after commentator on cable networks.



The sexist double standards hurting Hillary Clinton
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-sexist-double-standards-hurting-hillary-clinton/2016/02/12/fb551e38-d195-11e5-abc9-ea152f0b9561_story.html


?uuid=lGMGutGiEeWIzXU-gM0prQ
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)


By Dana Milbank Opinion writer February 12 at 11:09 AM

Much of Hillary Clinton’s difficulty in this campaign stems from a single, unalterable fact: She is a woman.

I’m not referring primarily to the Bernie Bros, those Bernie Sanders supporters who fill the Internet with misogynistic filth about Clinton. What drags down her candidacy is more pervasive and far subtler — unconscious, even.
Dana Milbank writes about political theater in the nation’s capital. He joined the Post as a political reporter in 2000. View Archive


The criticism is the same as in 2008: She doesn’t connect. She isn’t likeable. She doesn’t inspire. She seems shrill. “She shouts,” Bob Woodward said on MSNBC this month, also suggesting she “get off this screaming stuff.”

Joe Scarborough, the host, agreed: “Has nobody told her that the microphone works?”

At that, Clinton supporters hollered — about the double standard that condemns her but not Sanders, who bellows at the top of his lungs. The episode was part of a constant stream of commentators (generally men) taking issue with Clinton’s demeanor and conduct — “She’s got to become herself,” David Gergen advised her on CNN before Thursday night’s debate — in a way they don’t do with Sanders.

At a Clinton rally last week in New Hampshire I discussed the decibel dilemma with Jay Newton-Small, of Time magazine. “It’s very hard for a woman to telegraph passion,” she explained. “When Bernie yells, it shows his dedication to the cause. When she yells, it’s interpreted in a very different way: She’s yelling at you.”

That’s not about Clinton; it’s about us. “It is a subtle kind of sexism that exists that we don’t recognize,” said Newton-Small, who literally wrote the book on the matter. “Broad Influence: How Women Are Changing the Way America Works,” out last month, includes a chapter on Clinton. “When women raise their voices, people tend to get their hackles up. People I talk to at Clinton events put her in a maternal role: Why is she screaming at me? Am I in trouble?”

Campaigning While Female also deprives Clinton of the ability to make lofty promises. Sanders, for example, has a $15 trillion non-starter of a health-care plan. If Clinton floated such a plan, the media would mock it as patently absurd. But Sanders gets a pass.

Why the double standard? “Men are the guys who want to go out and buy the motorcycle and women are the purse-string holders,” Newton-Small said. “It’s a very traditional role we are putting women into by making them the one saying, no, we can’t do all these really fun things. This is a very stereotypical box she gets put into, which then makes it very hard for her to be inspirational.”

This is the essence of Clinton’s trouble: If she can’t plausibly offer pie-in-the-sky, and she can’t raise her voice, how does she inspire people? This hurts particularly with young voters — the same segment that shunned Clinton in 2008.

Clinton’s “likeability” problem also has something to do with her lack of a Y-chromosome. It’s a direct consequence of the imperative that she demonstrate her toughness. Men can be tough and warm at the same time — think Ronald Reagan — but for women, it’s a trade-off.........................