WMC News & Features

10 ways for women candidates to beat the electoral double standard

Clinton Hillary Manchester 2017

Donald Trump can use sweeping generalizations to describe his policies, disparage the appearance of men and women, and, as Jeb Bush said, “insult [his] way to the presidency” because the male archetype of leadership is so ingrained in our American psyche that, for his supporters, he’s just an original, Marlboro-man type of leader who can be forgiven anything. However, a woman candidate who was as careless would be laughed off the stage and fall to last place if she utilized the same rhetorical strategies (or lack of them). Which is why Hillary Clinton’s New Year’s resolution, “to let [Donald Trump] live in his alternative reality,” and to not respond to him, is the best rhetorical strategy she could adopt.

What we know about women and leadership is that women need to be more careful in word and deed than male candidates. What a male candidate could get away with, a female candidate simply cannot.

If a male candidate can do almost anything and still be ahead, what must a presidential woman do? As the list of presidential contenders thins, it looks as though the 2016 U.S. presidential final will have Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee. During our research on our book, Gender and the American Presidency: Nine Presidential Women and the Barriers They Faced, my co-authors, Theodore Sheckels and Diana Carlin, and I found these qualities to be absolutely essential for a woman to be elected president.

1. Credentials Women have to have not only government experience but successful campaigning experience. A future female president should have foreign policy experience. Despite the presence of numerous women leaders internationally, such as Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s or Angela Merkel today, the U.S. electorate still tends to see the conduct of foreign affairs as male-defined.

2. Fundraising Women who are being considered for the presidency must have the ability to raise the money necessary for a long, expensive campaign. Historically, women have found it difficult to garner the financial support men have. However, Hillary Clinton certainly raised a significant sum in 2008, as did Michele Bachmann for her 2012 campaign. Clinton has a significant war chest for 2016, so this “barrier” is coming down.

3. Charisma Women who are being considered for the presidency must be charismatic or, at least dynamic. Lack of charisma is more of a disqualifying trait for women, such as Washington Governor Christine Gregoire and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, than it has been for men, such as Michael Dukakis and George H.W. Bush, and may end up being less of a barrier for Jeb Bush in 2016 than it would be for a woman. A restrained style may well be highly effective if one is trying to either court business or work with the opposition, but that style does not appeal to media across state lines.

4. Assertiveness A woman, however, cannot push that dynamism too far, for, fourth, women who are being considered for the presidency must not be overly assertive or aggressive. Should they do so, they run the risk of being dismissed with the “B” word. That has been a fate suffered by Barbara Mikulski and Nancy Pelosi. That was the fate that Hillary Clinton constantly back-pedaled from in her 2008 campaign, and must guard against now. There's a marked difference in perspective between how male and female aspirants are viewed: aggressive males are said to be in need of reining in their style when it truly becomes uncivil; aggressive females are said to be inherently nasty should they strongly state their views too often.

5. An Attractive Appearance Women who are being considered for the presidency must be attractive and, furthermore, must expect their appearance to be front and center in the media coverage of a campaign. Dianne Feinstein’s expensive attire and “Snow White” hairstyle; Barbara Mikulski’s short stature and “roly-poly” physique; Kathleen Sebelius’ dress color and toenail polish; Nancy Pelosi’s mauve designer suits and cosmetic surgery—commentators will focus on all such attributes. Men running for the presidency will not draw comparable attention; furthermore, physical traits will rarely disqualify them. Some might note their height (Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis), their weight (Chris Christie), and their suit color (Al Gore), but these traits will not be what media coverage notes first and then dwells upon.

6. The Right Look Women must look the part. The problem here, of course, is that the part has always been played by a male. Thus, to look the part—especially in its commander-in-chief facet—a woman must look masculine but, of course, not too masculine as to be unattractive. Women are then trapped in a double bind to add to the five in Kathleen Hall Jamieson’s book—between looking presidential, defined in our culture in masculine terms, and looking attractive, defined in our culture in feminine terms for women. Nancy Kassebaum, a senator from Kansas for two decades, noted that she wasn't tall enough to look the part; Barbara Mikulski, who is even shorter, may have felt the same.

7. The Denis Thatcher Spouse Women who are aspiring to the presidency must have no “spouse problem.” The problem might be a spouse whose business or political dealings are questionable. Dianne Feinstein had questions raised about the former; Olympia Snowe, the latter. The problem might be a spouse who cannot be successfully scripted. Elizabeth Dole experienced this difficulty, and so has Hillary Clinton. The problem might even be the absence of a spouse, as is the case for Barbara Mikulski and Linda Lingle, former governor of Hawaii. An aspiring woman’s spouse must—it seems—be either well in the background or, maybe better yet, deceased.

8. Heterosexual Orientation At least for the present, women who are aspiring to the presidency should be heterosexual. On this point, there may be little sexism, for the door is probably as closed to a gay man as to a lesbian woman.

9. Restraint When It Comes to Playing the Gender Card Women now aspiring to the presidency must remember that their gendered struggle resonates with only a part of their audience. Although there still exist many barriers impeding women’s movement in life and in the professions, we believe that this perspective doesn’t resonate in the same way with younger women, who outnumber their male counterparts in universities and law schools and have not experienced the groundbreaking “firsts” of the baby boomer generation.

10. Rhetorical Finesse A woman aspiring to the presidency must possess considerable rhetorical finesse. Her phrases will be scanned for the words that suggest high seriousness in a world with major economic and international problems. Rick Perry’s silly gesticulations or Herman Cain’s hat-wearing may make it to late night comedian routines, but they won’t immediately disqualify them. Women candidates who don’t exhibit brain power, rhetorical constraint, and likability simultaneously and consistently will be disqualified as not presidential material.

Not responding to a candidate—even a front-runner—whose rhetoric does not heighten the quality of political discourse is likely the best strategy of all.



More articles by Category: Politics
More articles by Tag:
SHARE

[SHARE]

Article.DirectLink

Contributor
Categories
Sign up for our Newsletter

Learn more about topics like these by signing up for Women’s Media Center’s newsletter.