What makes an effective female politician?

[BornBlue]

I will be forth right, and say, yes I am an Obama supporter and a woman, who would love to see a woman become president. The problem is I do not trust Hillary Clinton. My distrust is a combined result of my age(23), her behavior during this primary, and my parents being staunch repubs. I hear it all the time, we want a woman, but not her.
Let us all(women and men)take a moment and describe what qualities would make an effective female politician/president, after all we really cannot define something only by negatives. I have tried thinking about this on my own, but really cannot come up with anything that is fair, seeing as all my conclusions on are based on a long tradition great politicians being men.

[Writer]

1. Here's my theory on "we want a woman, but not her."

If Hillary Clinton doesn't make it, I think that the first woman elected to the presidency will be a Republican. I think this, because our concept of a woman leader must have a somewhat motherly mystique, because our nation will never fully shake its puritanical roots. I'm not saying that Liddy Dole would be it, but someone that Republicans and conservative Christians won't mind dropping their misogyny to vote for.

The completely career-minded woman is offensive to many in their 20's and 30's who grew up as latchkey children. They resent what Clinton stands for - and they associate a selfish desire with her that they believe a woman of her nature would possess. All subtlety and nuance is lost, in other words. I think it's degenerated to applying any evil, selfish behavior to her - the devil to our collective need to feel good about ourselves again. She's not dropping out and permitting Obama to grab the nomination by default (How dare she!!!) so there "must be" something despicable about her nature. She's selfish. She's out for acquiring power, not that she really cares about the nation. That simply can't be.

That's my read on it... but then I'm 32 and a Clinton supporter.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

6. I have always said that our first woman President will be a conservative republican

Probably a fundie and definitely a war hawk. Sorry, but that's the only form America will accept a woman POTUS in. Hillary Clinton came close in the hawk department but her liberal social and economic positions make her too unacceptably female.

I actually come down on the other side of your "motherly" argument to a certain extent. I subscribe to Lakoff's theory of the Strict Father/Nurturing Parent dualism in America. A female politician is already tagged with the nurturing mother label due to being female. The most successful ones I've seen are those to take great pains to differentiate themselves from it. "Motherly" is fine so long as it comes with a healthy dose of Strict Father to go with it.

[SharonAnn]

12. As a woman who's Hillary's age, I recognize "we'd hire/promote a woman but not her" as

discrimination. It's the line that's used all the time in order to avoid hiring/promoting a woman.

Somehow, the particular woman in questions is always seen to be something: too strident, too soft, too passive, too agressive, too cold, too sympathetic, too analytical, too emotional, etc.

In reality, it's always about the speaker's bigotry.

That's all. It's really simple.

[bain_sidhe]

14. GMTA!

Or maybe it's our age... But I too have become wise to the gambit.

[bain_sidhe]

13. MHO, for the forseeable future, it will always be "not her"

There will always be some reason--She's too soft, too hard, too compromised, too uncompromising, etc...

My view is that, even with her faults, Clinton had the best chance of actually making it, because of her particular circumstances... support of (and perceived as a continuation of) the only successful Democratic President in "modern memory" (I was alive when JFK & LBJ were president, but I too young to really pay attention, and Carter was not perceived as successful), the backing (at least initially) of the party establishment, national familiarity and yes, for some, affection, and money. Name one other woman on the political scene today that has that.

So, since I don't think Hillary IS going to get the nomination, and I have worries about whether she could win the general if she did (I have worries about Obama, too, but they're different worries)... I have sadly accepted that I'm unlikely to see a female president in my lifetime. Hope I'm wrong, but this campaign season has convinced me that I'm not. I don't think any other woman is going to even get as far as Hillary did--another female candidate would get the same treatment as previous female candidates (until Hillary). "Allowed" to go a couple of rounds, then patted on the head and told to run along now, because the boys have to get to work.

The exception: if a female becomes V.P.--in a two term administration--that female would have to be taken seriously as a candidate after those terms.

**edited for typo**

[hayu_lol]

2. Offhand, I would say that females are better at concensus building and less ...

concerned with their personal egos. That said, politicians are pretty much politicians despite gender differences.

One good thing that has developed during this particular cat fight is that the color and gender bars to advancement in politics are shattered for the first time in history.

A shame it came too late for Shirley Chisholm and Barbara Jordan...but there are many bright women out there considering future runs. The same holds true for all of our minorities of either gender.

Some feel Senator Clinton is a good choice, others feel Sen. Obama is a good choice. Problem is that they seem to be pretty well matched, neither being able to pull ahead of the other in any really meaningful way.

[ShortnFiery]

3. Too many variables for a gender-neutral "effective politician" ... there's no perfect formula. eom

[pinto]

4. The same that makes an effective male politician, imho. n/t

[BornBlue]

5. If only that were true.

Women, despite what anyone thinks are held to a different standard. Men are expected to be tough, women who appear tough are cast off as lesbians or power hungry. Men are not expected to wear make-up but women are(I usually don't, so I know what kind of response it gets). Men who sleep around are studs, women are whores. The list goes on and on. How are we expected to decide what an effective female politician is when the standards have all been set by men?

[PeaceNikki]

8. And that's the problem that women face in all (ok, most) lines of work.

Different expectations and held to a very different set of standards.

Skinner posted a response in a thread a couple months ago that REALLY made me think. So much so that I've bookmarked it. I will re-post here because I think it's relevent to the question that you posed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4202492&mesg_id=4203137

Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jan-25-08 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
26. I have to admit that I find this incredibly sad.
It seems so obvious to me: It is not a coincidence that the first viable woman presidential candidate projects an image of centrism and moderation. Just as it is not a coincidence that the first viable African-American presidential candidate projects an image of centrism and moderation. The sad reality is that neither candidate can afford to stray too far from the mainstream, lest they be dismissed as stereotypes.

Hillary Clinton's greatest obstacle to becoming president is NOT the fact that some people see her as moderate. It is the fact that a lot more people (wrongly) see her as a bra-burning, man-hating, pantsuit-wearing "feminazi" who has contempt for women who stay home to "bake cookies and have teas." That is the perception that could sink her candidacy if she makes it to the general election, and she knows it.

The truth is that Hillary Clinton could very well be the woman who smashes through that glass ceiling and gets a major-party presidential nomination. And she may well have to do it without the help of feminists. But women -- and feminists -- will benefit if Hillary Clinton does get the nomination. Some day a woman WILL be able to run for president as a liberal and a feminist. And she will be free to do so because Hillary Clinton came before her and already made the unfair and unpleasant compromises that she shouldn't have had to make, but did.

[pinto]

10. I see your points, yet maybe *we* ought to set the bar at effective, regardless

of gender, or race, or sexuality, and help keep the focus on that goal - politics that work.

As you note, there are entrenched presumptions. I think it may be more effective to answer those presumptions with a different set of standards - and act on them, clearly, consistently.

[crispini]

7. "Politician" is not always the same as "presidential candidate."

The desirable attributes in Presidential candidates have to appear consonant with the needs of the times. For example, right now we are at war. (Sort of.) Clinton is trying to appear 'strong' and much like a commander in chief. The problem for her is that it's tough for a woman to be, well, tough... without also seeming shrill. She can't pull it off. Women CAN tap into the model of toughness but not in this way. A model of feminine strength and martial-ness can be seen in female action heroes like, well, Sigorney Weaver in the movie "Aliens" -- she is strong, speaks few words, tall and assertive, low voice, athletic and trim carriage, and can kick ass. I'm not saying that a female presidential candidate has to be able to shoot an alien, but IF she wishes or needs to convey this strength and martial quality, she would need personal characteristics that enable her to seem commanding without coming across as a nagging mother. (And, while I'm talking about these more superficial characteristics, let me add one more: She will be a brunette.)

BUT, as I said before, times change. I am not sure the quality of toughness will be as applicable in future elections, depending on the climate. It may, and it may not.

[backscatter712]

9. I'd say the same things that make an effective male politician.

Y'know: Charisma, honesty, leadership, not being a sociopath...

[bain_sidhe]

18. especially a penis

That seems to be the one non-negotiable attribute of a successful politician.

Ok, being a bit sarcastic, but still.

[OzarkDem]

11. When you're 23

you don't trust anyone. Wisdom comes with age.

[XemaSab]

15. I think the best female politician would be compassionate but firm

Sort of like my old high school English teacher.

She had high standards, and she expected us to meet them, but she also taught in a very nurturing style.

When she was pissed, though, it was time to hide under your desk. :P

(On edit: for a pop-culture comparison, she was sort of like a younger McGonagall from Harry Potter. :P )

[Lucky 13]

16. The ability to overcome sexism and the grace not to scream it from the rooftoops.

[Asgaya Dihi]

17. Effective female President?

Same thing it would take for an effective male one. The right policies and some personal skills to help get them implemented would be nice as well. That to me is one of the most depressing aspects of this campaign, how so much of the support and arguments has broken down on racial and sexual lines. It isn't going to make a damned bit of difference to that kid going to prison for a non-violent crime or to the parent who doesn't see their kid come home from Iraq what color or sex the President in charge at the time was. The life is just as lost either way. Maybe the right policies would make a difference though.

I didn't like either candidate all that much and I stayed out of the race until well after the kitchen sink, the Wright bit had been going for a little while. But the arguments from the Clinton campaign were becoming more and more right wing and extreme, some of those vid clips posted in these forums could have come straight from FR, the sniper thing, the creative use of history and logic to take both sides of the disenfranchising arguments, and so on left me with no choice. I'll support the one who tried to run their campaign as if they were a dem.

I don't like the direction the Clinton campaign is going and it gives me no faith that they'll act any better if we give them more power. We're just trying to get out from under eight years of that stuff, I don't want more aggression and more of someone who can't just say they were wrong and back up a step.