Crimson847 wrote:The other issue is that even talking about a female candidate's appearance causes people in studies to rate her competence lower, regardless of whether the comment was positive or negative. It seems to unconsciously shift people into a different mindset. The same effect has not been found for male candidates IIRC.
I've seen that study and I agree with it's outcomes, but I've always wanted to see that followed up with something more in depth cause I'd think it'd be interesting. How much does a woman's appearance affect my judgment if I agree with her politically vs. I don't agree with her politically. Tina Fey is tasked with doing impressions of Sarah Palin because they look exactly alike. I've noticed the same people who compare Palin to the dumb bimbo cheerleader will turn around and have nothing but positive things to say about Tina Fey. Meanwhile, Breitbart.com has probably used the word cankles eleventy billion times in the time it's taken me to post this one comment, which is the penance their writers must endure every time someone besmirches the name of Margaret Thatcher.
I'd also like to compare how men scored women vs. how women scored women, because in my personal experience, the people most judgmental about a woman's appearance are other women. Magazines like Style, Vogue, Esquire, and People have a mostly female audience and is where most of these types of articles come from.
gisambards wrote:Also, one thing I see raised - often by rather extreme feminists, but even so it's something I don't think they're wrong about - is: when people talk positively about how guys like Bernie Sanders or Jeremy Corbyn have quite disheveled appearances, as it shows how genuine they are or something, you just know there is no way a female politician would be afforded that same privilege. I honestly do not think a female politician could get away with putting as little care into her hair as Bernie Sanders does, or as little effort into picking clothes as Corbyn.
Although thinking about that, it might be an age thing: would people see a young man with their fashion senses in a positive light? Equally, I wonder if they'd let an old woman get away with it.
So it's probably a double standard of sorts, but it might be ageism rather than sexism. But the one Clay raised - the one about female politicians being judged more harshly on their appearance - is I think still a sexist double standard, albeit not as totally one-sided as he made out.
You have a point about age being a factor. If Bernie Sanders were in his 20s, he'd come off as some idealistic pot-smoking hippie with no knowledge of how the world works. As an old man, you can't deny that he has experience. He knows exactly how the system works and has been fighting it for decades. No woman at any age could pull off that disheveled appearance though. As young woman, you'd be that girl in dreadlocks and a Bob Marley t-shirt, and as an older woman, you'd look like crazy cat lady. Women in politics have to pull off a delicate balance. They can't be ugly, cause then they look like a nagging shrew, but they can't be too attractive, cause then they look like someone that slept their way to the top. So you have to fall somewhere in between those two extremes. Case in point. Everyone that says they would love to see a woman become President, but don't want it to be Hillary Clinton, have chosen Elizabeth Warren almost unanimously. This is what she looks like:
She is neither attractive nor unattractive, but she has qualities that I look for in a woman. She's also well dressed. She looks warm and genuine when she smiles. She has a great sense of humor, in spite of the challenges she faces. Everything about her is endearing. She's just always there looking out for me, worrying about me, nurturing me, and I love her for it. I wish Mom-I mean Elizabeth Warren were running for President.