Fox News Belittles Most Powerful Woman in Politics
|
Posted by Guest Blogger January 4th, 2007 |
By Guest Blogger JudyDaubenmier
Reacting to the idea of a powerful woman, Fox News Thursday (January 4, 2007) marked the occasion of the swearing in of the first woman as Speaker of the House with coverage that mocked her authority and depicted her policy disagreements with other members of Congress as petty jealousies typical of women. Click here to see the video.
“Fox and Friends” began its coverage not with a story about the history-making aspects of Nancy Pelosi’s swearing in as speaker, but with a story about Rep. Jane Harman, D-California, still being upset after Pelosi failed to reappoint her as chair of the House Intelligence Committee.
“Fox and Friends” co-hosts Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Andrew Napolitano blamed Pelosi’s dumping of Harman on Harman’s willingness to work with Republicans, Foxspeak for failure to challenge Bush administration’s intelligence abuses.
As the trio discussed the story, Fox News displayed a banner reading “Congress Catfight.” The term “catfight” is a belittling term often used to ridicule disagreements among women, casting them as fights among animals (especially an animal that is often seen as fickle and hard to understand like a cat). Saying a disagreement among women is a “catfight” is akin to saying that the women are less than human and their disagreement is based on something other than rationallity, intellect or principle. Men do battle. Women have catfights.
This subtle swipe was not the end of Fox News’ efforts to belittle the new speaker.
In a segment on Pelosi’s comments that by becoming speaker, she was now the most powerful woman in America, Doocy read her quote about breaking through a “marble ceiling” and then mocked her by saying, “All rise, Nancy Pelosi takes control” as the music of “Pomp and Circumstance” played in the background. When Doocy mentioned her name again later in the program, Fox News played the same music.
At one point, Fox News also displayed a banner beneath video of Pelosi which read, “Stepping Down.” And in the second hour of the program, the Fox and Friends trio repeated their discussion of the Harman-Pelosi disagreement, complete with the “Congress Catfight” banner.
Later, going into a break, Napolitano teased, “Is the new Speaker of the House really the most powerful woman in America?” “She says so,” answered Doocy, suggesting there was reason to doubt it.
After the break, the co-hosts interviewed Michael Barone of U.S. News and World Report about Pelosi’s power. He confirmed that her political power is considerable: third in line for the presidency behind the president and vice president, with the power to set the agenda in the House. Hard to argue that any woman right now possesses more actual political power.
During the two-hour show, Fox News also tried to further undermine Pelosi by repeatedly rehashing Republican complaints about being shut out of offering amendments for the first 100 hours, while downplaying any memory of how Republicans had shut out Democrats for 12 years.
Carlson did mention Pelosi’s achievement, saying, “You either like her or you don’t, but it is historic in the sense that she is assuming this position, and I think for women in general this shows that any door is open for you, no matter what.”
The tone of the two hours, however, undercut that theme.
Pelosi does not fit the mold of “fair and balanced” femininity espoused on Fox News: women are either innocent victims, like Natalee Holloway, or they are whores, as they consider the accuser in the Duke lacrosse rape case. Pelosi threatens to upset Fox News’ entire world view. For them, that’s worse that repealing Bush’s tax cuts.
Cross posted from NewsHounds.us.
Guest Blogger JudyDaubenmier is one of the News Houndswho watch Fox so you don’t have to, as well as the author of a book on the media titled, Project Rewire: New Media from the Inside Out.
January 6th, 2007 11:31
Thanks for the headsup about Fox News. Always knew they were anti-women. Just proves it.
Pelosi’ll smoke ‘em, though.
January 9th, 2007 21:15
Just the other day the feminist friendly NYT ran a piece about dem males being “too macho” This refusal of the medias to let politicos define there own gender image is not just targeted at women. Step out of the feminist male mold and you get mocked by the media.
http://tinyurl.com/y9dhby
(tell me that pic doesn’t hate men)
Just saying we should all standup against negative gender portrayals.
January 9th, 2007 21:57
Actually, the New York Times can *hardly* be considered “feminist-friendly” (consider their constant stream of factually inaccurate attack pieces on working mothers; their refusal to cover reproductive rights issues as they affect families and instead their focus on how they affect politicians on either side of the aisle; their Sunday magazine cover story years back about how date rape is a myth… I could go on, and on, and on…)
Hugo, we do agree on one thing, though: it is absolutely important for all of us to stand up against negative gender portrayals, whether of women or of men. Feminism is not about stopping sexism at the expense of men - it is about removing gender-based obstacles to freedom and equality, and it is about combatting and hopefully ridding our culture of gender-based discrimination. Ridding our culture of such barriers will help men, too.
January 10th, 2007 08:11
Hmmm well there you go, the NYT dumps on men routinlyas well, humanism hates sexism as much as feminism.
I don’t think feminists will help men in this area. I think feminists expect a certain mold from men that’s just a reverse of trad male image but still an unfair limiting expectation. In my experience most feminists align with the above NYT article and feel it’s ok to mock men that choose to define themselves as macho, that’s no different than a macho guy mocking a metro guy or people mocking lesbians for being “butchy”
I don’t think feminism has meant men’s liberation at all, women have been liberated and men labeled privileged, men’s silent history is still silent and we are still bound to trad roles, we still are “not men” if we don’t pay the bills, we are not the “fit parent” in the eyes of the law. We are only fit to pay.
If feminism thinks we are liberated by being marginalized to the roles of sperm donor and bank account it is sorely mistaken.
The day that calling a guy “man-child” or saying there is something wrong with him for being macho garnishes the same strange looks as asking a woman to be more “lady like” will be a good day. Feminists wont bring men there, they haven’t touched men except to demonize them these past thirty years. men will have to step up and they will have to overcome many negative stereotypes created by both feminism and the patriarchy to do it. We are not all football loving war movie watching macho’s nor are we all potential rapists or inherently discriminating sexists.
January 10th, 2007 08:23
Hugo, you are saying that you don’t want to be stereotyped, and then you go on to stereotype feminists. It’s awfully hypocritical of you.
January 10th, 2007 12:52
[…] […]
January 10th, 2007 13:02
Sarah, what I am saying is based off of the actions of feminists. I thought feminists believed the wage gap is the result of men’s inherent discrimination, I thought it was mra’s not feminists fighting the family courts and pushing for shared parenting that would liberate women from home, and I thought feminists don’t really agree women hit men in equal numbers? Women are good, men are bad?
If a man is happy working a dirty job with low pay we consider him less of a man because of patriarchal definitions of what a man is, if a man has a job deemed desirable and he is successful we say he is privileged, it was handed to him, he didn’t work for it, because of feminist definitions of what a man is. When men dominated in school we created titleIX and the university of women pushed for changes to advance women in the 90’s, a mere two decades later women dominate and many feminists are dismissing boys needs, Gandy, Kathy Pollit.
What I am saying is we should respect choice, gay marriage or metros don’t harm or threaten me, so manly macho men shouldn’t threaten anyone but as we see it does. So do women in power threaten some, I guess. Women in power do not bother me but I do not trust that feminists will look out for people, I feel Nancy will favor women and that’s a conflict of interest, her duty is to represent people.
I am really trying not to prejudge but feminism’s negative influence on men is prevalent in society. One example of many?; the way we react to teachers that stat rape students, men are condemned and women get on the today show and are sympathized with.
I guess I should say certain feminists or the majority of feminists but I don’t really meet/observe manypro women and men feminists, that’s a humanist.
It is inevitability, when men liberate and define themselves feminism will be challenged, feminism has been defining men for men since it’s inception and that was never right.
Instead of keeping to my own camp I like to talk with feminists about it, it’s what needs to be done, I obviously disagree with much of the ideology but I don’t have anything against individual feminists outside of power and I appreciate feedback.
January 10th, 2007 20:50
Am I misogynist or liberated for being honest with my feelings? Not trying to make mad, I am sorry if I did.
I regress, just saying we should all standup against negative gender portrayals, I feel by looking at half the picture we will never find the true solutions. Peace.
June 18th, 2007 17:11
i hear you, Hujo. Peace.