Representation of candidates in the media

In the first three chapters of her book, Douglas writes about the media’s changing portrayal of women, changing from a Murphy Brown to Melrose Place. While this can bring up an interesting discussion on to what degree the media tells us what we want, whether it is only responding to our wishes, or some mix of the two, I found the chapter “Castration Anxiety” to be interesting. I found the part about Bobbitt frightening and the Buttafuco case to be incredibly messy. However, what really made me think was the section on Janet Reno.

I do remember some of the late night television shows making fun of her when I was younger, but I didn’t understand it at the time. I think that looking at how they treated her and many other female politicians is intriguing. I don’t really know that much about her and what she has endured, but I’m thinking of some contemporary women and some of the double standards, in my opinion, that are in the media.

                Like her or not, Hilary Clinton is a major political player. I find it odd that there are so many discussions on her appearance: pantsuit jokes and even pointing out that she had a ponytail. Why? I know that there are discussions on male appearance too. So I’ll concede that pantsuits and sweater-vest discussions are about on the same level. I don’t think that a $400 haircut falls under the same realm as up-do choice but I’ll give that a slide.

                I know that other women have been targeted as well. I can remember flipping through channels and catching a little bit of pundits discussing whether or not a woman was showing cleavage and whether or not that was appropriate for a candidate. I can’t think of a similar type discussion that happens regarding men.

                I found some of Douglas’ argument to be off-putting because of her writing style, but her discussion on Janet Reno in the media made me think about the way we represent authoritative women and the discrepancy between male and female candidates.