"Hair-swinging" and "Finger-wagging"

As I was the reading the weekend edition of the Winnipeg Free Press, I came across an article on Michelle Obama. I've always been a supporter of Mrs. Obama, from her crusade for healthier eating, to her ability to appear so approachable and friendly that I could imagine myself in the White House baking cupcakes with her. It's a dream.

Courtesy of People

I'm embarrassed to admit though, I didn't read the newspaper as religiously as I do now. Especially during President Obama's presidential candidacy. However, Helena Andrews article "Michelle Obama Superstar" enlightened me to how the media originally viewed Michelle Obama. Andrew wrote Obama was considered "too militant, too angry, too unpatriotic, too deprecating of her husband or too hard. Just too much."

Furthermore, Obama said the media seemed to want to pin her down "as some angry black woman." And yet, Obama has shown to be far from this stereotypical and insulting observation that was so quickly thrust upon her.

It seems that words like "angry", "militant", and "hard" are used often and carelessly to describe women like Obama in the media.

"People aren't used to strong women; we don't know how to talk about them"says Obama and I have to agree. Last year I wrote a paper on the identity of gender in the media. I based my paper on an article written by John Doyle from the Globe and Mail. His article focused on Sara MacIntyre, BC Premier Christy Clark's new director of communications.

Courtesy of the Vancouver Observer

There was an incident where MacIntyre refused to let the media talk to Clark. This is how Doyle described it:

"It’s tremendous television. MacIntyre, all gum-chewing, hair-swinging, finger-wagging, mall-rat malice and attitude, expressed her utter contempt for the reporters and TV crews with aplomb. She was so sharp it looked like she’d even cut herself if she happened to look at herself. The idea that a reporter might want to ask the Premier a question was, to her, so patently outlandish that one imagined her cackling with derision in her dark

lair after the event."

I'm not going to assume anything about MacIntyre, or even Doyle. The actual topic of the article doesn't bother me. In fact I agree with Doyle's account of the "CTV reporter in Vancouver [who] condemned the hostility to the press as undemocratic, a rebuke to voters who want to see politicians questioned." What I don't agree with is the language Doyle uses in his article to describe MacIntyre.

This isn't just a fanciful recreation of events. What Doyle is actually inferring here, is to make MacIntyre’s behaviour appear erratic, inadequate, and unacceptable for the circumstances. One has to wonder if Doyle’s description of MacIntyre would be the same if she had been a man instead. It's this idea that is perpetuated in which women cannot be strong or powerful- they have to be cold, calculating and villainous.

It's a social problem, but it's also an easy scapegoat when we don't want to recognize that a woman like MacIntyre can rival her male counterparts- or do her job, which may not be what the media or the public want, but what she was hired to do. 

This is apparent to Meryl Streep as well. Streep calls this a "special venom" reserved for powerful women. Streep says "[that] culture wants to cast them as cold. As if somehow they’ve lost their maternal bearings, their essential womanhood, to occupy this space. As if they’ve had to cut off their…whatever it is…to succeed" (W Magazine).

The Iron Lady

Streep, who has portrayed Margaret Thatcher, appears to understand the dichotomy regarding strong women. We can't be both powerful and retain our womanhood. Thatcher made sacrifices in her political career that are never fully realized or appreciated. While I don't agree with all of her political decisions, I have to respect that she stood by them. Isn't that what we expect in a political leader? Why then is a woman still being chastised when she pretends otherwise? 

Power is considered a mans forte, but rather ironically, having to give it up is his weakness. What MacIntyre had was the power to control the media, which in general is never well-received, but this was particularly venomous. Perhaps she could have handled it better, but again, what if Clark's  director of communications had been a man? Would this have generated the same kind of controversy?

While Michelle Obama has quickly turned her "militant ways" into a "mom-in-chief" can-do attitude. Not all women are afforded a "second" chance. 

However, this isn't to disregard her. Not at all. Michelle Obama is paving the way. Her DNC speech is something to watch:

Yet, whether it's "angry black woman", "bitch", or "cold" these words reflect back a detrimental picture of ourselves. While many groups of people will take words and make them their own, as women, should we do this as well? It isn't uncommon to hear a woman who takes the lead to be referred to as a bitch. Even I, regrettably, use the word sometimes. Do we have to re-appropriate this word to become our own? To have its connotations become positive? 

We deserve to be strong and powerful, and have it recognized as strength. Not as some coinage made famous in a song from the nineties. 

What do you think?