Is Ms. Magazine trying to make a valid point or just stir up controversy to sell more magazines?
I’ve been thinking about this a lot before launching into this piece because I wanted to put my finger on exactly why I had a gut negative reaction to this cover. I don’t have a philosophical objection to a man on the cover of Ms. My problem is that they chose to portray President-elect Barack Obama as a superhero who will swoop in and use his superhuman feminist cred to save women.
Sorry, I’m just really uncomfortable with that.
First, who at Ms. could possibly have thought this cover was in keeping with the mission of Ms.? According to its website, “Ms. was the first national magazine to make feminist voices audible, feminist journalism tenable, and a feminist worldview available to the public.” Showing a man, any man, on the cover in the guise of a superhero doesn’t really seem to fit with that.
And is it in keeping with that mission for that man to be Barack Obama, a candidate who commented freely during the presidential campaign using sexist language about Hillary Clinton, talking about her emotions going up or down and having her claws out, among others?
Criticize your opponent on policies and ideas? Go for it. Use blatantly sexist language to belittle your main competition with language that’s dripping with gender specific? I guess that’s fair game these days, too, but then you really don’t get to call yourself a feminist. And I’m ashamed of Ms. Magazine that they would ignore that.
Some had wondered whether this was a just a play on the first Ms. Magazine cover with Wonder Woman running for president. If so, it could have been considered an interesting juxtaposition. But the editors say that’s not what they intended.
Supposedly, Ms. Magazine believes that this is what a feminist looks like. Maybe my inner cynic is working in overdrive today, but I don’t think this cover is really about portraying a feminist-in-chief. It’s about getting people like me to express their outrage about it, so they’ll sell more magazines.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
I couldn’t tell you what or why I found it distasteful….but my inital reaction is discomfort. and that cover photo would make me NOT buy it.
I’ll have to think about it and try to dissect what it means to me…..
January 15th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
I’ve objected all along to the idea that Obama was the next best thing to a woman president because of his leadership style. The next thing you know they’ll be wanting us to believe he IS a woman – just with a penis.
It’s a calculated way to sell magazine and garner attention in the name of stirring up a “debate” about whether Obama is or is not a good thing for American women. (Until proven otherwise, I stand by the idea that he is still a man and women’s issues don’t have priority in his admin, wouldn’t have regardless of whether the economy tanked.)
He may appreciate strong, capable women and be intent to raise a couple himself, but I really doubt he thinks that sexism is anymore real than the ghost in the Lincoln bedroom.
January 16th, 2009 at 9:32 am
How can you criticize Obama for being a fake feminist when you yourself criticized Lily Ledbetter’s choice to get married at a young age? I believe the comment was something about her being young and stupid.
If you’re for women making their own choices, every choice should be valid.
Perhaps a look in the mirror is justified?
January 16th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Notice that the message is shown “emerging” from under his conventional clothing. Why don’t we wait and see what effects his presidency actually has once it starts? Maybe Ms. is expressing a bit of optimism.
January 16th, 2009 at 10:06 am
H., Not sure how the two relate, but I was not criticizing Lilly Ledbetter …. I was referring to myself as young and stupid when I got married the first time at age 19. Some 19 year olds are probably mature enough for that … I was not.
January 16th, 2009 at 10:06 am
On first look I took it as irony. Maybe half irony and half hope.
You saw the “This is what a feminist looks like” Internet video right? They had a lot of men on there. We need men – men in power – to get on board with the movement because we’re not making a lot of progress alone.
The fact is he got elected in large part because he’s supposed to be so pro-woman. And he BETTER show up as a feminist icon and savior. A lot of women bet on him over the woman with more experience. A lot of them call themselves feminists. He better show up for us is all I have to say.
Cause, now he works for us.
January 19th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Definitely a weird choice, considering that in one of his books (I forget which), he says that he rejects identity politics, including feminism. I’ve always figured that feminists that were excited about Obama were so for reasons mostly unrelated to the aims of feminism. (Except perhaps for the fact that O might be at least little bit less harmful to the cause than yet another GOP fuddyduddy? That’s how I usually feel.)