In this day and age, post-feminist, where women are allegedly equal to men in all places but the Islamic world and Washington DC, and the Democratic Party, Sarah Palin is now considered too “Sexy” to be taken seriously.
Bobby Jindal seems to be the chosen one among the glittring conservative media super-stars. HE is the one (they want) not Sarah Palin. I don’t have anything against Bobby Jindal, other than he is not Sarah Palin. He’s also way too young. I have a feeling there is going to be a back-lash against young and inexperienced after The One (anointed). The real problem according to the LA Times, is that new research suggests that Sarah Palin’s appearence could be used against her.
The LA Times suggests the following for Sarah Palin:
“…”It was the effect her appearance had on their perception of her competence and humanity,” Heflick said. “Those variables made people less likely to vote for her.”
All of which would seem to suggest that, for any hope of success in 2012 or beyond, the 45-year-old governor needs to whack off that hair, pork up a bit and get some cheap, baggy pantsuits over at the Wasilla Wal-Mart. And instead of that come-on wink that many thought they liked, she’d do well to develop an uncontrollable facial twitch.
Also lose the kids, stop smiling, get angrier, so she can look more congressional. That’s been working real well for Republicans the last two elections….”
If a woman is attractive, she is less competent, unless she is Michelle O who only wants to stay home and care for her daughters. She’s not a bit like that annoying Sarah Palin who, babe in arms, dares to aspire for the highest office in the world.
How dare she!
Well, it seems that the “scholarly work” about Sarah Palin’s appearence is just another way to denigrate her and lift up The One (anointed).
“…New research suggests the Cato Institute research fellow was right. The Alaska governor’s attractiveness may indeed have affected the race — by making voters less likely to support the GOP ticket. In a paper just published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, psychologists Nathan Heflick and Jamie Goldenberg of the University of South Florida describe an experiment they conducted shortly after Wilkinson wrote those words. Building upon 1980s research suggesting attractive women in high-status jobs are perceived as less competent (a finding that has been challenged in recent years), they examined whether Palin’s sex appeal — the subject of endless media chatter in the weeks after she joined the ticket — hindered her ability to make the case she was up for the job.
They took a group of 133 undergraduates and assigned them to write a few lines about one of two celebrities: Palin or actress Angelina Jolie. Half of the participants in each category were asked to write “your thoughts and feelings about this person,” while the other half were asked to write “your thoughts and feelings about this person’s appearance.”
The participants were then asked to rate their subject (Palin or Jolie) in terms of various attributes, including competence. Finally, they were asked who they intended to vote for in the upcoming election.
Those who wrote about Palin’s appearance were more positive in their assessments than those who assessed her qualities as a person, but they rated her far lower in terms of competence, intelligence and capability, and were far less likely to indicate they planned to vote for the McCain-Palin ticket.
“It wasn’t her appearance per se” that soured people on Palin, Heflick said in an interview. “It was the effect her appearance had on their perception of her competence and humanity. Those variables made people less likely to vote for her.” (Not surprisingly, the participants’ feelings about Jolie did not influence their political opinions, whether they focused on her looks or personality.)
Heflick noted that all the self-proclaimed Democrats participating in the exercise indicated they were voting for Obama. So at least in this sample, it was Republicans and independents who were internally debating Palin’s suitability for the job. The study suggests that their confidence in her abilities may have decreased the more they focused on her looks — and thus, in feminist terms, objectified her.
Maybe the real problem with Sarah Palin is the fact that she is decent and honest. Karl Rove has a piece in the WJS about Barack Obama. Maybe Sarah Palin needs to be more like Obama and learn how to lie, cheat and steal. That way she might be treated better.
“…Mr. Obama’s personal popularity remains higher than support for his proposals. A raft of opinion surveys show Americans take the conservative side on issues ranging from the efficacy of government spending, to nationalization of banks, to bailouts for auto companies, to whether tax cuts or government spending will create more jobs. Packaging Mr. Obama’s proposals is easier than rigorously defending them. Team Obama will find this out as the details of their budget and other plans are scrutinized.
Barack Obama has been president for a little more than five weeks. During his speech to a joint session of Congress last week, he showed what a skilled speaker he is and how persuasive he can be. But words delivered from a teleprompter, while important, have to line up with actions. Promises have to be met. And a president who promised to be one thing cannot be another. At some point, the gap between good feelings and results, between perception and reality, closes.
Eloquent words and “spin” work better in a campaign than they do while governing. …”