Power Seeking and Backlash Against Female Politicians

[WestCoastRunner]

A lot has been said about Hillary in other threads on this forum ranging from 'crooked Hillary' to 'sociopath' to 'power hungry'.

No one has really provided much to backup their theories on why they think this except to say that because she is part of the establishment she is a 'shill' for Wall Street.

I have other theories regarding the backlash against Hillary and I will back them up with some studies. A Yale Study discovered these:

• Voters are less likely to vote for female politicians when they perceive them as power-seeking, though male politicians are not penalized
• When participants saw male politicians as power-seeking, they also saw them as having greater agency (i.e., being more assertive, stronger, and tougher) and greater competence, while this was not true for their perceptions of power-seeking female politicians.

• When participants saw female politicians as power-seeking, they also saw them as having less communality (i.e., being unsupportive and uncaring), while this was not true for their perceptions of power-seeking male politicians.

• When female politicians were described as power-seeking, participants experienced feelings of moral outrage (i.e., contempt, anger, and/or disgust) towards them.

An experiment was conducted at Columbia Business School and was mentioned in Sandberg's book 'Lean in'. It involved copying a resume for a real-life female entrepreneur who was very successful as well as very out-going.

The participants were each presented with these two resumes but one had a man's name on it. The results of the study were mentioned here:

"The students rated Heidi and Howard as equally competent, but Howard was judged to be likable and a good colleague. Heidi, however, was seen as overly aggressive, selfish and not someone you’d want to work with."

It would be nice to see some hard evidence of Hillary being a sociopath among other terms thrown around here.

A Progressive Case for Clinton - In These TImes

People Don't Have to Like Hillary Clinton To Vote For Her

The Price of Power: Power Seeking and Backlash Against Female Politicians

[Bonam]

There is definitely some truth to some people perceiving the same personality traits in a different light when present in a male vs a female.

[Topaz]

There's nothing wrong with a female in the US being president, the problem is who it is. There's too much garbage and corruption in their lives, how can anyone TRUST her or him.

[WestCoastRunner]

There's nothing wrong with a female in the US being president, the problem is who it is. There's too much garbage and corruption in their lives, how can anyone TRUST her or him.

Who is it you are referring to and what corruption and garbage are you talking about?

[Ash74]

The best thing that could happen in the U.S. is Hillary winning. Compared to Trump she seems the sane choice.

Now let us take it a different way.

If I had a choice between Trump and Kathleen Wynne I would vote Trump and feel I made the better choice even while the nukes were passing overhead.

I would vote for Rona Ambrose in a heart beat over some of the names that have popped up in the conservative party for leader.

I think that Heritage Minister Melanie Joly is somebody that will raise up and a damn sight better than that nutcase Shelia Copps.

Truth is that sometimes people just do not like somebody because they don't agree with them , not because of their sex or race.

[WestCoastRunner]

Truth is that sometimes people just do not like somebody because they don't agree with them , not because of their sex or race.

Of course I would agree with you there. Sarah Palin comes to mind. Buchanan and what was that republicans name who claimed she was a practicing witch.

Edited July 29, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[Hal 9000]

A lot has been said about Hillary in other threads on this forum ranging from 'crooked Hillary' to 'sociopath' to 'power hungry'.

No one has really provided much to backup their theories on why they think this except to say that because she is part of the establishment she is a 'shill' for Wall Street.

I have other theories regarding the backlash against Hillary and I will back them up with some studies. A Yale Study discovered these:

• Voters are less likely to vote for female politicians when they perceive them as power-seeking, though male politicians are not penalized
• When participants saw male politicians as power-seeking, they also saw them as having greater agency (i.e., being more assertive, stronger, and tougher) and greater competence, while this was not true for their perceptions of power-seeking female politicians.

• When participants saw female politicians as power-seeking, they also saw them as having less communality (i.e., being unsupportive and uncaring), while this was not true for their perceptions of power-seeking male politicians.

• When female politicians were described as power-seeking, participants experienced feelings of moral outrage (i.e., contempt, anger, and/or disgust) towards them.

An experiment was conducted at Columbia Business School and was mentioned in Sandberg's book 'Lean in'. It involved copying a resume for a real-life female entrepreneur who was very successful as well as very out-going.

The participants were each presented with these two resumes but one had a man's name on it. The results of the study were mentioned here:

"The students rated Heidi and Howard as equally competent, but Howard was judged to be likable and a good colleague. Heidi, however, was seen as overly aggressive, selfish and not someone you’d want to work with."

It would be nice to see some hard evidence of Hillary being a sociopath among other terms thrown around here.

A Progressive Case for Clinton - In These TImes

People Don't Have to Like Hillary Clinton To Vote For Her

The Price of Power: Power Seeking and Backlash Against Female Politicians

I think you're assessment is false. If any male candidate had the baggage she has, there would be no chance of being considered to run let alone winning the presidency. The gender gap is the greatest it's ever been in any presidential election. Woman by the millions as well as progressives will vote based on one thing only - a woman making history. Just like Obama, people want to see history being made.

It's not harder for Hillary, she has a built-in demographic that is hers for the taking. Her problem is not gaining votes, it's whether she screws up bad enough to lose them.

[WestCoastRunner]

I think you're assessment is false. If any male candidate had the baggage she has, there would be no chance of being considered to run let alone winning the presidency. The gender gap is the greatest it's ever been in any presidential election. Woman by the millions as well as progressives will vote based on one thing only - a woman making history. Just like Obama, people want to see history being made.

It's not harder for Hillary, she has a built-in demographic that is hers for the taking. Her problem is not gaining votes, it's whether she screws up bad enough to lose them.

What baggage are you referring to?

[TimG]

There is definitely some truth to some people perceiving the same personality traits in a different light when present in a male vs a female.

There is some truth to same personality traits been seen differently in different people. How people are perceived depends a lot of the narrative built up around that person. For example, many things that Trump gets away with would be consider beyond the pale for any other politician of any sex or race. Trump gets a way with it because being 'rude and crude' is part of the narrative created around him.

[bush_cheney2004]

It doesn't matter if the female Clinton wins....the "historic" election of "the first African American president" resulted in no significant political change and largely the continuation of the previous Bush administration's foreign policy. Getting wrapped up in the hype will only result in the identical disillusionment from 2008's Obama cheerleaders and believers of "hope and change", including those who couldn't even vote for him in Canada.

[WestCoastRunner]

It doesn't matter if the female Clinton wins....the "historic" election of "the first African American president" resulted in no significant political change and largely the continuation of the previous Bush administration's foreign policy. Getting wrapped up in the hype will only result in the identical disillusionment from 2008's Obama cheerleaders and believers of "hope and change", including those who couldn't even vote for him in Canada.

What does this have to do with the OP Is this your attempt at taking a weird dig at Canadians weighing in on American politics.

[Hal 9000]

What baggage are you referring to?

My point exactly!

[WestCoastRunner]

My point exactly!

You are going to have to spell out your point. I completely missed it.

[bush_cheney2004]

What does this have to do with the OP Is this your attempt at taking a weird dig at Canadians weighing in on American politics.

No, it is my attempt to demonstrate that the OP means nothing in the context of the present election and candidates, regardless of "power seeking". Clinton has already achieved political success (and failure) at the highest level of American politics, just like any male counterpart.

[WestCoastRunner]

. Woman by the millions as well as progressives will vote based on one thing only - a woman making history. m.

One thing only? Seriously? You don't think women of all races may vote for Hillary because of trumps mysoginistic and racist views?

You are of course displaying a mysogynistic view that women are too dumb to consider government policies when choosing who to vote for.

[WestCoastRunner]

No, it is my attempt to demonstrate that the OP means nothing in the context of the present election and candidates, regardless of "power seeking". Clinton has already achieved political success (and failure) at the highest level of American politics, just like any male counterpart.

The attacks against her are unreasonable given her record of achievements even at this current campaign and has more to do with her gender. Edited July 29, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[bush_cheney2004]

For those of you who do not remember the United States' 2008 election campaign, we have already been down this road for Hillary Clinton (The Nutcracker), and Hillary Clinton (Her Big Secret):

http://ntstudent32.weebly.com/hillary-clinton-and-sexism.html

http://www.terapeak.com/worth/hillary-clinton-nutcracker/161081689425/

[WestCoastRunner]

For those of you who do not remember the United States' 2008 election campaign, we have already been down this road for Hillary Clinton (The Nutcracker), and Hillary Clinton (Her Big Secret):

http://ntstudent32.weebly.com/hillary-clinton-and-sexism.html

http://www.terapeak.com/worth/hillary-clinton-nutcracker/161081689425/

Your first link doesn't work. You are proving my point.

[bush_cheney2004]

Your first link doesn't work. You are proving my point.

Works fine in my browser....the point is that Clinton has been very successful despite any such whining about sexism and power.

[-1=e^ipi]

One thing only? Seriously? You don't think women of all races may vote for Hillary because of trumps mysoginistic and racist views?

You are of course displaying a mysogynistic view that women are too dumb to consider government policies when choosing who to vote for.

Do you think that if Bernie Sanders were female and Hillary Clinton were male, that Bernie Sanders would have not won the primary?

[jacee]

Woman by the millions as well as progressives will vote based on one thing only ...

Mhm ... Because she's a Democrat.

.

[jacee]

Do you think that if Bernie Sanders were female and Hillary Clinton were male, that Bernie Sanders would have not won the primary?

That's an interesting question.

But I doubt - if Sanders was a woman - it would have been an advantage.

I think it's only working for Hillary because she's a known quantity and a Party power player already.

For an unknown woman outside the inner Party clique, being a woman wouldn't be an advantage.

.

Edited July 29, 2016 by jacee

[-1=e^ipi]

There are lots of people voting for Hillary Clinton because she is female and there is a fair sized movement that it's time for a woman.

For most of Hillary Clinton's career, being female was a disadvantage. But for this election it's an advantage.

Being female is political advantage nowadays, be it Canada, USA, Germany, etc.

[WestCoastRunner]

There are lots of people voting for Hillary Clinton because she is female and there is a fair sized movement that it's time for a woman.

For most of Hillary Clinton's career, being female was a disadvantage. But for this election it's an advantage.

Being female is political advantage nowadays, be it Canada, USA, Germany, etc.

So you are saying Clinton beat sanders because she's a woman?

[-1=e^ipi]

Obviously there were other factors in play, but given how close the race was, it probably made the difference.