There is no doubt that I was super upset when hearing the news of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's arrest on federal corruption charges. After all, he has been a huge advocate for emergency contraception in Illinois. But amid the disappointment, the New York Times added even more distaste to the debacle when covering his wife Patricia Blagojevich's role in the scandal.
While many are in shock and awe over the "brash" phone conversations she took part in that resulted in the charges against the governor, the Times' tabloidy take on Blagojevich by painting her as this "first lady gone bad" is just tacky. Firstly, the author takes it upon herself to identify what the proper role of a first lady is:
The Web site for the governor's office says that in addition to raising the couple's two daughters, Ms. Blagojevich occupies herself with typical first lady issues: raising awareness on children's health, food allergies and literacy, and starting the State Beautification Initiative, which planted native wildflowers along state roads. (Emphasis mine)
I didn't realize horticulture was a "first lady issue" (whatever that means). Of course breeding is expected, but planting flowers too! Yet behind the blooming buds of a first lady's life, Ms. Blagojevich didn't only know about her husband's dealings but is, in fact, a potty mouth.
And, in a blast of vulgar language, Ms. Blagojevich eggs on her husband when he reportedly threatens to prevent the Tribune Company from selling the Chicago Cubs and Wrigley Field unless The Chicago Tribune fired editorial writers who had called for the governor's impeachment. Ms. Blagojevich is quoted in the complaint as saying that the state should 'hold up that [expletive] Cubs [expletive] ... [expletive] them.'
Taking any opportunity to paint women involved in politics as divisive and manipulating is sadly an old tactic by mainstream media. But when it specifically comes to women who are married to men involved in political scandals, the media seems to usually victimize them for not knowing about their husband's "double life." This case, however, is different; her knowledge of it immediately makes her not only his partner in crime, but the trophy wife turned trickster.
Related: A few days ago, community poster Nicolechat questioned what the "role" of a first lady actually is.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: NY Times Thinks Patricia Blagojevich Isn't as "Rosy" as Expected of a First Lady.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10930
Yeah, she did more than just "knew."
I'm from Chicago, so Roddy's behavior isn't exactly new news here. No one will vote Republican because we're such a solidly blue state and it's impossible to get a third party candidate. So machine politics is just a political reality, and his wife was a player.
I'd put my whole life savings on betting that an immunity deal, involving her Father, was cut protecting her because of their kids.
In the journalists defense, US First Ladies historically have been advocates for those very issues, for example, Lady Bird Johnson is well known for her road beautification project and Laura Bush was very involved with literacy campaigns. Not that that is what all first ladies SHOULD do, but it is fair to call those things "typical" I think.
The lady macbeth casting of her, though, is pretty interesting. Her husband is also being mocked for his foul language, but it does feel different when they talk about it on a woman, huh?
This, Lady Bird was known for planting wildflowers along highways and banning billboards, something I think we can all get behind.
Have you ever heard of Ladybird Johnson? If not, have you heard of Lyndon Johnson?
This opens up the bigger discussion of what the role of a First Lady/Gentleman should be and I absolutely cannot come up with an answer. The feminist in me wants to see strong women in the spotlight, thinking for themselves and acting as equals with their husbands, not just supporters (yes, like Michelle Obama). But the democracy advocate in me doesn't want them doing much at all in politics since it's not an elected position and, as Sarkozy has proven, private issues like marriage and divorce are what can bring the spouse to that position of power and can kick her out of it. Perhaps the best solution is to let them keep their own private careers, and do away with the ridiculous, antiquated political formalities of hosting and meet-and-greets. In Germany, hardly a single voter knows what Chancellor Merkel's husband does let alone what he looks like, and I think that's appropriate. Then again, America is terribly voyeuristic about famous people and their families, so we're probably quite far from that goal.
Private careers = huge conflicts of interest.
I think most Americans are quite comfortable with First Lady's having their own careers. Though with Michelle having just come out of the health care industry can you imagine the conflicts of interests there'd be as Obama tackles universal health care? It would make the criticism Hillary endured seem good fun in comparison. A number of the Cabinet members have spouses with senior careers in politics/lobbying (eg, Daschle), and they too are under scrutiny for conflicts of interest.
Horticulture is actually a science. Not that the First Ladies are out in greenhouses doing trials or anything.
Never in my entire life have I seen such a blatantly corrupt politician. I don't know whats worse, Blagojevich's disregard for public office, or his 1982 haircut.
First off, to Vanessa: I liked this post a lot. An early feminist outrage I remember was when I was in high school, and a history teacher explained to me the typical role of a first lady, and that the few who have broken it have been the only unpopular ones, e.g., Eleanor Roosevelt and Hillary Rodham Clinton. I thought that this communicated that we want to see women like that in the public eye as smiling wifey staying at home and preparing the home. She must not be an activist. How dare a first lady, a mere wife, have opinions of her own? That role is too uppity for a woman, and like disobedience and sexuality apparently unbecoming on her.
Yeah, fuck that.
Here's a New York Times reporter proclaiming that same role as the proper one for such a public woman. If women in media were treated as they should in normal media, this would be cut and dry for the media: Two corrupt people, one of them holding public office and using his power wrongly.
I'm a chicagoan myself. But wumpscut, having followed national politics for any considerable time during the Bush administration, let me tell you, I've seen plenty of equally blatantly (or more blatantly) corrupt politicians.
Vanessa, you forgot to note the Times' photo choice. Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but it does correspond quite well to the "potty mouth" part of the article:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/12/11/us/11wife_450.jpg
..."i mean, he HAS been a huge advocate for emergency contraception."
...can you not think outside the box of birth control and abortions? the man has always been an awful governor and a slimy guy. he even looks like a snake.
While I admit, yes, he is a corrupt sleazebag, that doesn't mean that we have to ignore whatever good deeds he's done (few they may be).
Though I wasn't surprised, I was appalled and disappointed. I had hope for G-Rod doing more positive things for sexual and reproductive health like *crossed fingers* rejecting abstinence-only funds. It might have been a foolish wish, but considering how adamant he was about EC, I didn't think it was too much of a long shot. On the other hand, I also didn't know the true extent of his douchebaggery...
To be fair, Patti Blagojevich really is a horrible person, just like her husband and father. Involving yourself in getting reporters fired over politics is a disgusting thing to involve yourself in.
Patti's coverage has been pretty fair I think. No one's attacking her career, they're attacking her behavior. She's being called out for the very same things her husband is being called out for: Corruption, Influence Peddling, and Potty Mouth-edness. So you can't really argue a double-standard here.
The fact of the matter is that she did have an independent career as a real estate agent, and no one in the state cared until she started being implicated in several shady deals. You're probably right that what's jawdropping for the reporter here is that Patti was no demur First Lady, but was in fact simply the female twin of her husband, in language, thought, practice and ethics. That's newsworthy. The two make a modern day Bonnie & Clyde.
She should consider herself lucky that she, to this point, hasn't been charged herself.