It's been interesting to catch up to the Sotomayor coverage this morning. I really like this clip from CNN, which features Erica Gonzalez, the opinion page editor for El Diario/la Prensa, the third largest Spanish-language daily newspaper in the country. She actually manages to position Sotomayor's accomplishments in the history of Hispanic people contributing to this country in diverse ways. (It's incredibly difficult to say such complex, historicized statements on our soundbite news shows.) It also has "man on the street" interviews with folks talking about how her roots are inspiring, and of course the requisite America Dream talk from the pundits.
My personal feeling is that the American Dream stuff always gets oversimplified and overplayed when exceptional political leaders like Obama or Sotomayor get their due. It's important that we not lose sight of the fact that though our government, at the highest levels I might add, is becoming less white, male, and less historically privileged, that doesn't mean that the majority of barriers have been smashed or the majority of Americans of color given truly equal opportunities to become the next Obama or Sotomayor. Will it be easier? Probably. It's hard to aspire to be what you can't even see. But will it be easy? Absolutely not--especially with our failing public education system, health care inequities, rampant environmental racism etc. etc. None of these things are eradicated just became Sotomayor steps into her rightful place of power. Neither does her election eradicate the sexism--both institutional and social--that still prevents so many women from living the lives they want to live.
On that note, I find it interesting that a lot of the coverage I saw while surfing around this morning seems largely focused on her ethnic background with just a mention of her gender identity. Perhaps it is still easier for the mainstream media to figure out how to talk about ethnic "uplift" because it fits so nicely into the American Dream narrative than to explore the ongoing gender issues still so implicit and insidious in our daily experiences.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Ethnicity and Gender in the Coverage of Sotomayor .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/13948
The thing that drives me nuts is that when it's a white man who does what conservatives say they want and "pulls themselves up by the boot straps" it's a great American Success Story.
When someone like Sonia Sotomayor or Michelle Obama does it then it's due to affirmative action, not matter how good their grades were and what they accomplished afterwards. I've heard people say that Sotomayor's "story" isn't important. It's the biggest contradiction, they want all people of any ethnic minority to come to America and do it "our" way, yet when they have a perfect example of someone who DID they just stick their fingers in their ears and are all "lalala not important, didn't deserve it."
I completely see your point about gender coverage, but I also wonder how much of it is because Sotomayor, if elected, will be the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice, but not the first female Supreme Court justice. It's not that it's unimportant, but it's less of a milestone.
What's interesting to me is that that same (perfectly reasonable) quote gets repeated over and over again without any kind of context.
Mmm. I did hear some bit of commentary on gender on some NPR segments. Apparently conservatives dug up some speech she gave around '02 where she basically says there is no such thing as objectivity (which is right) and are using it to try to smear her, which makes me LOL, because I hardly see how anyone can even DENY there is no such thing as objectivity. Conservatives spreading the usual myths, I guess.
Some male legislator (I think from Iowa, a Dem, who voted against her previously - can't remember who) said one thing I didn't like, which was akin to "Men and women just think differently." but also said one thing I did like, which was, "Women bring very different experiences to their decision-making." Yes. They definitely do. The recent school strip-search Court decision attests to that.
So. I'm not real happy with the (barely existent) gender coverage thus far, either.
I've been mostly following the latin media and suffice it to say they like myself are still very hyped. I'm not going to let the neo cons drain my joy but if they act crazy they will learn the meaning of backlash.
I have mixed feelings about Sotomayor and about the media coverage on her. It's clearly extremely significant that a Hispanic woman has achieved what she has and has gotten to this point in her career, and I think the media should absolutely note how significant that is in their coverage of her. However, I think the coverage should be more focused on her experience, her decisions, and other aspects of her career that make her a good candidate for the position (or not a good candidate). I think the focus should not be entirely on her status as a woman and as Hispanic. I think emphasizing her minority status as the most important thing often contributes to allegations of racism. Because, let's face it--white people (especially white men) love the opportunity to call a minority a racist. I think it's like their favorite thing ever.
I have mixed feelings about Sotomayor herself. I don't like the decision she made that upheld the right of a town to seize private property for redevelopment, and her abortion decisions are problematic for me too. I just don't really know what to think.
You know, I usually hate when the media focuses so much on a person’s gender and/or ethnicity when it comes to politics or achieving greater things, mostly because I would like for ‘it’ to be normalized, but I am so overwhelmed with happiness when I see a fellow Puerto Rican woman doing something so amazing. I think this will be an eye-opener for most Puerto Ricans to see beyond the horizons of our beaches back home. Not only this, but the amount of stereotypes surrounding Puerto Ricans are so besieging that it’s good that mainstream society will see otherwise.
"...that doesn't mean that the majority of barriers have been smashed or the majority of Americans of color given truly equal opportunities to become the next Obama or Sotomayor."
I definitely agree. Racism and sexism will be alive as long as people notice when there's a fist woman/african american/hispanic running for anything. As long as people can't overlook that, it will still be a barrier that we need to overcome.
What makes me smile is that conservatives routinely are shooting themselves in the foot whenever they discuss Latino/a issues. Who in their right mind would alienate the largest growing minority in the country?
With gender...I think that the people of America are slowly (mind you, very slowly) coming to terms with race, yes thanks to President Obama but also due to the fact that people are eager to bend over backwards to prove they're not racist. No one wants to be called out for racism, because people are now more then ever aware of it. I hope. But who would bend over backwards to prove their not sexist? They won't be called out, because it would just be 'those crazy femi-nazis' again.
I agree. This country is still miles behind when it comes to race, and because of President Obama, race is the in thing to talk about. Everyone's trying to make sure that they aren't called a racist because the country can no longer ignore that it's a huge problem. Gender, on the other hand, can still be safely marginalized.
Just as we have "those crazy/ angry/ uppity/ what have you minorities" always pointing out racism and white privilege, the same derision gets applied to "those crazy feminazis." Who are, totally like Nazis, btw.
It's funny how whenever a minority or woman succeeds, white male privilege comes into play and starts talking about how they must be less qualified and only succeeded because of affirmative action. Le sigh.
It's very interesting how they view any minority or female successes as "taking away" from any possible chances they have. The whole implication of people objecting to affirmative action is that they believe it will not be a white male who receives the benefits. Never mind the fact that white males get more benefits in this nation then anyone else!
If you called, oh, Rush Limbaugh, a Nazi on national television there would be a huge backlash from the conservative community. "How dare you compare his freedom of expression to Nazi Germany!"
But people laugh and use the term Feminazi.
FYI, the Law Library of Congress has created a resource page for Sotomayor: http://www.loc.gov/law/find/sotomayor.php
And I do find it interesting and disturbing how everything is simplified into soundbites.
Do the complaints about her weight count as gender-based complaints? I like Bromius's MetaFilter comment at 7:40 AM on May 26 about those:
"...but Taft was down to a relatively healthy 250 as Chief Justice after skirting 300 in the heady days of his presidency.
"Can we create a unit of Justice weight called 'the Taft'? 'Too fat?! But Sotomayor weighs in at a mere .7 Tafts! Thomas is already 1.1 Tafts!'"