The Return of the Mommy Party, according to NYT.

The New York Times has a piece today on how women seeking high political positions are playing up their motherhood for more votes. (And that the strategy is a good one.)

For a long time women seeking high office, particularly executive office, were advised to play down their softer, domestic side, and play up their strength and qualifications. Focus groups often found voters questioning whether women were strong enough, tough enough, to lead.
. . . Today, many political strategists say women no longer have to be so defensive. Voters have grown more accustomed to women in powerful positions. And women like Ms. Pelosi and Mrs. Clinton, whatever other problems they may have, have been on the public scene long enough and are familiar enough players in the architecture of power that they no longer have to prove their strength day in and day out.

Relax, ladies! Now that you’ve proved yourself worthy, you can be your natural, nurturing selves again!

What this means, strategists say, is that motherhood and a focus on children can become one more political asset to be showcased — a way of humanizing a candidate and connecting with voters, especially other women.

Because motherhood and children is the only thing that connects us, right?? Ugh. This piece is masking a sexist stereotype as some sort of liberation for mothers in politics: now that they’re seen as equals (ha), they can breathe a sigh of relief and embrace the domestic, softer and, most importantly, the most honest side of themselves again. (And it’ll get you votes too! How convenient.)
Like Jen said, it’s not like Harry Reid is pitching his familial obligations to the masses. Anyway, the end of the article is my favorite part; when finally addressing childless women in politics, Condi is the one to defend, of course.

Join the Conversation