Full Frontal Coverage
Last Friday we mourned the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Between binge eating chocolate and reading tributes, the loss of this feminist icon has had me reflecting on the importance of role models. There are always amazing women to find if we are looking, but sometimes it feels like we have to look pretty hard.
Notorious RBG
Ruth Bader Ginsburg is one of the great feminist icons of our time. Since her passing last Friday, everything has felt a bit less just. With US elections fast approaching, COVID cases rising, and the general dystopia of these times, RBG's death is another scar on the year.
Over the past week, I’ve read article after article discussing RBG’s long legacy. She is and forever will be a queen, immortalized in some of my favourite feminist attire and in the occasional photoshopped image holding a flamethrower.
I won’t spend much time on the details of her impact. There are better tributes out there than I can write, and my punny prose won’t do her any Justice (see what I did there?). I will, however, share my favourite thought on her passing:
It's not a happy new year with RBG gone, but at least we had her until the very last moment. She never seemed like one to leave a party early anyway.
RIP RBG.
Betty Jean Shea, Slate
The Other Women
If you've spent any time reading about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, then you know she was one of nine women in a class of over 500 at Harvard Law. This fact is spouted ad nauseam, serving as proof of her resilience. While impressive, there’s a key component to that stat we often overlook: eight other badass women were there too.
In mourning RBG, I came across a brilliant article in Slate about the other women in her class. RBG is definitely in a league of her own, but she graduated with some pretty fabulous females.
For instance, there’s judge Carol Brosnahan who has spent over 40 years on the bench, Rhoda Solin Isselbacher who was “a pioneer in legal advocacy" for medical patients, Virginia Davis Nordin who literally wrote the textbook on higher education and the law, Marilyn G. Rose who started fighting for free health care the 1970s, Flora Schnall, the first female president of the American College of Real Estate Lawyers, and Betty Jean Shea who was also a model throughout her law degree (see above. So fierce)
All of these women are revolutionaries in their own right, and they have some harrowing stories to share about being women in law. In school, Schnall recounts “ladies day” where the two women in her class were forced to answer every question for a full lecture. So, in other words, my worst nightmare.
After graduation Virginia Davis Nordin recalls her interviews all focusing on her pregnancy plans instead of her qualifications. Alas, that still happens. I've had friends share stories of going into interviews without their wedding bands, hoping to keep interviewers off the scent of imminent child rearing. Even worse, Alice Vogel Stroh was told after giving birth to a stillborn child that her job was given to a man and she was not welcome back.
Like holy shit. Can you imagine? To go through that traumatizing experience and be told you aren't wanted back at YOUR job... it's unthinkable.
There’s also the now famous example of Erin Griswold’s Harvard tradition. He would invite the class to a dinner and ask each woman, in front of their peers, why they were taking the spot of a man in law school.
In summation, these women have seen some shit. More than that, they are impressive as hell. When asked to reflect on her life in law, Schnall had the most relatable thought: “I just wish men were better.”
Hey, if men were better, maybe they wouldn't have 'let' a woman 'take' their spot. I guess it's asking too much for them to earn it on their own accord.
Anyway - as wonderful as it is to hear these stories now, why is it that I hadn't heard from any of these icons before? With quippy answers like Schnall's, you'd expect at least 3 Buzzfeed lists to exist on her antics by now.
Full Frontal Coverage
“Talking the spot of a man” sounds like an archaic point of view, but in media that line of thinking is ever present.
After last week's newsletter, a friend of mine sent me an article about a graphic designer named Katherine Burgess. Burgess starting clipping the sports section of newspapers to see how much space was allocated to female stories. She had heard that only 4% of women’s sports were covered and wanted to draw attention to the discrepancy.
Her main point is that:
With that in mind, is it really that the other women at Harvard were less accomplished than Ruth, or have we just created systems wherein they cannot be found? Maybe the issue isn't a lack of incredible female stories, but really a lack of amplification.
Not to discredit RBG, but is it so surprising that we idolize her when the only other woman I can picture in a robe is Judge Judy?
Taking this a step further, Katherine Burgess rightly explains that ”it's hard for girls and women to strive toward goals they don't see documented around them". Without icons like RBG (and now Sonia Sotomayor - thanks, Obama), how many women would aspire to be on the Supreme Court?
They say seeing is believing, and that is profoundly true in representation.
These thoughts are echoed by research. In Germany, for example, only 1% of young people were able to name a female entrepreneurial role model. The UK and France managed 2%, a bleak reminder that there aren’t enough women showcased in these spaces to resonate with the next generation.
Studies have also shown that highlighting women yields more engagement from female audiences. In fact, ”where female candidates are visible due to viable campaigns for high-profile offices, girls report increased anticipated political involvement”
No duh.
Here I am pretending to be Carrie Bradshaw. Was I ever inspired by Hemingway’s crazy antics? No. I wanted to be the hip girl in the city with a laptop and a shopping addiction. In the same way, no woman ever looked at Nixon and thought, "I want to be him." But AOC is changing the game for young women in politics. Show me someone I can relate to, and I'm inherently more interested. The same is true for sports, law, business, science - you name it.
Online you can find lists and lists of successful women to look up to. This is great, but when we put them on the front page, the results are astounding. Female excellence isn't something I should have to dig for in the news. Outlets decide what's on the front page and what's on page six everyday. Maybe it's time for a bit more variety in coverage.
And really, Katherine Burgess is only asking for more than 4% of sports coverage. That's a pretty low standard to beat. Even 20% would be an outstanding leap. But you know the internet took offence....
Burgess pulled these gems from the comment section of her CBC article
Watch Your Tone
Ah yes, the beloved comment section.
Alas, the sentiments above are commonly cited when it comes to women's sports. In my eyes, many women have happily looked up to male athletes for years, so I don't know why it would be challenging for men to start looking up to women. That WNBA player can still jump higher than you, so stop telling me it's "less impressive". Also maybe women would be more interested in sports in general if they could see themselves in the players...
That aside, the fact of the matter is that we've built a narrative about women in media that is hard to unravel. Namely, that they only exist in relation to men - if they exist at all.
One project found that only 17% of new stories worldwide quote women. When they were involved, women were 3 times more likely than men to be presented alongside their families. Moreover, studies have shown that media still relies on men as experts. In the news, women are often featured in stories where they are the victims of accidents or violence, rarely coming into a segment as a professional or a voice of authority.
Contextualizing women as victims extends well beyond the news. For example, the language we use around women in sports is starkly different than how we describe men. Commentators will shift from words like “strong,” “gutsy,” and “aggressive” to “ “frustrated,” “panicked,”and “vulnerable” when describing female athletes.
Of course, 97% of commentators are men, so their perceptions are also a factor.
Interestingly, commentators are also twice as likely to call men by their last names. While not seemingly a big difference, using a first name is a much more casual way to address someone in sports. We all know Jordan, Gretzky, and Phelps, but if I said Michael, Wayne, and Other Michael, it holds less weight.
To me this name differentiation felt huge during the 2016 election. There’s a reason we said Hilary vs Trump. Imagine if we had had a Clinton vs Donald debate. Who sounds more legitimate there?
Obviously the method in how we showcase our women is just as important as representation itself. Though step one would be getting these women a platform, step two is recognizing the ways we frame these voices.
Something I often hear when voicing my frustration in the lack of female content in sports is this: "well we have tons of female anchors." That's great. I'm glad sportscasters have become more diverse. That said, the programs they are reporting on are all male. Moreover, the audience they're speaking to is male. Merely putting a woman on a screen doesn't solve the problem, in the same way that putting lettuce on a burger doesn't make it healthy.
Not All Heroes Wear Robes
It seems to me that, when it comes to women, only the best of the best are ever showcased. As much as we all want to be like RBG, she's a pretty unrealistic pacemaker. She became an icon because she was damn near flawless, and that's a high bar for the rest of us. Honestly, the woman was more goddess than human
That said, I don't think role models need to be perfect. In fiction male leads almost always have flaws. How many college boys do you know who idolized Fight Club or Scarface? Those aren't exactly the best morale drivers.
As women, our options are limited. I grew up wanting to be Hermione - the perfect student with outrageous intelligence, amazing hair, and who was still second to two pretty average boys. Sure, Harry was the Chosen One, but he was temperamental, impulsive, and frankly an asshole for all of book five.
Imagine looking up to him as a child. How much more lenience would you have with yourself?
In media, flawed women are even harder to come by. They have to be perfect or they don't exist at all. You're either RBG or a generic 'victim' in the news. Naturally this creates all kinds of competition. And Harvard Law in the 1950s was no exception. Slate reflects that "the extraordinary pressures on these women didn’t always create a sisterhood. Sometimes, the pressures even drove them apart."
I can't say I'm surprised. Women often exist in a pressure cooker: Do you have on too much makeup, not enough? Are you the right kind of feminist? Did you give him the wrong idea? What were you wearing?
The amount of stress put on women is extreme. You can't show any flaws less you prove one side of the argument right. Did I take the place of a man? It's often challenging to turn off the perfectionist element that drives us to 'have it all'. It's even harder to learn how to celebrate the success of other women.
That stress is, unsurprisingly, compounded in male-dominated spaces. As a lone female representative, you often feel the weight of your gender. I need to make sure I do better than all these men to prove that I belong to be here. Sometimes this manifests in the idea that "I'm not like other women." I am stronger and more resilient, and that's why I'm the only one here.
It makes you feel like you're on an island.
Decades after graduating, Rhoda Solin Isselbacher found out that Ruth Bader Ginsburg had made it to the Supreme Court.
The she cried out of frustration.
It's unfortunate, but comparison is a fact of life for pioneering women. They were jealous and cliquey, just like we all have been from time to time. For example, a few felt annoyed that RBG was able to have so much support from her husband. They openly claimed that her path to success was easier because she had an ally as a partner.
When asked, RBG had this to say: "what you’re finding is these are not flaming feminists….there wasn’t a type that became the first woman."
She couldn't be more right. People don't set out to be icons. They are painted into that role by people who look up to them. We're told not to meet our heroes because they won't measure up. If we could be more lenient in who we allow to be heroes, maybe our expectations would be more reasonable. Even though Rhoda was jealous, that doesn't mean she wasn't remarkable. I want to hear her story of resilience just as much as I wanted to hear RBG's.
With more representation and coverage, maybe we can start to see that there is enough space for all the badass women to coexist.
The Verdict
It's important to remember that role models don't have to be gendered. RBG is a feminist icon, but she's a hero to men too. As women, we have been looking up to men for years, why is it radical to think that men can do the same?
By now the over-instagrammed quote: “Women belong in all places where decisions are being made” has made its rounds through your newsfeed. But I want to take it a step further.
Women belong in all places where decisions are being made, and we deserve to hear about it.
I want to leave you with a heartwarming story about a female scientist named Emily. It came across my timeline a few days ago, and I'd be lying if I didn't choke up a little. This is the perfect way to illustrate why having female excellence in the limelight is important. She puts it best in her own words, so I won't try to paraphrase. Just enjoy:
