48
‘Mansplaining’ UK election coverage marginalises women’s concerns, study finds
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
48 points (80.8% liked)
News
23301 readers
3833 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That stat only makes sense if compared with the ratio of women vs men in politics. It's either legitimate, or it's like someone saying "100% of the coverage in the US presidential election goes to male candidates". I'm not saying it's as it should be, it's just maybe the problem is one level deeper, that there aren't enough women in politics, not that they don't get covered.
That said, just based on experience with other nations' politics (I don't know enough about the UK), it looks like progressives elect whoever based on policy, and it may be a man or a woman, but conservatives in general like their strong men, so in aggregate there are just more men.
My point is, maybe it just goes back to "let's fix politics". And all that said, more coverage may get more women elected, but on the other hand, maybe it all should be more about policy, lest we get more Thatchers.
While I agree with some of that, you seemed to immediately spin to the one woman who was shit to represent all women in politics.
Do better.
Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that while the problem that women are underrepresented in politics is a real problem and we should elect more women, since women's issues also are usually underrepresented, we shouldn't elect or even cover people because of what's between their legs.
The Thatcher thing is that for example if the choice is between US Jewish Space Lasers Lady (just so that it's not the same person again) and her opponent, "voting for the woman" might get you an opposite effect that you expect on for example women's rights or the over all sanity of politics.
There are a ton of great women in politics, like Sanna Marin, elect more of them. But elect them because of their work, not their genitalia.