Sex Appeal May Have Hurt Sarah Palin

[Miss Mia]

This was put here, because it's not really political but more on the objectification of women, that attractiveness = incompetent.

Sex Appeal May Have Hurt Sarah Palin

In a Sept. 4, 2008 column, just after Sarah Palin accepted the Republican nomination for vice-president, Will Wilkinson wrote admiringly of her “sexual power,” adding: “I think she is a tremendously sexy woman. How this will affect the race, I have no idea, but it’s just got to.”

New research suggests the Cato Institute research fellow was right. The Alaska governor’s attractiveness may indeed have affected the race – by making voters less likely to support the GOP ticket.

In a paper just published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, psychologists Nathan Heflick and Jamie Goldenberg of the University of South Florida describe an experiment they conducted shortly after Wilkinson wrote those words. Building upon 1980s research suggesting attractive women in high-status jobs are perceived as less competent (a finding that has been challenged in recent years), they examined whether Palin’s sex appeal – the subject of endless media chatter in the weeks after she joined the ticket – hindered her ability to make the case she was up for the job.

They took a group of 133 undergraduates and assigned them to write a few lines about one of two celebrities: Palin or actress Angelina Jolie. Half of the participants in each category were asked to write “your thoughts and feelings about this person,” while the other half were asked to write “your thoughts and feelings about this person’s appearance.”

The participants were then asked to rate their subject (Palin or Jolie) in terms of various attributes, including competence. Finally, they were asked who they intended to vote for in the upcoming election.

Those who wrote about Palin’s appearance were more positive in their assessments than those who assessed her qualities as a person. But they rated her far lower in terms of competence, intelligence and capability, and were far less likely to indicate they planned to vote for the McCain-Palin ticket.

“It wasn’t her appearance per se” that soured people on Palin, Heflick said in an interview. “It was the effect her appearance had on their perception of her competence and humanity. Those variables made people less likely to vote for her.” (Not surprisingly, the participants’ feelings about Jolie did not influence their political opinions, whether they focused on her looks or personality.)

Heflick noted that all the self-proclaimed Democrats participating in the exercise indicated they were voting for Obama. So at least in this sample, it was Republicans and independents who were internally debating Palin’s suitability for the job. The study suggests that their confidence in her abilities may have decreased the more they focused on her looks – and thus, in feminist terms, objectified her.

-snip-

And here's an interesting blog.  While the author is clearly on the left politically, I think they highlight some important aspects of this research.  The indented paragraphs are from the study, not-indented is the author speaking.

Which Came First: The Objectification Of Sarah Palin, Or The Mistrust In Her Competence?

              "We also found evidence that focusing on Palin's appearance led to reduced intentions to vote for the
               McCain-Palin ticket in the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. Further, perceptions of competence and
               humanness played a mediating role, such that appearance focus lowered perceived human essence and
               competence, which in turn reduced intentions to vote for John McCain."

When Sarah Palin's nomination was rolled out in August 2008, it was followed by near radio-silence from the McCain campaign as she prepped exhaustively for her RNC speech, given less than a week after her nomination. What that meant, in effect, is that there was a great deal of coverage on her more superficial aspects — including her looks and the parentage of her youngest child.

              "However, given the media's focus on Palin's appearance prior to the election, it is possible that people
              came to see her as less fully human (more robotic) and competent than they would have without this
              focus, and in turn, that they became even less likely to vote for her as a result (a more robotic, less
              competent candidate is certainly less desirable)."

How many times did you call her "Caribou Barbie"? Comment on her looks as an indicator of her competence or intelligence? (Furthermore, how many times did you hear a near-visceral hatred for Palin expressed by people that seemed out of proportion with her role?) Heflick and Goldenberg found that  both men and women, as well as liberals, moderates and conservatives, tended to objectify Sarah Palin and Angelina Jolie and judge them less competent when asked to contemplate their looks exclusively.

             "In considering the consequences of objectification, these findings suggest that being objectified affects
              women at not only an intrapersonal level, but also interpersonally, in ways that affect their real world
              chances of success. Research documenting that stripping people of their humanity plays a role in
              legitimizing aggression (e.g., Bar-Tal, 2000; Bandura, 2002) further suggests that objectification may
              have consequences for women beyond those we have discussed."

-snip-

Maybe you're wondering why most people who objectify Obama sexually (as opposed to, say, racially) don't find him less competent.

             "when women are evaluated for high status jobs, attractiveness reduces perceptions of women's, but not
              men's, competence (e.g., Heilman & Stopeck, 1985). Similarly, a recent study utilizing a mock U.S.
              presidential election methodology found that competence was rated as important for male and female
              candidates. But only for female candidates did appearance matter; and they were viewed as less
              competent overall"

So, you have to be pretty, if you're a woman, but not too pretty — but male appearance doesn't seem to matter one way or the other. And it's not just men that engage in this behavior, either:

-snip-

[thundley4]

I think the study is full of  . This is just more trashing of Palin because they are still scared of her. We've seen similar trashing of Jindal by the left and media also.

[Miss Mia]

I think the study is full of  . This is just more trashing of Palin because they are still scared of her. We've seen similar trashing of Jindal by the left and media also.

When did the Cato Institute become left and why would they be trashing Palin? 

BTW, it's about how people view attractiveness, that being attractive (which both Palin and Jolie are) as being incompetent. 

[NHSparky]

Again, it's hard to pin down libertarianism because even libertarians can't define what they are (or aren't).

Oh, and a few points from the USF survey:

--133 undergrads
--October
--Building upon 1980s research suggesting attractive women in high-status jobs are perceived as less competent
--Constant targeting by the MSM

Think there'd be any bias against Palin?  Nah, really?

And you're still 60 percent favorable towards Obama, Mia?

[Sweet Dee]

It's because of those damned Barbie dolls.

    

[Miss Mia]

Again, it's hard to pin down libertarianism because even libertarians can't define what they are (or aren't).

Oh, and a few points from the USF survey:

--133 undergrads
--October
--Building upon 1980s research suggesting attractive women in high-status jobs are perceived as less competent
--Constant targeting by the MSM

Think there'd be any bias against Palin?  Nah, really?

And you're still 60 percent favorable towards Obama, Mia?

Palin and Jolie were both used in the study.  The findings that the more someone's focused on a woman's attractiveness that same person will deem them less intelligent, was shown with both Palin AND Jolie. 

[Sweet Dee]

Palin and Jolie were both used in the study.  The findings that the more someone's focused on a woman's attractiveness that same person will deem them less intelligent, was shown with both Palin AND Jolie. 

Maybe it's just an intimidation factor for both men and women?  A woman who has striking looks can't possibly be intelligent!  It has to be one or the other.  I for one don't think Palin's all that fab looking, but I do enjoy listening to her talk   She's interesting and has that rad accent thing going on. lol

Angelina Jolie is great looking, but insanely overrated.  She comes off as way too smug and self-righteous.  At least in my opinion.

[Miss Mia]

Maybe it's just an intimidation factor for both men and women?  A woman who has striking looks can't possibly be intelligent!  It has to be one or the other.  I for one don't think Palin's all that fab looking, but I do enjoy listening to her talk   She's interesting and has that rad accent thing going on. lol

Angelina Jolie is great looking, but insanely overrated.  She comes off as way too smug and self-righteous.  At least in my opinion.

Yes, I think intimidation is a factor in this.  And women are the worst critics of other women (and more women than men participated in this study). I think both Jolie and Palin are very attractive women.  And both definitely driven in their respective fields.

[Ptarmigan]

If I am correct, I have seen studies of the opposite of people who are considered more attractive are more likely to be helped.

[5412]

Hi,

I think they made a study and it is a bogus result.  Had they done the study before Palin had been introduced, where none of the students knew who she was, the results may have been different.  The media did everything they could to destroy her before she could even get started.

If one actually took the time to listen to her they might find she was the best candidate on either ticket.  She has actually run a government and very well.

regards,

5412

[Miss Mia]

If I am correct, I have seen studies of the opposite of people who are considered more attractive are more likely to be helped.

That's referred to in the first article

In a paper just published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, psychologists Nathan Heflick and Jamie Goldenberg of the University of South Florida describe an experiment they conducted shortly after Wilkinson wrote those words. Building upon 1980s research suggesting attractive women in high-status jobs are perceived as less competent (a finding that has been challenged in recent years), they examined whether Palin’s sex appeal — the subject of endless media chatter in the weeks after she joined the ticket — hindered her ability to make the case she was up for the job.

 

I cannot open the PDF that it links to though.

[Miss Mia]

Hi,

I think they made a study and it is a bogus result.  Had they done the study before Palin had been introduced, where none of the students knew who she was, the results may have been different.  The media did everything they could to destroy her before she could even get started.

If one actually took the time to listen to her they might find she was the best candidate on either ticket.  She has actually run a government and very well.

regards,

5412

Sure, but Jolie received the same results. Though not about if they'd vote for Jolie (that wasn't asked of course) but her competence level in relation to her perceived attractiveness. 

[NHSparky]

Sorry Mia, but media coverage/bias colors the results.  No way to spin out of that one.

[BEG]

I can't attest to the validity of the study but I do believe women who are more attractive are considered less intelligent.  While their looks may get them ahead in business (as well as other things), it is not necessarily because they of their "smarts".  Of course if the woman is as dumb as a box of rocks, it probably wont help her too much that she is attractive (that is unless they are in Hollywood or P0rn). 

[Lacarnut]

When did the Cato Institute become left and why would they be trashing Palin? 

BTW, it's about how people view attractiveness, that being attractive (which both Palin and Jolie are) as being incompetent. 

66% of voters from 18 to 29 voted for Obama. That tells me something right there. How about a poll where the pollsters don't pick and choose age groups. Rather they pick across all age groups. This study is a load of horse manure.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Mia, thanks for posting this, I have wondered about it myself, because it seemed that a large part of the criticism directed toward her was inexplicable* unless motivated by a certain latent sexism (on the part of both men and women, and Liberals especially who refused to recognize their own issues with it) and poorly-concealed jealousy (mainly on the part of women and those who aspire to be women).

*Especially considering the defects of the competing ticket in experience on one hand, and mental faculties on the other.

[Miss Mia]

Mia, thanks for posting this, I have wondered about it myself, because it seemed that a large part of the criticism directed toward her was inexplicable* unless motivated by a certain latent sexism (on the part of both men and women, and Liberals especially who refused to recognize their own issues with it) and poorly-concealed jealousy (mainly on the part of women and those who aspire to be women).

*Especially considering the defects of the competing ticket in experience on one hand, and mental faculties on the other.

Yes, as the second article (a very liberal source) pointed out, how many liberals were calling her Caribou Barbie.  That's extremely sexist and quite disgusting. 

[Duke Nukum]

Sure, but Jolie received the same results. Though not about if they'd vote for Jolie (that wasn't asked of course) but her competence level in relation to her perceived attractiveness. 

I have a total negative opinion of Jolie because of her public behavior.  I think she is a moron but may be coming around.  But I don't really perceive Jolie as attractive either with those freakish fish lips.  That was the most distracting thing about The Changeling.  I kept thinking, "Can't they find a real actress?" But I digress.

Sarah Palin isn't really my type but she is a conservative so that makes her seem more attractive to me.  Because conservative women are hot, usually.  I do think she was totally competent for the job.  Way more so than Obama.  But she was completely savaged. 

Tina Fey's mission was to destroy her.

I think the problem with this study is comparing a competent women like Palin to a basket case like Jolie...it just doesn't make any sense.  It's like they are just looking for a reason to discount Palin.

[Rebel]

Wonder how many people are wondering about how better it would have been had Sarah BEEN elected?

[rich_t]

Wonder how many people are wondering about how better it would have been had Sarah BEEN elected?

Me for one.

[Duke Nukum]

Wonder how many people are wondering about how better it would have been had Sarah BEEN elected?

Sadly, many, many Obama voters aren't the kind to read the news or stay informed in any way or have any real skin the game, AKA the market.  They voted for him because he looked good in a suit and could read a teleprompter nearly flawlessly.  Some may have even voted for him solely because he was black and they felt voting for him would prove they aren't racist, even though it proves exactly the opposite.

But it seems that Jim Cramer is among those who might be wondering that.  He's living that famous cliche of the liberal who gets mugged.

[ReardenSteel]

Why didn't the "sex appeal" question get settled with Hillary Clinton?










j/k 

[rich_t]

Why didn't the "sex appeal" question get settled with Hillary Clinton?










j/k 

Cuz they weren't polling fat lesbians?

[NHSparky]

Why didn't the "sex appeal" question get settled with Hillary Clinton?










j/k 

Man, and I just had dinner, too.  So not cool!

[5412]

Sadly, many, many Obama voters aren't the kind to read the news or stay informed in any way or have any real skin the game, AKA the market.  They voted for him because he looked good in a suit and could read a teleprompter nearly flawlessly.  Some may have even voted for him solely because he was black and they felt voting for him would prove they aren't racist, even though it proves exactly the opposite.

But it seems that Jim Cramer is among those who might be wondering that.  He's living that famous cliche of the liberal who gets mugged.

Hi,

Some might have voted for him because he was black????   Only something like 94% of the black population.  What was the quote going around from MLK, "I look foreword to the day that a man is not judged by the color of his skin.  Seems to me that is exactly what the blacks did.

I really got pissed off when Colin Powell said how esctatic he was, "We finally made it!".  Yes Mr. Powell, you got a black guy elected who never held a job other than a community orgainzer, had the most liberal voting record in the senate, even worse than Kennedy, and was totally unqualified......but indeed be proud because he is black.  Yes General Powell he is your totally unqualified commander in chief, just pissed away a trillion dollars or pork projects but cut the pentagon budget by 10% and is putting the safety and security of the nation at risk.  I am sure you are quite proud sir......

It looks to me that the very few white folks took skin color into their decision, but racism is still alive and well in the black population.  Seems to me that BO is one of them and he is acting like it is payback time......

Sorry for the rant, that just struck a chord with me.

regards,
5412