Obama's election means a lot for women -- and, of course, girls. No big surprise there.
But according to a new study conducted by the Girl Scout Research Institute, the presidential race was influencing girls across the country even before Obama won. Their survey of over 3,000 boys and girls (including non-Girl Scouts) found that the election increased girls' interest in leadership, but also heightened "their appreciation for the difficulties that women face in our society."
According to the study, 43 percent of girls today strongly believe that "girls have to work harder than boys in order to gain positions of leadership," a statement that just 25 percent of girls agreed with just a year ago. And the percentage of girls who believe that "today both men and women have an equal chance of getting a leadership position" declined from 35 percent to 24 percent between 2007 and 2008. Ouch.
Also: Ritu Sharma of Women Thrive Worldwide on what having Sasha and Malia in the White House means for girls outside the Beltway.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: New Study: 2008 Election's Impact on Girls.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/11625
The link to the study is not working.
I imagine this how to do with Clinton and Palin. I imagine plenty of girls heard choice words from the media and even their parents about both women. I know I did.
I agree with Kat-
clearly this is not obama-centric. how can you post this without any mention of EITHER of the two WOMEN in the presidential race?
in fact, i don't know how obama would have an impact on girls any more than boys- is there anything that would be apparent to girls as something he has done to promote the opportunities for them (other than seeing his daughters physically inhabiting the whitehouse)?
a little credit where credit is due, huh?
I am disappointed how this was framed in the media. When Clinton and Palin were actually running and viable, the media brushed away accusations of sexism and generally participated in sexism themselves. But after they lost (particularly after Palin lost) they started to frame it as a defeat for women and a win for sexism.
Each step of the way, the media did the worst possible thing.
The truth is, Palin lost because she she was mishandled, lacked the experience, and had extreme views, and the fact that she was a Republican after 8 years of Bush. And Clinton lost because Obama was a very unusual candidate, who would have beaten the pants off of *anybody*. It had nothing to do with Clinton and Palin being women.
However, both did face sexism (uncalled) by the media.
If you follow the link to the Girl Scout Research Institute, you can access the study there. It's really interesting which reasons girls and boys give for not pursuing leadership roles (fear of seeming bossy, being laughed at, etc).
In terms of this election, a lot of people concluded that "now we can tell our children they can be anything they want...", when in reality I think it gave a lot of girls and young women the opposite message.