Nick-naming women 'Beyoncé voters' is exactly why we don't vote Republican

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/03/beyonce-voters-republican-single-ladies

Version 0 of 1.

Female voters in the US have been called "soccer moms" and "security moms". In 2004, single women were "Sex and the City voters". Now – because apparently women can't ever just be "citizens" or "voters", or more likely because conservatives prefer to call us names instead of delving too deep into women's issues – we are "Beyoncé voters". Bow down, bitches.

Most single ladies would generally be thrilled with a comparison to Queen Bey in any way, shape or form, but the cutesy nicknames for politically-engaged women need to stop. Surely pundits and the political media culture can deal with the collective electoral power of the majority voting bloc in this country in some better way than symbolically calling us "sweetheart", complete with head pat.

Tuesday on Fox's "women's show" Outnumbered, panelists were talking Hobby Lobby and electoral politics when co-host Jesse Watters said the following about Hillary Clinton:

She needs the single ladies vote. I call them "The Beyoncé Voters" – the single ladies. Obama won single ladies by 76% last time, and they made up about a quarter of the electorate. They depend on government because they're not depending on their husbands. They need things like contraception, health care, and they love to talk about equal pay.

You know: single gals, just chatting away at the salon about equal pay, wishing they had a husband to depend upon!

First of all, if you are going to call women "Beyoncé voters", perhaps it's best not to wield the term as an insult. She's a bad example of "dependant" women, considering the superstar makes twice as much money as her husband. And as Alyssa Rosenberg at the Washington Post points out, if Beyoncé's music and writing are any indication, a "Beyoncé voter" would actually be quite the bad-ass, valuing marriage and blogging about income inequality: "for a demographic inspired by Knowles-Carter, girls run the world, and getting their votes will require Democrats and Republicans alike to acknowledge that."

But I wouldn't expect any better gender analysis from a Fox employee who recently snuck into a National Organization for Women conference and got kicked out after asking questions like this: Have you ever been wounded in the war on women? What are you gals trying to accomplish?

Perhaps the snideness and name-calling is a last desperate resort from conservatives who still haven't figured out that "women" aren't a monolith to be labeled and "figured out"; women are half the electorate. It certainly seems Republicans haven't learned their lesson from the last presidential election, when a now-mocked "war on women" narrative ensured the largest gender gap in history – a win brought home by women of color and unmarried women. Now, single ladies, who make up a quarter of eligible voting Americans, could single-handedly hold the Senate for Democrats in 2014.

No matter: as much as politicians and pundits vie for women's approval and support - even while they're calling us names - those on the right still have a hard time taking our issues very seriously.

Even today, conservatives continue to dig a deeper hole in the wake of the US supreme court decision on Hobby Lobby by mocking women who want their contraception covered by insurance as idiots and whores, when the ruling has already gained traction as a legitimate mid-term campaign issue for firing up the left. And countless figures on the right continue to whinge about a potential Hillary Clinton run - simplifying possibly the most nuanced and experienced would-be candidate in the country as a screechy ball-buster and/or aging grandma. Beyoncé would not approve.

And neither will women come November. The stupid things Republicans said about "legitimate" rape last time are set to become the stupid things Republicans refuse to stop saying about birth control, Hillary and 112m potential voters.