by Jessica Reed
On our last day of our legislatives elections in France it was made official that ex -presidential candidate Segolene Royale would be separating from her life partner Francois Hollande, currently head of the Socialist Party.
Compared to Nicholas Sarkozy's ordeal with his wife (her infidelities were reported in the press, she didn't vote on the elections day, etc) the struggles between Hollande and Royale -it is believed that he found a new partner- were mainly kept very private until the campaign was over. But now that the separation is official, comments and rumours are fusing.
I must admit to being extremely annoyed by the immediate portrayal made of Royal by the media; according to several newspapers and outlets, she would want to become leader of the Socialist party, and in wanting so becomes a power-thirsty beast who calculated the demise of her relationship in cold-blood.
The similarity between Royal and Hillary Clinton's media image strikes me as extremely condescending and insulting: both are women accused by journalists of seeking "powerful positions" in the political spectrum as a way to get revenge on their cheating husbands (1). This angle sounds so backwards to me: it is an old fashioned portrayal of neurotic women making career decisions solely based around their husbands or partners, even when the couple is no more.
I am only speaking for myself here, but I would find it incredibly refreshing if journalists would consider that some women do get into politics because this is something they want and always wanted to pursue - long before they met their partners, were married, or had children. In other words, their involvement is not always about the men in their relationships.
(1) See Le Monde today (in french).
