Women and Girls

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How to Grow Old Like Isabella Rossellini

      by

      If you go to Isabella Rossellini’s Instagram page — and I recommend you do — you will see the 71-year-old actress/director/model/farmer wearing a giant woolly hat and vest, beaming with joy in the sunshine at her farm on Long Island. Another photo shows her staring off into the distance, her face proudly unretouched. Scrolling through, I often wonder how Rossellini is so comfortable in her own skin at an age when many women struggle in theirs.Rossellini’s early life was, in some ways, defined by other people’s fame. She looks strikingly like her mother, the Swedish Hollywood star Ingrid Bergman. Her father, the director Roberto Rossellini, was a giant of Italian cinema. She was married to Martin Scorsese, and another partner, David Lynch, famously directed her in the 1986 film “Blue Velvet.” But she also built her own interesting and varied career, becoming one of the most recognizable models in the world as the face of Lancôme until, in her 40s, the beauty brand dumped her for being too old. Rossellini was suddenly faced with a question, she told me, that she’s still working through today: “Who am I, and how do I fulfill the rest of my life?”The short answer is that she wrote books, went back to school, bought a farm, learned to be single, got rehired by Lancôme and kept acting. In the film “La Chimera,” directed by the Italian filmmaker Alice Rohrwacher and opening in theaters on March 29, Rossellini plays a Tuscan matriarch who’s aging with a lot less equanimity than Isabella herself. (She also has a small part in the new film “Spaceman,” starring Adam Sandler.) Rossellini just started “a little experiment with sheep” at her farm, partnering with design schools to help students better understand wool, and describes herself as diligently following whatever amuses her. “I just play,” she says. “I’m playful. And I became increasingly more playful with age.”I will confess that I have been slightly obsessing over your farm, where you are right now. It’s clearly both a refuge and also hard work. Did you always think this is what you’d be doing in your 70s? Because when I dream of my 70s, I’m not working quite as hard as you are. Well, you know, I say you need two ingredients to open a farm: optimism and ignorance. Optimism is like: Oh, it’s a piece of a dream, wouldn’t it be great to have it? Sure, I can do a farm! And ignorance is how hard it is — how hard it is workwise, but also to make it financially viable. All these little farms in the Hudson Valley or in Long Island, we are all struggling. How do you make it? Yet it’s such a contribution to the community, and it opened up so many possibilities and fills my mind with wonder, and I have to study hard to understand how to run it well.What is it about the hard work that you find so compelling? There are little farms that don’t exist anymore, because there’s no money and it’s a lot of work. So why do it? It started with my love for animals. I always had dogs and cats, and then my father, when I was 14 years old, gave me Konrad Lorenz’s book “King Solomon’s Ring.” Lorenz is a founder of the science of ethology — the science of animal behavior — and I read that book. It was like an illumination. This is what I want to do. And when I became older and there was less work as a model and as an actress and my children were grown up, I thought, Well, maybe I’ll go back to school and study ethology. And so in my 60s, I signed up.Ingrid Bergman and Roberto Rossellini in 1954 with their children, Isabella, Ingrid and Roberto.Keystone-France/Gamma-Rapho, via Getty ImagesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      A Marketplace of Girl Influencers Managed by Moms and Stalked by Men

      by

      This box represents a real photo of a 9-year-old girl in a golden bikini lounging on a towel. The photo was posted on her Instagram account, which is run by adults. 1 🔥🔥🔥 wooowww Mama mia ❤️❤️🥰💯🤗 Great body😍🔥❤️ Love 😍😍😍😍 Perfect bikini body ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️😋😋😋😍😍😍🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 Mmmmmmmmm take that bikini off 😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️ You’re sooooo hot ❤️🤗💋🌺🌹🌹💯 […] More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Don’t Underestimate the Mobilizing Force of Abortion

      by

      Poland recently ousted its right-wing, nationalist Law and Justice Party. In 2020, a party-appointed tribunal severely restricted the country’s abortion rights, sparking nationwide protests and an opposition movement. After a trip to Poland, the Times Opinion columnist Michelle Goldberg came to recognize that similar dynamics could prevail in the United States in 2024. In this audio essay, she argues that Joe Biden’s campaign should take note of what a “powerful mobilizing force the backlash to abortion bans can be.”(A full transcript of this audio essay will be available by Monday, and can be found in the audio player above.)Illustration by Akshita Chandra/The New York Times; Photograph by Getty ImagesThe Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, X (@NYTOpinion) and Instagram.This episode of “The Opinions” was produced by Jillian Weinberger. It was edited by Kaari Pitkin and Alison Bruzek. Engineering by Isaac Jones and Sonia Herrero. Original music by Isaac Jones, Sonia Herrero. Fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker. Audience strategy by Shannon Busta and Kristina Samulewski. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Jean Carnahan, First Woman to Represent Missouri in U.S. Senate, Dies at 90

      by

      Ms. Carnahan was appointed to the seat after her husband was posthumously elected to it just weeks after he was killed in a plane crash in 2000.Jean Carnahan, who in 2001 became the first woman to represent Missouri in the U.S. Senate after being appointed to fill her husband’s seat following his posthumous election, died on Tuesday. She was 90.Her family released a statement saying that Ms. Carnahan died following a brief illness.“Mom passed peacefully after a long and rich life,” the statement said, without specifying the cause of death. “She was a fearless trailblazer. She was brilliant, creative, compassionate and dedicated to her family and her fellow Missourians,” her family said in the statement.Ms. Carnahan, the wife of Mel Carnahan, was appointed to the U.S. Senate from Missouri in December 2000, following the posthumous election of her husband, who was killed just weeks beforehand with their son and a longtime aide in a plane crash. She was sworn in on Jan. 3, 2001.Ms. Carnahan, a moderate Democrat who had never held public office before being appointed to fill in for her husband, served for nearly two years. She lost to Jim Talent, a Republican, by 22,000 votes in November 2002.Following her defeat, Ms. Carnahan told The New York Times that despite the tumult and heartache she had endured, she had always pushed bitterness aside. “It’s an acid in your life that corrodes your soul,” she told The Times.Sheelagh McNeill More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      For ‘Barbie’ Fans Online, a Bitterly Ironic Oscar Snub

      by

      Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie missed Academy Award nominations for director and actress, respectively — a fact that was a little too on the nose for some.When the 2024 Oscar nominations were announced this morning, the snubs of the two most prominent women involved in “Barbie” — the director, Greta Gerwig, and the lead actress, Margot Robbie — became the breakout story.The top-grossing film of 2023, passing the $1 billion mark worldwide, is based on the imagined life and times of the iconic Mattel doll. A cultural phenomenon on its own terms, “Barbie,” along with “Oppenheimer,” became half of an unusually thoughtful summer blockbuster duo released on the same day in July (“Barbenheimer”): nothing to sneeze at.As it turns out, the internet has strong opinions about today’s announcement.“Let me see if I understand this: the Academy nominated ‘Barbie’ for Best Picture (eight nominations total) — a film about women being sidelined and rendered invisible in patriarchal structures — but not the woman who directed the film. Okay then,” read a viral X post by the writer Charlotte Clymer.The film wasn’t completely shut out — it was nominated for best picture, while Ms. Gerwig picked up a nomination with Noah Baumbach for adapted screenplay, Ryan Gosling for supporting actor, and America Ferrera for supporting actress. But the fact that Mr. Gosling was tabbed for his towheaded Ken, who discovers the idea of patriarchy and then attempts to dominate Barbieland, before Ms. Robbie’s character destroys gender-based oppression, was too much for some to take.“We’re actually doing patriarchy very well,” the writer Jodi Lipper wrote in an Instagram story, quoting a Ken line from the film.(In a statement released today, Mr. Gosling wrote, “To say that I’m disappointed that they are not nominated in their respective categories would be an understatement.”)Indeed, because “Barbie” functions as a commentary on sexism and a metacommentary on its own place in feminist discourse, the movie itself was the first place some of its fans reached to express their outrage over the snubs.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Campaign Sharpens Its Post-Roe Message: Abortion Is About Freedom

      by

      In events next week, the president and vice president will argue that abortion access is crucial to personal freedoms, and warn of what is at stake if Donald J. Trump is re-elected.President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris will headline events next week centered around protecting abortion rights, throwing more heft behind an issue that has galvanized voters in the 18 months since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.On Monday, Ms. Harris will visit Wisconsin to begin a national tour focused on preserving access to reproductive health care as Republicans call for more restrictions. Then on Tuesday, she will join Mr. Biden at a rally for abortion rights in Virginia, where Democrats recently took control of the state legislature and have proposed to enshrine abortion protections in the state constitution.Ms. Harris offered a preview of the administration’s election-year messaging to Americans when she visited “The View,” the most popular daytime talk show in the country.“We are not asking anyone to abandon their personal beliefs,” she said during an appearance on Wednesday, adding that “the government should not be telling women what to do with their bodies.”The idea that preserving access to abortion is tantamount to preserving personal freedoms has been embraced by Biden administration officials, lawmakers and activists who hope it will energize a flagging base and draw independent voters into the fold. They also want to contrast the administration’s policies with the political peril that the Republican Party faces by embracing hard-line measures.“I start from the place that most Americans believe that women should have the freedom to make their own decisions about health care, including abortion, without government interference,” Senator Tina Smith, Democrat of Minnesota, who traveled to the Iowa caucuses as a surrogate for Mr. Biden, said in an interview. (About 69 percent of voters think abortion should be legal in the first three months of pregnancy, according to a Gallup poll last year.)We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Should Trump Be Removed From the Ballot?

      by

      More from our inbox:Reflections After Claudine Gay’s Resignation at HarvardLegal challenges similar to the one former President Donald J. Trump faces in Colorado are pending in at least 16 additional states. Doug Mills/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Seeing Threat to Democracy, With Trump on Ballot or Not” (front page, Dec. 31):The argument by Republicans like J.D. Vance and Chris Christie and Democrats like Gavin Newsom that removing Donald Trump from the ballot would be anti-democratic and would deprive voters of the right to choose their president is flawed in two respects.First, the 14th Amendment — like the rest of the Constitution — was adopted through a democratic process. It is no more anti-democratic to deny Mr. Trump a place on the ballot because he engaged in insurrection than it is to disqualify a 34-year-old from running for president because of the age requirement.Second, if the Supreme Court chooses not to enforce the 14th Amendment on the premise that voters should be able to make an unfettered decision, it must give voters an opportunity to assess all of the facts for themselves. If the court were to reverse the Colorado decision to keep Mr. Trump off the ballot, a necessary corollary must be an expedited criminal trial on the Jan. 6-related indictment so that voters can be fully informed before deciding whether to vote for Mr. Trump.The polls suggest that the results of this trial could change the votes of a significant number of Mr. Trump’s supporters and could determine the outcome of the election.Randy SpeckWashingtonTo the Editor:“Seeing Threat to Democracy, With Trump on Ballot or Not” leaves out a crucial problem: the glacial pace of the criminal justice system. Whether former President Donald Trump is guilty of insurrection should have already been decided in court. But our justice system is too slow, and too vulnerable to Mr. Trump’s favorite legal strategy, to delay, delay, delay.Since March 2023, Mr. Trump has been charged with 91 felonies in four cases: falsifying business records, mishandling classified documents, and attempting to overturn the 2020 election through an insurrection and by trying to strong-arm Georgia officials. But we haven’t seen Mr. Trump cleared or convicted of these charges, charges filed only years after the fact.With courtroom justice delayed, and mountains of compelling evidence publicly available, it’s no surprise that challenges have been filed in 32 states to consider whether Mr. Trump is guilty of insurrection and thus ineligible to run for president.Deciding Mr. Trump’s guilt or innocence before the next election is still possible. But it will require judicial officials to act faster than may be comfortable or usual. American democracy is at stake, making it imperative that justice not be denied through delay.Tom LevyOakland, Calif.To the Editor:Re “How Justices May Weigh Trump Case,” by Adam Liptak (news analysis, front page, Dec. 30):In 2000, I wrote a statement eventually signed by 673 law professors (and run as a full-page ad in The Times) denouncing the Bush v. Gore justices for acting as “political partisans, not judges of a court of law.” Will they do so again?The Republican-appointed justices can escape partisanship by rejecting the feeble arguments against removing Donald Trump from the ballot.First, the 14th Amendment plainly applies to the presidency. Who can take seriously the notion that the amendment’s authors wanted to prevent insurrectionists from running for dogcatcher but not the most powerful office in the land?Second, Jan. 6 was obviously an insurrection — a violent attempt to overturn an election and prevent a lawfully elected president from taking office.Finally, those who argue “let the voters decide” ignore that it was precisely the point of the constitutional provision to prevent voters from deciding to put insurrectionists back into power.Anti-democratic? In a way. Those who wrote Section 3 of the 14th Amendment recognized that American democracy remained at risk from those who had once tried to overthrow our government. When it came to insurrection, their view was: “One strike, you’re out.”We face the very same risks today. An insurrectionist wants another shot at dictatorship. The Constitution says no way.Mitchell ZimmermanPalo Alto, Calif.To the Editor:Re “In Trump Case, Voters’ Will vs. Rule of Law,” by Charlie Savage (news analysis, Dec. 23):Mr. Savage considers the argument that removing Donald Trump’s name from the ballot based on the 14th Amendment would deprive voters of the right to pick their leaders, and he sees a clash between voters’ rights and the principle that no one is above the law.But there is no such conflict here. We must of course respect voters’ rights, if our democracy is to endure. Which is all the more reason to enforce the 14th Amendment and keep Mr. Trump off the ballot.He was already rejected by the voters in 2020, and he refused to accept their decision. He refused to honor his constitutional duty to enable the peaceful transfer of power. He attempted to deprive millions of voters of their right to have their votes counted. One purpose of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is to prevent such people from repeating such a travesty.Let us also dispense with the argument that we should keep Mr. Trump on the ballot to avoid social unrest. The coming election — assuming a rematch between President Biden and Mr. Trump — will be fraught with problems, no matter the outcome.If Mr. Trump wins, he will keep his promises to destroy many of our democratic institutions; if he loses, he will not accept his defeat, and we will see a replay of 2020, and possibly of Jan. 6, 2021.The consequences of enforcing the law might be dire, but the consequences of not enforcing it might be worse.Larry HohmSeattleReflections After Claudine Gay’s Resignation at Harvard Adam Glanzman for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “What Happened at Harvard Is Bigger Than Me,” by Claudine Gay, the former president of Harvard (Opinion guest essay, Jan. 4):I applaud Dr. Gay’s guest essay. She emphasizes how her position as a Black woman in a position of power partly explains the venom with which she has been attacked. The press, including The New York Times, should be drawing greater attention to the rampant misogyny unleashed in these attacks on leading women in academia.Susan Laird ModyPlattsburgh, N.Y.The writer is emerita associate professor of education and gender and women’s studies at SUNY Plattsburgh.To the Editor:Claudine Gay wraps herself in Harvard’s toga of integrity. It simply won’t work, not for herself nor for Harvard. Plagiarism allegations are serious, especially for an academic researcher — or for a president of a leading academic institution. The best she can do now is to leave gracefully, without excuses or explanations.Mark CastelinoNewarkThe writer is an associate professor of finance at Rutgers Business School.To the Editor:As a Harvard alumnus, I for one am sorry to see Claudine Gay go. Not because she was a perfect president. But because she demonstrated several qualities often lacking in public figures today: kindness, humility and a commitment to growth.I also don’t understand people who say she wasn’t “qualified” because she didn’t have a voluminous research record. The presidency of Harvard is not a Nobel Prize. It’s an administrative role, and Dr. Gay was an accomplished university administrator. We should consider the agendas of those who suggest otherwise.Bernie ZipprichNew York More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Haley quiere que la respalden por su experiencia, no por su género

      by

      La aspirante a la nominación republicana sería la primera mujer en llegar a la Casa Blanca. Hasta ahora ha evitado presentarse de una forma que espante a algunos votantes.Dentro de la bodega de una lujosa cadena de tiendas departamentales al este de Iowa, Michele Barton, vestida con una camiseta blanca engalanada con el rótulo de “Mujeres por Nikki” en letras de color rosa brillante, reflexionaba emocionada sobre la posibilidad de llevar a la primera mujer a la Casa Blanca.Sin embargo, Barton, de 52 años, una madre de cuatro hijos y republicana de toda la vida, se apresuró a insistir en que no apoyaba a Nikki Haley por ser mujer.“Creo que es la candidata correcta”, opinó el miércoles mientras esperaba que Haley apareciera en un evento del ayuntamiento en Davenport. “Solo resulta que es mujer”.Es un estribillo familiar que repiten algunas de las simpatizantes más entusiastas de Haley, quienes, como la candidata misma, le restan importancia a su género en la contienda presidencial de 2024, aunque celebran el carácter potencialmente histórico de su candidatura.Haley está haciendo este acto de equilibrismo en un momento notable de la política estadounidense. Su ascenso en las encuestas y las complicaciones del gobernador de Florida, Ron DeSantis, implican que el candidato republicano con más esperanzas de impulsar al partido más allá del expresidente Donald Trump —quien tiene un largo historial de comentarios misóginos y acusaciones de conducta sexual inadecuada— bien podría ser una mujer.A lo largo de su campaña, Haley ha procurado ser muy cautelosa al hablar de su género. Enfatiza elementos originales de su vida y carrera que la hacen destacar en un terreno que por lo demás está dominado por candidatos masculinos, pero evita tocar políticas de identidad que puedan disgustar a la base de votantes conservadores que necesita para ganar la nominación, los cuales en su mayoría son blancos y canosos.“No quiero ser solo una mujer”, le comentó a Charlamagne Tha God en “The Daily Show” el mes pasado. “No quiero ser solo india. No quiero ser solo madre. No quiero ser solo republicana. No quiero ser solo todas esas cosas. Soy más que eso. Y creo que todas las personas son más que eso”.Su discurso político incluye referencias a sus experiencias como esposa de un militar y como madre. Sus réplicas concisas a los rivales invocan sus tacones de 10 centímetros. Su lista de canciones para cerrar los actos municipales incluye “Woman in the White House”, de Sheryl Crow.Un acto de campaña de Haley en Iowa el mes pasado. Cuando Haley menciona que fue la primera mujer y la primera persona de color en ocupar el cargo de gobernadora de Carolina del Sur, lo hace en gran parte para argumentar que Estados Unidos no está “podrido” ni es “racista”.Jordan Gale para The New York TimesNo obstante, Haley, hija de inmigrantes indios, casi nunca, o nunca, menciona de manera directa que aspira a romper el techo de cristal más alto en la política estadounidense. (En el video de su anuncio de campaña, señaló que no creía en esos límites).En la campaña electoral en los estados de Iowa y Nuevo Hampshire, donde se vota primero, casi no menciona su género, lo cual para sus aliados podría ser una ventaja potente para ganarse a los votantes con estudios universitarios y a las mujeres de los suburbios en unas elecciones generales, si venciera a Trump en las primarias.Chris Cournoyer, senadora por Iowa y presidenta de la campaña de Haley en ese estado, declaró que estos sectores demográficos también podrían ayudarla a ser más competitiva en el estado, donde ha quedado detrás de Trump en las encuestas por un amplio margen y, hasta hace poco, también iba a la zaga de DeSantis.“He oído decir a muchas mujeres independientes, a muchas mujeres demócratas, que van a cambiar de partido para votar por ella el 15 de enero”, comentó Cournoyer.Aunque suele mencionar su victoria histórica, pues se convirtió en la primera mujer y la primera persona de color en ocupar el cargo de gobernadora de Carolina del Sur, Haley lo hace sobre todo para argumentar que Estados Unidos no está “podrido” ni es “racista”.Su evento del miércoles en la bodega de Von Maur en Davenport se pudo haber promocionado como uno de Mujeres por Nikki, pero, aparte de tres camisetas de la coalición expuestas cerca de la entrada, en el lugar había pocas señales de los grupos de base conformados solo por mujeres que han ayudado a difundir su mensaje.Los estrategas republicanos y los especialistas en estudios de género afirman por igual que el enfoque relativamente moderado de Haley en materia de género tiene sentido: el camino de las mujeres hacia los altos cargos suele estar lleno de dobles raseros y prejuicios de género, independientemente del partido o la ideología del candidato. Pero puede ser especialmente difícil para las mujeres republicanas. Los votantes conservadores tienden a albergar opiniones tradicionales sobre la feminidad al tiempo que esperan que las candidatas parezcan “duras”.Un informe reciente del Centro de Mujeres Estadounidenses y Política de la Universidad de Rutgers reveló que los republicanos eran menos propensos que los demócratas a ver obstáculos claros a la representación política de las mujeres, a apoyar esfuerzos particulares para aumentar la diversidad en la política y a presionar a los líderes de los partidos para que adopten estrategias que amplíen la cantidad de mujeres en el poder.Kelly Dittmar, quien, como directora del centro trabajó en el informe y ha analizado las propuestas políticas de Haley, dijo que le parecía que había paralelos entre las campañas de Haley a la gobernación y a la presidencia. En ambas, los anuncios de Haley dicen que es “nueva” y “distinta”, lo que ofrece a los votantes pistas sobre su raza y su género pero, dijo Dittmar, les permite interpretar estas palabras a su antojo.“Es al mismo tiempo estratégico y coherente con la identidad conservadora de ella”, dijo Dittmar, y añadió que como candidata a la gobernación Haley rechazó los pedidos de sus votantes que querían que se comprometiera a nombrar el mismo número de hombres y mujeres en su gestión.Ninguna mujer ha conseguido la nominación presidencial del Partido Republicano a la presidencia, y ni siquiera a una primaria presidencial estatal del partido y Haley solo es la quinta republicana destacada en buscar la nominación de su partido. Carly Fiorina, la ex directora ejecutiva de Hewlett-Packard, fue la última que lo intentó, en 2016, y en su campaña el asunto del género era clave.Con su enfoque mesurado, Haley ha intentado apoyarse en su experiencia de política exterior y ejecutiva, desafiar las ideas erróneas sobre las mujeres y la posibilidad de ser elegidas, y posicionarse como una de las mensajeras más eficaces de su partido en materia de aborto, a pesar de haber aprobado algunas de las restricciones antiabortistas más duras del país como gobernadora de Carolina del Sur. Hace poco declaró que, como gobernadora, habría autorizado una prohibición del aborto a las seis semanas.El camino de las mujeres a los altos cargos públicos a menudo está lleno de dobles raseros y sesgos de género, sin importar el partido o la ideología. En especial, los votantes conservadores tienden a tener opiniones tradicionales sobre la feminidad. Sophie Park/Getty ImagesEse enfoque le ha granjeado el apoyo de algunas de sus seguidoras más leales que, a menudo, también hacen trabajo voluntario no remunerado: son mujeres dispuestas a conducir durante horas para ir a instalar sillas, recabar información de contacto de los asistentes y animar su esfuerzo. Los líderes de campaña dicen que ya hay capítulos de Mujeres por Nikki en los 50 estados del país. En eventos recientes en Iowa, al menos dos mujeres le pidieron que reafirmara su postura sobre el aborto, a pesar de que ya la habían escuchado, con el fin de que otras de las asistentes también la escucharan.“No creo que los muchachos sepan hablar de esto de forma adecuada”, dijo en ambas ocasiones.Y, a pesar de todo, el tema del género ha sido ineludible. En el cuarto debate presidencial republicano, el emprendedor Vivek Ramaswamy lanzó ataques de género, en los que la acusó de beneficiarse de la “política de la identidad”, mientras el exgobernador de Nueva Jersey Chris Christie fue en la otra dirección para defenderla, una maniobra que para algunos de los partidarios de Haley fue tan solo una actuación para quedar como su salvador. Y, luego está Trump, quien la llama “cerebro de pájaro” y sigue siendo popular entre las mujeres republicanas.Una encuesta de The New York Times y la universidad Siena College publicada este mes reveló que el 63 por ciento de las votantes en las primarias republicanas apoyaba a Trump. Haley obtuvo un 12 por ciento de apoyo de ese grupo. Otras encuestas la muestran con un mayor apoyo entre los hombres que entre las mujeres. Sin embargo, en enfrentamientos hipotéticos, Haley ha vencido al presidente Joe Biden por el margen más amplio de todos los aspirantes republicanos, pues casi dividió los votos de las mujeres con él.“Nikki tiene una elegibilidad poderosa contra Biden, pero necesita encontrar una elegibilidad poderosa contra Trump”, opinó Sarah Longwell, una estratega republicana que ha trabajado para derrotar a Trump. “En este momento, los votantes simplemente no creen que ella pueda hacerlo, así que debe cambiar esa percepción”.En un evento reciente celebrado en Agency, Iowa, tal vez Haley reflejó mejor su propuesta al responder a una pregunta de una posible votante. Tras escuchar a Haley en la bodega de una empresa de semillas de maíz, Sarah Keith, una ingeniera química de 28 años, quiso saber qué haría la candidata para atraer a más mujeres al partido, en particular quienes están descontentas con la agenda liberal.“Hablan de los problemas de las mujeres”, respondió Haley, para referirse a los demócratas y definiendo esas inquietudes como las mismas que le preocupan a la mayoría de los votantes, incluidas la economía y la seguridad nacional. “Creo que las mujeres están hartas. Creo que todo el mundo está harto del ruido y quiere ver resultados”.Jazmine Ulloa es reportera de política nacional para el Times y cubre la campaña presidencial de 2024. Reside en Washington. Más de Jazmine Ulloa More