Irene Montero presents herself for the general elections of 29 November without the word Podemos appearing in her main campaign materials. On the posters we find a name, Irene, accompanied by a slogan, "Paz, casa y trabajo". The party’s acronym, which took her to the Government, disappears and the purple color that identified for years one of the most recognizable formations in Spanish politics loses prominence. She remains, turned into the main point of reference of a candidacy that seems to rely more on the recognition of its leader than on the capacity of attraction of her organization.
The decision is explained by the fact that Podemos drags the wear-and-tear of years of internal confrontations and electoral setbacks, while Montero retains significant public visibility. However, the operation raises an interesting question from the perspective of political communication: what happens when a candidate turns her own personality into the main campaign argument, especially if it is a woman who triggers reactions of rejection?
We could also think of a strategy aimed at feminizing her profile, using her first name, which is something that is usually used more when we refer to women than when we do so with men. Or to humanize her and bring her closer, almost as if she were a new friend.
And it is that Irene Montero is a politician who generates deep support and deep antipathy. Her figure has been associated with feminism, with the confrontation with her opponents, and with controversial decisions from her time as minister of Equality, especially the implementation of the law of "solo sí es sí". She has also been the target of personal attacks and sexist comments that exceed, and much, legitimate criticism of her management. Reducing all that rejection to a question of gender is a simplistic analysis, but ignoring that gender plays a role in how a leader of her characteristics is judged is equally mistaken.
The party’s acronym, which took her to the Government, disappears and the purple color that identified for years one of the most recognizable formations in Spanish politics loses prominence
In a questionnaire that the influencer "NoSoloViernes" has answered and that was broadcast on social media, we hear her affirm that her qualities are almost defects. In her case, the result is that an intervention that her followers consider brave can seem arrogant to her opponents. The same firmness that some interpret as consistency can be perceived by others as dogmatism. And the more recognizable the public figure becomes, the more difficult it is to separate the assessment of her arguments from the emotional reaction that her presence provokes.
Research in social psychology has been studying for decades what is known as role congruity theory, which explains that prejudice can arise when the characteristics traditionally attributed to a social group come into conflict with those that are considered necessary to perform a particular role. In the case of women who aspire to leadership, this can generate contradictory expectations: they are expected to be able to exercise authority and make difficult decisions, but also to be close and conciliatory. Attributes that are considered to belong to leadership, such as ambition or a willingness to conflict, some viewers interpret as incompatible with their expectations about female behavior.
behavioral science explains that judgments about people depend on categories and expectations previously learned. When we observe someone, we do not evaluate every gesture from scratch, but rather interpret it based on prior experiences and cultural stereotypes that can operate even without an intention to discriminate consciously.
That is why, in politics, the impression that someone is disliked deserves a deeper analysis than we usually give it. Antipathy is not necessarily an irrational reaction. It may be grounded in political disagreements, previous experiences, or perfectly legitimate assessments. But it can also incorporate expectations about how a woman who exercises power should behave.
Irene Montero presents an especially interesting profile for studying this phenomenon because her political identity has been constructed, to a large extent, around conflict. Her way of communicating is usually forceful, with a strong delimitation between the positions she defends and those she opposes. In addition, her career is closely linked to a feminism that precisely calls into question some of the social norms about the expected behavior of women. We are therefore not dealing with a leader who systematically tries to soften her positions in order to be pleasant. And that choice has consequences for public perception, although not all of them can be attributed to gender biases.