Portrayals of First Ladies in the Israeli Press

‘All the Time His Wife’: Portrayals of First Ladies in the Israeli Press

BY DAFNA LEMISH AND GILI DROB

‘ALL the time his wife’ reads the title of Leah Rabin’s autobiography.1 The internationally recognised widow of Israel’s Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, assassinated in 1995 for his efforts on behalf of peace, chose to frame herself in a highly dependent role. The book title inspired us to investigate the role First Ladies play in the highly conflictual Israeli public sphere and consequently examine what they reveal about the status of women in Israel in general. Our point of departure assumes that images of women in the press reflect society’s ideological stance toward them and at the same time perpetuate world views, granting them further legitimisation. We assume that this perspective has particu- lar significance for portrayals of First Ladies, since they symbolically represent the glorified characteristics of contemporary ‘womanhood’, being both a ‘Lady’ and the ‘First’ one at that. The concept of a First Lady is rooted in the history of the United States and has always been treated with ambivalence by the public and the media. The new vision of the First Lady offered in the 1990s by Hillary Rodham Clinton elicited a host of empirical studies as well as biographies attempting to come to terms with the significance of this particularly visible female public role.2 Analysis of the news coverage of American First Ladies suggest that they are framed in traditional gender roles, including that of a supportive and nurturing partner, a ceremonial and fashionable escort, and a volunteer for charitable activities. However, when the American First Lady diverges from these roles and offers a model of a powerful woman, exerting her own political or professional influence on the President or directly through her own policy interventions, she becomes the focus of debate and harsh criticism. After all, it was not she but her spouse who was elected to an active political role. The constant public transformations of Hillary Clinton and the ambivalence with which she has been treated are the most vivid illustrations of the difficulty American society has in dealing with strong, talented and opinionated women who have departed from traditional care-giving and spousal roles. In more than one way she did not conform to reporters’ expectations of public women, symbolising many of the seemingly unresolved tensions between the private sphere of marriage and child-rearing and the public sphere of work and power. The unique situation of First Ladies, at the centre of the political Ą Hansard Society for Parliamentary Government 2002 Parliamentary Affairs (2002), 55, 129–142 130 Parliamentary Affairs stage, yet gaining that access not through their own doing but through their husbands, can be regarded in many ways as being symbolic of women’s gradual penetration into the public sphere. On the one hand, they are becoming more acceptably visible in politics; on the other hand, they are also expected to maintain their private roles in that newly explored territory. Female politicians, for example, are assigned responsibilities primarily in social fields such as education or health— but not in economy or defence. First Ladies are expected to look good and ‘stand by their man’ no matter what—but not to intervene in decision-making. They are expected to be present and yet absent at the same time. In this sense, the media’s treatment of First Ladies continues to reinforce the dominant traditional, gendered value system rather than challenge it. Changes in the coverage of First Ladies and their public status can therefore serve as an indicator of general changes in women’s status in a given society. The American model of the First Lady has infiltrated other countries, Israel included, as part of the Americanisation of political and cultural processes. This is evident, among other things, in the centralisation of power within the hands of the directly-elected Israeli Prime Minister and the related growing media exposure of private realms of politicians’ lives. To contextualise the presentation of Israeli First Ladies, we bring together three lines of research. First is the general mapping of the status of women in Israel and its special characteristics. Second is the examination of the role women play in the Israeli political arena. Lastly, we present our knowledge on the interrelationships between women and their media-created images. The self-image of Israeli society as egalitarian and liberal—from the myth of the woman kibbutz pioneer, through the conscription of women into the army and the election of Golda Meir as Prime Minister in the 1970s, to the adoption of politically correct slogans regarding the struggle against family violence—creates an illusion of equality. In reality, the gap between discourse and practice, between substantial gains in legislation and the courts and their enforcement in everyday life, has substantially remained outside the democratic debate. Beyond universal characteristics of gender discrimination, such as extensive segregation in the world of employment, the restrictions imposed by firmly placing the female in the private sphere and the ‘normalisation’ of inequality through educational and cultural institutions, there are also a number of complex obstacles unique to the Israeli experience. The traditional national emphasis on the importance of family and childbearing and the glorification of motherhood as a form of devotion to the attainment of national goals and nation-building perpetuate women’s place in the private sphere. The centrality of the military in the ongoing regional struggle and the system of values which is its outgrowth (such as domination, repression, exploitation, violence) exalt powerful masculinity, identified with national loyalty. Women’s strug- First Ladies and the Israeli Press 131 gles against war or conquest are perceived as a double betrayal of conventions about women’s ‘natural’ location in the private sphere and of the nation and its land. In addition, the growing status of religious parties in Israel and the control religious institutions have over individuals’ lives are detrimental to the status of women and their freedom of choice with regard to issues such as marriage, divorce, and rights over their own bodies. The Israeli religious establishment has consistently demonstrated opposition to the political equality of women, to their participation in obligatory military service as a means of strengthening their status in society— personally and publicly—and to their participation in organising relig- ious life within their communities. The unequivocal preference given both to the issues of ‘national security’ and to the cultivation of the Jewish nature of the state over its egalitarian nature strengthens the marginalisation of women and impedes their penetration into the central political sphere. Indeed, in the institutional political arena in Israel—such as political parties, the Knesset (parliament), and local authorities – the presence of women is consistently low. Representation in the Knesset has fluctuated between 6% and 10% and most governments have had very few women ministers. The explanations offered by the professional literature for this gloomy situation are various. They include the absence of socialis- ation processes preparing women for roles in the public sphere; the influence of the Israeli electoral system and the channels for achieving positions of power; and the fact that the political hierarchies are ruled by men. There are ladders for advancement within male-dominated parties but it is also possible for men to be ‘parachuted in’ directly from previous army careers, as has been the case with many party leaders, ministers and even Prime Ministers. Political life is still perceived as being governed by relationships of power, toughness and aggression, making it inappropriate for women who are seen as passive citizens engaged in their ‘natural’ maternal and domestic roles.3 Furthermore, the heavy burden placed on the politician’s life, demanding commitment and the devotion of personal resources is thought to prevent women from fulfilling their political aspirations, confining them to their glori- fied role as mothers. Israeli women’s marginality in the public sphere and their relegation to the private one are clearly reflected in their media portrayals. They are generally under-represented, often associated with their traditional roles as care-givers or in their dependency roles as the ‘wife of’ or the ‘daughter of’, and as victims of crime and domestic violence. The inequality in gender presentation is so well entrenched that it is even evident during television election campaigns based on an official dis- course of equality. The various strategies used to reinforce and repro- duce this order include the compartmentalisation of women and their issues in the ‘soft’ news and magazine-style sections of the media, and 132 Parliamentary Affairs the presentation of female leaders as first and foremost women in conflict with their traditional roles. In addition, the social world pre- sented in Israeli advertising is primarily focused on women in the private sphere and on the realm of sexuality and objectification, includ- ing hints at violence, degradation and submission.4 Within this context, the framing of the Israeli First Lady can be particularly insightful. How is she presented? What roles do the media assign to her in contemporary Israeli society? Which aspects of her being are glorified and which condemned? We have tried to investigate these questions through a thematic analysis of Israeli newspaper cover- age of First Ladies of the 1990s, during the periods of office of each Prime Minister, through the three major Hebrew dailies—Yediot Achar- onot, Ma’ariv, and Ha’aretz; women’s magazines Olam Ha’isha, At, and La’isha; as well as occasional articles from local papers. The coverage spread was therefore from December 1963 (Rabin’s first premiership) to February 2001 (end of Barak’s premiership), and included all items (over 400) concerning Leah Rabin, Sonia Peres, Sarah Netanyahu and Nava Barak. Particular attention was given to the different roles that each First Lady played, change over time, and the degree to which media coverage has become invasive of privacy. We then discuss the general motifs emerging from our analysis. Major categories in press coverage Each of the four First Ladies studied presents a unique case. They came from diverse backgrounds; they were of different ages during the premiership period; they perceived themselves and their roles very differently; they chose to position themselves with the media in different ways; and they presented very different appearances and style. The purpose of our analysis nevertheless is to focus on the similarities that bound them as women together in their media coverage rather than on their unique personalities and backgrounds. What therefore, are the Israeli media’s general frames of reference for First Ladies that go beyond one individual or the other? They can be analysed under seven interrelated categories. prince charming: Where does the story of becoming the First Lady begin? According to the Israeli press, First Ladies are born through a romantic fairytale love story. ‘The two young lovers [Sonia and Shimon Peres] spent their time as it was customary in those days: she used to escort him at night to guard duty. And there, in the post, he used to read her poems and selected chapters from Marx’s writings . . . “For me it was love at first sight”’ (Olam Ha’isha, January1996). ‘Yitzhak Rabin and Leah Schlosberg met in “Little Tel Aviv”. She was then a high-school student . . . he was a Palmachnik [Independence War soldier] “in search of the future”. On her way to the library, she saw him at the Vitman Ice Cream Store, and his refreshed figure reminded First Ladies and the Israeli Press 133 her immediately of King David’ (Kol Hair, 3.7.92). Nava and Ehud Barak’s first meeting was recalled romantically: ‘In the winter of ’68, a young man, a lieutenant out to study mathematics and physics, was sitting in the library of the Hebrew University and listening to classical music with headphones. Next to him sat a beautiful student of English literature, who wished to listen to Shakespeare’s plays. They didn’t exchange a word. While engaged in deep study of his math books, the student passed the young woman next to him a piece of paper with a circle around a list of movies playing at the theater and a question mark. She returned the piece of paper with an exclamation mark by one of the movies. Since then they have been together’ (Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). This discourse is also associated with the romantisation of femininity, so popular in fairytales as well as popular modern texts: the emotional peak and social status conferred by the act of marriage, and the passive longing for the prince who will release the young woman from the drabness and hopeless chains of daily life. Sonia Peres used to spend ‘many lonely hours in front of the TV . . . or doing household chores . . . always waiting for his return from his activities’ and Leah Rabin ‘would sit at home and be content with being his wife and the mother of the children’ (Yediot Acharonot, 15.10.76). ‘“All my life by Ehud’s side is a kind of longing,” she says in a somewhat choked voice’ (Yediot Acharonot, 5.3.99). The only exception to this glorification of romantic longing is presented in the story of Sarah Netanyahu, not accidentally, as we shall see below. An additional discourse strategy is the controversial, double edged metaphoric use of the theme of ‘royalty’ in reference to First Ladies. ‘Leah Rabin behaves as if she is Queen Rabin The First, as if she has her own Royal Court...’(Ma’ariv, 4.11.94). Sarah Netanyahu was described as follows: ‘. . . from the flowing photographic coverage of her every movement, reminiscent of the media treatment accorded the Royal Family . . .’. Nava Barak was ‘a beauty, and queen of her class’ born to a ‘local aristocratic family’ (Ha’aretz, 3.2.98). Association with royalty—high status, power, dignity, wealth, is very foreign to Israeli culture and the Zionist ethos of self-sacrifice, modesty and devotion to the national cause, and is thus also perceived as being snobbish, detached from the people, self-centred, non-democratic. afamilywoman: First and foremost the First Lady is a family woman, who puts her children and her husband before anything else in her life. In her early role as First Lady during Yizhak Rabin’s first candidacy, Leah Rabin was described as ‘devoting her afternoon hours to the children. In her view, a mother must welcome her children when they return home’ (La’issha, 4.5.68), and in one of the journalistic eulogies after her death from cancer: ‘Leah Rabin was all the time his wife. She gave up a lot to stand by her husband as a soldier, as Chief of 134 Parliamentary Affairs

Staff, as ambassador, as a minister in the government, as the Defence Minister and as Prime Minister—she wrapped the life of Yizhak 24- hours-a-day’ (Yediot Acharonot, 13.11.00). Twenty-five years following Leah Rabin’s early interview, Sarah Netanyahu similarly admits: ‘Moth- erhood is above all else, even when you are a career woman, you are a mother. The moment you give birth to a child, this becomes your primary commitment’ (Yediot Acharonot, 31.12.93). Nava Barak’s ability to perform her motherly duties fully, and to do so on her own, with no assistance, was highly regarded: ‘. . . the difficult labour with Yael: how Ehud arrived a second before the delivery and had to leave right after it; struggling with raising the daughters with no husband by her side’ (Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). In this sense the press framed the First Ladies as conforming their own lives to the national ethos of glorified motherhood and lovingly accepting their place in society as bound to the private sphere. As bearers of children and care-givers, women are entrusted with the social as well as the biological reproduction of the nation. ‘The unique mission of the woman, the mission of motherhood—there is no greater mission than that in life,’ declared the first Prime Minister of Israel, David Ben Gurion, in 1949. The romanticisation of motherhood and the power conferred by its calling is commonly used in Israeli politics in persuasive messages such as in family-planning strategies and election campaigns, as well as being employed by women themselves in protest movements against war and occupation (such as ‘Mothers Against Silence’ and ‘Four Mothers’). The role of a mother in Israeli society provides legitimacy for women’s voices to be heard, where a civil-female voice would be ignored or even ridiculed. This perception of the totality of an uncompromising motherhood is also the drive at the root of the decision to give up on a career, discussed next. giving up career: All four women were trained in traditional feminine professions: nurse (Sonia Peres), teacher (Leah Rabin and Nava Barak) and child psychologist (Sarah Netanyahu). Three of them gave up their professions early on to devote themselves completely for to the advancement of their husbands’ careers, with Nava Barak joining in when her husband moved from military to civil leadership roles. Newspaper coverage has highlighted these choices on many occasions. ‘My going out to work never received support and encouragement from Yizhak,’ admited Leah Rabin, ‘but the truth is that the issue of self- fulfilment never bothered me too much. I felt that it is important for Yizhak to know that I am at home with the kids and that my staying home facilitates his ability to devote himself to his work. I was completely at peace with the role I have chosen for myself’ (Yediot Acharonot, 25.12.87). ‘Shimon Peres’ career continued to advance and flourish. Sonia, so it seemed, has already given up on the dream to become a nurse, and in the meanwhile the third son was born . . . First Ladies and the Israeli Press 135

Sonia . . . continued to seclude herself’ (Hadashot, 26.7.85). Nava Barak’s case is the most revealing. While she herself described her decision as an autonomous one, the press chose to force it into the stereotypical frame. ‘I left teaching not because of Ehud’s role. I worked for over 20 years in the field and I felt that I had a need for change,’ she explained (Ma’ariv, 25.4.00). ‘When Ehud Barak was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs in November 1995, Nava understood that from now on she couldn’t “dance at both weddings”, she took a sabbatical from school and since then she has been on an unpaid leave of absence . . . When he entered political life, Nava understood that she must be by his side...’explained the journalist (Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). A career for the First Wife is thus presented as a luxury, a hobby, not an essential part of her life, something to be easily and willingly sacrificed for the sake of the husband’s political position, which is perceived as the ‘really important work’. This perspective reinforced a traditional and unrealistic value system in a society where most families are unable to make ends meet without two salaries and where women form almost half the workforce. The possibility of choosing to be a full- time homemaker is a reality only for the privileged classes. Presenting it as the ideal choice for the national role-model is thus contributing to both class and gender inequalities. charitable engagement: All four First Ladies were portrayed as engaged in some form of consensual charitable occupation for the benefit of society. They lent their names to non-profit organisations, sometimes voluntarily, sometimes after being actively pursued by them. This is clearly perceived as a legitimate, expected, external involvement. Sonia Peres was described as follows: ‘Most of her time is devoted to volunteer activities within various charitable associations’ (Ma’ariv, 1.3.96). Sarah Netanyahu ‘has only recently responded to the many offers directed at her to chair voluntary organisations’ (Olam Ha’isha, July 1996). Nava Barak ‘serves as the chairperson of the Friends of the new Center for Women’s Health . . . and she is also active in Elem, an organisation for youth at risk and in distress’ (Yediot Acharonot, 5.3.99). These bodies, run mainly by women, have assigned themselves the tasks of handling issues such as education, social welfare and health, which are considered feminine and secondary to central national issues such as security, foreign affairs and economics. While filling in the social needs gaps neglected by official institutions, they indirectly serve to isolate women from the centres of power. The voluntary unpaid work done by women in such organisations situate their roles in the realm of endless unrewarded care-giving functions, as an extension of their private spheres, reinforcing their ‘motherly traits’ of warmth, compassion, nurturing and self-sacrifice. 136 Parliamentary Affairs a homemaker: Many of the newspaper reports provided detailed descriptions of the First Lady’s home, furniture, home atmosphere, remodelling done and the like. All four women were described as performing household duties and as perfect hostesses for their husband’s guests. ‘Sonia manages the household herself. The house shines with cleanliness’ (Ma’ariv, 18.10.92). Leah Rabin was described as ‘engaged in all kinds of household chores in her home . . . at home she cooks by herself’ (Ma’ariv, 21.8.74). ‘On their beautiful apartment door in the prestigious Jerusalem neighbourhood, which Sarah designed and remodelled according to her own taste...’ (Yediot Acharonot, 31.12.93). ‘Nava’s house is a home with Galilee-Israeli cooking . . . it is always full of pots...’(Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). The women were identified in these articles with their ‘natural’ place, being at home, where they seemed fulfilled and happy, and were generous in acknowledging their husbands ‘help’: ‘. . . Shimon Peres goes down in the morning with the shopping basket to the grocery store, and as opposition leader, stands by the sink to wash the dishes’ (Hadashot, 6.7.85); ‘Occasionally Bibi [Netanyahu] makes a few [household] gestures’ volunteers Sarah Netan- yahu (Yediot Acharonot, 31.12.93). The unresolved issue of the division of labour in the domestic sphere is portrayed in its common liberal form: the woman is happily in charge, and her husband goes out of his way to ‘help her’. The more devotion and self-sacrifice exhibited by the woman in relieving her husband of any responsibility in the private sphere—the better she is portrayed by the media. This was clearly the case with Nava Barak: ‘Everything she could take off Ehud’s shoulders, she did . . . she took care of the house-finances and he for his part, backed her up. “I trust you, whatever you decide,” he would tell her. She designed the house they lived in by herself: Ehud was not there to choose the ceramic tiles’ (Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). The coverage trivialised the responsibilities involved in the private sphere—‘choosing the ceramic tiles’—once again reminds us who is involved with the really important things in politics, and who is busy with the marginal decisions. This framing is highlighted once again when it is contrasted with Nava Barak’s own recollection of her sacrifice, as she admitted: ‘I got used to caring for all matters of the home . . . I got used to packing and unpacking alone for each of the eleven times that Ehud and I moved from one place to another . . . it had something of a toughening experience to it’ (Yediot Acharonot, 5.3.99). For the woman involved, being a home-maker is far from a trivial pastime, it is hard, tough work. leisure: A favourite topic of newspaper coverage was the First Ladies’ leisure activities. All of them chose to describe themselves as avid book readers, a consensually highly regarded occupation in the tradition of the Jewish ‘People of the Book’. This was particularly emphasised in the description of Nava Barak, who majored in English literature but who ‘would not give up reading a book by an Israeli First Ladies and the Israeli Press 137 author’ (Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). Reading books was thus not only prescribed as a cultured activity signifying good taste and seriousness, but was also a form of declaring national loyalty. In addition, each of the women was described as having her own feminine interests. Sonia Peres, ‘if she goes out of her home, it is mainly to play gin rummy with her good friends. She likes to vacation in the Dead Sea’ (La’isha, 21.11.94). Leah Rabin ‘would not under any condition give up her favourite sport— tennis’ (Yediot Acharonot, 15.1.76). Sarah and Bibi Netanyahu ‘. . . like to be alone. They mainly go out to restaurants. They are both crazy about the movies’ (Olam Haisha, July 1996). Nava Barak is portrayed as having multiple leisure interests: ‘I like art very much, and I go to exhibitions, and I go with friends to movies and plays, and I study computers . . . and I dance folk-dances, and I participate in educational tours in Jerusalem...’(Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). Once again, Nava Barak’s leisure activities intertwine culture (exhibits, plays, movies, computers) with clear loyalty to the collective identity (folk-dancing, tours in Jerusalem). Dwelling on the First Ladies’ leisure activities reinforces the impres- sion that while the husband is devoting his life to the good of the nation, his wife has plenty of time to entertain herself with her hobbies, ranging from card games (the old-fashioned absent wife) to playing tennis (the active strong-willed wife), to eating in restaurants (the hedonistic spoiled wife) to going on educational tours in Jerusalem (the perfect Israeli wife). appearance: Not surprisingly, the First Ladies’ appearance is a cen- tral motif in the journalistic coverage, as is the case with most women in the public sphere. Similar expressions are often used to describe them as moulded in one ideal shape. For example, both Leah Rabin and Sarah Netanyahu were described as looking ‘younger than their age’ and of ‘walking around the house in jeans’. Leah Rabin was described as ‘having green eyes, black hair and being tall. Her dress—modest. Except for a diamond ring showing on her finger, her jewellery is always discrete. She never wears pants in public...’(La’isha, 4.5.68). Similarly, Sarah Netanyahu has . . . ‘big green eyes. When she loosens up, she looks younger than her age. At home she walks around in jeans that emphasise her thin figure. Outside, even when going to the market, she is meticulous about wearing an elegant outfit...’(Yediot Achar- onot, 31.12.93). Nava Barak was described as ‘a beautiful student of English literature’...‘inablue, tailored suit...’(Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). The emphasis on ‘looking young’ is a highly valued feminine trait, reflecting the importance attached to sexual attractiveness as the core of the feminine being. It is highlighted in many aspects of Israeli media —including news-reporting, election campaigns, advertising, talk- shows, coverage of female politicians, as well as the glorification of young fashion models, actresses and celebrities. 138 Parliamentary Affairs

Media relationships The four women developed different styles of relationships with the media, that reflect their personalities, their husbands’ leadership styles and interests, as well as the characteristics of Israeli media at the time. The 1990s brought about a major change in the media arena. Israel changed from being a single public television channel environment to a multi-channel one. A second commercial channel was introduced and the majority of households were connected to a multi-channel cable system. Competition between channels meant that ratings became a key factor in programming. Access to the media, through appearances in the news, talk shows and documentaries has become a key factor in attaining political visibility. These trends have also resulted in deep changes in the popular press, both in format and in content, moving gradually to more colourful and visual reportage.6 In this historical context, Sonia Peres represents the old-fashioned style of the absent First Lady. She always shied away from the media, did not escort her husband to public appearances, and did not initiate contacts. Her consistent silence resulted in general unfamiliarity and lack of interest in her. Ironically, her absence was brought up as an issue several times as a contributing factor to her husband’s failure in the elections. More recently, when Shimon Peres was a candidate for the ceremonial role of Israel’s President, the concern was voiced that he might decline the position because of his wife’s insistence on maintain- ing her privacy. Leah Rabin and Sarah Netanyahu, on the other hand, received massive coverage. They collaborated with the media, often initiating contacts and exposing private aspects of their lives. Both, however, learned the hard way that they could not always manipulate the media as they pleased, and that opening the door could be a double-edged sword. In fact, the media expressed harsh criticism of both, dwelling on stereotypical female characteristics and highlighting the supposed dam- age done by them to their husbands. In Leah Rabin’s case, media exposure of her American bank account resulted in Prime Minister Rabin’s resignation in 1977. Her long and stormy relationships with the media since have included direct confrontations, with threatening tactics against certain media personalities. Sarah Netanyahu received the most intimate and harsh criticism over many aspects of her private life: her mothering style, her relationships as an employer with house- hold and office staff (the most famous affair, not surprisingly, was related to her young sons’ nanny), her supposedly hedonistic and compulsive behaviour, her appearance, her childish lack of self-control and the like. Both women addressed the question what possible reasons there might be for such negative treatmeat. They attributed it, first, to personal envy of their socio-political position and, second, as a form of attack on their husbands. Both suggested a correlation between hard First Ladies and the Israeli Press 139 times in their husbands’ political careers and the timing of massive planned media attacks against themselves. It is interesting to note how First Ladies can find themselves exposed to negative coverage of the media even when they restrict themselves to traditional roles, they are criticised for not performing them well enough (like Sonia Peres) or to conforming to negative female stereo- types (being a ‘greedy’ wife like Leah Rabin or being a compulsive housewife and mother like Sarah Netanyahu). They are perceived as deviating from the expected ‘good-wife’ dependency role, and therefore as defying expectations of the ideal woman in general and the ideal nationalistic-Israeli woman in particular. Several critics have remarked on this phenomenon: ‘As a man, Netanyahu enjoys immunity over the way he leads his life, and the press is delighted to blame his wife for the private upsets of the couple’s private life...what Benjamin Netanyahu will be spared, she will get, and with interest’ (Yediot Acharonot, 9.10.96). Nava Barak provides an exception: she was presented as the suppor- tive, devoted, self-sacrificing wife, leading a very discreet, modest and private life and not exposing any unique independent self; she managed to keep the media generally sympathetic to her even during her hus- band’s rough times. The little coverage she received presented her as the prototype woman who sacrifices herself for the needs of her husband and, through him, for the nation. As a somewhat modern ‘superwoman’ who can do it all and yet remain unthreatening to society’s conceptions of womanhood: ‘She started to teach English in a middle school . . . She worked part-time, and combined it with folk-dancing, exercise, higher education and functioning as a mother of three teenage daughters’ (Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). She is the woman ‘who doesn’t irritate anybody’, whom the media loves to love because she ‘photographs well and she doesn’t bring us shame. She didn’t want this exposure, as we are reminded again and again, but was forced into it. This is an important point, since we don’t appreciate women who like exposure and enjoy it....sheisclearly intelligent and cultured, but those traits were never channelled toward building her own career. She is not too young, not too old. Pretty, but not in a blatant way. She is everything we wanted in the right measure’ (Ma’ariv, 20.4.99). This very positive portrayal is indeed the double-edged sword, since it idealises, reinforces and fixates the stereotypical and old-fashioned normative model of the perfect woman who is queen of the private sphere, willingly and gracefully sacrificing both her private and her professional life for her husband’s career and the collective good. Conclusion Understanding the construction of First Ladies in the Israeli media can be facilitated by applying a frame analysis.7 Frames offer an organisa- tional tool that creates meaning and directs possible interpretations. 140 Parliamentary Affairs

Journalists covering First Ladies (as they do other issues) depend on frames to organise an otherwise meaningless collection of facts. The commonality of the traditional sex-typing frames of reference within which First Ladies are treated in the Israeli press leave very little room for an alternative voice to come forward. The schema of ‘feminine’ continues to include the roles of mother, wife and housekeeper, the centrality of a particular form of accepted appearance, and traits such as compassion, warmth, honesty, nurturing, passivity and emotionality. Any deviation from these expectations is clearly sanctioned. ‘It is almost an Israeli political axiom: the candidates’ wives remain in the shadow. The Israeli public does not like them standing out, being involved, expressing themselves’ (Ma’ariv, 5.7.96). It is interesting to note that the coverage of First Ladies in the Israeli press does not leave room for the emergence of the more influential types of roles. None of these four women were portrayed as significant contributors to policy-making by influencing their husbands’ develop- ment and formulation of issues beyond occasional ‘interference’. Indeed, when reference to their involvement was made, it was either criticised, delegitimised or denied by the First Lady herself. Of Leah Rabin: ‘The media always tried to expose the degree to which she influenced her husband and his policy decisions. She was named in the newspapers as “Iron Lady” (Hadashot) and the country’s Manager (Ha’olam Hazeh). Yediot Acharonot was content with the question, “does Leah have an influence on policy?” . . . “It is only an attempt to hurt my husband” she responds. “I am, of course, far from any attempt at influencing him, and he doesn’t consult with me at all about political issues”’ (Ha’aretz, 27.5.94). ‘Staying out of it’, on the other hand, was positively acknowl- edged, as in the case of Nava Barak: ‘Barak’s close colleagues testify that she does not interfere in the matters of the Prime Minister. She hardly ever calls the office and only checks regarding those events where she has to participate with her husband’ (Ma’ariv, 25.4.00). Clearly, there was no evidence of these women having a powerful role on their own as politicians with an independent following. It takes Yizhak Rabin’s murder to create a change in the media’s relationship with his widow, Leah Rabin, from a ‘bitchy’ wife to a respectable leader. Indeed, the transformation of First Ladies’ images over time reveals much about society’s resistance to change. The media framed the turnover in Leah Rabin’s image as being the result of her personality as a ‘woman of extremes’ rather than as an expression of their own difficulty in handling women as complicated, multi-dimensional person- alities. The coverage unveils society’s difficulty in coming to terms with strong, opinionated women; it glorifies personality when it is directed towards total devotion to the husband, his career and his political goals, yet it reviles this kind of personality when it appears to stand indepen- dently on its own ground. The easiest escape route seems to be the appropriation of the non-conformist personality within traditional First Ladies and the Israeli Press 141 frames of reference: ‘Characters like Leah Rabin—the strong and dominant woman, who devotes herself entirely to the success, promo- tion and the defence of the memory of her husband the public person- ality, in such enormous emotional passion and high public profile—are not very common at our time in history. In our country we have grown accustomed to the prudish character of the “wife” operating behind the scenes as the representative and softening character . . .,’ wrote a prom- inent journalist in the quality daily (Ha’aretz, 13.11.00). This seems to offer a way to eat one’s cake yet keep it at the same time. Even Leah Rabin, a multi-faceted woman, is granted by the media a very narrow territory in which to exercise her free spirit: ‘A woman of contradictions was Leah Rabin. With the same orthodoxy with which she maintained a dinner protocol at home, the unbelievable strictness over pretty dishes and beautiful napkins . . . with some Palmachnik [Independence War soldier] non-conformist spirit, as the Prime Minister’s wife, she liked, for example, to sleep on the floor of the airplane’ (Ma’ariv, 17.11.00). Leah Rabin’s independence and non-conformity is best expressed, in Israeli newspapers’ perspective, by her ‘good-sport’ willingness to sleep on the floor. When push comes to shove, what ‘really’ matters is her role as the loving partner: ‘Above all it was a rare love story of a couple, devotion to one another, and an example of life together. This is such a rare story that we are bound to appreciate it, even if Leah certainly knew how to torment us with her stabs’ (Ma’ariv, 17.11.00). With a condescending generosity, the journalist is willing to exercise indulgence toward her opinionated verbal jabs, because ‘above all, it was a rare love story’. The First Lady appears in the public limelight due to her husband’s role, and is evaluated in those terms alone as: a ‘good’ wife, mother and housekeeper, reflecting positively on the person in office. When she is absent, as Sonia Peres was, she is criticised and pressured to expose herself. When she is too obviously present, like Sara Netanyahu, she invites harsh criticism or is used as a pawn in a cynical attempt to divert attention from the husband’s failing performance. When she is later actively ‘concealed’ from the public, as was Sarah Netanyahu during her husband’s brief reappearance as a candidate at the beginning of 2001, the public’s negative perceptions are reinforced that there is indeed something requiring concealment. Nava Barak attempted to play the expected roles ‘just right’: ‘...I wouldn’t have gone with my husband to Wye Plantation, but I think that Sonia Peres went too far with her style. It is also very difficult for me to be too clingy, but I feel that you can’t be detached’ (Yediot Acharonot, 5.3.99). Indeed, as we have seen, Nava Barak the wife and mother, ‘The One and Only’ as she was called by her husband the Prime Minister, was embraced by the media as the ideal First Lady: ‘A woman who grew and matured into the role by Barak’s side. There was never before a Prime Minister’s wife, as the one Nava Barak is going to be’ (Ma’ariv, 23.1.98). The 142 Parliamentary Affairs

Barak model, as presented in the Israeli press, was the epitome of gendered dichotomies: while the woman is emotional and relegated to the private, the man is publicly doing the important work, as Nava Barak herself testifies: ‘I was afraid to break down by Ehud, and I covered my head with the blanket and cried quietly to myself so he wouldn’t hear, so it wouldn’t interrupt him from doing the things he had to do’ (Yediot Acharonot, 5.3.99). Analysis of such representations of First Ladies should be understood in the broader perspective of the ongoing discussion of women’ images in Israeli media, their ideological roots and their consequences. Since the First Lady has no officially expected role, she is a product of her framing by the media, assisted by public relations consultants. Both the traditional American bourgeois model of the well-dressed First Lady as an escort and the alternative model of the powerful and independent American First Lady are too foreign for the Israeli public. In this sense, the Israeli expectations follow more along what has been portrayed in Israel as the British picture represented by Cherie Blair: ‘I am a mother,’ said Blair, ‘I am a barrister and I am married to this man standing by me.’ The British press did not neglect to mention that Cherie Blair never attempted to build a career for herself using her husband, as Hillary Clinton tried to do. It will be interesting to see whether the future will bring with it a locally contextualised alternative model which will cater to the particular characteristics and social needs of Israeli society.

1 L. Rabin, All the Time His Wife, Idanim, 1988 (trans. from Hebrew). 2 See for example B.B. Caroli, First Ladies, Oxford University Press, 1995; B.H. Winfield, ‘Who Elected Her Anyhow? The First Lady as a Campaign Issue’ in P. Norris (ed.), Women, Media and Politics, Oxford University Press, 1997. 3 See for example S. Fogiel-Bijaoui, ‘Women in Israel: The Social Construction of Citizenship as a Non- Issue’, Israel Society Research 1, 1997; H. Herzog, Gendering Politics: Women in Israel, Michigan Press, 1998. 4 See for example D. Lemish, ‘The Whore and the Other: Israeli Images of Female Immigrants from the Former USSR’, Gender & Society 2, 2000; D. Lemish and I. Barzel, ‘Four Mothers: The Womb in the Public Sphere’, European Journal of Communication, 2, 2000. 5 For a detailed analysis see S. Halevi, ‘The Premier Body: Sarah Netanyahu, Nava Barak and the Discourse of Womanhood in Israel’, NWSA Journal, 1999/2. 6 D. Caspi and Y. Limor, The In/Outsiders, Hempton, 2000. 7 E. Goffman, Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience, Cambridge, 1974.