It's interesting. Very rarely see it applied to men, but it is pretty much standard reporting when they are writing about a woman to refer to her either by her marital status or her parenting status (wife of X, young mum, Grandmother).
Maybe they've decided to treat male subjects the same as they've been treating female subjects, all this time?
From an article in the Guardian about these reporting tendencies :
Quote:
Did you know that women can continue to manage high-profile jobs after their grownup children have had babies? This may not sound like a shocking revelation, but it came as such a surprise to the Sunday Times that it made its front page on the weekend: "Grandmother, 71, tackles slave traffickers for the Pope." That she is a university professor and the most senior woman in the Vatican did make it into the article itself, but apparently wasn't considered as arresting for the headline as her age and offspring. Despite several ensuing pleas to the media to present women as people first and babymakers/marital appendages second, the Times was the next paper to get in on the act with another headline a few days later declaring: "Banker's wife arrested over deaths of her three children."
-snip-
The phenomenon, whereby women's identities and achievements are considered less important than their husband's role, even when the woman is focus of the story, was also seen last year in the case of drowned research scientist Rosemary Wickstead. "London GP's wife drowned on holiday trying to rescue son", read one headline ; "Drowned GP wife may have been trying to save her son" said another .
|