Republicans and Democrats alike have panned Sen. Katie Britt’s response to last week’s State of the Union address, but Professor Sheri Rogers of Grand Valley State University in Michigan is one of the few people with an explanation for why things went so awry in the senator’s fake kitchen.
Sheri Rogers
“I research women and far-right movements in the U.S. and Europe, including why women are increasingly likely to join and how their role has changed. This speech was a masterclass,” tweeted Rogers, who is an adjunct professor in American politics and international relations at the state university.
“First, platform a woman. This is becoming an increasingly common and intentional tactic, especially if you can use that woman to promote the heteronormative (and white) family archetype. Place the woman in an environment that promotes traditional gender roles, even if it is a façade. Many of these women promote traditional gender norms while often violating them (e.g., working outside the home).
“Many of these women promote traditional gender norms while often violating them.”
“Use references from the majority culture, like religious symbols and practices, references to ethnicity, or language (wearing a cross, referencing prayer). Raise the alarm about the threats to children. The threats to children are always a powerful motivator, which is why the ‘Save the Children’ campaign and attacks on schools and libraries as threats are so effective. ‘She had been sex-trafficked by the cartels at age 12.’
“Frame immigrants as a threat to women and children, especially white women. ‘Just think about Laken Riley … this beautiful, 22-year-old nursing student went out on a jog one morning. But … she was brutally murdered by one of the millions of illegal border crossers.’
“Hearken back to an idealized version of the nation (e.g., references to the blood of patriots who overthrew tyrants and pioneers who tamed the wild), and we need to reclaim that. ‘Despite the current state of our union, our best days are still ahead.’
“Promote childbirth (within heteronormative families, of course). ‘We want to help loving moms and dads to bring precious life into this world.’
“Incorporate a call to engagement. ‘I am asking you for the sake of your kids and grandkids, get into the arena.’”
She summarized: “What is the cumulative effect? First, and most importantly, is the intentional framing. Putting women in leadership positions softens the rough edges of the movement that historically has been patriarchal and misogynistic. This mainstreams the movement.
“Putting women in leadership positions softens the rough edges of the movement that historically has been patriarchal and misogynistic.”
“Second, use women and children (especially children) as a foil against whatever you’re fighting against: current leadership, immigrants, foreigners, etc. Who doesn’t want to do whatever you can to protect children? This motivates participation.
“As a result, more women are not only joining far-right movements but are becoming active participants. This, in turn, helps normalize the movement, making it more socially acceptable and contributing to the rise of the far-right in places like the U.S., France and Germany.”
In response to this thread, Rogers engaged in a public conversation with Eviane Leidig, postdoctoral fellow at Tilburg University who is affiliated with the Center for Research on Extremism at the University of Oslo, the Global Network on Extremism and Technology in London, and the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism in The Hague. Leidig is author of the new book The Women of the Far Right: Social Media Influencers and Online Radicalization.
Leidig told the French magazine Le Temps she believes GOP leadership made a “strategic selection of Sen. Katie Britt as the modern image of the party — women who normalize extreme right talking points.”
Publicity for her books explains the premise:
On mainstream social media platforms, far-right women make extremism relatable. They share Instagram stories about organic foods that help pregnant women propagate the “pure” white race and post behind-the-scenes selfies at antivaccination rallies. These social media personalities model a feminine lifestyle, at once promoting their personal brands and radicalizing their followers. Amid discussions of issues like dating, marriage and family life, they call on women to become housewives to counteract the corrosive effects of feminism and champion the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, which motivated massacres in Christchurch, El Paso, and Buffalo.
While white males get the most attention as influencers among white supremacists in America today, Leidig “argues that far-right women are marketing themselves as authentic and accessible in order to reach new followers and spread a hateful ideology,” a book publicity flier explains. “This insidious and highly gendered strategy takes advantage of the structure of social media platforms, where far-right women influencers’ content is shared with and promoted to mainstream audiences.”
The fact that Britt wore a silver cross necklace while giving the prime-time rebuttal was not lost on some critics.
One X respondent noted: “A female senator from the state where the highest court just banned IVF treatment is wearing a prominent cross necklace, sitting at kitchen table, and railing against immigration.”
And Los Angeles Times columnist LZ Granderson took up the cross as well:
The youngest Republican woman ever elected to the Senate, and the first from Alabama, chose a long-sleeved green blouse for the biggest speech of her political career. The centerpiece was the crucifix pendant hanging from her necklace, which would occasionally flicker when Sen. Katie Britt shifted her weight. This wasn’t by accident: What better way to communicate trustworthiness to evangelical voters than a cross?
Granderson’s column also exposed an anti-immigrant story Britt told as a manipulated fabrication of real events to score political points against the Biden administration on immigration. Granderson wrote, “In other words, the woman sitting in the kitchen with the cross glittering on her neck lied.”
In that sense, the silver cross around the senator’s neck appears as fake as the kitchen she was sitting in, the columnist implied.
“The question for the evangelical voters who make up much of the Republican base is how much more politics can outweigh morals in the name of whatever conservatism even means anymore. Politico reported Monday that an evangelical group is spending north of $60 million to get a twice-impeached, repeatedly indicted former president back in the White House, so perhaps that is our answer.
“The whole ‘moral majority’ movement in conservative politics always involved theatrics and cosplay. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene took it to a new level by deploying Hunter Biden’s sexting photos during a House committee hearing. And now the future of the Republican Party is sitting in a kitchen purporting to speak honestly with voters of faith while telling a lurid lie for political purposes.”
Britt and her family attend First United Methodist Church of Montgomery, Ala.
Correction: This story was corrected March 13 to remove a line that said First United Methodist Church of Montgomery had voted to disaffiliate with The United Methodist Church.
