Jesse Watters spent his airtime this week making the case against female presidents, then denying he meant it.
The Fox News host laid out a series of arguments for why women shouldn't lead the country, only to walk back the claim afterward. But the damage was already done. When a broadcaster with millions of viewers spends segments advancing a particular idea, the distinction between personal belief and provocative commentary becomes academic. Repetition normalizes the concept.
Watters' latest grievance appears to have been triggered by a recent interview featuring Nancy Pelosi. The former House speaker, now 86, remarked that while a female U.S. president is inevitable, she doubts it will happen during her lifetime. For some reason, this prompted Watters to flood his show with reasons why women lack the capacity to hold the nation's highest office.
This fits Watters' established pattern of inflammatory remarks designed to generate attention. He's previously suggested eating soup in public is unmanly, indulged in inappropriate commentary about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and recommended bombing United Nations headquarters. His mother, a self-described liberal, has publicly called into his program pleading with him to use his platform more responsibly.
The timing is particularly noteworthy. As a male president navigates what critics describe as a disastrous and unpopular military conflict, Watters chose that moment to question women's fitness for executive power. The irony seems lost on him.
What makes Watters' comments especially problematic isn't primarily that he holds these views, but that he broadcasts them to a large audience without meaningful pushback. Whether he genuinely believes women shouldn't be president becomes secondary to the effect of the messaging itself. Each segment plants the seed with viewers, creates talking points, and legitimizes the underlying prejudice.
The
Comments