Comments on: Show us yer tits! On second thought, don’t!

By: Bruce/Crablaw

Bruce/Crablaw — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 05:15:49 +0000

What this says about me, I am not sure. But when I saw the picture, the first thing I thought was not “decolletage” but rather, she looks seriously stoned. Granted, it’s a pixelated freeze-frame and she didn’t get to pick the camera angle. But that’s how I call it from the appearance.

By: Zuzu

Zuzu — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:07:10 +0000

Thing is, Robin Givhan is actually very good at getting at sociological issues surrounding fashion (see, e.g., her piece about what Cheney’s parka and snowboots at an Auschwitz memorial meant in context, and how the way that John and Jane Roberts dressed their kids (not to mention Jane) as a conscious effort to evoke the Kennedys). And it started off as a fairly interesting examination of how different cultures treat revealing clothing on their female leaders.

But then she got into the whole unzipped-fly analogy, and it went to hell.

By: Mnemosyne

Mnemosyne — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 00:59:38 +0000

“Showing cleavage is a request to be engaged in a particular way. It doesn’t necessarily mean that a woman is asking to be objectified, but it does suggest a certain confidence and physical ease. It means that a woman is content being perceived as a sexual person in addition to being seen as someone who is intelligent, authoritative, witty and whatever else might define her personality. It also means that she feels that all those other characteristics are so apparent and undeniable, that they will not be overshadowed.”

And the problem with Hillary Clinton wanting to be perceived this way is …. what, again?

Seems to me that the problem here is the writer’s, not Clinton’s. The reporter sounds like she just walked in on her parents and discovered that — ew! ick! — those old people actually, like, have sex and stuff! Disgusting!

By: inkybrain

inkybrain — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:24:04 +0000

You’d think that anyone writing an article citing other women politicians across the world would realize that…women can actually be politicians without causing nationwide panic. But apparently not. What’s the follow-up article going to be? “It has been suggested that Sen. Clinton has two X chromosomes. This has led to speculation that she may be in possession of a stash of Olde-Timey liquor jugs. Will she enforce the Volstead Act?”

By: Kate Harding

Kate Harding — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:17:08 +0000

I don’t think anyone’s going to be throwing beads at her, Robin.

That totally made me LOL. Which was a nice break from the crying.

By: B.D.

B.D. — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:48:23 +0000

Oh, good god. Newsflash! Hillary Clinton is a woman! We’re reminded of this fact constantly by the media as she runs for the presidency. They comment on whether or not she can be tough. They comment on the style and color of the clothes she is wearing. Now, they comment on her cleavage. How much more immature can these idiots get? Forget it…I’ll be sorry I asked…expect a scene from Porky’s to be the model for the next new low discussion. Ugh…

By: Laurie

Laurie — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:34:58 +0000

That would be what some colleagues and I call “church cleavage” — enough to look nice, but not enough to be embarrassed by if attending church, especially someone else’s church! I wonder how much of it is “Yikes! A woman *of her age* showing cleavage! The horror!” Bleah!

The fact of the matter is, a V-neck blouse/shell/t-shirt is DANG flattering on most woman. And apparently, Senator Clinton just can’t win.

Can we be done with this particular round of backlash now?