fashion backward

a busy month and a bit of an inspiration-drought have made for a quiet blog this october...

but today my blood pressure went up a couple of dozen points when i read the following gem:

Not Over The Hill: Secretary Clinton Turns A Stylish 62
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton turns 62 years young today, and we can't help but be sentimental about her style statements over the years. She started out as sassy Miss Rodham sporting striped pants and huge glasses in the '60s, donned sparkles and scarves in the '70s and '80s, and worked up to becoming the 1990s first lady who fancied a good plaid and headbands. And now, as the modern day pantsuit enthusiast, Hillary has certainly covered a lot of sartorial ground. Take a look back at the Queen of the Hill's memorable ensembles...

ok...let's just do a quick run-down:
sexism, check.
agism, check.
total non-sequitur??? CHECK.

what in the world does the Secretary of State's taste in "a good plaid" have to do with anything?

nothing. except that the Secretary of State happens to be a WOMAN. so of course, on her birthday, it makes total sense to publish a retrospective of her STYLE choices, rather than her political ACCOMPLISHMENTS.

bonus: there's also a slide show of michelle obama's "cheap chic" style choices on HuffPo today.
don't get me wrong- i love both of these stylish women. but why oh why aren't we being treated to a slideshow of any male dignitaries?

that's right. because they're men. but when it comes to women, their fashion is the most interesting aspect of their lives, and clearly the top priority in their busy schedules.

not to put too fine a point on this, but here's why this seriously gets under my skin: when we focus our national attention on a female politician/public figure's FASHION choices, rather than their social, political or humanitarian choices, we are implicitly MOVING and SECONDING the notion that this is the extent of said woman's worth. this is what matters to women: CLOTHES. we don't want to bother our pretty little heads with anything more significant than today's choice of printed j.crew cardigans.

and that implicit message leads to explicit sexist treatment of women from the board room to the stock room to the courtroom to the hospital room.

to sum up: if you're going to give me a retrospective slideshow of hillary clinton's wardrobe, either include her corresponding political milestones along with the designer's names, or show me bill's annual pantsuit choices on his birthday too. (yeah right)

better yet. stop wasting bandwidth with this kind of offensive and patriarchal crap. arguably the two most powerful women in the united states deserve to be regarded as more than mannequins. we all do.


Elizabeth said...

Seriously? sigh. it reminds me of the fascination with Madeline Albright's pin collection. let's start a blog commenting on the daily tie choices of certain male political figures. I mean, it must say something about them, right???

Jade @ Tasting Grace said...

Really? Really? Oh that is maddening. Are her CLOTHES really all they can focus on? Ugh.
Thanks for sharing! As frustrating as that is, it's definitely eye-opening.