To Breast Or Not To Breast . . .
. . . That is the question.
Fuggedabout troop withdrawal timetables, tax cuts and universal health insurance. Can a woman political candidate be taken seriously if she shows cleavage?
This became an issue last fall in Alabama, when The Associated Press noted in a report on Loretta Nall, the Libertarian Party candidate for governor:
“[She is] campaigning on her cleavage and hoping that voters will eventually focus on her platform.”
Now I’ll be the first to admit that while my thoughts do occasionally turn to breasts, I do not lie awake at night pondering the issue, but there it was again the other day in the WaPo when fashion writer Robin Givhan wrote about the “interest” in Hillary Rodham Clinton’s neckline on the Senate floor:
“With Clinton, there was the sense that you were catching a surreptitious glimpse at something private. You were intruding — being a voyeur . . . Showing cleavage is a request to be engaged in a particular way.”
I guess you had to have been there because whenever I have been in the same room with Hillary, including a meeting when I was right across the table from her, I can say in all honesty that I was not drawn to her breasts.
Without going off the deep end and examining whether any of the male presidential wannabes show any . . . well, I did notice a bit of a bulge in one candidate’s pants during a recent debate . . . I gotta tell you that this cleavage thing is beyond silly, especially when someone like Givhan tries to get all weighty.
Cleavage is a matter of personal choice. Let’s leave it at that, okay?
11 Responses to “To Breast Or Not To Breast . . .”
Thanks for the plug. My take on the strangeness of this situation is here
Clinton Campaign Copies Cleavage Candidate
Despite the fact that she’s really not rivaling Gypsy Rose Lee, its pitiful that these faux controversies are what constitute media coverage of a presidential candidate these days.
We live in the era where the escapades of Brittney, Lindsay and Paris get more attention than the death of a former first lady, so what else would you expect?
One sexist question deserves another:
Can a woman political candidate be taken seriously if she DOES NOT show cleavage?
I don’t particularly like the French, but they are so much more enlightened on this subject than we are.
This is just more of the same bizarre obsession with the Clinton’s sex lives.
She’s what, in her 60s? That these writers and reporters think she is some sort of sex object at that age says a lot more about them than it does about Hillary.
Ugh, this reminds me of when Pelosi was sworn in as speaker. This is supposedly this historic moment and instead of talking about her career, her years in public office etc. all the news coverage spent lengthy time commenting on her “teal blue suit” and such nonsense. I don’t know how sexist the population is, but the news-media has it’s head so far up its A@# that it doesn’t even seem to fathom that THEY are the ones revealing prejudice when they question the prejudice of others in that light.
I’ll laugh if Fox picks up on this and starts to suggest that a showing cleavage undermines the seriousness of a female politicians political campaign. If I remember correctly, they tend to go out of their way to emphasize the breasts of female republican candidates.
Huh? Which candidates would those be? Citations please.
Entropy,
It was for Katherine Harris, she is the one I remember … Fox dropped all the graphics so her chest took up a rather large portion of the screen.
I always have thought that it was sexist that the First Lady makes many more headlines with her fashion than with her opinions, projects or good deeds. She is expected above all to be a fashion icon at the balls and state dinners. Which is why it would be interesting to have the first First Man, and see if they put him to the same standard, lol.
This could all be solved by making nudity de rigeur for both men and women in all public appeareances
I call for transparency..
Hmm, strange. You’d think the hosts on Fox provide enough eye candy that they wouldn’t need to bother. Media is a strange business.