Completely Unnecessary

Only at my house can a gathering over a bottle of wine turn into a knock-down drag-out about the nature and purpose of feminism. I want to add, for the record, that I was not one of the hotter heads in the room.

I brought up this, of course. And, eventually, I defined feminism via my favorite political campaign of all time: Jim Edgar vs. Dawn Clark Netch for IL governor in god knows what year (I remember seeing her speak at WY with Madeline, so had to be after ‘93). Every time a comment, idea or proposal of Edgar’s was mentioned in the paper, it was just that - mentioned. Clark Netch, on the other hand, was an older woman who wore scarves. As I recall, not a single discussion of the woman or her campaign failed to mention the scarves and that she was not particularly attractive.

Feminism is about not having a mention about your clothes, style, etc. and, more importantly, ‘what they say about you’ attached to everything you do.

So to people like my housemate, who casually thinks that feminism has ‘just kind of gone too far’, when I stop seeing things like this in the paper, that’s a discussion we can have.

There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

…

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. 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.

To display cleavage in a setting that does not involve cocktails and hors d’oeuvres is a provocation. It requires that a woman be utterly at ease in her skin, coolly confident about her appearance, unflinching about her sense of style. Any hint of ambivalence makes everyone uncomfortable. And in matters of style, Clinton is as noncommittal as ever.

This isn’t to attack the point of the article, per se, mostly because I don’t care about HC’s cleavage. What I find appalling is that this is seen by the Post as a valid point of discussion. For all those who think women are just getting too many breaks or whatever these days - that it’s so easy being a woman - think about having comments about your appearance attached to every idea you propose or speech you make.

That’s the degrading part - knowing that your appearance is just as important as what’s going on inside your head. That you can get an entire article about your breasts, but not your policy initiatives.

No, I wouldn’t say we’ve arrived.

ps - I’m home.

Vaguely Related

• Tony Abbott Knows the Lingo
• The Media Introduces Dana Perino!