The mind, so easily distracted by things mauve and lemon yellow, strays from more pressing concerns to ponder the sartorial: How many pantsuits does Hillary Clinton have in her closet? And does she ever wear them in the same combination more than once?
The pantsuit is Clinton's uniform. Hers is a mix-and-match world, a grown-up land of Garanimals: black pants with gray jacket, tan jacket with black pants, tan jacket with tan pants. There are a host of reasons to explain Clinton's attachment to pantsuits. They are comfortable. They can be flattering, although not when the jacket hem aligns with the widest part of the hips (hypothetically speaking, of course). Does she even have hips?
This is just a more acid version of the same story Givhan did on Nancy Pelosi last year, headlined “Muted Tones Of Quiet Authority: A Look Suited To the Speaker.”
We get it. Women in politics wear pantsuits. Stop the fucking presses. Hey, Robin, with any luck we’ll get more women elected to political office and then you can just phone it in.
Of course, the 2006 Pelosi story did have this gem:
(The appearance of the current speaker, Rep. Dennis Hastert, will go unmentioned here except to say that there is nothing chic or particularly polished about it.)
Thank you for explaining why you never did a story on Hastert’s schlubby, wrinkled appearance. We all know, men’s appeareance is not news. Women are still judged by their external qualities: their clothes, their mannerisms, the size of their hips and the way they laugh and even their accessories. No wonder we still don’t have a woman president. Hastert’s slept-on-a-park-bench look wasn’t even noteworthy, but imagine if a woman had shown up for work looking like that.
Honestly, aren’t we way overdue for an end to this sexist nonsense? This is a presidential election. I don’t care what people are wearing, I want to know what they will DO if the American people hand them the reins of power.
I know my endless harangues against the media get tiresome but honestly: "Clinton-the-human-color-wheel”? How can you not read that and just think the WaPo doesn’t get it?