One theopry,as below is that she triangulates her clothing. I find this hard to accept. There is another theory and that simply that she has little taste. Does this matter? No. Bit the samer issue aouwld arise fopr a male who dressed in doudy clothes. Our current President is proabably the most extreme male model we have ever had .. look at how he dresses for the occasion! His costume changes are wrthy of vaudeville.
So why is HRC so dowdy? My thought is that she is living in an era where woman needed to dress right. Her generation of successful women were obsessed wiht unoforms. To be a marine, you need the blue treousers and red stripes, To be abanker a mannish suit and no makeup. Bars were to confine while leaving woman at an advatge of NOT having manly chests and broad sholder that "fit" a suit.
Them times ahve fortunately gone away. Woemn in authroty today do have a kind of uniform but it one that enhances rather than conceals gender. As blwo, Ciondi Rice is a great example as is Congresswoman Lowry. This is a sixtyish l;ady form California. She was on TV yesterday as a pro HRC talkiing head. Ms. L. is rather hiomely (in the positive sense of hadsome w/o being pretty). But she wopre a blue suit, soem jewelery, .. the female rquivalent of what Obama or McCain where. Herc lothese were not an issue at all.
Imagine, by comnparison, jow Obama would come of if he showed up at a debate in a letyter jacket or even a Harris tweed with pathces on the shoulders?
Bottom line, Hillary doe snot have to dress the way she does. I suspect she is still living in the 70s..
Why does Hillary Clinton wear such bad clothes? | "It is obvious to the point of cliche that Clinton is in a trickier position in many ways than Obama: when he is emotional, he is persuasive; when she is emotional, she is betraying her feminist roots. So just as Obama can cut a dash in his slimline, clearly style-conscious suits, Clinton has to hide herself in garishly coloured squares going under the name of 'jackets', or else risk being dismissed as so vain that she would be too busy putting on her lipstick to respond to an international terror threat.
But is this necessarily true? One need only look at Condoleezza Rice to see that, contrary to what some might think, American voters aren't always horrified to see a woman in power who doesn't look like Eleanor Roosevelt, and Rice has to placate a far more conservative group of people than the one Clinton is meant to be wooing. Nor did Rice's appearance several years ago in US Vogue seem to harm her credibility. Clinton, on the other hand, was so fearful of such a possibility that she backed out of a shoot with the magazine at the last minute last year, provoking a diatribe from Vogue's editor, Anna Wintour. To make matters even worse for Clinton, who should appear that same month on the cover of Men's Vogue but Obama, appearing very appearing very suave and relaxed, whereas Clinton now looked as if she was neurotically focus grouping her campaign to death.
When Clinton complained in a debate just before the March 4 primaries that she "always" got the tougher time from the press, there was another clue to her personal style. It is as if Clinton - incredibly, given what her husband went through - seems to be under the impression that the media is always fair. So last year, when there was a bit of a hoo-ha in the US press about Clinton showing some cleavage, instead of dismissing it as the load of misogynistic nonsense it was, she seems to have taken this to heart and buried herself ever since in shapeless, defeminised, frequently yellow (yellow!) suits.
Of course a woman shouldn't be denied the presidency just because she can't dress well, but that is not the point with Clinton - she has always carefully tailored her style to what she thinks the electorate desires. Just look back at photographs from when Bill was elected and Hillary was wearing pleated skirts and alice bands, looking very much like a Sloane circa 1984. In short, she is doing what she thinks she should as opposed to having a splinter of courage and being true to herself. Which kinda makes you wonder what sort of leader she would be. And that, Anonymous, is why it matters.
"Here is the beginning of my post. And here is the rest of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment