Am I the only one offended by this Washington Post story about Hillary Clinton's "cleavage"?
From the Post story:
She was talking on the Senate floor about the burdensome cost of higher education. She was wearing a rose-colored blazer over a black top. The neckline sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape. The cleavage registered after only a quick glance. No scrunch-faced scrutiny was necessary. There wasn't an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable.
This is incredible. It's not like Clinton is wearing something that could be considered slinky. It is as prim and proper as it gets.
Is the Post realizing for the first time that Hillary Clinton is a woman and like all women she does have breasts and there's no getting away from that?
And I find it unbeleivable that even when you are a Senator running for President, there are journalists out there looking to see if you can see a "hint" of cleavage. Gosh!
The story is by one of my favorite Post writers, fashion and style correspondent, Robin Givhan. But this is a total mis-step.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Get over it Priya and stop being such a prude. Its a good thing that people are finally realizing that old Hill is a woman and a little cleavage never hurts, and in fact, helps to soften her harsh image.
I think you ought to write a letter.uj
Post a Comment