WWTBAM Bored

It seems to me that often when I read a story about a woman politician, there's a description of her clothes. I don't recall ever seeing a description of the clothes worn by a male politician.

Has anyone else noticed this? --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:I don't recall ever seeing a description of the clothes worn by a male politician.

I recall reading that Lincoln wore a stovepipe hat. I also recall reading that Clinton usually wears briefs. (Bill Clinton, that is. I don't recall anyone ever asking Hillary that question.)

Bob78164 wrote:It seems to me that often when I read a story about a woman politician, there's a description of her clothes. I don't recall ever seeing a description of the clothes worn by a male politician.

Has anyone else noticed this? --Bob

I notice it in all sorts of interviews, political or entertainment for sure, and often business. Makes me grind my teeth.

Tonight I edited a short story about an Olympic medalist skeet shooter whose shotgun was stolen from her truck while she was in the store shopping for shoes for her wedding. I took out the specifics of what she was shopping for, as they would never have written that if she'd been a man. That stuff ought to be irrelevant.

Part of it is that this culture does not especially want men's clothing to stand out - they are encouraged to wear solids, and simple color combinations. That's great for men, because it makes it harder for them to screw up their clothing choices.

Women are still mostly expected to stand out in some way (a simple way if they are in business), using colors or showing a little leg or chest. Even snazzy eyeglass frames are a way to make a statement. I have always resented this cultural double standard, and ignored it until I started teaching, when a mentor pointed out that wearing bright colors can help keep the attention of the students.

Ritterskoop wrote:Part of it is that this culture does not especially want men's clothing to stand out - they are encouraged to wear solids, and simple color combinations. That's great for men, because it makes it harder for them to screw up their clothing choices.

Women are still mostly expected to stand out in some way (a simple way if they are in business), using colors or showing a little leg or chest. Even snazzy eyeglass frames are a way to make a statement. I have always resented this cultural double standard, and ignored it until I started teaching, when a mentor pointed out that wearing bright colors can help keep the attention of the students.

About all they could note about the sartorial choices of male politicians is whether they were wearing a red or blue tie. Perhaps--if they're at an event trying to appear as "one of the people"--they might take off their jackets and even roll up their shirtsleeves!

MarleysGh0st wrote:

Ritterskoop wrote:Part of it is that this culture does not especially want men's clothing to stand out - they are encouraged to wear solids, and simple color combinations. That's great for men, because it makes it harder for them to screw up their clothing choices.

Women are still mostly expected to stand out in some way (a simple way if they are in business), using colors or showing a little leg or chest. Even snazzy eyeglass frames are a way to make a statement. I have always resented this cultural double standard, and ignored it until I started teaching, when a mentor pointed out that wearing bright colors can help keep the attention of the students.

About all they could note about the sartorial choices of male politicians is whether they were wearing a red or blue tie. Perhaps--if they're at an event trying to appear as "one of the people"--they might take off their jackets and even roll up their shirtsleeves!

Heck of a job, Brownie!

According to "Sylvia" -- that may be changing

Ritterskoop wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:It seems to me that often when I read a story about a woman politician, there's a description of her clothes. I don't recall ever seeing a description of the clothes worn by a male politician.

Has anyone else noticed this? --Bob

I notice it in all sorts of interviews, political or entertainment for sure, and often business. Makes me grind my teeth.

Tonight I edited a short story about an Olympic medalist skeet shooter whose shotgun was stolen from her truck while she was in the store shopping for shoes for her wedding. I took out the specifics of what she was shopping for, as they would never have written that if she'd been a man. That stuff ought to be irrelevant.

Part of it is that this culture does not especially want men's clothing to stand out - they are encouraged to wear solids, and simple color combinations. That's great for men, because it makes it harder for them to screw up their clothing choices.

Women are still mostly expected to stand out in some way (a simple way if they are in business), using colors or showing a little leg or chest. Even snazzy eyeglass frames are a way to make a statement. I have always resented this cultural double standard, and ignored it until I started teaching, when a mentor pointed out that wearing bright colors can help keep the attention of the students.

Yeah, I can't wait for the day when there is positively no noticeable distinction between men and women.





Just shoot me.

I can think of many for whom appearance was important, and clothes were part of appearance:

Would have been true for any British Pol prior to 20'th century, and I do remember the comment that Winston Churchill was the last person in the world who could properly wear a top hat.


Pierre Trudeau's clothes were a subject of interest, controversy and merriment, depending on one's POV, and remembering that that was still the sixties. René Levesque by contrast was known for his rumpled, ill-fitting suits.

There are many examples of distinctive dress in oldertimes in USA, but it is true that within the last generation the business suit has been a pretty constant uniform for POTUS. No doubt those who look carefully at the distnictions among guys in suits write first about how the POTUS wears his, but for the rest of us, it is not noticeable. To the point that the "suit-as-uniform" was imiitated by the rock band Presidents of the United States of America.

I do think Reagan was more somber, half way towards mortician, but he wore it well, as Rod said. Then the infamous sweater of Jimmy Carter....


Interestingly, our current PM Steven Harper has quite clearly borrowed from the Reagan look, and now from the Carter sweater look. He does not look particularly at ease in the sweater, and while he has jumped out to a lead in the polls, there is something about the way he did it -- largely by buying these ads at times the other parties could not afford, and the way he looks, that makes him vulnerable to a counterattack, at least I would be worrying if I were a Tory adviser. We shall see if my gut is generating false postive concerns or not.

There was a Doonesbury cartoon about this eons ago (okay, decades), and I have it in a book somewhere. I'll see if I can find it online, since I remember some of the wording...

Others were looking for it also a few years ago! I found the description on another forum:

Unfortunately, doonesbury.com’s online archive is behind a paywall. I happen to have that strip on dead-tree, however (in the collection The Doonesbury Chronicles). The “article” in goes like this:

Today, President King and Special Assistant Chuck Taylor presided over the presentation of the new University Art Gallery.

Mr. King, the pert father of three, looked stunning in his provocative mohair suit as he flashed a smile at nearby admirers.

Mr. Taylor, the husband of Mrs. Charles Taylor, and still a svelte, firm 30-32-30, turned more than one head with his sheer, skin-tight socks. Chuck, a special assistant, is a former brunette.

DevilKitty100 wrote:Yeah, I can't wait for the day when there is positively no noticeable distinction between men and women.

There was no other option for me except to LOL.

DevilKitty100 wrote:

Ritterskoop wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:It seems to me that often when I read a story about a woman politician, there's a description of her clothes. I don't recall ever seeing a description of the clothes worn by a male politician.

Has anyone else noticed this? --Bob

I notice it in all sorts of interviews, political or entertainment for sure, and often business. Makes me grind my teeth.

Tonight I edited a short story about an Olympic medalist skeet shooter whose shotgun was stolen from her truck while she was in the store shopping for shoes for her wedding. I took out the specifics of what she was shopping for, as they would never have written that if she'd been a man. That stuff ought to be irrelevant.

Part of it is that this culture does not especially want men's clothing to stand out - they are encouraged to wear solids, and simple color combinations. That's great for men, because it makes it harder for them to screw up their clothing choices.

Women are still mostly expected to stand out in some way (a simple way if they are in business), using colors or showing a little leg or chest. Even snazzy eyeglass frames are a way to make a statement. I have always resented this cultural double standard, and ignored it until I started teaching, when a mentor pointed out that wearing bright colors can help keep the attention of the students.

Yeah, I can't wait for the day when there is positively no noticeable distinction between men and women.





Just shoot me.

Can you say what about my statements made you think I was saying that there should be no differences?

I thought I was saying our choices should not be relevant or important in how we are evaluated as human beings, not that there can't be differences.

I thought I was saying it is unfair that women are judged or valued by their clothing choices, and for the most part, men aren't, because their choices are more limited.

But if I said something else, I'm sorry to have miscommunicated.

I can't wait until there is MORE of a distinction between men and boys. I just read an article about the whole "Entourage lifestyle" lasting longer and longer in men...

minimetoo26 wrote:I can't wait until there is MORE of a distinction between men and boys. I just read an article about the whole "Entourage lifestyle" lasting longer and longer in men...

I don't know what the Entourage Lifestyle is, but I'll bet it doesn't apply to me. I'm as Plain Jane as it gets when it comes to clothing, and have been since I was in my teens.....

lb13

littlebeast13 wrote:

minimetoo26 wrote:I can't wait until there is MORE of a distinction between men and boys. I just read an article about the whole "Entourage lifestyle" lasting longer and longer in men...

I don't know what the Entourage Lifestyle is, but I'll bet it doesn't apply to me. I'm as Plain Jane as it gets when it comes to clothing, and have been since I was in my teens.....

lb13

It's not about fashion, and more about partying and delaying settling into careers and families.

frogman042 wrote:

MarleysGh0st wrote:

Ritterskoop wrote:Part of it is that this culture does not especially want men's clothing to stand out - they are encouraged to wear solids, and simple color combinations. That's great for men, because it makes it harder for them to screw up their clothing choices.

Women are still mostly expected to stand out in some way (a simple way if they are in business), using colors or showing a little leg or chest. Even snazzy eyeglass frames are a way to make a statement. I have always resented this cultural double standard, and ignored it until I started teaching, when a mentor pointed out that wearing bright colors can help keep the attention of the students.

About all they could note about the sartorial choices of male politicians is whether they were wearing a red or blue tie. Perhaps--if they're at an event trying to appear as "one of the people"--they might take off their jackets and even roll up their shirtsleeves!

Heck of a job, Brownie!

I'm yanking your Texan citizenship if you can't spell better than that.

It's "heckuva job, Brownie!"

Ritterskoop wrote:

DevilKitty100 wrote:

Ritterskoop wrote: I notice it in all sorts of interviews, political or entertainment for sure, and often business. Makes me grind my teeth.

Tonight I edited a short story about an Olympic medalist skeet shooter whose shotgun was stolen from her truck while she was in the store shopping for shoes for her wedding. I took out the specifics of what she was shopping for, as they would never have written that if she'd been a man. That stuff ought to be irrelevant.

Part of it is that this culture does not especially want men's clothing to stand out - they are encouraged to wear solids, and simple color combinations. That's great for men, because it makes it harder for them to screw up their clothing choices.

Women are still mostly expected to stand out in some way (a simple way if they are in business), using colors or showing a little leg or chest. Even snazzy eyeglass frames are a way to make a statement. I have always resented this cultural double standard, and ignored it until I started teaching, when a mentor pointed out that wearing bright colors can help keep the attention of the students.

Yeah, I can't wait for the day when there is positively no noticeable distinction between men and women.





Just shoot me.

Can you say what about my statements made you think I was saying that there should be no differences?

I thought I was saying our choices should not be relevant or important in how we are evaluated as human beings, not that there can't be differences.

I thought I was saying it is unfair that women are judged or valued by their clothing choices, and for the most part, men aren't, because their choices are more limited.

But if I said something else, I'm sorry to have miscommunicated.

I'll probably elaborate more on this later today when I have time, but my short answer is pretty much summed up by one of Liberace's favorite lines:

"Go ahead and applaud. I didn't get dressed up like this to go unnoticed."

While I agree that there are women who may prefer to go unnoticed, I think most of us (females) spend a considerable amount of time and effort for the opposite effect. I just think it works better and is more fun than getting knocked in the head and dragged to a cave.

And no quibble about the intrinsic human value part of the post.

DevilKitty100 wrote:I'll probably elaborate more on this later today when I have time, but my short answer is pretty much summed up by one of Liberace's favorite lines:

"Go ahead and applaud. I didn't get dressed up like this to go unnoticed."

Preach on, girlfriend!

Makes me wanna put on my hot pink, overly sequined gown!

Liberace wrote:

DevilKitty100 wrote:I'll probably elaborate more on this later today when I have time, but my short answer is pretty much summed up by one of Liberace's favorite lines:

"Go ahead and applaud. I didn't get dressed up like this to go unnoticed."

Preach on, girlfriend!

Makes me wanna put on my hot pink, overly sequined gown!

Just be careful where you put your tulips, Handsome.

tubadave wrote:

DevilKitty100 wrote:Yeah, I can't wait for the day when there is positively no noticeable distinction between men and women.

There was no other option for me except to LOL.

The Borg look in your avatar should do the trick!

minimetoo26 wrote:Others were looking for it also a few years ago! I found the description on another forum:

Unfortunately, doonesbury.com’s online archive is behind a paywall. I happen to have that strip on dead-tree, however (in the collection The Doonesbury Chronicles). The “article” in goes like this:

Today, President King and Special Assistant Chuck Taylor presided over the presentation of the new University Art Gallery.

Mr. King, the pert father of three, looked stunning in his provocative mohair suit as he flashed a smile at nearby admirers.

Mr. Taylor, the husband of Mrs. Charles Taylor, and still a svelte, firm 30-32-30, turned more than one head with his sheer, skin-tight socks. Chuck, a special assistant, is a former brunette.

If it was indeed Chuck Taylor, I hope he was wearing these with his socks!

They seem to report about whether male politicians wear American flag tie pins or not.

minimetoo26 wrote:
Mr. Taylor, the husband of Mrs. Charles Taylor, and still a svelte, firm 30-32-30, turned more than one head with his sheer, skin-tight socks. Chuck, a special assistant, is a former brunette.

News articles do refer to people's relatives if they are more well known, regardless of whether the celebrity is male of female.

Whenever they refer to that trooper, Wooten, in Alaska, they refer to him as the "former brother-in-law" of Sarah Palin.

In some cases, the fact that the person has a famous relative is the only reason the story is considered news at all (remember Billy Carter). In other cases, knowing who the relative is puts the story in perspective (athletes who are the children of other athletes).

Once the relative becomes well known in his/her own light, the references tend to cease (or go the other way). When Drew Barrymore first appeared in pictures, articles always mentioned her father and grandfather. Last week, an old film with John Drew Barrymore was released on DVD and it mentioned that his best known claim to fame was being the father of Drew Barrymore.