Nancy Pelosi’s Hair is Not Newsworthy
I receive email alerts from Huffington Post. Whether you agree with the write or not, Huffington Post is on top of their media coverage and I happen to enjoy being up to date when it comes to what’s going on in the world, as any feminist/political blogger should! However, I was fed up with their Style Alerts by the time the second style email was delivered to my inbox. The entire style section of the Huffington Post is ridiculous, sexist, and the furthest thing from “newsworthy” that I can think of. The big poll as of late is Do you prefer Nancy Pelosi’s hair long or short? Who the fuck cares? She is the House Speaker and the last time I checked, the length of her hair had nothing to do with how she performs her job. The post regarding this very hot topic reads:
See how House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s hair has gone from short to long to somewhere in between over the last 13 years.
Then voice your preference in the poll below.
The first comment left on that post got it right:
Oh, Come on! This is stupid and sexist! Where’s the slideshow featuring Joe Biden’s hair through the years!
Other style alerts I have received throughout the past few days have been about the fact that Michelle Obama wears sleeveless dresses (and apparently her arms are offensive) and the fact that she wore a suit of blue velvet to address the Environmental Protection Agency. What’s next, ‘Hillary Clinton wears shoes?’
This is ridiculous. Why is it acceptable to obsessively critique strong, professional, and intelligent women? Why must be continuously degrade women to the point where their fashion and their hairstyles are up for discussion? I think that not only these women, but all women deserve so much more than that. We are not merely the clothes we wear or how we look; when will what we actually do become newsworthy?
Related Posts:
23 Comments Leave a Comment
Leave a Reply
Sex-Positivity
I'm passionate about sex-positivity and believe every sexual being should have the freedom to explore their sexuality safely and without condemnation. I even lost my ad network after my refusal to censor myself after reviewing feminist porn.So if you're in the market for sex toys, porn, books, etc. take a look at the retailers below, all of which are feminist-friendly.
Out Campaign
The OUT Campaign allows individuals to let others know they are not alone. It can also be a nice way of opening a conversation and help to demolish the negative stereotypes of atheists. Let the world know that we are not about to go away and that we are not going to allow those that would condemn us to push us into the shadows.
If a woman is famous, how she carries herself, including physical beauty is completely fair game. It always has been since the invention of TV and the mass media. The same can be said for men. However the same shouldn't be for women and men in general.
The same can be said for men? Did I miss the slideshow and poll of Joe Biden's hair throughout the years? How about people claiming Bill Clinton's arms are offensive and open to debate? Please provide me with these medias where we can have our say about how men carry themselves. And this brings me to another point–Politicians should not be seen as celebrities. They are not movie stars, they are the people running the country you live in and deserve a hell of a lot more respect.
Ha ha, I care! I liked it long.
The style updates were exactly why I flat-out quit reading HuffPo. I can get my news elsewhere, like NPR and the BBC, and not be subjected to bullshit like that.
But WHY is physical beauty fair game? Is there any justifiable reason? I can't think of one.
Wow, who cares about Nancy Pelosi's hair! We should be more focused on the economy and the money that our government is handing out to big business while we suffer.
Because I think that is one way to attract people to comment on a site. Others banter racist slurs ( no names mentioned) to get a response…some just make overtly sexual comments.
Well here is one reason that was rather compelling for me. The Dalai Lama once wrote that our mental state has a very discernible effect on our physical state. I think his point is that if you're having a bad hair day, it's possibly because it started with a bad mind day. Secondly, people implicitly understand this truth. A person that takes good care of his/her body gives the impression that he/she also takes good care of other things in his/her life. The more that a position requires human interaction and public relations, the more physical beauty is a factor. Compare celebrities and business executives with academics and writers. I'd say all of these livelihoods are very important to society and culture, however physical attractiveness is more of a factor of success when a role requires more social interaction. The only problem I see with this is glorifying physical attractiveness as the only factor, which is really damaging to people's self-esteem. Even successful modeling requires the right attitude, if anyone hasn't seen Tyra Banks' show. I don't think the Huffington Post article doing this. I think they're just trying to get clicks. My final point is that everyone judges everyone by physical beauty in real life (in person, not on the phone or through E-mail). Before you open your mouth in an interview, or before you approach someone in a bar, you look at each other, and, unfortunately judge them. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental in this way, but there's no way around it. Otherwise we wouldn't take showers, comb our hair, or even wear clothes for that matter.
Well, I think you're onto something. We don't care about Joe Biden's hair or Barack Obama's arms, and that's an inequality, but I think there's a reason for it. First some examples. The big one I can think of is Nixon vs. Kennedy. After a little googling, check out this excerpt about Sarkozy and Chirac: “There are also important differences. Chirac is tall, Sarkozy is short.” Why is that an important difference? Isn't that unfair and irrelevant? Why aren't women judged likewise? Well for men, height is a HUGE factor of physical attractiveness. For women, it's not as big of a factor. Does anyone care if Sarah Palin is shorter than Joe Biden? But during the presidential debates, people repeatedly commented on Obama's height advantage over Mccain: “Obama must maximize his height advantage of at least 6 inches.” And on Obama's voice: “it's too bad John [Edwards] doesn't have Obama's deep voice, too.” Shouldn't the words coming out of their mouths be more important than how deep they sound? You already know about Bill O'Reilly's remarks about Helen Thomas. What makes a man attractive is different from what makes a woman attractive to the general public. It seems that for women, the factors of attractiveness have been made much more overt than for men. As far as respecting politicians, I respect my parents and loved ones far more than politicians. They chose public life, so they get all its benefits and costs. Again, I agree this Huffington article is utterly inane, but again, they're just trying to get clicks.
Sources:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/…
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/…
http://www.newsweek.com/id/84343/output/print
Yes! And get subsequent advertising revenue….
I guess Hillary's hair has been too boring for the last few years, so they needed a new target. Maybe Nancy Pelosi can turn up somewhere in a Blair Waldorf headband and really give them a groundbreaking “news” story to cover.
I really appreciate you posting about this. Are you thinking of doing a “part 2″ to this post? I think all of us would love to hear a bit more from you on this.
I agree with you. News has definitely had and off day when the biggest thing they talk about is the length of Nancy's hair. It seems journalists get things messed up all the time, huh? Analyzing political figures as if they were Hollywood stars and treating Hollywood stars as if they were important political figures. Thanks for the post.
Yeah, that is pretty patronizing. I wonder if people actually take part in these polls?
It is refreshing. I guess we're sick of hearing about death,war and the failing economy. Lighten up once a while guys!
haha. Thats a nice one. Who the hell cares whether her hair is long or short!
It's refreshing to judge a woman not for the work she does but by how she has worn her hair throughout the years? I had no idea! Silly me was sitting here thinking it was just sexist.
House Speaker Pelosi isn't the only high ranking government official whose hair has been under scrutiny as of late; moreover, the triviality has been given airtime on the last of the big 3, if you will, of cable media outlets. Just last night on Rachel Maddow I heard mention of how rapidly President Obama's hair has grayed. Keith Olberman focused on his own hair on his own show with a photomontage of head shots throughout his many years in broadcast, although his 2006 hair did deserve attention. At least a few moments as what I saw was ~ okay now I find myself caught in the political hair babble. Actually, I just wanted to STOP.
Agree with most of you that she is perfect woman. That for sure. Here the little offtop from me about scammer payment system Liberty Reserve – you can read it all information here http://www.trainexservice.com/libertyfraud/
lol, I completely agree, just like talking about Obama's dogs.
now days due to skin and other related problem many are losing their good hairs at the age of 20's. i think it is gene and also the food habit and too much of make up with colors result in that.
I really do not think any womens hair style should be considered news, especially those in politics. I actually prefer her focus to be on the country and the best policies for those that live here. Not her hair.
I really do not think any womens hair style should be considered news, especially those in politics. I actually prefer her focus to be on the country and the best policies for those that live here. Not her hair.