[img_assist|fid=2835|thumb=1|alt=pelosi suit|caption=courtesy of New York Times]
Here's an informal poll:
Do articles and quotes like this one, about the chic of political leaders like Speaker Nancy Pelosi, demean women in power, or burnish them?
Fashion authorities say Mrs. Pelosi should be applauded for her color choice (burgundy on Jan. 4, the day she was sworn in), her playfulness with jewelry (chunky, but tasteful, including signature Tahitian pearls) and her suit selection (from velvet to tweed), all of which can be imitated at a more affordable price by women who are not wealthy. Women are already taking note of her style; orders of Tahitian pearls have skyrocketed. (The New York Times, "Speaking Chic to Power").
Personally, I'm all for it, as long as articles such as this are contained in appropriate sections of newspapers (e.g, "Styles"). I would not like to see an article about Pelosi's fashion on the front page displace her recent laudable move to appoint a committee on Global Warming (see here).
Comments
The equivalent of Power Ties discussions?
While I am VERY wary of discussion fashion and powerful women in the media...because it is all too often patronizing and diminishing, I can see that they sometimes do the same with men...analyzing their tie choices, their hair styles etc. So, I'm willing to reluctantly agree that covering it in the Style section is acceptable.
It's the constant insertion of appearance-related adjectives into every news article about female leaders that drives me really bonkers.
Elisa Camahort
BlogHer and Worker Bees
elisa@blogher.org/elisa@workerbees.biz
They're demeaning, in my opinion
Unless we're going to start commenting on Denny Hastert's or Harry Reid's fashion choices and hairstyles, I think it's rather sexist. I can't say I've ever seen a discussion about men in power and their fashion choices, except when Cheney wore his hunting gear at a celebration of the liberation of Auschwitz...
Mixter
global warming
No wonder America did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol