This is a real thing in the world.

[Content Note: Misogyny.]

image of a Time magazine cover featuring the lower part of a female leg clad in blue slacks and black pumps, with a tiny man in a suit clinging to the heel of the shoe, accompanied by the headline: 'Can Anyone Stop Hillary?'

Let's count just a few of the ways this cover is a piece of shit:

1. As I have previously observed, after first being told to GTFO during the 2008 election, then being admonished for the past year that she HAS TO run, now we're back to wondering if there is any way to stop her. That sound you hear is my mirthless laughter reverberating through the entirety of the known universe.

2. That image. Oh my god that image. Can anyone stop Hillary from smashing all the tiny, helpless men who want a shot at the presidency but are too tiny and helpless to stop her?! Even when a woman reaches something resembling parity with men, at least in terms of access to power, suddenly she is MONSTROUS. A destroyer of all things.

3. That image. Blue slacks. Black shoes. Where have I seen that before? Oh right.

4. That image. Of Hillary Clinton's giant feet and a tiny, helpless man. Where have I seen that before? Oh right.

5. The accompanying story opens with a novel new way to assert that Hillary Clinton is a totes big liar about whether she's made up her mind about running in 2016—by saying it's probably true, but ha ha you know how those tricksy Clintons are!
Hillary Clinton has not decided whether to run for President again. I have this on good authority, despite a recent barrage of reports detailing the many moves that signal a campaign in the making. People close to Clinton and familiar with her thinking insist that she hasn't made a decision.

Perhaps it all comes down, in Clintonian fashion, to definitions. It depends on the meaning of the word decide. And on the meaning of the word run. In Hillary Clinton, the United States of America is now experiencing a rare, if not unprecedented, political phenomenon; she requires a new lexicon.
Can anyone else think of any problems with using this sort of "I know what she really wants despite what she's saying" narrative about a female candidate? Because I can think of one!

Although I'm sure I'm just being a hypersensitive, over-reactionary, hysterical feminist who's just looking for things about which to get mad again. You know me.

Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.

blog comments powered by Disqus