STACITA.

I would like to call your attention to the final paragraph of Ms. Givhan's piece. She salutes and celebrates Ms. Clinton's confidence and assertiveness, in both her politics and her fashion.  Why is this outrageous? Sure, maybe the Post will never publish an article on how big Edwards' muscles are or how Obama's butt looks in tight jeans - but Ms. Givhan is making a statement about Ms. Clinton's femininity and her feminism.  In a time when we want to support more press about women, this isn't the type of outrageous press we should be condemning.

Again, I think Ms. Givhan speaks to me.  She speaks about Ms. Clinton in complimentary ways and honestly, she is drawing attention to the history of oppression women have faced when they weren't allowed to express themselves through fashion or alternatively, when they were judged for fashion in a negative way.   Her article wasn't about turning Ms. Clinton into a sex symbol or sexualizing her  image, but about noticing and affirming Ms. Clinton's bold statements and framing the debate in a POSITIVE way before the antis can claim it in the most literal, unintelligent, backwards sense. 

Please, let's choose our battles carefully and make a conscious effort to support all women together.

With respect,
Stacita

Take Action! Protest the Washington Post's sexist coverage of Senator Hillary Clinton. The Post's recent article analyzing Clinton's cleavage is a new low! Read Post article Dear Stacey, Mainstream media coverage of women politicians has hit a new, unbelievable low. On Friday, the Washington Post ran a prominent article analyzing Senator Hillary Clinton's cleavage. Let the Post know that this kind of demeaning coverage will not be tolerated. Senator Clinton is a distinguished member of the Senate and quite possibly the next president of the United States. Instead of writing about her strategy to end the war in Iraq or her plans to reform the health care system in this country, the Post devoted a feature story to analyzing her breasts. Let's stop this ridiculous coverage now, in the early stages of the campaign, and demand that Senator Clinton is treated with the same dignity and respect as her male competitors. In her article in the Style section of the Post, staff writer Robin Givhan calls Clinton's décolletage "a provocation" and declares that "showing cleavage is a request to be engaged in a particular way." Never does she consider that Clinton's minimally revealing neckline might have been the result of the 90 degree Washington, D.C. heat. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. The media has rabidly attacked Sen. Clinton for years for her appearance. For example, in his April 26 coverage of the first Democratic presidential debate, MSNBC host Chris Matthews commented repeatedly on Clinton's jewelry and outfit, saying he believed viewers "like the fact that Hillary was demure, lady-like in appearance." In early June, speculation on whether or not Hillary had gotten botox injections rippled through prominent newspapers and television programs. Women politicians' clothes, hairdos, weight, and other physical characteristics have been the obsessive focus of journalists ever since women first began holding public office in this country. We've had it! Let the Washington Post know that sexist coverage of Hillary Clinton or any women politician is unacceptable. For Equality, Katherine Spillar Executive Editor