Republican presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., speaks during a Republican presidential debate Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2011, in Las Vegas. (Chris Carlson - Associated Press)
A Washington Post article by Maura Judkis asks, Michele Bachmann’s manicure: Tasteful? Tacky? Totally off-limits? The gist of the article is that Bachmann's french tipped nails were too long and distracting as they clicked against the podium before her.
“At last night’s GOP debate it was Bachmann’s fake nails that stole the show,” declared Huffington Post editor Ellie Krupnick. “The Republican candidate’s hard, glossy, squared-off acrylic nails are a prominent feature of her look, visible from a great distance and audible [sic] clacking against the podium.”
Although at the tail end of the article there is a brief mention that the focus on Bachmann's nails may indeed be sexist; the main article presents different viewpoints from different sources about the style of Bachmann's nails. Why does this matter? Shouldn't we be focusing on the dangerous notion that this woman could possibly become our President?
Although, I greatly disagree with Bachmann's politics, she does deserve to be heard. It is insulting that women in politics, as well as most avenues within the media, are viewed as an aesthetic rather than a person with ideas.
I could go on and on and on, but I don't think that I really need to. My point has been made.
I totally agree with you that it is insulting for women in politics when people try to criticize everything and anything but what they are there for. WHY DO THE MEDIA care about her nails?! Maybe a nail polish-aholic would care, but if you don't care for nail polish, how did your attention come to that?
ReplyDeleteYes. It's called sexism. So disappointing.
ReplyDelete