First Givhan criticizes Sen. Hillary Clinton for her "cleavage" and now this? The LA Times has published an article by staff writer Robin Abcarian concerning the sexual pose of Mr. and Mrs. Guiliani photographed for a Harper's Bazaar photoshoot. Abcarian proceeds to discuss the sexuality of politics and quesiton whether nor not showing "a little leg" can help sway a few votes in 2008.
America, if something like a sexy pose in a magazine can sway our votes for the Presidential election, maybe we don't deserve the right to be voting in the first place, which I'd like to believe is not true.
And of course, all this discussion about sexuality and politics begs the question: "Just how sexy is the first lady allowed to be?"
In this long, hot campaign season, intimations of sexuality are sprouting like wildflowers along the road to the White House. Not that the commingling of sex and politics is anything new, but for what seems to be the first time in memory, voters are being confronted with questions that don't usually break the surface: Just how sexy is a first lady allowed to be? And what constitutes an appropriate display of affection between candidates and their spouses?With a nominating field full of older men and younger wives, experts say that a youthful, even sexy wife offers a none-too-subtle message about the vitality of the candidate.
When sex becomes a strong factor, or even just a factor at all, in judging our presidential candidates, maybe it's time to analyze our culture and what the media is telling us should matter to us. Where are our priorities? No wonder Sen. Clinton has suffered so much scrutiny as the only woman running. It's not because she's the only woman, but because she has to be super sexy in order to spark any interest in the American people.
I always thought the goal was to judge politicians on their politics when choosing a president. Hmmm.....
