...BUT, according to the m-dollar sign-m, these are the IMPORTANT ISSUES we should ALL be concerned about! That Nancy shows 1/4" more knee than Hillary is neuz we don't want to miss. It saves us from over taxing our thinking processes, not to mention saving the MSM from having to do some work. Besides how else could some of these idiots have gotten elected if we knew more about them than who their tailor is?

You know there had to be rap music there. Since it seems only Imus and rap music are the big problems with sexism.

We report on their clothes because the army of gray suits and bad combovers who really run things only wax sensual about bribes and lobbyists. This army of white dullards is uniform to a man in their depravity and all equal in the eyes of Hickey Freeman.

Interesting indeed, that comment about Hickey-Freeman. Took me waaay back.

And I do think that men are as vain as women, at least about the things they care about. Take Henry The K (Kissinger). He liked secret power, the trophy dates 'n' all. But his real vanity, IMHO, is still his "foreign-ness." How long has he lived in the US and STILL has that just-off-the-boat accent? Solly, Cholly, that's a deliberate affectation. So why not trivialize the men just as they trivialize the women.

I grew up in Rochester, NY, HQ to that company once upon a time. The company even spun off tailors who, on nights and weekends, would take customers for custom suits for way far less than they'd cost at McFarland's or similar tony store in other cities.

My dad bought me such a suit as a going-to-college present--and also because I had no suits. He thought it would be a good idea to have two pairs of pants made for the suit, as he figured that the pants would wear out first. (I grew out of the suit--about 15 years later, before the suit had a chance to wear out.)

I do remember the fun--I did think it was fun--picking out the fabric, feeling the "hand" of the various weaves, picking one that would wear well and wear well.

And I also remember a shoe outlet store on Main Street, between the Genesee River and South Avenue, where my dad took me to get shoes that were unlike any I'd ever seen before. Seems that the proprietor liked taking trips to Bologna, Firenze and Milan and buying remainders of shoe lines. My dad had come on the place because he had difficulty fitting what my brother and I called "Dad's hooves"--7 1/2 quadruple E. One pair I remember, now 49 years "on," felt as if I'd been wearing them for six years. Yet they were brand new.

So what's the point of this reminiscence? Well, I think it's time the press corps--the womens' press corps at the very least--start commenting on men's garb, EXACTLY as the male & female press report on women's wear. The type of belt, the shirting (silk, rayon, Sea Island cotton, other long-staple cotton), the shoe manufacturers, the lasts, the animal skin (or synthetic or fabric in their high-tops), the tailoring (double-breasted, single- or double-vent backs, three- or four-button sleeves, cufflinks, diamond earring(s), quality of the cloissone in their "flag brooches," where they get their manicures and pedicures, whether they're using neutral nail polish or a very pale pink to add a look of youth to otherwise yellowing nails.

And comments about hair weaves, implants, hair coloring, a particular "bob" or comb-over, a subtle feathered tucked-behind-the-ears longish cut, or the Army Bowl-over-the-head cut (how many of those do you see nowadays?), hair-spray, (Makassar oil, bear grease...) type of perfume (umm, sorry, cologne). Are the boys using an astringent face mask before turning in for the night? Dental caps, eye-pouch tucks, liposuction for the beer belly, massages for the flabby back, girdles for a bad back (and/or to give the simulacrum of a "six-pack" abdomen). What foundation makeup they're wearing for the new HiDef video appearances. Howabout new, tinted "chapstick" to prevent flaking, cracked lips in the hot, dry recesses of Congress? How their tailors accommodate the gentlemen's "dress" when tailoring their trousers (like, "how're they hangin,' dude?").

Also men's hosiery, undergarments--not just the briefs/boxers bit, but also the fabric, the colors, prints, button flies, garters to keep those milk-white calves from showing. And ties--are they $3.50 Haband ties from New Jersey, or $350.00 Hermes silk numbers--and do they have one, two, three or perhaps even four layers of lining, or whatever that inside stuff is called.

How tight the derrierre, how many buttons are open at the neck, how snug the inseam (remember Shrub in his flight-jockey suit, his penis and testicles squished into high relief by the crossed webs of his parachute harness? How they were so tight that the legs of his flight suit looked like last year's pants on a growing teenager? So tight, in fact, that it would probably not have been inaccurate to call him a numb-nuts, though the flight from the California mainland was probably not much longer than four minutes, hardly long enough for the man's circulation to have been affected), how wide/numerous the waistband pleats.

God, there must be hundreds of ways to agressively go after male fashion, appearance habits, hair-, beard-, muscle-pride, primping, attire, etc. And, while there's no male codpiece equivalent in this century for women's cup sizes, certainly men's weight is fair game--and perhaps the secrets only their work-out-coaches know, just how many pounds they can bench-press, leg-lift, etc. Ahh, forgot rings and watches, money-clips, tie-tacs or tie-clips, collar bars (remember those?!), other male jewelry. Like eyeglasses, contact lenses (tinted?).

And, of course, power. Money? Chairmanships? Number of houses, yachts, concubines? Age difference between man and his new wife? Fecundity (Ahhm ovah 68 but mah yungust 'r 2 and 5.) (Do women boast that they had their last twins when they were 62?)

Ladies, wouldn't it be a total hoot to report on the "men as meat" aspect of the world, just as men have for so long reported on the "women as meat" aspect of the world?

When taking on the males in this, and on their, fashion, you will want to button up that decolletage, drop those hemlines, eschew silk shirts, err, blouses, form-hugging jackets, lower those skirt-slits and heels, take off those ankle-straps and ankle bracelets, tone down the lipstick, rouge, foundation, mascara, liner, blush, lash-extenders & curlers, quadri-color hair "do's," perfume, forget the knee-high boots and black fishnet stockings, the red, white, blue or black silk bustiers and under-wire, push-up bras, or you'll be accused of--and be guilty, IMHO, of the rankest form of hypocrisy.

Most men couldn't care less about what politicians wear, and I think largely find it a distracting waste of their attention. This whole thing is "news" aimed at a small subset of women-- and perhaps a few gay men, though the ones I've known haven't been clothes horses-- who care about that kind of thing.

Perhaps it the world would just be better off if neither sex wore any clothes.

Or come to think of it, in the case of myself and Hillary, perhaps clothes are a good idea, after all.

I don't think it is just aimed at some women and gay men. Journalist know how to manipulate readers' perceptions. The comments aren't really about fashion. Reading an article that talks about someone's clothes instead of their foreign policy makes that person easier to dismiss as a real candidate. It is pulling them down to a physical level, focusing on how stylish or attractive they are, instead of their ideas and actions.

I don't believe the answer is to objectify men in the same way, but to treat both genders with respect. Judge a person by their actions, not by their shoes.

Actually, I agree with Pin. Totally.

But how do we reach that non-dismissive goal in the 4th estate's descriptions of people & their ideas & their actions?

My perhaps lame thought is that humor will have more of an effect than any screeds of mine. A "reductio ad absurdam." (Would that I could write like Jon Stewart-and-staff.)

And Pin makes the even more important point that it's ACTIONS by which we should judge, not by what people say, what they appear to have said in video/audio clips edited by others, are said to have said, or reported to have said.
--end of comment--

--commence screed II--

Watch what they do, not what they say. (Still, the press sticks to dealing almost exclusively with what people say, not do. Like, who cares what lies Cheney tells. What is he keeping in those four-number Mosler Safes in his office? The Iraq War Plans from Jan., 2001? Iraq oil field maps he and his Big Oil pals drew up in Jan-Feb of 2001. The draft USA PATRIOT act from 1970?)

Of course, we're still left with other dismissive, propagandistic labels. Those Frank Luntzian "Words That Work--to let the audience do the heavy-lifting to convince/brainwash its-own-darned-self." That is, use words that generally evoke, in the reader/listener, the effect you want to invoke by virtue of the audience's own non-reflecting spin-center(s) (or lexicon).

Death? A bad thing (unless you're in unremitting pain).

Death Tax? A REALLY bad thing. But the federal tax on estates, the "estate tax," actually only affects 2% of all decedent estates, so saith the IRS website. But the propaganda "words-that-work" people want this phrase "death tax" to do this "work" on the topic of estate taxation: "Let's use a word, 'death,' that people think--as established by our own focus/focthem groups--means 'universal' -- 100% instead of 2%. And a 'universal TAX' at that. THAT will 'mobilize the base,' won't it!"

Freedom?

Democracy? Heck, in the US we don't even have that--never have. Ours is a Constitutional Republic. And now it's just a Republic, by the way.

But for others, these are Good Things, right? "We're bringing 'freedom' and 'democracy' to the Iraqis."

But not electricity.

Not sanitary hospitals.

How about medicine?

Any schools, libraries, museums, grocery stores, smooth streets, whole homes and apartments and hotels and banks?

How about potable water?

How about sewer systems/

How about public safety? Well, there's death by: aerial bombardment, random gunfire, car- and individual-suicide bombs, random roadside bombs, high-speed Humvee and truck accidents. Does that cover it?

How about gasoline or kerosene for travel & cooking? Not so much.

But Freedom? Oh yeaah, baby (think Mike Myers), we're bringin' 'em Freedom! Democracy? Oh yeahh, democracy, purple index fingers. And do we know how many folks we're killing? US troops, killed? Yes. Maimed and wounded? Not so much. Iraqis? Ahh, sorry, "We don't do body-counts." Do the Iraqis die with Democracy Dye still on their finger?

(Unasked is always this question: What are we TAKING, in return for what we're "giving"?

Is it:

A. Operation Iraqi Liberation thing? OIL?

B. Land for 14 permanent US Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine bases?

C. Land for military armaments, munitions and materiel?

D. Air bases for Halliburton and its oil-sucking equipmen?

E. Bases for BMWs (Blackwater Mercenary Waffen) and the CIA?

F. Land for the biggest US Embassy Castle the world has never seen--because no one's allowed to photograph it?

G. All of the above. (All your bases are belong to US!)

Speaking of "winning hearts and minds" -- not in the LBJ way, though his approach IS certainly effective with men):

Let's not forget the MOST important bit about doing that is repetition, petition, tition, ition, ition. Keep the words echoing, reverberating, never ceasing. Freedom, reedom, eedom, edom, dom, ommmmmmmmmmm. Democracyyyyyyyy, etc.

Repetition is how a word, phrase, slogan, jingle, opinion, is morphed into "Conventional Wisdom." Or "How it's always been--yuh don't even hafta think aboudit. Cuz evverbuddie nose iss trew."

--end of screed II--

It would be really good to read some examples of what people feel are good and empowering and true descriptions of women.

I care not a whit for Hillary's tit
Just a new boob to follow the old
But I curse the Chief Twit and the twisted Vice-Shit
A pair that will run your blood cold