the deuce with all these wannabe feminists for rushing to defend rona ambrose from crrrazy environmentalists mocking her hair. yet again, the right of a girl to dress up and play gender and be pretty is among the most strongly defended rights extended to womankind. fuck that.
now, let us speak frankly of her hair. fuck her hair. dramatic flowing locks 24/7? come on, does every occasion call for the blatant 'look at me, im young and have a lot of hair' do? would it kill her to go out with a ponytail or chignon or braid? im not the only one convinced it is probably covering a neck tattoo. id feel bad if i was sitting here making fun of her and it was covering up some scar that she was self-conscious about. but whatever.
playfully mocking her hair, which she has consciously made into a trademark by wearing it the same fucking way every day she has been on camera, is not a serious affront to the participation of women in politics. give me a break. men, such as pierre pettigrew, survived many a barb in reference to his signature locks. how significant is grooming in relation to political performance? not at all, unless it cuts into the budget. if youre going to be on camera every day, can people playfully mock your appearance? its bitchy, but such is public life.
partisan hackery at its finest, folks. uh, yeah its mean. its a literary device called caricature, which was not executed that brutally. please visit your colleagues in the english department.
yeah, dont take greenpeace or civil society (and why the fuck are reports saying 'environmental groups' rather than nailing a specific environmental group responsible for the offending publication) seriously because they dissed poor rona's hair and pushed female participation in politics back a hundred years because the real thing holding us back is the refusal of the patriarchy to defend our most-serious right to have big, sexy hair.
having a stupid, ever-present hairdo is rona's right, but being mocked for it is a privilege of public office. we shouldnt judge women on their bimbo hairdo, and ive had many a woman prove me wrong in this department.
that being said, fuck you if you are rushing to defend a young womans right to show off her mane and calling it feminism. back in the day, feminism was about pushing for rights, being active in the political sphere, and helping your fellow woman. now, its all about irony, college students yapping about gender performance, and average women picking the right to wear a corset under a business suit without being judged on the fact your boobs are hanging out as their marquee issue.
women are free to be feminine, but this is not the right we should really focus on. are women avoiding politics because all women in politics have to be butch, or are there other economic and social considerations?
do you know what would end all this nonsense about her hair? yulia tymoshenko braids.
Posted by: Giovanni | 12.11.2006 at 13:36
"seriously because they dissed poor rona's hair and pushed female participation in politics back a hundred years because the real thing holding us back is the refusal of the patriarchy to defend our most-serious right to have big, sexy hair."
LOL! yeah, her hair always is the same. some soccer mom hair might be a good change for her.
Posted by: bza | 13.11.2006 at 17:56
Except that all this noise about her hair now makes it impossible for her to change it without someone commenting on it (unlike, say, going from "great shoes" to sneakers).
Posted by: Candace | 14.11.2006 at 23:18
lol, candace, good point. still, she brought it upon herself... hehe. i vote for the timoshenko hair, so she can represent the prairie ukranian community. hehe
Posted by: ainge | 15.11.2006 at 05:31
Hello!
What do you think about love? >:)
Posted by: CandyShopGirl | 09.10.2007 at 11:52