It’s the Cleavage, Stupid

If April is the cruelest month, then August is certainly the silliest. As the American press debates Hillary’s recent plunging neckline, as shown on C-Span, our cousins across the Pond are having at it, too.

In an article entitled, "The US Debates Hillary’s Cleavage,", the venerable Times of London defends their new Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, for showing some skin in her first terror update to the House of Commons.

"Too much Home front? " the headline asks. "Oh, do grow up."

"…only hours into her new job as Home
Secretary, came those horrifying terrorist attacks. Under enormous pressure,
Smith nevertheless managed to remain calm and statesmanlike. On Monday she
addressed the House of Commons: it was a solid performance from a serious
politician. Which is why, presumably, the blogosphere is alive with talk . .
. of her cleavage.

Yes, that’s right: her cleavage. This is a woman who is trying to cope with
one of the biggest terrorist threats that Britain has ever faced – and all
people care about is her bosom. There’s 40 years of feminism for you."

It really is pathetic that female politicians in this day and age should be
judged so much by their appearance. What you want in a politician is
intelligence and experience, and I’m afraid those things don’t tend to come
in pert, 22-year-old packages.

Besides, it’s rude. It’s bad enough judging one’s own appearance in the mirror
in the morning, let alone having to deal with the cruel jibes of every Tom,
Dick or Harry with access to a computer, many of whom may not be oil
paintings themselves. No wonder there are so few female politicians. In
fact, it’s amazing there are any at all.

Hail, Britannia!