Obama’s Angels
 |
James Joyner | Wednesday, January 28, 2009 |
Both Spencer Ackerman and Matthew Yglesias, males both, are highly offended by the cover of the current The National Interest depicting the foreign policy triumvirate of Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Janet Napolitano as “Obama’s Angels,” claiming the implication that these accomplished women are somehow analogous to sexy female crimefighters is insulting to women.
In my New Atlanticist look at the Obama’s Angels Cover Controversy, I defend TNI for the choice, pointing out the irony of the controversy.
In an OTB exclusive, I would add my conjecture that few women are offended at being compared to Farrah Fawcett, Jacklyn Smith, Cheryl Ladd, Drew Barrymore, Lucy Liu, or Cameron Diaz.
About the Author: James Joyner is the publisher of Outside the Beltway and the managing editor of the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer, Desert Storm vet, and college professor with a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. He lives just outside the Beltway in Alexandria, Virginia with his wife and infant daughter.
Follow James on FriendFeed | Twitter | Digg
- Obama’s Angels
- Farah Fawcett Dead at 62
- Obama ‘Small Town’ Remarks Give Clinton Opening
- Obama Fails to Assuage White Voters (Who Weren’t Paying Attention and Didn’t Need Assuaging)
- OTB Outside the Blog
- Abe Vigoda Still Alive
- Obama Picks Warren, Angers Gays
- Obama and Monkey Business
- Beating Al Qaeda But Losing in Afghanistan?
- Tammy the Virtual Bar Maid
- House Trades Freedom for Health Coverage, Senate’s Move
- Hasan a Muslim First, American Second?
- OTB Caption JamTM
- Taking “No” As Iran’s Answer
- Update on the Fort Hood Massacre
- OTB Latenight – Soft Cell
- Caption Contest Winners
- Breaking: Shootings at Fort Hood (Updated)
- Pentagon Expected To Ask For Supplementary War Funding. As Usual.
- Marking the Anniversary of the Embassy Seizure
In an OTB exclusive, I would add my conjecture that few women are offended at being compared to Farrah Fawcett, Jacklyn Smith, Cheryl Ladd, Drew Barrymore, Lucy Liu, or Cameron Diaz.
Any woman compared to them is not likely to be offended. However, the women who are not compared to them will find it offensive, because it highlights what they do no have as being a positive trait.
Not that I think TNI is making the comparison based on looks, but rather on the organizational chart, so nobody should find it offensive.
I think the comparison is insulting to sexy female crimefighters.
I'm thinking that Hillary would just laugh (or cackle); IIRC, she's been called worst.
This is much ado about nothing. All three of these ladies in addition to Obama have now stepped front and center into the world of politics where political satire and cartoons are the name of the game.
Give them all some time to put a few mistakes under their belt and they will wish for the days when they were compared to three sexy women from a 70's TV show.
I think the comparison is insulting to sexy female crimefighters.
lol, the fist group yes the second group not so much.
claiming the implication that these accomplished women are somehow analogous to sexy female crimefighters
..yoiks....that needs to get shot down on the quick...sheesh.
“Obama’s Angels,” claiming the implication that these accomplished women are somehow analogous to sexy female crimefighters is insulting to women.
El wrongo there, Mr. Joyner; it's a simply an insult to human intelligence.
claiming the implication that these accomplished women are somehow analogous to sexy female crimefighters is insulting to women
James, this kind of attitude no longer surprises me. What is it with Liberals "these days," anyway? They're always looking to get a leg up on someone by finding some kind of victimhood to which they can appeal. Can't they just be honest about being addicted to control?
Outrage is the coin of the realm, and inflation is on the horizon.
Charles! I like that quip a lot. Like my friend's email signature used to say: "Death takes its toll. Prepare exact change."
I defend TNI for the choice, pointing out the irony of the controversy.
It's only ironic if you assume that women can't or don't buy into the same sexist stereotypes men do. That would not seem to be a safe assumption to me.
""somehow .... is insulting to women.""
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Should read "...insulting to feminists"
[quite a different category altogether]
