My, my, the Bush administration sure does seem to make fashion waves on its trips to Europe. First there was the shameful Cheney in his "Staff 2001" knit hat and green, fur-trimmed parka at the Auschwitz ceremony. And now Condoleezza Rice is raising brows among cultural critics with her fashion pick for the Wiesbadan Army Airfield.
Washington Post style writer, Robin Givhan critiques:
"Rice's coat and boots speak of sex and power -- such a volatile combination, and one that in political circles rarely leads to anything but scandal. When looking at the image of Rice in Wiesbaden, the mind searches for ways to put it all into context. It turns to fiction, to caricature. To shadowy daydreams. Dominatrix! It is as though sex and power can only co-exist in a fantasy. When a woman combines them in the real world, stubborn stereotypes have her power devolving into a form that is purely sexual."
"Rice challenges expectations and assumptions. There is undeniable authority in her long black jacket with its severe details and menacing silhouette...If there is any symbolism to be gleaned from Rice's stark garments, it is that she is tough and focused enough for whatever task is at hand."
While I'm still wrestling with Givhan's critique, I'm struck by the fashion conundrum that powerful women are left to wrestle with. By breaking with her usual uniform -- "a bland suit with a loose-fitting skirt and short boxy jacket with a pair of sensible pumps" -- Rice got cast a dominatrix. While I personally think that the "power-suit" is an extremely unflattering look, why does breaking free of a two-piece suit imply sexual deviance? It seems that even in wardrobe choices, critics are eager to impose the virgin/whore dichotomy on women.
Any thoughts?
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
Wow. I think that Givhan is making entirely too big of a deal out of this. I think that Rice looks attractive, but I don't see that as a bad thing, or a ploy for power, or anything. Maybe she just got tired of her normal attire?
It's really annoying how women have to wardrobe issues. I'm not a fan of Rice, but I'm not going to pick on her because of what she's wearing. It all comes back to appearance.
It's a very martial outfit with the buttons and the black. Had it been a different color, I don't think that would have been the conclusion. Of course, we'd probably still have to sit through deconstruction of the sexiness of the outfit.
Personally, I had first seen a picture of her sitting down, and my first thought was, "Nice boots." And then I thought that it was a much different, more modern look for her. It's an outfit I'd see on a coworker, but I don't think I love it for the Secretary of State (and you don't know how painful it is for me to type those words in reference to Kinda Sleazy Rice).
Does anyone remember Madeline Not-so-Bright and those brooches and pins she wore?
I'm not a big Rice fan myself but I actually like her outfit. Men can't get away with much more than a sport jacket and tie, but women have more variation on what is considered professional. It is a shame that one would even bother to write about what she is wearing...
Yeah. I pretty much don't give a shit what anyone wears in any postion as long as it is appropriate to the situation. I.e. business casual for business casual, business formal for business formal.
She wasn't showing too much skin, she was dressed stylishly.
I don't really get it.
Had Ann Coulter said this the board would be on fire...