Feminists aren't allowed to arch their backs? Whatever. Intentional or not, I'd totally arch my back for Bill Clinton. But not for The Politico.

Ridiculous. The other, unanswered question I have is why anyone would be profiling Ann Althouse in the first place...she strikes me as pretty irrelevant. On days when particularly bored, I have suffered through reading her posts (including the captions of her endless photos and tedious descriptions of the minutiae of her daily life) and comment sections, and she seems to me to have approximately 5 loyal readers who consistently leap to her defense, and anyone else commenting is critiquing her. If that's what passes for a politically influential blog, I'm certainly disheartened about the state of blogging.

I never understood this.

Feminists aren't allowed to have breasts and....uh, stand in the middle of a photograph??

Slight arch? I don't even remember a "slight arch." I think they're stretching.

Even if there were a "slight arch," that's actually what your back is supposed to do naturally, again, they're stretching.

As I said before, it's like they expected you to slouch to minimize your breasts, which is ridiculous. Clearly, they just want you to develop shoulder and back problems from slouching, so that you'll spend more time with the doctor, chiropractor, and physiotherapist, and less time calling out the patriarchy, misogyny, and sexism.

I believe the author of silly that article thinks you posed for the cover of your book!

Now I saw that photo of Bill Clinton and the bloggers, and I am a girl-watchin' kinda guy, so if the famous Valenti superstructure were actually the "focal point" of that photo I'd sure have been quick to notice. And applaud of course, yay cheesecake! But when I saw that photo I didn't immediately rise to the O'Kayshion and think "hey hey, there goes one now!" Of course Ms. Althouse would probably argue, all angry-like, that I'm lying through my teeth.

Anyway, it must thrill the Dickens out of you to learn that your breasts are the two biggest things that ever happened in Ann Althouse's life.

And to think, I was feeling a little guilty about dredging this up again in this week's Feminist Reader just for the sake of mocking Ann some more. Now I don't feel quite so guilty.

Weird coincidence, though.
Am I prescient, or just really, really topical?

It's like rappers who grab their groin; or politicians who infer priviledge with inference of male power by wearing a fashionavble suit; it is a clear statement of sexual power.
Is that a bad thing? Obviously, if women do it it is negotiable and suspect( by so-called feminists) because when men do it it is clearly oppressive and disrespectable... ummm. wut?unless ms. valenti ( a brilliant opportunist)does it.
Double standard, and clearly disrespected, unless one is in the mind of Jessica.

"It's like rappers who grab their groin"

Actively grabbing your genitalia is soooo much like simply existing with breasts.

Oh joy, another one. It's a shame the blog doesn't have an "ignore" feature.

penelope traintrax: It's like rappers who grab their groin... it is a clear statement of sexual power...

I'm going to give you more credit than your moronic comment probably deserves, as you are, almost certainly, merely a troll. But here it is: here is The Picture.

Now you look at that photo. It looks, to the sane, like the hi-skool yearbook photo of the Debate Club. No one but a obsessive loony (Althouse) or a fraud (you) could seriously characterize it as some kind of overtly indecent display.

Althouse's blog hits must have dropped if she's stooped to reviving an old controversy that earned her lots of traffic.

Gee, maybe people wouldn't stare at women's breasts as the focal point of a photo if we were taught to respect women as human beings instead of seeing them as members of the secondary sex class.

Ugh. This is just so stupid. I'm not sure what the big deal is--yes, Jessica has breasts. So do those other women. I'm not sure what makes her "pose" different from the others, now that I see the pic. Is it because she has the audacity to stand front and center? The world may never know.

This whole thing makes me mad. It boils down to the idea that female sexuality must be hidden, because once we remember that a women is female she can no longer be respected. Because, in case anyone forgot, women are actually deformed male derivatives. "Hide those breasts so we can take you more seriously!"

God.

Wow, people are still on about this? Is your body really that important to them?
One would think that there would be more pressing matters to write about, like say... pretty much anything else.

Anyone notice the "God bless America" plaque in the corner? With the light cleverly highlighting "God" so it shines in golden glory?

Why did Jessica's breasts arrange the photo this way? Is her breasts' Patriarchy Reinforcing Field so powerful it can make biblical phrases shine as the focal point of any room?

They have obviously read their Maya Angelou

WTF is wrong with it even if Jessica did arch her back purposely to pronounce her breasts? Should she be ashamed of them?

I mean,where in the law book of feminism, are women not allowed to (joyfully) pose for a photograph?

Is Jessica not allowed to meet a man and fuck him too?

Nahhh... Fuck that. We as women are beautiful and perfect, any shape or size, and have every right to pose or look attractive for a photograph.

And thats IF it was on purpose, which I dont even believe it was.

Cut the girl some fucking slack. She has more class than anyone posting complete nonsense gossip about posing and what not.

Yeah, Jessica is a real slut for her body shape. She cant be a feminist with above average breasts, it simply cant happen.

The plaque? I think it's Irving Berlin, actually. Even more insidious!

Jessica,
If you are looking to author another book in the near future(or perhaps to edit an anthology ...), I have a suggestion for a title.
I hope you'll forgive me if it's been suggested before.

Althouse in Madison:
The Evil of Banality

I imagine you could find a decent shot of a panel of pundits for the cover.
Best,
kenga

Jessica, you are a very beautiful woman and have nothing to be ashamed of. And you look amazing in that picture! Even if you had been "posing" for the camera, what would be wrong with that? Just another right-wing smear attempt.

God forbid you have a spine with a normal curvature, Jessica. Oh, and you totally made your legs the focal point of the Colbert show interview. I can't believe you wore a skirt on TV. For shame!

Fucking hell. What a "controversy" one tan t-shirt can cause. Ann's post just highlights the fact that we live in a society where you can't just be yourself. You have to fit into the preconceived notion of what someone's belief system looks like physically. With all the fucked up things going on in the world this trite shit is what gets people talking. Depressing as hell.

I don't understand. It seems like Jessica is just standing there, nothing special. I don't see much back arching or any kind of movement with the intention of showing off her breasts. I suppose, Jessica, you just have to BIND your breasts next time. Apparently, they are too distracting for some people.

I think whoever wrote this was just some person who can't help but stare at women's tits. Or maybe he was surprised to find that feminist women have breats, just like other women do.

Jessica, I can see how this would make you cross. It's crummy to hear negative things about yourself. I'll bet it's also frustrating to have discussions like this focusing on your attractiveness, rather than your intellectual and social contributions. It makes me want to sigh just to see it. I would not want to be at the center of it.

Althouse's accusations are all manner of ridiculous. Beginning with the "so what if you posed," comments and progressing through the "you look totally normal," comments, I hope you can see that through others' eyes. I just read her "dust-up" and Althouse clearly has some kind of an issue with boobs. Please try not to focus on it or take Althouse's boobophobia personally and keep cranking out the good work.

Cheers.

Ooops – not on Althouse's blog. My bad.

BUT

"is standing at an angle with a slight arch in her back, making the focal point of the photo, whether intentional or not, her breasts."

Do these people not have an ounce of self consciousness? Do they never think that maybe that's the "focal point" because *they* have a titty fixation?

People are nutso. I think that Jessica stands out because she's standing in the front and center. And right in front of Bill.

Jessica – I never said that you should be shy about your body. I just said that you were not. Am I wrong? As you know, I e-mailed you as I was writing the profile of Althouse seeking your perspective, but you didn't respond (until now). If you care to discuss this beyond telling us we should be ashamed of ourselves, I’ll be doing a live chat on Friday at noon at politico.com. I’d be happy to respond to your points and/or questions then. Hope you can join us.

Ryan, I never got an email from you until today. I'll re-post my response here:

Hey Ryan, thanks for the heads up, though I have to tell you that I never received an email from you about the profile. I just looked through my inbox and junk box and I don’t see it anywhere...

And thanks for letting me know about the live chat, but I have to be honest—I don’t see what there is to discuss. Your comments on the post were completely inappropriate. You, I, and everyone who read that post knows exactly what you meant by “Valenti isn’t shy about her body.� Not to mention saying that my breasts were the focal point of a group photo! Cheap shots, all around. So I hope you’ll understand why I don’t think it’s worth my time to engage in a conversation that is coming from the standpoint that there is something to discuss—outside of an apology and a retraction.

Thanks, Jessica

Now you look at that photo. It looks, to the sane, like the hi-skool yearbook photo of the Debate Club.

Awesome line up. Aravosis, Hamsher, et al ... oh to have been a fly on the wall for that one.

Typical lizard-brains: a righteous blend of bloggy goodness, and all they see are mammaries. Idiots.

-GFO

I've always thought it looked a bit like she was slouching over, just the tiniest, tiniest bit, at the shoulders. So I never got the whole "arched back" thing. What backs are these people comparing it to?

So I hope you’ll understand why I don’t think it’s worth my time to engage in a conversation that is coming from the standpoint that there is something to discuss—outside of an apology and a retraction.

Such grace. Well said.

Now he can cry to his three readers about how you turned down the invite, poor baby.

-cue violins-

-GFO

From now on, all descriptions of body types at the Politico should be handled by Roger Simon: he writes as if everyone's a character in an 18th century pirate romance novel by Dame Barbara Cartland. But only if you're Mitt Romney, I guess.

I'd like to know what Althouse thinks Jessica should have done? Not appeared in the photo? Worn a nun's habit? The simple fact is, Jessica Valenti is quite lovely and no matter what she did in the photo, she would attract attention.

Althouse strikes me as being jealous of Jessica Valenti in a Heathers kind of way, and Politico is like Pajamas Media, only with a less intelligent cadre of wankers.

I've always thought it looked a bit like she was slouching over, just the tiniest, tiniest bit, at the shoulders. So I never got the whole "arched back" thing. What backs are these people comparing it to?

I saw the same thing.

What it is, is some asshole decided to mock Jessica over appearance, and didn't have the moral courage to admit that it was wrong to do so, and went on to try to justify it. It was intellectual dishonesty of the worst sort I'd seen in a long while, and what amazed me about it was how petty it was.

It'd be one thing to get het up and irrational over something *important*, you know? But it wasn't.

A grownup could have recognized what a petty, cheap shot it was, and apologized.

It might have hurt to recognize, but it would have felt good to do it it... for a grownup.

Apparently, Althouse never outgrew high school. "How dare you disagree with me! You're ugly!" And continuing to press the issue far after it's over is embarrassing.

"Valenti isn’t shy about her body"

This line is telling about Alhouse. She is apparently criticizing Jessica, because Jessica is not shy about her body. Actually I saw Jessica on the "Colbert Report" last night, and in my opinion she has no reason to be shy about her body, but of course no woman has any rational reason to be shy. But Alhouse evidently thinks women should be shy.

Alhouse is anti-feminism, because she wants to promote self-consciousness to women, and never wants to let a woman assert her endowments without receiving scorn.

Personally I am hoping that I will get to see more of Ms. Valenti on TV and in the press.

"It's like rappers who grab their groin"

has anyone actually heard of a rapper who got criticized because he grabbed his groin? What's wrong with rappers grabbing their groins? Jessica's body is beautiful, so I see no reason to fault her for wanting to flaunt it.

Jessica's body is beautiful, so I see no reason to fault her for wanting to flaunt it.

Gah.

Maybe I'm wrong- and please, Jessica, correct me if I am- but I think you're missing the point. It's not about whether Jessica is pretty or not.

i had never seen the famous photo before it was linked here, only read about the controversy and generally think this althouse woman sounds like someones outdated older relative fretting about how "young ladies should never ever call a boy on the telephone, they must wait for him to call" or "that dress is far too revealing, cover it up with this gigantic cable knit cardigan and youll be much more ladylike". the fact that shes calls herself a feminist yet judges a woman for *gasp* having breasts is absurd.

now that ive seen the photo, im even more blown away, jessica looks happy and confidant like shes enjoying experiencing something pretty rare that she worked hard to acheive. her breasts look like breasts. my breasts look like that whenever im not lying down (as if i lie down, they kinda fall into my armpits and flatten into pancake-esque hills), when im out shopping, on a date, at work, checking the oil in my car, doing yoga, making dinner, talking with friends, i even wear my breasts just like that when i attend christmas and thanksgiving with my extended family! my grandfather has even seen my breasts in just that sort of context! im a sick twisted whore. pfffffft.

the average breast size in this country is a 36C, not exactly small potatos, althouse must be offended constantly.

as to politico, i think jessica's great response was more than gracious. just becos althouse wants to keep bringing this up doesnt mean that jessica has to acknowledge it or effing group chat about it.

I’m selfishly glad for the whole Althouse “dust-up.� It is how I found this site. I have been reading it for a while and just now starting to comment. I am amazed at the articulate, intelligent, and insightful comments and posts here. They can make me scream at the monitor (and sometimes my hapless hubby) and laugh out loud all within the same post. Almost every time I come to this site, my convictions about feminism are challenged. Since feminism is intrinsically a part of me, you people challenge my beliefs about who I am. I hope to become a contributing member here as well as continue to learn about myself and what role I can play in progressing freedom and equality for women (and other minorities). So, I just wanted to say thank you to the people who post on this site and to those who comment on this site. “Thank you!�

I'm sorry but I LOLd a little;

"Valenti isn’t shy about her body; she just published a book"

Book publishers are sexah!

Roymac

Would you fault a woman (or a man) if they had wanted to flaunt their beauty?

I have no idea if Jessice was trying to flaunt her beauty or not, but Althouse inplied that she was. But even she was, I see no reason to fault her for wanting to flaunt her beauty. I wouldn't fault anyone for flaunting their beauty for that matter.

I'm sure everyone else has already said this, but I just want to say it anyway I guess...WTF?!! if it was a man they'd say "what great posture!" but since its a woman you must be sticking out your breasts for attention.
also, would they have preferred you wear a burlap sack?
by the way she made such a huge deal about it, it sounded like you came out wearing booby tassels and a leather thong.
It's SO annoying when people act like that...it's like they had nothing legitimate to say so they were digging for things to attack you for. I get the same thing from some (mostly male) friends of mine...I happen to have abundant cleavage (which I am proud of) and I often wear low-cut shirts because I am confident in myself and feel attractive...NOT because i'm trying to attract other people, just cuz I like how I look. but then i get, oh, arent you a feminist? and i hate that standard.

Beauty of course is in the eye of the beholder!

And I think it is fair to say that Althouse thinks Jessica is beauty, or else she would not be faulting Jessica for posing.

Althouse is a woman right?

Lelie

Do you consider yourself flaunting when you take pride in your cleavage?
I support you for taking pride in your body, and I would still support you for taking pride in your body even if I did not find you attractive.

How much support do you give other women when they take pride in their bodies?
I always assumed that the first step toward becoming a feminist was taking pride in yourself.

As a man I would definitely strike up my best pose if I was standing next to President Bill Clinton, and I would never feel ashame for it, and I would laugh at anyone who tried to make me feel ashamed for posing.

Itazura: You're still missing the point.

Would you fault a woman (or a man) if they had wanted to flaunt their beauty?

No. I don't care one way or another if any person wants to "flaunt their beauty." That's not the point, here. The point isn't whether Jessica is attractive, which is what some people seem to be taking away from this. It's not about "Well, she can flaunt her beauty if she wants to!" Of course she can.

The point is that she shouldn't be judged for her perceived beauty in this circumstance at all. She was being recognized for her actions, not for her looks.

From my perspective, telling her that she looks great in the picture misses the point just as much as the criticisms about her did. She wasn't there to look pretty or to flaunt her body or anything like that- she was there because she's an intelligent and talanted blogger. Pointing out that you think she looks great is just the other side of the coin. You're still missing that she was there for her accomplishments, and you're still drawing attention away from those accomplishments and to her body.

I'm sure you've got nothing but the best of intentions, but it seems to me that drawing more attention to her physical appearence misses the point, because it doesn't matter what she looks like. Her breats, pose, posture, outfit, and physical attractiveness have nothing to do with how talanted or intelligent she is.

Roymac

Keep in mind I never mentioned anything about Jessica's breast, cleavage, or other body parts. That would be tacky, and I would never do that.

"The point is that she shouldn't be judged for her perceived beauty in this circumstance at all. She was being recognized for her actions, not for her looks."

Whether you want to admit it or not you and I are making the same point; that people shouldn't be judged on their beauty or lack there of. However I am added that even if Jessica was posing (no one will ever know if she was except for her), then there is nothing wrong with that. As a man I pose all the time when photos are being taken of me, and I never feel the least amount of shame for posing. Why should Jessica, or anyone else for that matter be ashamed because they posed?

Are you going to shame someone for posing Roymac?

If I see a women expressing pride in her body, then I will support her, not condemn her as Althouse did.

Keep in mind I never mentioned anything about Jessica's breast, cleavage, or other body parts. That would be tacky, and I would never do that.

Except that you did! Remember, where you said "Jessica's body is beautiful, so I see no reason to fault her for wanting to flaunt it."

You didn't mention a specific bodypart, but you still focused on whether or not she's attractive.

Whether you're criticizing or praising her body isn't the point- the problem wasn't that Althouse or whoever said that Jessica was ugly, it was that they were reducing her to a body at all. She wasn't in the picture because of her body- she was there because of her actions. Saying "she shouldn't wear that sweater" "she's got good/bad breasts" or "she's ugly/beautiful" are all the same.

Whether you want to admit it or not you and I are making the same point; that people shouldn't be judged on their beauty or lack there of.

If that's your point, you're doing a terrible job getting it across. When you say things like "Jessica's body is beautiful, so I see no reason to fault her for wanting to flaunt it" you are judging her beauty.

Why should Jessica, or anyone else for that matter be ashamed because they posed?

Who here said she should? Nobody. What's I'm saying is that whether she posed or not doesn't matter. When you say that she's beautiful and shouldn't be shy about her body, you're judging her based on her looks just as much as Althouse is. That you're coming to a different conclusion doesn't mean you're not still judging.

Are you going to shame someone for posing Roymac?

*head desk*

Have I said thing one that suggests this?
No.

I assumed you were here on good faith, but comments like that make me question my assumption.

If I see a women expressing pride in her body, then I will support her, not condemn her as Althouse did.

For, like, the hundredth time: This isn't about someone "expressing pride in her body." That was never the issue. It wasn't an issue of Jessica thinking "Hey, I look hot, why are you criticizing me?"

The issue was "Hey, I was there because I'm smart and worked my ass off, why are you reducing my accomplishments by focusing on what I look like?"

Wow. It must feel weird to have one's breasts, posture, supposed body-confidence, rhetorical cleavage, and physical attractiveness discussed publicly and at length.

Jessica, your fortitude is showing. You wear it well and nobody can fault you for that.

Roymac

You like to argue to limit the range of discussion don't you?

However you still didn't answer my questions?

Are you going to shame someone for posing? Why didn't you answer that question? It seems like you would rather condemn me than talk to me.

It is OK for people to pose (express pride in their body)?
I think it is, do you?

"Whether you want to admit it or not you and I are making the same point; that people shouldn't be judged on their beauty or lack there of.

"If that's your point, you're doing a terrible job getting it across. When you say things like "Jessica's body is beautiful, so I see no reason to fault her for wanting to flaunt it" you are judging her beauty."

Why do you see my point that it is OK to flaunt as a terrible job of strengthening my position that people shouldn't be judged on their beauty? Why do you see my opinion that Jessica is beautiful as a judgment of her? Did I say that she should not be listened to because I think she is beautiful? Can a man say a woman is beautiful and still respect her? Even if I thought Jessica was ugly I would still respect her, and I would still support her whenever she wanted to flaunt her body. But Jessica is not ugly, at least not in my opinion, and I am glad that she takes confidence in her looks (or at least I assume she has confidence in her looks).

There are a lot of women who look as beautiful as Jessica does, but believe themselves ugly (particularly girls and women with big noses), and I hope many of them can come to feel the confidence within themselves that I assume Jessica feels in herself.

My point is that no one (male or female) should be ashamed to take pride in their body, and everyone should be able to flaunt without question. And we should support anyone who expresses pride in their body, even if we don't find them attractive.

By the way Jessica, I really do think you're beautiful, not just because of the way that you look, but I would still be one of your fans even if I didn't find you attractive. I am married, but I can still give support to anyone who promotes self pride.

*head desk*
*head desk*

Roymac

I feel that you and I could be friends, so please explain to me what *head Desk* means?

If it makes you feel any better, Roymac, I get you.

Iazura: the definition of the word "judging" does not involve a negative reaction. You can judge something to be good or judge something to be bad. You have judged Jessica's looks to be good. I really don't think you can argue that.

But what Roymac has been trying to tell you is that you shouldn't be involving her looks in the question at all. It should be all about her accomplishments. Her non-looks, non-body, non-clothing related accomplishments. Of which there are more than enough to keep anyone occupied for quite some time.

Roymac, sometimes you just have to give up.
Itazura is not getting what you're saying, even though it seems pretty straight-forward to me.
Don't worry, Roymac, you aren't misunderstood by *most* readers here.

Kimmy my opinion of Jessica's beauty is not a judgment of her talents, but rather a form of support I give to Jessica for expressing pride in herself (if that was what she doing in her photo with Bill Clinton).

My questions directed to you all on shame were all rhetorical. I know none of you would shame someone for posing, but Althouse suggested that Jessica should be ashamed because she posed.

I agree with your arguments that what Jessica's does was more important than how she looks, but it seemed like you guys were completely forgetting the point that is OK for anyone to express pride in their body. I am not beautiful, but I express pride in myself and my body whenever anyone takes a picture of me.

I thought the string was to poke holes in Althouse's comment, which I thought was offense, because she implied that it was wrong for Jessica to take no shame in her posing in front of the former president.

Even if Jessica was posing she still has earned every reason for us to listen to her, and respect her achievements, but I also think we should support her for taking no shame in her body. Which in my opinion is beautiful, but even if she wasn't beautiful I would listen to her, respect her, and support her.

The issue is whether or not someone should feel unashamed to pose. I support anyone who wants to pose whether or not they are beautiful, because I see posing as a form of self pride (or self confidence if you prefer).

Is there room on your desk for my head, Roymac?
'Cause I'm feeling the need to hit myself repeatedly.

Itazura, to catch you up on things: Jessica has said in the past (I think) that she was not "posing" in any sense other than "standing still so that a formal photo could be taken." She has been accused of "posing" as in "I want to stick out my boobs the better to attract the attention of former President Clinton." There are a lot of implicit judgments in there, including 1) that she is posing and 2) that that is a bad thing.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you on the idea that posing, or body pride in general, should be nothing to be ashamed of. But since the entire controversy (posing or not? for what purpose) distracts from the point of Jessica's attendance at the event--as a politically important young feminist blogger--most Feministing readers disapprove of rehashing the discussion generally, except to say that Althouse is clearly delusional when she says Jessica is "flaunting" herself and is distracting from Jessica's accomplishments by focusing on her appearance in the first place.

*Head desk* is the sound of Roymac's skull hitting the surface of his desk because he is frustrated that you are not understanding his point. And I don't mean to insult you, but I don't really blame him since he tried to explain several times.

This might help explain it:

When we have a discussion about when/whether/in what manner it would be okay for Jessica to flaunt her bod, we are implicitly giving credence to Althouse's delusion/distraction tactic that Jessica was somehow flaunting her bod in the first place. So while the issue of body pride is important, this is not the thread to have that discussion.

It's a big desk, and there's another one a few feet away. I also have a couple of nice heavy books, too.

Are we disagreeing with each other?

I certainly don't disagree with you guys, and it doesn't sound like you guys disagree with me, so why all the hang banging?

We all agree that what Jessica does is more important than how she looks, and we all agree that is OK to take pride in one's self.

Personally I don't care if Jessica was posing or not, and I could care less if she was trying to gain Bill Clinton's attention or not, but I thought she looked good, and I was glad to see her in the media. Hopefully we will see more of her on TV and in the media.

In any case if someone says something offensive like;

"Jessica Valenti, who runs and blogs on feministing.com, is standing at an angle with a slight arch in her back, making the focal point of the photo, whether intentional or not, her breasts.
Valenti isn’t shy about her body; she just published a book called “Full Frontal Feminism: A Young Woman’s Guide to Why Feminism Matters.�,"

we should attack them, rather than come up with defensive excuses.

If someone accuses a feminist leader of taking pride (showing no shame), I am going to say that that feminist leader is beautiful, and she has no reason to feel ashamed.

I'm just saying, there's plenty of desk space.

I think I'll join you, Roymac, thanks for the invite.

Thanks, mate! (Roymac).

I'll try one more time.

Itazura, everyone here is saying that considering whether or not Jessica looks good or not is not the point.
I think you're starting to get it.
The problem is that she is going about her professional life, and somehow her appearance is deemed relevant by her detractors.
It isn't.
It's that simple.
So if you feel the need to defend Jessica's attractiveness, you are playing their (the detractors') game.
We are calling foul ball.

So you would rather head bang, than take the offence in discourse?

Interesting.

Perhaps I was wrong about the shame thing.

***BANG!!!***

"The problem is that she is going about her professional life, and somehow her appearance is deemed relevant by her detractors.
It isn't."

You're very very wrong on that one, though I agree with you that Jessica's beauty should not be relevant.

Unfortunately a woman will not get much of a voice in the media and on TV, if people don't think she is beautiful. I hate that reality, but it is none the less a fact of reality.

People like Althouse want people like Jessica to take shame in their positions and in their looks. That's why we should never make excuses for our behavior if it is falsely interpreted, and we must be ready to combat those who question or demonize our confidence. Which was exactly what Althouse was trying to do Jessica.

Itazura: I'm not interested in taking the offense. Discourse isn't adversarial.

My point is very simple. I've spelled it out several times. I blogged about it. Several other people tried to clarify what I was saying. The point has been made very clearly by now.

If you don't get or choose not to get what I'm saying by now, I really have no idea how to get it across to you.

We're not saying the same thing. As far as I'm concerned, your comments aren't really any better than Althouse's, you've just come to a slightly different conclusion than she did.

"Discourse isn't adversarial."

You really think so?

You have been nothing but adversarial to me, and I'm on your side. Discourse is debate, and their at least 2 sides to every debate. In this case we are debated about whether or not Jessica was posing. My position is; I don't care if she was, but I support her even more, because I am glad that she is confident enough in herself to pose in front of the former president, if that was what she was doing.

"your comments aren't really any better than Althouse's, you've just come to a slightly different conclusion than she did."

You're right I did come to a different conclusion than Althouse did. I concluded that Jessica had no reason to be shy, because she had nothing to be ashamed of, even if she was posing in front of the former president.

"In this case we are debated about whether or not Jessica was posing."

No, no, no.

WE ARE NOT DISCUSSING WHETHER OR NOT JESSICA VALENTI IS POSING.

If you really still don't get it, well, noone here can help you.
Though I'm starting to think this is the internet version of "why are you hitting yourself?"

I'm curious, Itazura, how did you come across this site?

"I'm curious, Itazura, how did you come across this site?"

What relevance is that?

Maybe you guys are not debating whether or not Jessica was posing, but a lot of other people are.

Why are you not willing to entertain supporting analysis to promote Jessica even if she was posing.

I will take Jessica's word, as we all should, that she was not posing, but I am still going provide arguments to support her taking confidence in herself when people doubt that she was not posing.

Sorry I meant to say supporting position, not supporting analysis. It's hard to write comments at work.