Thrown with Great Force

REALLY??

This is what the world has come to?

ELEVEN HUNDRED WORDS about Hillary’s hair (and not just her hair, but cultural expectation for women’s hair). But seriously?? 1100? In the Washington Post?

This is pathetic.

And can we please, please, please get the hell over the whole “Hillary as a defiant woman” thing? Why is growing her hair out considered her “latest” act of defiance? What were the others? Running for president? Taking an active role in the government as first lady? Wearing pantsuits?

This is complete and utter crap.

Hillary Rodham Clinton has had an incredibly accomplished life and career. She holds one of the top spots in a very powerful government. She’s had more success than many, many men. Yet we still can’t get past the hairdo?

This entire piece is about the “conventional wisdom” of women “of a certain age” cutting their hair. Conventional wisdom has, at various points in history, also advised that women shouldn’t vote, shouldn’t work outside the home, shouldn’t hold political office.

And while this piece ends with an acknowledgment that conventional wisdom isn’t always right (“Cultural assumptions do more damage to women as they age than any poorly chosen frock ever could”) the fact that the freakin Washington Post would even run an 1100-word piece on the appropriateness and cultural acceptance of women’s hairstyles depending on their age and era, using the SECRETARY OF STATE as an example, is disgraceful evidence that women are still judged too much on looks and not enough on merit.