Official portrait of First Lady Michelle Obama
Audacious informality
Even in a gown (this picture has been cropped and doesn't show the floor length of her gown), our first lady looks strong. There have already been complaints about the lack of sleeves on her dress. Haters are saying that it's too informal and too revealing.
I love it that she shows off her arms. It's an elegant show of strength. We are not living in a society in which women have to cover themselves up and it is appropriate that the woman who is married to the leader of our free society reveals her physical power in an understated way. Those arms of hers are amazing.
Posted by Annette Marie Hyder at 2/27/2009 11:03 AM 
Categories: News and Politics, Feminism, History
Categories: News and Politics, Feminism, History
Trackbacks
-
3/5/2009 7:01 PM
Ad Libitum wrote:
Bonnie Fuller has a great blog over at Huffington Post. She asks, in her post titled, Michelle Obama's Sleevegate: Why can't America Handle Her Bare Arms?:Is Michelle Obama supposed to wear a burka? Since when are a woman's arms considered an erogenous zone here in America? Why would it be inappropriate for the First Lady to attend her husband's address to Congress in a beautiful, purple Narcisco Rodriguez SLEEVELESS dress? Photo courtesy of Huffington PostMs. Fuller goes on to remind us that those who have raised the question of propriety, should check out a history book because ... -
3/5/2009 1:26 PM
Ad Libitum wrote:
Bonnie Fuller has a great blog over at Huffington Post. She asks, in her post titled, Michelle Obama's Sleevegate: Why can't America Handle Her Bare Arms?:Is Michelle Obama supposed to wear a burka? Since when are a woman's arms considered an erogenous zone here in America? Why would it be inappropriate for the First Lady to attend her husband's address to Congress in a beautiful, purple Narcisco Rodriguez SLEEVELESS dress? Photo courtesy of Huffington PostMs. Fuller goes on to remind us that those who have raised the question of propriety, should check out a history book because ...
Comments