Scanner

So, the essence of Wintour's political and cultural analysis here is "gross, she wears pants?"

Anna Wintour is nuts.

But has Hillary Clinton not seen what Vogue's makeup, lighting, camera, and photoshop artists are capable of? Has she failed to notice she is the least physically attractive of the Democratic frontrunners? Given the fact that she is not above getting Botox (how else to explain the immobility of her facial muscles?) she seems to understand that physical appearance plays a role in shaping our views of people and getting positive images of one's self out into the world is a good thing for a politician. Why turn down an opportunity for publicity and to reach people?

Screengrab brings us the Top Ten Action Heroes Who Deserve a Comeback , conveniently packaged in Parts

Pingback from  Hillary Clinton » Anna Wintour Calls Hillary Clinton "Mannish"

I think Anna Wintour is sadly mistaken, and I wish she was right in lot of ways because it would mean our country wasn't nearly as stupid as it actually is.

Besides, no way Hillary is a size 2, let's be real, Wintour would never let her on the cover anyway.

agreed with everything alimum said, except the fact that anna wintour is nuts. i think the woman has a pretty good point, that being feminine has absolutely nothing to do with politics and shouldn't. how many magazine covers has Obama been on? google image tells me GQ, Wired, Vibe... and, oh wait! MEN'S VOGUE! how dare Obama try to look, uh, masculine....

It was a busy week here at Scanner. We got a new URL, we thought a lot about boobs (big ones! Jessica Alba's!), we found some new furniture, and unfortunately, a few people died. Anyway, we're spent. But in case you missed any of it, here's

Although Vogue has produced some very good feminist articles over the years, the truth of the matter is still that it is not a feminist magazine.  Vogue is a fashion magazine.  The fact that the editor would retaliate against Clinton for having more important things to do during her campaign than get foofified by Vogue stylists is just ridiculous.  Vogue is not a political journal.  As far as the comments regarding Hillary's appearance goes - get real!  Does anyone give a shit what any of these politicians actually have to say?!  Has no one learned their lesson from the Bush regime?  

Wow. Wintour didn't call Clinton "mannish" directly. Clinton's handlers decided that a Vogue appearance was "too feminine" and Wintour is, in effect, asking why Clinton thinks "feminine" is an undesirable quality in a presidential campaign. Clearly, Clinton isn't trying to promote a trans-gendered or sexless image of herself. The Clinton team WANTS her to come across as masculine, because they think American voters will respond more positively. I don't think Wintour should be jumped on for this.

I think that the Clinton camp probably was more concerned about the perception that Hillary would be perceived as more frivolous than serious by turning up on Vogue right now.  Also what if Hillary's look wasn't authentic enough?  Could cost some votes.  The Donna "Karanization" of Bill & Hillary was a little awkward in their first term and rang false and indulgent with a lot of style watchers.    

Vogue should wait for when she's really President (because she WILL BE!!) and Ms. Wintour and all of her great stylists can preen Hillary and Bill to their hearts' content for all the Inauguration Day parties...Now that will be a fun (and collectible) issue!!!

Pingback from  Butch, don’t. « kanzan