Blogs and Stories
Time to End Pantsuit-Gate
David Zalubowski / AP Photo
With viewers tuned into Palin's much-anticipated Oprah interview, Linda Hirshman explains the sexist double-standard at work over the fuss about the clothes the RNC bought her. Plus, view our gallery of Palin's fashion.
On Monday, October 20, 2008, Sarah Palin waved to the crowd in the stadium in Grand Junction, Colorado, clad in a shiny red leather zip up jacket. Two days later, reporters revealed that Palin's gorgeous red leather jacket, and most of her other campaign trail clothes, didn't come from her usual North Face store. She wore a White Valentino blazer for the acceptance speech and a shiny black Elie Tahari suit for the vice-presidential debate. All in all, including the family's clothes, Palin's wardrobe, hair and makeup cost the conservative Republican National Committee a liberal $150,000. The media erupted. Couldn't she have dressed for success for less? Was she going to pay taxes on the swag? What kind of hockey mom was this? Where was the pink sweatsuit so fetchingly caught on camera in the Juneau Costco just months before?
Click the Image Below to View Our Gallery of a Brief History of Sarah Palin's Fashion
I’m with Palin on this one.
Those who savaged Palin for her fancy duds mostly argued a self-described working-class hockey mom shouldn't be wearing pricey designer outfits. Why not? In a system of representative government, the mass of people are almost always poorer than their candidates. But the most interesting aspect of the wardrobe flap was that Palin, the poorest of the four candidates, and with five children to support, was in no position to spend her family's money on a new wardrobe. Either her titular employer, the Republican National Committee, was going to have to buy her clothes or she was going on the stump in a down parka and something from the resale shop. So what exactly did she do wrong?
It's not like the candidates of the common man were going around in sweat suits. When Hillary was on the stump tossing back shots and extolling the "real people, white people," she was wearing a tailor-made pants suits from a shop in Los Angeles where they cost five grand a pop. Yet no one said a word about the shot-and-a-beer candidate wearing garments created off a mannequin specially designed with her particular proportions, requiring a minimum order of $15,000. That information was available to any journalist with a Google search function, but no one chose to set off Pantsuit-gate.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Stars Celebrate the Super Bowl
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
The Bizarre Case Against Gay Marriage
Linda Hirshman is a retired professor of philosophy. She is the author of Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World. She is writing a book about the gay revolution.
Gay Marriage's Great Hope
Linda Hirshman is a retired professor of philosophy. She is the author of Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World. She is writing a book about the gay revolution.
The Gay Marriage Fiasco
Linda Hirshman is a retired professor of philosophy. She is the author of Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World. She is writing a book about the gay revolution.
RogueBeast
Wow a voice of sanity on TDB. Finally someone can comment positively about Palin without a side shot of vitriol.
Your analyis is a breath of fresh air in the smog of unwarranted hate directed at Palin by so many.
SimonSaize
The Suffragettes were the women who fought for economic justice and equality they were the first to get rights for females in America, Gloria Steinem engaged the next revolution. Without them, females would have no substantial rights. What Sarah should do after ironing her image is think of oppression, the impossibility of her even running for/in an election 100 years ago as her VOTE wouldn't count because she has a vagina,and then get a goddamn history lesson .Homosexuals have also fought for freedom and people of color couldn't drink from water fountains. If she continues to yap her ignorance of others and practices discrimination- her clothes will be all she has to cling to.
jus1drun
listen........ quiet. listen carefully. do you hear that? it's the crickets. i wonder why?
redismyneutral
I am not a Palin fan. I don't, however, like the complaints about the clothing she wore while campaigning.
I think the fuss over Palin's wardrobe was of interest because of the dichotomy of the hockey mom vs. the polished, presidential-ready candidate. The point of the criticism, as I saw it, was that the RNC was promoting Palin as hockey mom, while sneakily transforming her into someone who looked the part of a vice presidential candidate. All three other women have their own funding sources. HNC was a US Senator and is an attorney. Michele Obama was a practicing attorney. Cindy McCain is involved with the business she inherited, and yes, earns her own keep. Any of these women could and can afford to buy designer items on her own nickel.
However, to expect Palin to compete in the political snake pit, it is disingenuous to expect her to do so in a pink sweat suit. Her designer clothing was a uniform she was supplied for the job she was hired to do. Just a different look than a helmet, cleats and shoulder pads, although I suspect any woman candidate or spouse might wish for those, too.
Tinybugg
It never ceases to amaze me how far an attractive white woman can go...I can't believe the way the public is "sucking" her up...See this is why I have no use for the Right they don't value intelligence!!!
benrod1
What this writer and other commentators ignore is the disingenuous characterization of Sarah Palin by the RNC. McCain slams Obama for not having any experience and yet chooses the most inexperienced Republican woman available for the most important position of his campagn. She is touted as the epitome of Republican family values, and champion of absitinence only education, but no one seems to notice, or she conveniently fails to mention, that her daughter is sporting a baby bump at the 'unveiling' ceremony. It seems that for every flaw there is an excuse that is someone else's fault.
While it is admittedly unrealistic to expect "hockey mom" to compete with the more polished Hillary and the other wives of the candidates, there is really no excuse for the incompetent way the matter was handled by the campaign staff and Palin herself. The victimhood she and the campaign embraced only furthered the story. If she and the campaign had not immediately gone on the attack and just admitted the mistakes and had Palin explain how the media expects women to dress in this manner for purely sexist reasons, then the story would have disappeared as quickly as it arose. But that would kind of mental flexibilty and strategic thinking was beyond the capability of Palin and the Republican campaign. That says more about her ability to win a national campaign than any book that she could ever have ghost written for her.
taffastrophe
Liberals make it a point to complain about what a woman wears or looks like (see Katherine Harris, Condoleezza Rice, Sarah Palin). Conservatives discuss issues. In my opinion, stooping to defend Sarah Palin only serves to lend credence to the smear attacks levied against her. Let's talk about her ideas and beliefs, not her wardrobe.
bryanlevi
"Palin took the heat because women aren't supposed to earn their own clothes. They have to acquire their clothing in the private precincts of the family-as gifts from their husbands, rather than as a reward for succeeding at a public role."
What is mostly a salient argument that I agree with falls apart here because I don't understand it & the author doesn't bother to explain it.
Criticizing Palin for the clothes is petty, shallow & stupid.
Let's please leave it to Palin (and Cheney, Prejean, et al) to be petty, shallow & stupid.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.