WE'RE HERE, WE HAVE BREASTS, DEAL WITH IT -- UPDATED

I somehow missed out on the latest blog brouhaha until now, so you have probably already heard about it. Ann Althouse castigated Jessica Valenti of Feministing for her appearance in this photograph with President Clinton.  Althouse characterizes it as follows:

. . . she wears a tight knit top that draws attention to her breasts and stands right in front of him and positions herself to make her breasts as obvious as possible . . .

Which is just ludicrous.  I guess in Althouse's world, human beings with breasts are now obligated to stand off to the side to make sure their breasts aren't conspicuous.  And I suppose when posing for a photograph, a woman with breasts has an obligation to think about whether the color of her top will contrast with the colors worn by the men standing behind her, potentially drawing attention to her breasts.  In fact, maybe said be-breasted human should have thought of that before getting dressed in the morning and made sure to wear only dark, somber colors or better yet a black tent.  Hmmm, a burqa perhaps.   

Oddly enough, Althouse claims to be the true feminist as compared to Valenti.  Yet she can't seem to cope with the fact that women have breasts and that breasts, you know, stick out.

Since I'm late to the party, I don't have much to add to what a number of other bloggers have already said.  Check out Jessica's post, which contains a round up of links to posts by feminist bloggers on this.  I concur wholeheartedly that Jessica did not deserve the mean-spirited attack upon her. 

Also, Redneck Feminist reminds us of a similar incident a while ago when Alabama gubernatorial candidate for the Libertarian Party, Loretta Nall, was tsk-tsked in a newspaper article for her breasts.

UPDATE:  I am still reading some of the posts.  I think Majikthise really nailed it with some choice quotations from the Althouse comments threads, which provide a nice up-close view of misogyny in action. 

Comments

[jo(e)]

You know, I always wonder how feminism gets such a bad reputation, and then I see stuff like this. How is it that Althouse calls herself a feminist?

The comments on Althouse's original post were out-and-out misogynist, mocking Jessica, calling her an intern, suggesting that she was trying to seduce Clinton, etc. And Althouse's response was to agree with that crap and continue to attack Jessica for the crime of having both breasts and good posture?

One of the strangest things is the accusation that she was sticking her breasts out for Clinton, the male political figure. Uh, he was standing behind her, so he could not see her breasts. He was looking at the camera, as were they all.

I cannot even find a thread of logic in Althouse's attack. It seems merely like a mean-spirited attack, plain and simple.

I cannot believe in the year 2006 we are still having to waste time on stuff like this ....

[a feminist]

Looks like I've been in a virtual bubble over this particular row; I only became familiar after your posting of this blog entry.

Just wanted to add my support for your own thoughts. I can't believe there has been so much vitriol toward Jessica over her body/position in the photograph. I'm amazed. I'm all for a discussion on the idea of feminist bloggers meeting Clinton (I find that particular angle interesting), but the personal attacks I'm reading are just completely reprehensible. Talk about over the top.

[will]

Althouse is easy to predict. Anything about Republicans, she supports. Anything about Democrats, she opposes.

I guess she wants women to strap their breasts down so that they are not visible.

Jessica did not do anything inappropriate except own breasts.

[Moi]

Big breasts--with a "thin" knit sweater--and she had the nerve to stand in front of Clinton. And she's a "liberal"--and was actually attractive to boot. Damn that Jessica. Damn her. (Need I add: /sarcasm?)

[The Grouch]

I think Atrios said it best--you don't know "banal" until you've read Althouse.

Not only is the woman spiteful, petty and a complete stranger to logic, she's also boring.

[Sydney]

Perhaps Althouse wishes she were as attractive as Jessica and is merely administering a low blow? Seriously, there was nothing inappropriate about Jessica's attire, she was merely "posing" just like everyone else in the photo, as one does when one has one's picture taken. What is up with this lady? Doesn't she have anything more important to worry about?

[The Happy Feminist]

The funny thing is that she is claiming in the comments thread of the most recent post on the issue that the feminists are being petty and apparently have nothing more important to worry about. But SHE's the one who made an issue of Jessica's breasts. And yes it is worthy of comment when someone (purporting ot be a feminist) publishes demeaning comments about a woman based only on her looks and her temerity for owning a pair of breasts.

[will]

Althouse isnt a feminist. She isnt that smart.

[David Thompson]

Perhaps Althouse wishes she were as attractive as Jessica and is merely administering a low blow?

Um what? If it's not okay to make snotty comments about Jessica Valenti's personal appearance, then it's not okay to make snotty comments about Ann Althouse's personal appearance.

[Sydney]

David, I have no idea what Althouse looks like, so I cannot possibly comment on her appearance. I'm not sure why you think that I was. I was commenting on Althouse's *motivations* for making comments about another woman's chest, tongue in cheek. This is not the same thing as telling Althouse to cover her tits up, or the same thing as saying that she is unattractive.

[mythago]

Who pissed in Ann Althouse's catnip?

[Bitch]

The best part is, she wrote two posts about why feminists were evil for eradicating the idea that women should pay attention to their appearance.

[David Thompson]

...or the same thing as saying that she is unattractive.

Hmmm. Transaction: declined.

[Richard]

I have to say I'm puzzled at Ann's attack on that photograph. I really don't see anything she's talking about with regard to Valenti. I say I'm puzzled because if you have read Ann for as long a time as I have, you'll know that she does indeed have strong feminist leanings. Folks doubting this just haven't followed her long enough. For her to strike out at Valenti that way is just odd. Obviously, something more is at play here that we're just not privy to.

"Obviously, something more is at play here that we're just not privy to."

Not buyin', Richard. I'm thinking Ann went the cheap route, for reasons all her own, and is now furiously pedaling in whatever direction damage control takes her.

[will]

Richard:

Althouse's desire to be a Republican hack is stronger than any actual thought that she has.
She is a Coulter wannabe. She saw an opportunity to take a shot at Clinton.

[Richard]

Will-- I don't agree with Althouse's take on the Valenti group photograph, but why shouldn't a feminist take a shot at Clinton? His behavior and attitude re: women over many years exhibited everything feminists say they loathe. Pointing that out is not inappropriate. Why, too, would any self-respecting feminist give Clinton a smiling audience?

[Chalicechick]

Judging by this picture, I'd say Ann is an attractive, but non-photogenic woman.

Republic of T raises another interesting point about the picture.

CC

[The Happy Feminist]

Richard, I agree that the issue of feminist responses to Clinton is a valid question (not because of Lewinsky, as that was a consensual relationship, but because of Paula Jones's allegations). However, Althouse never said anything about that until after she had gotten called on the fact that she's made cheap comments about Valenti's appearance.

[will]

Richard:

I do not disagree that Clinton's behavior toward women is disturbing. I suspect people are more willing to view his behavior as "allegations from partisans" because he supports the correct policies. (ie If some butts have to be groped to advanced women's rights, then those women just have to take one for the team.)

But, that wasn't Althouse's point. She did not say anything about the irony of feminists being with Clinton.

She was simply knocking the woman for having breasts and trying to look good in a picture with the former President. Notice that she did not criticize any of the men for sucking in their bellies and sticking out their chest.

I will go on record that, if I have the opportunity to have my picture taken with President Clinton, I will suck in my gut, puff out my chest a little, and probably raise up on my toes, just ever so slightly.

[Chipmunk]

Hey, at least Clinton wasn't staring at her chest.

[will]

"Hey, at least Clinton wasn't staring at her chest."

Yes, but notice the redhead's face. She looks like someone just grabbed her butt.

[Richard]

>>> "[ ... ] not because of Lewinsky, as that was a consensual relationship [ ... ]"

Oh, it was a relationship. Is that what they call those now?

[Chalicechick]

""Oh, it was a relationship. Is that what they call those now"""

When a woman in her twenties has long conversations and intimate behavior with another consenting adult?

Sounds like a relationship to me.

CC
who is roughly Lewinsky's age and got REALLY tired of the 22-year-old-bimbo jokes. As a 22-year-old, I felt it was sexist to assume the only possible reason an older man could be interested in me was my looks, which have never been particularly impressive anyway.

[Antigone]

Actually, I agree with Richard a little bit on this one.

Not because of the age thing, but because of the intern thing. He had pretty much direct control over her job, and it was unprofessional, if not downright immoral, for him to pursue a relationship with a subordinate.

Not that I think that it deserved nearly as much attention as it recieved, and nor does it mean that I think Clinton was horrible president. I would still LOVE to talk to the former president, because Hey, it's the FORMER PRESIDENT. I'd talk to Bush Sr if I had the oppurtunity.