I think there's a very meaningful conversation to be had about the surgical homogenization of MAGA women's appearances to suit one man's aesthetic preferences, and what that says about patriarchal bargains under fascistic misogyny.
AND "haha, filler" is not that conversation
AND "haha, filler" is not that conversation
Reposted from
Chad Loder
Not a huge fan of how it's fair game to insult Kristi Noem's makeup or cosmetic procedures so easily. It supports the permission structure for attacking women about this kind of thing.
Comments
It’s not just a reflection of the woman’s insecurity, but of whomever chooses to be with her, too.
https://www.liberalcurrents.com/the-new-gender-synthesis/
It's like she needs her outward assistance to compensate for the wretchedness within
Gwen is on fire 🔥 … nailed it.
I think it is our "spidey sense" that has picked up on the signifigance of "Mar-a-lago face." It's a huge red flag.
Their careers and political existence at this point depends on his favor, and his favor is conditioned on this aesthetic compliance.
They are not innocent victims. They are complicit in their own coercion, because it brings them conditional power.
It is about a spectacle of surgical-level WHITE gender conformity that is extreme and also expensive.
For all the NYT's de-gendered reporting of MAGA attempts to force "parents" to stay at home with kids, the actual goal is removal of AFAB from public life.
They want us pregnant and barefoot and silenced, shut at home economically and by our "ugliness."