BoomerGirl Diary

Anna Wintour in her “Letter From The Editor” (Vogue, Feb 2007 issue) expressed amazement and chagrin over Hillary Clinton’s reluctance to appear on Vogue’s pages “for fear of looking too feminine.”

After all, she has been photographed by Annie Liebovitz for a 2003 issue and truly looked stylish and professional.

But, Anna, I understand where Hilary is coming from.

Believe me, I’m all for every woman and, indeed, every man (while we’re at it) to look her or his best in the political arena. However, you miss the message she sends between the lines. Let me attempt to explain:

Society tends to focus intently on women (it’s our joy or burden to carry) and judge us not only by our looks, but also fixate on what we wear because (you guessed it) we are women!

Sen. Clinton walks a thin political line, simultaneously trying to inspire the empathy and win the kinship vote from her own sex, while she tries to deflect from being female at all, as she rubs shoulders in a men’s club.

Magazines whose focus (and whose “raison d’etre”) is women’s fashion serve a real purpose and are terrific (I tout “Vogue” in my “Get Inspired!” section of “Forever Cool”), but they do underline the huge role women’s looks plays in the game of life.

I believe it would behoove Hillary to quietly seek out good (and I do mean “good”) style and wardrobe consultation. But having said that, I totally agree with her decision not to pose for a photo shoot at this all-important time. Doing so may certainly be perceived as lacking seriousness on her part, and what could be more serious than the office she aspires to? At the day’s end, it would be too much of a “womanly” thing to do.