It would not be the Democrats if they were not engaged in empty symbolic gestures that led to nothing getting accomplished. The hash-tag activists in Congress staged another such gesture for tonight’s State Of The Union speech.
A contingent of female Congresss members will sit together wearing white in order to — uh, they will accomplish…something, I’m sure.
Democratic women wore white to Trump's first address to a joint session of Congress in 2017. The color is same for Tuesday's #SOTU, but the reason has changed https://t.co/GcKMb5dG9D
— Roll Call (@rollcall) February 4, 2019
The reasons given behind this are the color is symbolic of the Suffragettes. Um, unless it is not…?
According to Lois Frankel (FL), Chair of the Democratic Women’s Working Group, “I know there’s a debate about whether the suffragists really wore white.” Well, when going with a totally sybolic gesture, accuracy is really not all that important.
Continuing, Frankel said, “This is really going to be sending a message — especially to all the women and their families in the country that put us into the majority with all these new women [members] — that a big part of our agenda is going to be promoting the economic security of women and their families.”
White dresses – those will be doing that.
"As someone who lives on the border, no," El Paso DACA recipient Senaida Navar said. "I refuse to trade my community for a status." https://t.co/YzU57G9EdP
— Roll Call (@rollcall) February 6, 2019
But wait, as Roll Call stated, they wore white at the 2017 SOTU for a different reason. What was that again?
At that time, they were trying to stand up for women’s rights amid concerns that the new administration would trample them.
Now, how do we read this? Because, based on the fact they are crowing about the women recently elected in the November elections, it sounds like President Trump has not been successful in his bid to “trample” them.
Or maybe they figure they staved off that aggression, by donning Blanco Couture???
This ability of the color white to hold all manner of social import and to solve societal ills harkens back to the campaign season of 2016. Recall, during the party conventions, how the color white was amazingly interpretational. When Hillary wore a fossil-hued pants suit to claim the Democratic party nomination, it was declared to be sending an amazing message of hope.
White was the color of the women's suffrage movement. Hillary Clinton also wore white during her convention acceptance speech. https://t.co/g8c3OyIJ3l
— Anthony Zurcher (@awzurcher) March 1, 2017
Oh. My. God.
It didn't occur to me until I I saw this post (h/t @anibundel) why Hillary wore white at the convention.
Suffragettes FTMFW! https://t.co/ppAfGD5LVx— Emily L. Hauser (@emilylhauser) November 9, 2016
Why she wore white: deconstructing Hillary Clinton's convention pantsuit https://t.co/mtJfWjHomI
— Guardian US (@GuardianUS) July 29, 2016
How noble, how uplifting, how so trenchantly inspiring!
However…
Just weeks earlier, Melania Trump was adorned in a luxurious white gown at the GOP convention, but somehow that attire carried with it an altogether different message.
Moonbat Lib Writer Implies Melania’s White Dress Is… Racist https://t.co/akDfoyTbU1 via @NYJooo
— Tammy Bruce (@HeyTammyBruce) July 25, 2016
Ha! A fashion writer for @PhillyInquirer says Melania's white dress = racist, while Hillary's = hopeful. #Doublestandard @EWellingtonPHL
— Stacey Dash (@staceydash) August 4, 2016
It sure sounds as if this color white has a convenient ability to change in meaning, depending on a particular agenda. Maybe we should identify it as “pigment-fluid”.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member