Another shoe post? We know, but hear us out. We’re old enough to remember when Barack Obama’s “perfectly creased pant” was proof he would one day be president, so these things carry some weight.
As Twitchy reported, the media had a bit of a freakout when first lady Melania Trump boarded Marine One Tuesday morning en route to Corpus Christie wearing stiletto heels. First came the tweets from reporters, and then came the earnest think pieces from the Washington Post, Vogue, Politico, and others. After we’d published that post, even more hot takes came in.
Here’s the New York Times from Tuesday night.
— The New York Times (@nytimes) August 30, 2017
Here’s Slate, a day later:
— Slate (@Slate) August 30, 2017
Christina Cauterucci writes:
True, Melania would risk an ankle sprain by merely stepping out of a climate-controlled limousine in those shoes, never mind walking through mud and debris to comfort evacuees recouping in shelters. But the rest of her outfit was just as obnoxious. It was as if an assistant told her they’d be roughing it on a mission to an inhospitable place of unimaginable devastation, and Melania thought “war zone.” Her aviators and bomber jacket are playing at the courage and ready-for-anything spirit that defines most mainstream depictions of the military, as if she were risking anything or helping anyone at all on this trip to Texas. (She’s not.)
OK, then. Now, two full days later, the Washington Post is back with an analysis of its own previous analysis by fashion critic Robin Givhan.
Yep. They’re like firefighters rushing toward a story.
Perspective: Here’s why it’s not sexist to criticize Melania Trump for running to a disaster zone in heels https://t.co/CZKeOab5bF
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) August 31, 2017
Because she's on the right https://t.co/iBsmHf8V53
— Ben McDonald (@Bmac0507) August 31, 2017
So this is the opinion piece to explain how criticizing the first lady’s heels (she changed shoes on the plane, by the way) wasn’t sexist — the opinion piece we’d all been waiting for breathlessly while killing time looking for actual updates on the Harvey relief effort.
This time it was Kayla Epstein’s turn:
Additionally, Trump wore the heels not because they were practical, but because she would be photographed outside the White House as she departed for Texas. Instead of understanding that her attire would signal the tone of the visit and ostensibly assure that “help was on the way,” she instead sought to look attractive for the cameras.
The heels imply to Trump’s watchers that she wasn’t thinking about others, but rather, that her primary concern was herself. Perched atop her pumps, she becomes a caricature of the one percent.
Epstein even took a shot at Trump’s change of shoes, noting that her “glistening Adidas” probably wouldn’t even get dirty.
Speaking of perspectives, how about getting one?
Uses "perspective" in the headline un-ironically. https://t.co/d3jyXIP53R
— Federalist Musket?? (@Patriot_Musket) August 31, 2017
You keep using that word "perspective." I do not think it means what you think it means. https://t.co/1igx3z4gMF
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) August 31, 2017
My perspective: Trump is handling a crisis correctly and y'all don't have anything else to criticize, but this. https://t.co/xDS9Kgp4x8
— That VCU Gal (@oh_hey_tori) August 31, 2017
* * *
Fashionably lame: These hot takes on Melania Trump’s shoes aren’t going to get any hotter https://t.co/ovtG6HvCEl
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) August 30, 2017