Skip to main content

View Diary: Time Magazine's cover girl this week... (371 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Glinda (none)
    Did you read the entire thread above?  I am concerned that you either read my post out of context or that I must not have made myself very clear (always a possibility).

    First, the only reason I mentioned any possible alternative "causes" for Coulter's thinness was to point out that it is not fair to assume she has an eating disorder merely because she is thin.  I did not say that I know definitively that Coulter has good genes--I only mentioned that is possible, along with the possibility that she works out like a fiend and eats healthfully, or any number of other possibilites I did not ennumerate.  Like it or not, there are some women who are thin for these and other reasons and I don't think one should presume and accuse an eating disorder without any evidence whatsoever to support it other than "she's thin."

    Second, I am all-too-keenly aware of how people view women who are not thin and "attractive" within the conventional view of such things.  I am very much aware of the effect that the pressure regarding "curves" has on a woman's self esteem, dating prospects, work success and myriad other areas of one's life.  I know this from personal experience, as an intelligent woman with curves.  So don't point your self-righteous finger at me as if I am the person perpetuating the myth.

    In fact (and here was the point I intended to make), my original post merely said I don't see why we talk about women's bodies at all in the context of attacking their political views.  Perhaps I missed the story, but I do not know of Ann Coulter holding herself out as the physical ideal for us and saying, "Believe me, I'm thin!"--rather, it was the poster above who chose to bring up Coulter's thinness as a personal attack, coupled with a bitchy remark about her having an eating disorder (based on pure speculation).  I am disgusted that those kinds of attacks based on one's physicality or appearance are only made on women, not men.  To me the sin is compounded when it is a woman making such an attack.

    Perhaps I have read a mean-spirited tone into your comment when one was not intended.  If so, I'm sorry.  But I feel as if I have had a sharp finger poked squarely into my chest, and unfairly so.

    •  I read your post (none)
      You aren't getting it: Just think about your use of the "good genes" meme and what that says about how warped women's view of attractive bodies are these days.

      As I stated in my previous comment, I don't care how she stays thin, the woman is emaciated ... positively skeletal. That is not attractive. I too live in New York and have seen hundreds of bodies of women whose body type is naturally "model thin". They look natural and healthy. Ann looks sickly. And I've seen that bodytype as well here and far too often. It's pure body distortion.  

      That aside, Coulter asks for references to be made to her looks ... in spades. She has attacked liberal and Democratic women for their looks many, many times. Here's just a sampling: From her July 26th, 2004 column about the Democratic National Convention:

      My pretty-girl allies stick out like a sore thumb amongst the corn-fed, no make-up, natural fiber, no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, hirsute, somewhat fragrant hippie-chick pie wagons they call "women" at the Democratic National Convention.

      One more thing: I'd take this discussion much more seriously if I had seen anyone who has come to Ann's defense on her body today also calling the following Kossacks on their pot shots at women's looks:

      Newsie's C&J got 39 '4s' for a post containing this snippet with nary a comment:

      Cheers to good looking princes! (uber snark alert!) Thanks to Diana, these two weren't infected by the Camilla gene pool.
      Or this pathetic commentary on Terri Schiavo:
      Another thing - have you seen pictures of her "before?" She was an attractive woman! Wouldn't she'd be horrified to know that she's all over the tv looking the way she does now?

      Yes, she was very attractive when she was drinking nothing but iced tea causing that disasterous potassium deficiency that resulting in irreversible brain damage. And wasn't Diana bulemic? But that's okay because she was pretty and thin.

      Neither Camilla Parker Bowles nor Terri Schiavo did anything to deserve remarks about their looks. But their looks are not "ideal".

      Ann on the otherhand deserves what she gets.

      "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

      by Glinda on Sun Apr 17, 2005 at 10:04:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think we are generally saying the same thing. (none)
        Although I did not see those 2 posts you quote before, I agree they are wrong.  I did tell Jillian at the beginning of this thread that I am tired of all comments about women's physicality, not just any pertaining to Ann Coulter, and that I had seen many other instances of such comments, not just hers.  

        And I get what you are saying about Ann bringing this on herself, but I personally don't think anything she has said merits lobbing the ball back at her.  I view that as stooping to her level.  Whether she looks skeletal or not, I don't think it is our business to comment on her appearance, any more than it would be our business if she had subjected herself to a plastic surgery that went awry, leaving her with only half a nose.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site