It’s not an accident that Hillary Clinton is the public figure most associated with the pantsuit, an outfit that is a compromise between liberal ideals and reality. When a female politician puts one on, it’s not like wearing a sign that says “I hate men,” but it does indicate something about her values; that she would, for example, prefer her daughter go to law school and build a successful career over getting married young and having a large family.
…
How much one “sexualizes” women is among the most important cultural differences based on class and ideology that exist within American society. Think of blue collar men putting up pictures of scantily clad women in their workspaces. Law school was the first time in my life I was exposed to upper-class American culture, and I remember a guy once being shocked when I started graphically talking about a woman’s body. Where I grew up, that’s how men bonded! Appreciating women’s bodies too openly is coded as lower class and more conservative…
I’ve observed this as well. There is an upper class (of Leftist political ideas, cultural elitism, anti-patriotism, sexual normophobia, and distinct ambivalence about expressing the values of children and marriage… and then there is a working class (black, white, hispanic) which still cherishes female sexuality, male assertiveness, basic notions of hard work and earning one’s way, and is generally (not certainly not always) positive in their assessments of American capitalism and the military and police.
This division is the most profound schism in our country and it is one that is almost NEVER acknowledged or discussed in legacy media. After all… no one likes feeling like the out-of-touch rich asshole. So they display their luxury beliefs and pretend that they’re ‘fighting’ for black people or gay people or the poor. The fact that they don’t know any poor people (of any color) barely gives them pause.
A birlliant piece on normophobia by :
