Hillary Clinton: A Haired Subject For Columnists

At this point in her career, Hillary Clinton’s resume should speak for itself. She was the former First Lady, senator of New York, ran for president, and is currently Secretary of State. With qualifications like these, why would her haircut even be considered in her potential second-time run for the presidency in 2016?

An op-ed piece in Newsday by Ann McFeatters makes reference to Clinton’s haircut amidst discussion of her past political experiences that may inform her decision to run for president again in 2016. Apparently, Clinton “is experimenting with yet another longer, younger-looking hairstyle.”

Two things are wrong with this reference.

1. Clinton’s hairstyle has no relevance at all to her ability to potentially run the country. The reference taints the surrounding comments about America being ready for a woman president. Quite frankly, as the current Secretary of State and a champion of international women’s rights, Clinton has bigger things to worry about than what hairstyle she chooses to flaunt these days.

2. The reference specifies that she’s flaunting a younger-looking hairstyle. Why should Clinton be worrying about looking younger when it is precisely her lifetime’s worth of experiences that makes her qualified for a potential 2016 run for the presidency? It seems that male candidates become more distinguished and qualified as they show their age, while women politicians like Clinton are pressured to look younger and untouched by time. Clinton’s lifetime experience should speak for itself. 

Finally, seeing the political expertise of high-profile women politicians like Hillary Clinton referenced amidst comments concerning their latest hairstyles certainly draws attention away from their competencies as politicians, not just as women.


Published by Kate McCarthy on 03/27/2012

« Back to More Blog Posts