Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour

Details

Closed to new replies
December 28, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 149

Rachel Maddow vs. Megyn Kelly.

:iconmgonzales041090:
mgonzales041090 Dec 28, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
So, not exactly politics-related, despite both being prominent political figures. On another forum I frequent, one poster commented that Republican women are generally hotter than liberal women (using Ann Romney vs. Michelle Obama as an example. I actually think Michelle Obama is a prettier woman). That being said, I thought it'd be funny to weigh other people's opinions on this using two different women of two differing political factions. Megyn Kelly of Faux News, and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC.

On one side, we have Megyn Kelly. [link]

Pretty face, blonde hair, and a somewhat ditsy and "playful" look. She comes off as your typical all-American hottie. She gets a leg up on her opponent with killer legs, which probably lead to a killer butt. Likely to be in a more submissive role, catering to your stereotypical female submissiveness as only 1950s women can encapsulate. Only downside is, as she ages, she may end up looking more and more like Nancy Grace, whom we all know doesn't blink. Ever.


And on the other side, we have Rachel Maddow. [link]

Pretty face, though some-what boyish. Featuring hipster glasses which work to accentuate her eyes, Rachel also posses a brain-up on Megyn. What's hotter than women with intelligence? Women with intelligence who are also lesbians. Lesbians are hot. Two women making out. Hot. Rachel is an open lesbian, and if you're into watching, she may be a bit more satisfactory. Rachel has a face which looks impervious to time. She seems like she may age well. Rachel seems to me as if she may have a more freaky side hidden behind her gentle looks, possibly into BDSM. Megyn doesn't give off that same sweet, adventurous vibe.


My two cents. What's it come down to? =D
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconfooly-cooly:
The thing is, republican newswomen are more stereotypically 'hot.' They are just there to fulfill traditional female stereotypes on the air.

I think dialog about the hotness of women on the air as opposed to their merits, and as opposed to discussion of their appearances and how their appearances say something about the image constructed by the parties, is just buying into highly sexist dialogs.
Reply
:iconjeysie:
Jeysie Jan 2, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
The irony is that Rachel Maddow also exemplifies liberal female stereotypes on the air, but since being a traditional woman is no longer acceptable, no doubt she's more acceptable despite being actually just as stereotypical in her way.

And, it's not sexist to talk about someone's hotness. It's normal sex-positive behavior. The correct way to fix it would be to encourage dialog about the hotness of men on the air, not to remove the discussion of women's hotness.

I mean, the irony is that women on the air are allowed to be attractive, with a greater variety of dress and presentation. In contrast, men on the air are expected to mostly have the same rather sterile appearance.
Reply
:iconfooly-cooly:
Which is to say, let's not perpetuate sexism by objectifying women more than they already are, plzkthx.
Reply
:iconmgonzales041090:
mgonzales041090 Jan 1, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
I don't think acknowledging two different women as beautiful is objectification. Women are allowed to be beautiful. Everybody is allowed to acknowledge it.
Reply
:iconfooly-cooly:
Yes, but discussing "which newscaster is the hottest" is pretty much more than commenting 'these women are beautiful.' You don't see people comparing the hotness of all male anchors, although of course there are notable hotties like Anderson Cooper on CNN.

It's not a fruitful, nor is it a political, discussion to merely mention different women and hubba hubba over them.
Reply
:iconjeysie:
Jeysie Jan 2, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
"You don't see people comparing the hotness of all male anchors, although of course there are notable hotties like Anderson Cooper on CNN."

Female sexuality is seen as bad/non-existent, so it's unsurprisingly that you don't see it discussed out in the open that often. There's also fewer media figures hired to be attractive to women as a result.

So there's nothing wrong with straight men discussing the attractiveness of women, as that's just just normal sex-positive behavior. It's rather there being few opportunities for straight women to discuss the attractiveness of men that's sexist.

"It's not a fruitful, nor is it a political, discussion to merely mention different women and hubba hubba over them."

So it's not fitting to the Political forum to discuss aspects of political figures? It's not like he's discussing rock stars or actresses or such.
Reply
:iconmgonzales041090:
mgonzales041090 Jan 1, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
Evidently you missed the other parts of the thread where I said I would make a male-centered thread too.
Reply
:iconmci021:
mci021 Dec 31, 2012  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
You're right. This isn't politics.
Reply
:iconjeysie:
Jeysie Dec 31, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
You know... I totally realized I should link this: [link]

The "anatomically correct" one with Scott Brown wearing only a leaf is kind of disturbing.
Reply
:iconmgonzales041090:
mgonzales041090 Dec 31, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
hubba hubba


Kind of makes me want to use Paul Ryan in the next thread (think exercise photos).
Reply
Add a Comment: