Staring at an Aging Woman (Updated)

I have no problem whatever with looking at old women, their hair turned gray (or white), their faces filled with wrinkles. They have a certain grandeur to them. They’ve earned their gray hairs and wrinkles. As Pat O’Brien used to quip, old age isn’t for sissies. I’d much rather look at people dealing with natural old age than at the botoxed surgically-altered monsters clinging desperately to a vanished youth. Gloria Vanderbilt, for example.

So, no, I have no problem looking at Hillary Clinton. My problem is that I don’t want to listen to her for the next four or eight years.


Amba has good words on the subject.

The Anchoress has sound commentary and a round-up.

5 comments… add one
  • PD Shaw Link

    The person most hurt by lines and wrinkles in this campaign is John McCain. Can’t see this picture hurting Hillary — heck it underscores the argument she is trying to make that she is the candidate of experience (compared with her opponents). Perhaps her opponents will get some wrinkle implants and grey dye to prevent her from opening up a new front.

  • PD Shaw Link

    The more perplexing question has to do with her voice and whether its more difficult for women to raise their voice without sounding shrill and unpleasant. I think when people raise their voice, they tend to raise their pitch and lose some control over tone. The effect is more problematic when your voice already starts at a higher pitch. If you avoid raising and lowering your voice, you sound dull and passionless.

  • DC Link

    Or what about having to see someone like Obama on the news for the next 4 years. . .the man is ugly as hell. I’d much rather listen to Hillary. Is he sick or something? He’s been looking malnourished lately. Somebody really should tell that gawd ugly man to eat a little more. He reminds me of one of those Egyptian mummies after they take all the wrappings off, showing leathery black skin on a skeleton.

  • walt Link

    I agree with PD Shaw about the problem women have with pitch, but Hillary’s problem is also that flat Midwestern tone. It’s just ugly. I remember Gerald Ford debating Jimmy Carter and thinking how dulcet Carter’s voice was.

    Hillary isn’t unattractive (despite the near-crazy obsession wingers have with her appearance). Bob Dole had an eye job and no one cared. Why can’t Hillary do a little nip and tuck? Probably for the same reason Democrats get lambasted for extramarital sex whereas Republicans are given points if they’re not gay.

  • Dana Chapin Link

    I was listening to the Democrats last debate on the radio and I recommend it. You hear more deeply without the distraction of the visual. The surprising thing to me was that they ALL sounded shrill, males and female alike. Maybe it’s a hazard of the debate format. As for wrinkles and vocal quality, how about that nauseating anal pucker of W.’s when he purses his little mouth (as he often does) or his cringe inducing mangling of American English in both pronunciation and meaning. Choosing purely on looks and sound, ANY of the presidential candidates will be better than the current POTUS.

Leave a Comment