or does this photo remind anyone else of a strip joint shot from a movie? I have to doubt there's a shot like this of Biden or McCain's legs.

But I question the motives of Fox in suddenly discovering sexism, you know?

but they're so cute. Like a kid with a new toy. Eventually they'll break it. I'm guessing a certain Senator Clinton will be involved.

What is really interesting is the headline:
"Viewers' Perspectives Widespread on Palin Leg Photo"

Let me point out 'widespread' part of it...

listener's face.

The implication that the listener can see up Palin's garments, though, is unmistakable.

Is it sexist? Dunno -- but it's definitely smarmy. It's reminiscent of the "girly pictures" that WWII and Korean era magazines used to sell to sailors, soldiers, etc. Got one of those "USO tour dancer vibes." What that says about the photog's opinion of Palin, you decide.

(Um, yes, I have seen similar photos of women in audiences -- they were looking at fashion models on runways, usually, but I think I remember seeing one or two, in my days in newspapers, where women were looking up like that - at concert singers and maybe at body-builders.)

Are there photos of women in audiences, staring up at the legs of male candidates? Are such photos framed this way? Has this photog shot some photos like that?

And on a purely personal-opinion, highly sexist note: if she's going to wear those shoes on stage on purpose, she's playing into that "look at me" vibe.

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

for Palin, Hillary, and Michelle -- have all been horrendous too.\

scroll down here and look at the difference bet their treatment of male politicians and female (the article is ignorable and idiotic)-- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/10...

"And on a purely personal-opinion, highly sexist note: if she’s going to wear those shoes on stage on purpose, she’s playing into that “look at me” vibe."

Are you saying she had it coming by wearing attractive shoes? Really?

I didn't catch that possibility, that the audience was framed in such a way that they could be looking up skirt of the speaker. But I think you are right that the photographer was framing the faces of the rapt audience.

Also, I don't think there is anything wrong with women wearing high heels if they want to, but it is certainly true that Sarah Palin has made a clear choice to play to one of her strengths - that her physical good looks are notably above average. Those suits she wears cost in the thousands, although she may be getting a deal on them. I'd be very surprised if she isn't travelling with a hair/makeup "artist." And I don't think it's sexist to point out that Palin is definitely into the "look at me" vibe; that doesn't mean that she's asking "for it," i.e., some kind of nasty sexist belittlement, (I'm not suggesting that you were suggesting that she is, Sarah), but I also don't think that she has been the victim of such belittlement, for the most part, in either the SCLM, or in the liberal blogisphere.

The PUMAS seem to conflate any and all critiques of Palin with sexism, and I've noted, with chagrin, a similar impulse among some posters here at Correntee.

I agree with ZuZu; how profoundly funny, in an entirely unfunny way, it is to see Fox News take up the horror of sexism in our society.

For those who ask the question whether such a photograph would ever be taken of a man in that situation, let's remember we're talking about a professional photographer whose primary concern is to take good news pictures that tell a story. It is unlikely that a similar shot of either Obama, or McCain, or Biden would have the same impact because how would you know which of these three men it is? That a picture of a hem line, and two lower calves and feet shod in high heels tells most of us that it's Sarah Palin isn't the fault of the photographer, and isn't, for that matter, the fault of Palin. In many ways, I would have thought the picture to be a plus for Palin and her campaign; there you have a multi-racial cast of women looking up with intense interest, if not outright adoration, at a women campaigner, whom we know instantly is Sarah Palin. What's so bad about that? From her point of view, I mean.

until women stop defending their own behavior and attitudes. They just keep doing it over and over again.

We are inundated with women and the willingness to show their nipples, vagina's, breasts with a smile on their face. It's "come see me having sex on You Tube". See me be as raunchy and degrading to other women...as possible. It's fun.

I'm not talking about porn here. This is the decade of everyday woman being treated as objects and many approving it. Men frequently despise them for it and they don't understand why.

The dark side of me would hope for a Palin to be doing her thing. Females want to call Palin a c**t, Hillary a b****h, blame Palin for wearing high heels, Hillary for wearing pants suits; call them names daily....go for it and look in the mirror.

BTW, when is the last time you heard anyone talk about Obama's parts, his sexiness, his seductiveness? Yeah I have too. Women faint at his body then turn around and write Palin is whoring for wearing high heels and for being attractive: HIllary for not being young and a raging bit** for being powerful.

Nothing will change until women learn to like themselves better.

the 'fashion plate' effect. Palin can. She's got the looks.
There's nothing wrong with that. But those are not "maverick" shoes, I think. I haven't watched her that carefully; is she a devotee of haute couture?

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

skirt, but on looking again there was no salaciousness in his expression--just rapt attention.

Melissa at Shakespear's Sister noted in her Palin Sexism Watch early on, September 2, #6, that a photog chose to cut Palin off just above the knees. And the same thing had been done to Hillary (link at post).

She also noted that men's photos showing only parts of their bodies are captioned differently than women's. It is sexism.

What makes this picture extra super-awesome is the caption that accompanies it:

Republican vice presidential candidate Alaska Governor Sarah Palin stands on stage during a campaign rally in O'Fallon, Missouri on August 31. Palin got comfortable in her new role as a vice presidential candidate as she made the Republican case to stay in power. (AFP/Robyn Beck)
She stands on stage? It's a picture of her fooking legs, not a picture of her. And you might think I'm making a pedantic distinction, except that I go through these daily photo dumps constantly, and if there's picture of a male politician in which his face isn't included, it almost always gets described like: "President George Bush's hand is seen waving to onlookers" or "The top of Senator Barack Obama's head is seen emerging from his campaign bus."

Their disembodied (ahem) parts are not called "George Bush" or "Barack Obama." But here, Palin's legs are described as "Alaska Governor Sarah Palin" full-stop. Curious, that.

Get the picture?

Bright red shoes this time, but with women in the frame.

One of the links is to a WSJ bit on Palin's shoes.

Well, have to highlight this link since it's the NYTimes(thicker heels)--note the caption in light of what Melissa said.

Liddy Dole wore heels and shorter skirts--did she get this kind of photo treatment when she was in the Repub primary?

The photo isn't sexist but the use of it, in this context, is. The photo is simply aesthetic - but the use of it borders on didactic. The photograher found a great shot, which says nothing about Palin as a VP candidate, and took it. The printing of it in campaign coverage is saying something about the candidate and her audience - that's the problem here.

Nothing will change until women stop defending their own behavior and attitudes. They just keep doing it over and over again.

We are inundated with women and the willingness to show their nipples, vagina’s, breasts with a smile on their face. It’s “come see me having sex on You Tube”. See me be as raunchy and degrading to other women…as possible. It’s fun.

How in the world is wearing high heels with a business suit anything like Girls Gone Wild?

I’d be very surprised if she isn’t travelling with a hair/makeup “artist.”

They all are. The men just pretend that they're not, and take potshots at each other for spending time on their hair.

Those are fairly standard-issue heels, not fuck-me pumps. I see a lot of those around law firm offices.

It's bad enough we're expected to wear those torture devices when we wear skirted suits in order to look "professional;" it's pretty galling that the goalposts are getting moved on them so that they're now "look at me" shoes.

Check out this illustration for an article titled The Sexy Puritan.

Sarah Palin represents the state-of-the-art version of a particular type of woman—let's call her the Sexy Puritan—that's become a familiar and potent figure in the culture war in recent years.

that Palin's beauty-queen image helps her 'turn' the campaign.

When I was in high school, the word for "sexy puritans" was "tease."

We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
1 John 4:18