AT Camera Lucida, Kidist Paulos Asrat writes about Michelle Obama’s latest fashion transgression, yet another hideously ugly get-up that represents a finger in the air to the institution of First Lady. She’s more the First Bratty Teenager who needs a mother to tell her to go home and get changed.

Michelle is like so many adults today. They think the duty of a parent is to act juvenile. She reminds me of Christine Lagarde, the chief of the International Monetary Fund, who, when presented with a job opportunity in Chicago that entailed leaving her sons in Europe, asked her eleven-year-old son for permission to go. Of course, her son said, “Go for it, Mom!” But then most children out of love for their parents will become authority figures, if asked. They then go on to become juvenile adults, having never had childhoods of their own.

Below is Michelle further demonstrating the dignity of her office while presenting an award to Taylor Swift, who displays the stiffness characteristic of a woman trying to keep her dress from slipping.

— Comments —-

Lawrence Auster writes:

Concerning Michelle Obama’s wild outfit (which is deliberately designed to make it look as though she is exposing her crotch area), you write:

“She’s more the First Bratty Teenager who needs a mother to tell her to go home and get changed.”

I think the observation somewhat trivializes what is happening here. At the most primary level, Michelle is not disobeying the code of socety; she is positively asserting the code of the NEW society that liberals have constructed on the ruins they have made of the old. Far from being a rebellious adolescent, she is the leader, the observed of all observers, the acme and exemplar of what we now are.

Laura writes:

I didn’t say she was being genuinely rebellious, did I? Teenagers are conformist in their thinking and behavior, the most conformist people on earth, always making their fears of being unaccepted and efforts to fit in appear rebellious. Michelle is the First Bratty Teenager of a society of bratty teenagers who refuse to grow up.

Laura writes:

By the way, I disagree that the outfit is designed to make her look like she is exposing her crotch. That stupid skirt is a way of getting around the fact that her hips are too wide for jeans.

Mr. Auster writes:

It sure looks that way to me.

Kidist thought the same.

Laura writes:

Yes, it does look like she is exposing her crotch. But, I think the aim was to put her in dress-up jeans.

 Mr. Auster writes:

Oh this is funny, it’s like my recent exchange with Jim Kalb in the “Trayvianity” thread about whether liberals seek to destroy the good. Exposing her crotch was not the intention, but it was the effect.

Mr. Auster adds:

You’ve heard of a high-class problem? This is what I’d call a high-class disagreement.

Laura writes:

: – ) Even if the skirt covered her crotch, it would still be a trampy outfit. Having abandoned her lawyerly, Apollonian self, Michelle has embraced Dionysian vitality.

Buck writes:

I’m probably out of sync with the comments, but, I just wanted to agree with Lawrence. My eyes were instantly drawn to Michelle Obama’s crotch and they lingered before taking in the whole picture. Then, I looked again. My eyes were drawn there by the purposeful configuration of that split. She knew that.

I think that that is so obvious, that she knew exactly what she was doing when she determined to display herself as sexual, rather than as authentically feminine. She is supremely aware and proud of her physicality. She is totally absorbed in what she enjoys as her stature and sexual presence. She is woman, she is strong, she is the proud and strong leader of women who stand against the traditions that have always held women like her back is a sexuality repressing way.

We don’t really have much that we can do about our normal healthy bodies, other than keeping them fit and clean. Michelle is proud of her guns and shoulders and stature, and she wants to stimulate your senses with them. She’s proud that she’s fit and she wants you to know it. She also says that she wants to encourage others to do the same. That’s not a bad thing, in the proper context. But, she has no propriety or respect for context. She has poor taste and selective class. She’s show and tell. She’s knows that she’s an embarrassment to the history of First Ladies. But, she could care less. She’s in their faces, because she has never cared or had any real respect for any of them.

Laura writes:

 She is woman, she is strong, she is the proud and strong leader of women who stand against the traditions that have always held women like her back is a sexuality repressing way.

Exactly. And I agree that she is entirely taken with her own physical fitness and exults in it. “Look at me! I’m not an obese American!” As to her thinking of herself as an embarrassment to the history of First Ladies, she obviously believes she is a vast improvement on that history.

Kidist writes:

Actually, I do think she’s exposing her crotch.

This is what I’ve noticed around these days. Women, and young girls, are going around in jeans and trousers with a deliberate focus on their crotch area, either by wearing pants that are too tight, or wearing jeans which gather around the crotch making it look bigger and more pronounced.

It is actually embarrassing to see this, and it I try hard to avoid looking “there.”

I think it is partly a lack of style, but I think it is the female version of the male crotch area. Men can’t help their pronounce crotch area, it is normal, and it not embarrassing, unless it is really too pronounced with pants that are just too small.

So, women think they can wear what they want, expose what they want, etc.

They are also in competition with men, showing that they also have “big ones.” In the end, it is aggressive and antagonistic. It is like the breast exposures that we will be getting now the weather is getting warmer. Once again, it may be a fashion statement, but it is also a “look at me, and my powerful femaleness” attitude, meant to disarm the people.

Laura writes:

You may be right.

The idea of a woman flaunting her crotch is completely foreign to me. I cannot relate to it in any way or understand the mentality. It’s what you would expect from some mythical tribe of Amazons, women of primordial eroticism who are not at all human and who devour and spit out men.

Roger G. writes:

You all obviously are not familiar with Klingon evening wear.

Buck writes:

Roger G. was not joking. (See picture here.)

Kimberly writes:

Michelle’s “crotch pants” caught my eye, too. I have noticed this trend of crotch emphasis growing. In Boulder you can find college girls wearing pants so low that you can see pubic hair. Their whole goal seems to be to emphasize their crotch-bones so that they point to “X” marks the spot. They want every pervert thinking about going there, apparently.

I am young and fit and it is always rather tempting for me to want to show it off. But this is one fad that I have not ever had the least wayward desire to wear. I find it totally repulsive. They might as well have man-parts down there if they are going to be that aggressive. It’s disgusting.

Please follow and like us: