Melania Trump’s heels garnered more world headlines than most any other story… It was then apparently followed up with a story in The Telegraph, by a woman, about why women don’t like her. The crux of the story was that she is too beautiful, too smart, and too wealthy, and chooses to not dress in a frumpy, utilitarian style.
Well gee, that makes great fodder for not liking someone… Actually, what that reveals is more than a bit of the ancient attribute of ‘jealousy’. The writer goes on to further find disgust with Melania because why would someone as suave as her marry – Trump? So now, her choice of husband’s is root cause to hate the woman.
Personally, I find her amazing. Not necessarily because she is beautiful and smart and suave, although she is, but because she can stand up to such base, ugly rhetoric and still hold her head high, like her heels, not bend to their level of mediocrity, and be exactly who she is despite the tacky whacks from all the gene pool of Lizzie Borden.
The media has seen fit to take her son down without mercy, to take her down without grace, and to take our President down without integrity. The reflection is then – not on the individuals – but on a classless journalist and parent media organization.
In this context, class is not a measurement of money, it is a measurement of honor and decency. Melania hasn’t bashed the media, she hasn’t raged back, she hasn’t even attempted a self righteous remark of indignation. She makes the Kathy Griffins of the world look trashy, and perhaps that is why they froth with slanderous commentaries. A pathetic ploy of vengeance their response is rooted in their own jealousy for not having her grace.
I suppose many women embraced Hillary and her pant suits because she wasn’t a threat to their Femme Fatale self esteem. She too is smart, but in a very different way. And it was that very antagonistic froth that turned so many other women away despite her intellect.
A frenzy of focus on Melania’s shoes has brought out the psychoanalysis of what they represent – according to The New York Times writer: clichéd femininity, decorative, impractical, expensive, and elitist. Gee willikers! One would think she was the only woman left on earth that wore high heels. One would think this “Fashion Writer” had a PhD in Psychology. Rarely, if ever, have we heard the media making such an obtuse commentary about any other First Lady’s choice of clothing – because they would then be branded as ‘sexist’, intolerant, derogatory, and racist.
The New York Times went so far as to say that the shoes represented everything they hate about Trump.
Perhaps the woman writing the article feels that she is somehow the judge and ruler of worldly fashion, an icon of what she thinks women the world over should wear? I am reminded of Heath Ledger. It is theorized that when he played the role of The Joker, he became – The Joker. To such an extent that the evil that was The Joker, became Heath Ledger. Sometimes, I think that is exactly what has happened to many within Hollywood, they play a role, and suddenly they think they are the world’s aficionados.