For those that Ha ha'd

[*bfine32*]

(11-21-2018, 10:26 PM)Dill Wrote: That's what happens when for most people criticism of "appearance" means facial beauty with reference to criticisms of the FLOTUS--an issue raised by people, for example, calling Michelle Obama a "gorilla," which you of course do not agree with. Or when Trump tweeted an unflattering picture of Ted Cruz's wife alongside Melania or said that a woman with a face like Carly's could not be president.

This become a "semantics argument" as soon as you expand this notion of appearance to mean the overly general "visible from the outside," including clothing choices, the criticism of which most would not place in the same category as criticizing a woman's face. Once you did that, your argument was trading on two different notions of "appearance."

Criticism of women's facial features is almost always misogynistic (certainly it is in all the Trump examples above), but criticizing a woman's choice of coat, or whether to wear one, rarely is.

Please share with me Dill's definition of appearance, so it will no longer be a semantics argument. 

Quick question yes or no to stop the debate. Did folks make fun of FLOTUS' appearance?

Of course I also said Cruz should punch Trump in the mouth.