Purse Politics: Tote and Vote

[MadrasT]

Purse Politics: Tote and Vote

The Congress of yore might conjure images of spittoons and old male politicians with briefcases, but the 113th has ushered in a historic number of women — 20 in the Senate, and 81 in the House — and with them a historic number of handbags. In some ways, the female legislator’s purse or bag has become one of the most outwardly physical manifestations of the nation’s changing deliberative body.

“What a woman senator slings over her shoulder is the next tangible and Technicolor proof of how the esteemed body has changed and is changing,” said Tracy Sefl, a Democratic strategist. “Today’s purses and bags are as new and interesting of a visual as the red power suit once was. They pop on the C-Span cameras, they serve a purpose and — intentionally or not — they make a statement.”

(snip)

“I think most of us, while we may look at the cute little purses, our lives don’t fit a cute little purse,” she said. “Our lives fit something that is in between a purse and a briefcase, and that’s what I carry.”

Their bag, female lawmakers said, might help add a splash of fun and fashion to what can be a tedious daily routine. But it must befit a member of Congress. Meaning: appropriately modest. Even the classic Birkin, for instance, would likely draw unwanted attention to its owner because of its five-figure price tag.

More at link: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/fashion/purse-politics-tote-and-vote.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

We have an unprecedented number of women in congress... and the New York Times sees fit to write an article about their goddamn purses.

Just fucking shoot me now.

[BainsBane]

1. Well, it is in the fashion section of the paper

Not the politics section. Plus, I confess to really loving a nice handbag.

[Arcanetrance]

2. So the purse is the defining symbol according to this

But I seem to know more women in this day and age that spurn the purse

[bunnies]

5. Yep. I havent carried one in years.

& I find this article entirely ridiculous.

[BainsBane]

6. Where do you put your stuff?

[bunnies]

10. I carry a wallet in my pocket...

& nothing else.

[MadrasT]

13. I also don't carry a bag 90% of the time.

I have a wallet that goes in one pocket, keys & phone in the other.

Not much for decorative bags, unless I also want to take water and/or a book, in which case I carry one of a small assortment of small canvas utility pouches and bags from the Army-Navy store.

[ismnotwasm]

3. I haven't even read the article and I was all WTF?

Last edited Mon Jun 3, 2013, 08:58 PM - Edit history (1)

To be fair, most women carry some kind of purse. To be real, purses are associated with dainty femininity, frivolous purchases--like shoes, or "shopping" in general. The article, I'll read it in a moment, probably didn't intend to be belittling. But it certainly speaks to our culture that is was even written.

Purses are actually practical, however and designers have been trying for years to find a "purse for men" that doesn't insult herteronormative masculinity.

I have a purse, after many years of not. It's a civil war replica small leather bag/ pouch with a bit of fringe my SIL made me. I love it. It's so well designed its doesn't flop around if you walk fast, it's so small and durable it goes fits in any weather. It also slings over your shoulder, leaving free hands.

An interesting observation; since I generally don't carry a purse, It apparently sends a sort of sub-conscience message, I'll be in a store--any store and I can't count the times someone has asked "do you work here"?

[BainsBane]

7. This is mine

I bought it for myself for a milestone birthday a year and a half ago. I love it. It's perfectly functional with a cross body strap I always use. I'm a feminist, but I still love a nice handbag.

[ismnotwasm]

8. Nice!

I think purses or handbags are practical, and there's no reason for them to be unattractive. As I noted before they still somehow convey a frivolousness for a very functional piece of wardrobe. For women to be described or defined by their purses or handbags as implied in the article, well that's a different matter.

No one should feel that thier 'feminist cred' is threatened by a damn purse. We have other, far more important things to worry about

[BainsBane]

9. I nor any other woman is defined by her purse

But I think they can actually be quite practical. It's a way of having stuff you need easily at hand. I couldn't carry my ID, debit card, insurance card, and all the other infernal cards I need in my pockets. Then I always have tylenol and a comb on hand, and my cell phone of course.

[eridani]

4. I use a smallish shoulder bag

After I turned 60, the backpack was too heavy, and I was always putting it down someplace and walking away without it. Something with a shoulder strap stays attached to my body at all times, and so far have not had any unfortunate credit card replacement episodes since I adopted these habits.

[redqueen]

11. Related. I like the 'compare and contrast' aspect of this.

New York Times Teases Female Politicians For Relying On ‘Purse Boys’

...

While scrutinizing female politicians’ fashion choices may seem relatively harmless, a recent study found that media descriptions of a woman’s appearance, whether they are praising or criticizing them, hurt her chances of winning an election.

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2013/06/02/2089821/new-york-times-purse-boys-sexist/

ht to name it change it. http://www.nameitchangeit.org/blog/entry/women-in-congress-use-purses-new-york-times-thinks-this-is-news

[ismnotwasm]

12. Oh right on!

As ThinkProgress points out, all politicians have aides who carry their things. However, the coverage of Reggie Love carrying President Obama’s belongings during the 2008 campaign is much more dignified than the depiction of the average “purse boy.” Love, described as a “body man,” is praised as being helpful and devoted, and not at all degraded by his position – in stark contrast to the demeaning portrayal of “purse boys.”

This begs the question: why is carrying a woman’s stuff different from carrying a man’s? Does the presence of a powerful woman automatically subjugate all the men around her? The power dynamic between politicians and their aides seems to be that a young man working for an older woman is degrading, but a young man working for an older man is not, and young women aren’t degraded by working for anyone (would we even be talking about this if they were “purse girls?”). The implication that a young man serving as a Congressional aide to female senator is somehow emasculating is insulting to both the male aides and their bosses.