The Roberts Family
The Style section of the Washington Post today has a profile of Jane Sullivan Roberts, who turns out to be a rather accomplished person in her own right. Hugo Schwyzer writes about how he’s encouraged by her involvement in Feminists for Life, which has fought against discrimination against teen mothers and the "family cap" under welfare. (However, some of his commenters argue that FFL isn’t really a pro-feminist organization.) More broadly, I generally think it’s a positive sign when men choose to marry women who are their intellectual and professional peers.
The Post also has an article by fashion columnist Robin Givhan taking potshots at the pastel outfits worn by Mrs. Roberts and their two young children. Jack’s outfit — a pale blue suit with short pants — is admittedly a bit over the top, but how the heck are you supposed to dress a four-year-old boy for a White House photo op? In the extremely improbably event that I was suddenly summoned to such an event, I’d have to rush out to the very expensive kids’ store near me and beg for their help in finding something appropriate.
This photo suggests that the photo op exceeded Jack’s standing still limits. I love the look on Josephine’s face too.
July 23rd, 2005 at 9:44 am
Oh Boy. I would have gotten slammed by that columnist, too, because I would have erred in precisely the same direction. We’re talking about your husband’s nomination to the SUPREME COURT in the WHITE HOUSE. Yeesh.
But never mind erring on the side of “over” dressing for the most public moment in your life.
Does this woman never attend religious services in the South? The idea that those clothes are “costumes from the past” is completely undone by the catalogues of half the upscale retailers of Easter clothes south of the Mason-Dixon line. More than half. Practically the entire lines of Storybook and Snips and Snaps feature children dressed precisely like that in the spring.
Has the columnist never read Style section reports about what the ultra-wealthy are buying for their small children? Before they succomb to ballgowns for 8-year olds, people buy enough 1950s retro nostalgic clothing to fuel this columnist’s ire forever.
It’s not just a class issue. Those outfits are standard spring fare, albeit on a slightly less fancy-schmancy scale, in JCPenney, Lord & Taylor, Hudson Belk, and every other midline retailer of children’s outfits. Little kids all across America have been wearing clothes just like that to boring weddings all season.
It seems to me that if you’re going to make these claims, you should suggest alternative styles or looks. I assume she wasn’t actually suggesting the kids show up in Gap clothes, which some of us reject simply because the majority of their summer fare is shoddily made, and because spaghetti straps on 4-year olds strike some people as absurdly age-inappropriate. (I just think they require too much sunscreen for the trade-off in coolness, and stick with shirts from the boys’ department at Target.)
July 23rd, 2005 at 3:25 pm
I share the commenters concerns with “Feminists for Life”. The use of the term “feminist” is brilliant and obviously very effective — I’ve read all over the blogosphere that progressive women are excited that Roberts is married to a proud feminist!
But if you poke around the FFL web site for a while, check out their prominent section on “Voices” for women — it’s all voices of shame, regret, remorse, shame, and a little more shame about abortion.
And then their “Refuse to Choose” ad campaign – quite brilliantly done. Beautiful ads. Very professional, memorable, and eye catching. Ads like, “Do I Deserve the Death Penalty?” featuring the photo of a grown woman who was conceived through rape? Then “Tell it to My Face”, featuring the photo of a disabled black man, advocating against abortions for fetal deformities/abnormalities. Because shame campaigns are SO pro-feminist!! Because calling rape victims who can’t handle carrying resulting pregnancies to term “executioners” is really pro-woman!!! AAAEUUUUUUGHGHGH!
In my opinion, any organization that considers a rape victim who chooses abortion to be a greater criminal than a rapist is no “feminist” organization.
July 23rd, 2005 at 10:43 pm
I agree about the outfits. Jesus, it’s mid-summer. If you have to put kids in formal clothes, of COURSE you are going to choose light colors!
July 24th, 2005 at 12:23 am
I practically blew a gasket at the FFL web site, after being willing to overlook the 1) the testimonials of people who are unhappy that had abortions. 2) descriptions of deaths of women who died during abortions (though #2 troubles me more then #1. I was trying to give the death reports the benefit of the doubt, that they were honoring the women — but they weren’t. They were graphically exploiting their deaths.
I blew the gasket on the section that asks you to write to Varmus (Varmus!!! — the NIH director from 10 years ago) about the “abortion breast cancer link.” There was a link to a 11 year old study about the link, now soundly refuted by all reputable sources.
I think it’s insane to equate abortion with murder, but respect other people’s right to feel that way. But, when they lie about facts about people’s healths, they’re proving that they can’t win on the moral merits of their argument. That they have to lie about the facts. And I hate hate hate that.
I enjoyed Ghivan’s discussion about the clothes, ’cause I remember wondering about Jack’s outfit, too. If I was in Mrs. Robert’s situation, I would have dressed my son in khakis, button down, and a blue blazer (yes, the capitol hill intern uniform). My daughter would have been tougher, since she doens’t let me control what she wears. It could have been anything from a little suit to her red princess dress.
[what I’d like to know, though, is whether the outfits were bought for the photo-op, or as others have suggested they are easter or church outfits. They are church goers, and maybe they had those clothes in their closet already?]
bj
July 25th, 2005 at 12:09 pm
The Givhan column annoyed me, too. Though I appreciated the comment that the colors of the outfits were like Peeps or Easter Eggs or Necco wafers. But really, what was wrong with Josephine’s dress? Nothing that I could see — I’ve seen plenty of little girls wearing dresses like it. And Jack’s outfit, while not what I put on my son for dressy occasions (blue blazer, button-down, khakis? check. though we only have a blazer b/c of his “graduation”), was well within the norm for summer dress-up wear for a 4-year-old. They may well wear Gapwear the rest of the time, but for this occasion they clearly needed the dressiest outfits they had, and this may have been them. I didn’t think it was kind to take pot-shots at the kids’ clothes.