By Heidi Stevens
WWR Article Summary (tl;dr) Thank you Heidi Stevens for this amazing piece on the power of celebrities wearing PANTS! She says, “I’d like to think we’ll keep buying magazines with women on their covers when those women are in pants because we’ll be interested in what our favorite actress/comedian/singer/model thinks or says or dreams or works toward, more than whether her thighs touch.”
Women bossed 2017.
Sure, the White House remained just out of reach. But the female candidate grabbed 3 million more votes than her male opponent in the race to get there.
Sure, women continued to endure sexual harassment and assaults in just about every type of workplace. But we shattered the culture of silence that used to routinely surround them.
Sure, we watched an admitted genitalia grabber take the oath of office, but millions of women and their allies marched in protest a day later.
A record number of women began exploring bids for elected office.
Tammy Duckworth was elected to the United States Senate, the first woman to arrive there from Illinois since Sen. Carol Moseley Braun left in 1999.
“Wonder Woman” became the highest-grossing superhero origin movie of all time.
Malala Yousafzai started classes at the University of Oxford.
We laid some major groundwork. I have high hopes for the future.
And a wee request.
Could we start giving women some pants for magazine covers?
Honestly. This cycle has bothered me for years: Actress/comedian/singer/model reaches magazine cover-worthy status; actress/comedian/singer/model appears on magazine cover with no pants.
So we can measure her thigh gap? So she appears unguarded? So we’re reminded to get a bikini wax?
To reinforce the pesky narrative that women should be, above all else, alluring creatures whose mysterious, sexual wiles lie at all times in wait?
(These are just stabs in the dark.)