Feminist Diversity Cop Wants More “Colored Women” in Vanity Fair
Vanity Fair’s annual Hollywood issue hit newsstands this week, and the full color glossy has taken a decidedly monochromatic approach to highlighting Tinseltown’s up-and-comers. Naturally, the preponderance of slender, white women gracing the Vanity Fair cover is a big deal in the feminist blogosphere.
Fair enough. The Vanity Fair cover does resemble the MSNBC lineup.
But it’s hard to take criticism of the melanin-challenged magazine seriously when it comes from someone decrying the lack of “colored women” in the issue. I kid you not, here’s what appeared in a post promoted to the front page of Feministing, one of the top “progressive” feminist blogs (emphasis mine):
We need to talk. I’m usually pretty excited for your new Hollywood issue ever [sic] year because the photo spread is as beautiful as the women. This year, however, I am less than pleased. First let me complain about the obvious, the lack of diversity. There is not a single colored women [sic] gracing your pages this year!
Here’s a screen capture in case the original post disappears down the memory hole:
The grammar is offensive enough, but colored women? Welcome to 2010. Thanks, Feministing, for leading by example on the racial sensitivity front. But it would appear that in this case, the diversity police acted stupidly.
From what I gather, the first step for Feministing editor Jessica Valenti should be to call Al Sharpton and ask his forgiveness. After that, perhaps the Feministing gang can join Harry Reid for some sensitivity training down at the NBC cafeteria. I hear they’re serving something special in honor of Black History Month.
Remember, always force the Left to live up to its own book of rules. Saul Alinsky would be proud.
Update, Feb. 5, 2010:
The Feministing post was updated today to remove the phrase “colored women.” An editor’s note stated, “The editors have changed certain terminology in this post to more appropriate language. The OP is being informed and asked to comment on the thread.” There has been no word on whether Reverend Sharpton received the obligatory apology.
—–
Follow Jenn Q. Public on Twitter and read more of her work at JennQPublic.com.
Colored? As in whites only, colored only? What is this? Leftist lobotomies go too far! Way too far!
When was the last time anyone saw a white face on the cover of "Ebony" ???
Ok, we gotta define the terms. How dark? How light? Are we talking luminosity? Saturation? What are the visible spectrum specifications that officially qualify one as colored? Inquiring optical scientists want to know.
Kudos! I was thinking about how to say this when I read the "colored" phrase. Thanks for *nailing* it! Cheers.
YAY!!!!! To hell with diversity
There is absolutely nothing inherently racist about the term "colored women". The politically correct term – women of color – makes me vomit unless I have had two or three coffees-of-morning.
Great closing line !
Diversity bullshit is annoying. What the hell is colored is a good question. Probably depends on how much sun one takes or how many carrots one eats.
And why people can't prefer white skinned women is something I will never understand. What will you do with Mr Tiger Woods above? He can't get a boner for black girls so I think he could use some brainwashing. Me too: because of my age prejudice I can't get a boner for 80 year old women.
Perhaps Vanity Fair could provide decals of colored women in each issue which could be pasted on every picture of a white woman in the magazine. I bet even that would not shut up progressive "femanazis." So Vanity Fair like good putative liberals should publish an all black/colored issue each month. I would like to see the circulation it would generate, the number of ads generated and the number of issues purchased by colored women. Another "Idiots in Action" adventure.