It Makes Women into ‘Witches’

What is it? Long hair:

Whatever the fashion, no woman over 55 should even think of wearing her hair long and loose, unless she wants to look like a mad witch. Hillary Clinton unwisely let her hair down recently and her authority drained away. She would do better to rein it back again neatly. Long hair may say “I’m seductive”, but it seldom says “I have authority”.

You can be sexual or you can have authority, says the Telegraph, one of Britain’s national newspapers.

This is the same fashion argument that the New York Times made two months ago: As commenters noted there too, it’s an argument about sexuaity, and whether older women should express any.

Is there some kind of p.r. campaign going on here?

5 Comments

  1. Medeine Ragana says:

    Bullpucky as they say around here. I’m 65 (almost) and my hair is halfway down my back. Okay, I do wear my hair in the traditional Slavic way of braids, sometimes one down my back and sometimes two, and the only reason I don’t wear it loose is because it gets too knotted up blowing around in the wind and it’s a bitch to try to comb it out.

  2. MomaFauna says:

    This “campaign” or whatever it is has so many layers of boo.

    As I mentioned, the whole premise of post-menopausal women being non-sexual creatures — by social stricture, as opposed to choice — is absurd given close to half of most women’s years will be spent in the menopausal/post-menopausal stage. Then there’s this whole bandying about of the “W” word as a pejorative.
    But with this new “bullpucky,” there is also this weird rule about women having to choose between sexuality & power. It seems we have a Catch 22 here. Everyone knows mature women aren’t allowed to have power unless they are Witches. But wait, if they have long hair they also must be Witches. Uh oh, if they have long hair, they might also be sexy… Could it be, that they might then have power AND be sexy?!? Oh, only a Witch could manage that!
    Of course, to add insult to injury, there is also that broad characterization of women (any age) who wish to wear their hair long as having an “air-headed dedication to girliness.” Doesn’t anyone edit that paper?
    Grrr, now I need to go gnaw on sticks in the dark for awhile… or, maybe I should just grow my hair long!

  3. Tess Eract says:

    Some years back, some twit laying down the latest law about fashion said that long hair was not “appropriate” for women over 40. I tossed that paper across the room, not bothering to examine the roots of such a pile of crap, but you have laid them bare. For me it is kind of ironic, as a shaggy mane has always been part of my ensemble, but I am asexual.
    The fashion police can still eat me.

  4. Hillary’s hair has always driven some people nuts. I remember when inches and inches of column space were devoted to her use of hairbands. Good analysis, Chas, I think you’re onto something.

  5. T.L. says:

    When Hillary grew her hair long, she also stopped wearing make-up–thus her color, as well as her authority drained away. This coincided with the time Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a “slut.” I thought Hillary was protesting or making a statement about womanhood–by not participating in social norms. (She also may just have been experimenting. By not wearing make-up and getting her hair cut every two weeks, she eked out more time to work each day.) But, I really think she was protesting. Just my opinion.

    https://sites.google.com/site/paganmythontheamericanfrontier/