Glossing over the almost comical disingenuousness of Scaramucci’s subsequent claim that his comments that began, “Sarah, if you’re watching…” were, in fact, directed at himself rather than Sarah Sanders, this is just the latest example from the executive branch, which has become the breeding ground for a very special brand of misogyny, of the continuous male assertion of control over the way that women look. At The Upstander Project, we call this “entitlement culture.” It’s in the same vein as “Why don’t you smile?” and attempts to strip women of agency over their own physical appearances. If you don’t see the big deal, here are just a few of the issues.

In this scenario, women are seen as something to be controlled. Women are objectified, while men assert their position as the party with agency and power. Is the constant barrage of comments by men in Trump’s circle (and by Trump himself) ever reciprocated by the women?

Women’s appearances become a subscription to the confines of “What is appealing to men?”

Professional competence and physical appearance are conflated and collapsed. You see how quickly Scaramucci moves from Sanders’ job performance to the way that she looks. This is a slippery slope that, again, leads right into the confines of objectification. Which professions, exactly, entail a synonymity between objectification of human beings and job performance? I can think of one. And, spoiler alert, it’s prostitution.

The Upstander Project

Written by

Helping people find — and stand up for — the ways they love to do good in the world.