Oh! I understand now.
Well, Michelle’s not our head of state but, yeah, I can imagine Carla Bruni nude, now that you mention it.
You know what? I used to think Sarah Palin was an attractive woman. But she has shown herself to be so disgustingly self-serving and so in service of the neofascists that I have visceral disgust toward her. Pass.
And two others as Hillary Clinton & Condoleeza Rice?
Or so I’ve heard.
Now that would be wrong.
Arms & torso too thin. Michelle is more of a Mailliol type.
I’m not outraged per se, but I’m extremely puzzled. What message are they trying to send here? If I had a clue what the message was supposed to be, then I could maybe decide whether it was offensive.
Looks like Kate’s distant cousin is meeting journalistic standards. Or something.
I will say I think she’s damn cute.
I bet a lot of people can, since I’m pretty sure Bruni has posed in the buff before.
An insult to all Americans? No, it isn’t. This isn’t a monarchy. The president’s spouse has no constitutional significance. It might be an insult to Michelle Obama. I haven’t decided yet what it is, mostly because I haven’t figured out what this image is supposed to mean. It could be satire. It could be political commentary. But I am sure that it is not an insult to America or all Americans.
I could be wrong, but I think it might be “She’s descended from slaves, but look at her now.”
According to Joe Biden, if Romney/Ryan are elected, she’s going to end up back in chains.
Mmmmmm, First Naked Boobie.
I don’t know the intent of the ‘artist’ who changed the original painting. I rarely know the artist’s intention when I observe art…I simply go by the way the art moves me, because I don’t have any formal training in appreciating the arts. In this case, I like the contrast of Michelle’s ancestors’ being slaves and her being the First Lady of the major super power on the planet, seated in the white house in a place of honor. Interesting contrast.
Now, I realize, in **this **case, this isn’t actually art for the sake of art…the cover is on a magazine that does have a message…intent does matter in this case. So I defer to the actual article which seems to paint her in a positive light…not an offensive one. At least according to the linked article.
After reading a few more articles about it, this is not about Obama as a slave, it’s about Obama as emancipated and empowered. The original painting was done six years after the end of slavery in France.
And workin’ the pole.
Here’s a portrait to Di for.
I really don’t think that the artist’s intent is to insult, but rather to celebrate powerful women that she admires.
How come both sites obscure/pixellate Michelle’s nipple, but not the nipple on the painting? Is it just because seeing an exposed nipple, which is obviously isn’t her own, might make someone picture her actual nipple?
You shouldn’t enjoy sex. Instead, just lie back and think of England.
The gist of the cover’s message is in the text: “Michelle eats up her husband” - no sexual overtones, it means she’s got him beaten. The smaller text says “the First Lady is more popular than her husband and that makes her key for November’s elections”; the smallest “what does she have that we don’t” (that is, what can the Magazine’s* female readers do to improve their own positions).
The article itself does reference slave ancestors, but the gist of the image+cover text is that it’s an image which could be submissive but isn’t, and indeed like hell she is - it’s a contrast between the concept (still very common in Spain) of women’s place as “her leg broken to keep her at home” with a woman who, while currently having a “Mrs. Important Dude” job, is anything but a shadow of her husband, and whose position behind him has more to do with her being a driving force for him than with being a “yes my dear husband” “supportive wife” of the type some people still believe should be the perfect one (no opinions except to agree with said husband and overlord). If Mrs. Obama happened to be white, the picture could have been a Spanish woman in mourning black (there’s quite a few paintings along those lines to choose from, specially from the 19th and early 20th centuries); if she’d been oriental, a peasant in a rice field… not for racism but for race-matching.
- Maybe el Magazine’s name is officially “fuera de serie” like the linked articles are calling it, but nobody calls it that. It’s the Sunday supplement of a Barcelona newspaper which used to be Spanish but eventually chose to be politically Catalan (thus losing readership not just in the rest of Spain, but also among the large amounts of people who live in Catalonia but which do not meet the political definition of Catalan) and everybody calls it “el Magazine”, which is what the banner says. In fact, el Magazine is one of the reasons people have to buy La Vanguardia on a Sunday, since it often has interesting articles. I’ve even seen people telling the lady at the newspaper stand to keep the paper itself, “that shit gives me a stomachache”.