Hillary Clinton Makes Cover Of Time Magazine – As A Scary, Man-Trampling Giant

“Can Anyone Stop Hillary?”

This is the headline of the latest issue of Time magazine, with Hilary Clinton on the cover. Well, she’s not really on the cover. An illustration that is supposed to depict her is. If I was shown this cover without the accompanying headline and was asked to make my own, I probably would’ve said something like:

“Emasculating She-Giant In Sensible Shoes Tramples Man”

Screen Shot 2014-01-16 at 4.32.32 PM

Why, when we’re talking about a professional, powerful woman do we oftentimes default to an image of her trampling over men to get to the top? In what way does giving women equal opportunities and rights diminish men at all? Can someone please explain this to me?

Unfortunately, there is no smart answer to this question, because powerful women do not diminish men. They just don’t. Can we stop perpetuating the myth that they do? Especially a source like Time magazine. Women read your magazine, you realize this, right? It’s amazing how an illustration like this manages to at the same time attribute some power to Hillary but also put the focus on the poor, minimized man dwindling at the bottom of her heel.

Stop her! Somebody stop her! She may be RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT!

This type of imagery is old and tired and just fuels those who would claim that feminists or women who attain any type of professional or political power at all only do so at the expense of men. It’s just not true.

This is not empowering. It’s quite the opposite.

(photo: Time.com)

You can reach this post's author, Maria Guido, on twitter.
Share This Post:
    • keelhaulrose

      The past six years have shown there are white, make conservatives truly terrified at the thought of different than them having the power the POTUS does.
      Electing Hillary after will probably make their heads explode as they watch their power slip further.
      You can tell who these guys are, they’re the ones already trying to sabotage Hillary.
      I don’t know what would be funnier, another moment of Karl Rove’s disbelief and denial, or hearing them claim they’re moving to Canada (aka liberal land) again.

      • Andrea

        I’d pay to see both.
        And for the record, exactly ZERO of them moved to Canada. Not that I wish those people on anyone (let alone those super nice polite Canadians), but maybe they deserve some payback after giving us the Bieber. ;)

      • ted3553

        In the absolutely nicest way possible-Screw you. Keep your damn garbage out of Canada. Plus, I live in Alberta which is the conservative stronghold and as I write this, I’m raising my hands to the roof repeatedly over that.
        Watching from north of the border, I adore HRC and would vote for her in a minute over those nutty old white men that seem to dominate american politics. We have crazies here too, they just don’t dominate the TV or keep it to themselves a little more

      • keelhaulrose

        You gave us Justin Bieber and Ted Cruz, and you’re saying “screw you”? You should take a few in retribution.
        Edited because my Swype apparently doesn’t know “Ted”

      • ted3553

        Damn it. I am really sorry for the Biebs. He’s a spoiled brat who needs a good time out and lecture from someone scary like my mom.

      • brebay

        Yeah, Canada has enough of its own garbage. At least when our politicians smoke crack, they have the good sense to lie about it!

    • Rachel Sea

      Go home TIME, you’re drunk.

    • LocalMom29

      I’m surprised they didn’t have a picture of a giant hand with a knife about to cut off the tiny man’s balls. That’s what they’re really afraid of, right?

      • Kay_Sue

        I would buy that magazine just for the cover. Truth.

    • pixie

      I find this image really interesting because it reminds me of what I’m reading for thesis research: a lot of things on gender studies and identity. Of course my studies relate to popular music (and more specifically working in rock genres), but there is always this underlying theme that masculinity = power. Female musicians in rock music, whether intentionally or unintentionally tend to take on a more masculine persona in order to be heard in the industry. Of course this hugely upsets the “old boys’ club” of music critics and people in the industry and often the women artists are portrayed in a much similar fashion as Hilary is on the cover of Time.

      It’s depressing that misogyny and false images of feminism/strong women are still rampant in 2014.

    • Carinn Jade

      I feel like if you could see her upper body she’d be wearing one of those limp dick ties that women were forced to wear when fashion didn’t know how to outfit a professional female.

      • http://fairlyoddmedia.com/ Frances Locke

        AHHH! Those ties! I had to wear one of those ugly ass ties when I worked at McDonalds in the early aughts. Awful. I used to call it my “Working Girl” tie.

    • aCongaLine

      My love of HRC will not be swayed, she’s badass. But when I saw this cover, I thought it was sad- women who can, and will, and have truly made a difference in the world are reduced to fashion choices and hair styles. THis cover shows her sensibly-heeled shoe, rather than her face, or her ideas. TIME has reduced a great mind to an ugly old lady shoe. And a pantsuit. Sigh.

      Watch out, world. HRC stars in “Gulliver’s Travels in Politics.”

      • JLH1986

        Right? I hate that Michelle Obama has become her bangs and clothes. She was a successful attorney before her husband ran for President. As was Clinton. Now she has continued to work in politics, I don’t know that Obama will work in politics after her husband’s term is up. But damn. They did their own things long before “married to the President.”. But just like the rest of us, “she’s too pretty to be in management.” “I had no idea a blonde could be so smart.” Ugh.

      • aCongaLine

        agree completely. Sigh.

      • EmmaFromÉire

        What’s an article about the Obamas without an in depth discussion of Michelle’s dress, with particular note of the cost? And a passing mention of those toned, toned arms of course.

    • Elizabeth

      Sigh. I just read TIME’s article about Janet Yellen in a waiting room today, and they dedicated nearly two paragraphs to praising her husband for doing half of the child-rearing. They actually praised him for washing dishes and doing diapers (in those words!).

      • JLH1986

        I think I just got a rage headache from this.

    • Kay_Sue

      Every minute gain we make towards gender equality is at the expense of men. Did you miss the memo, Maria? I’ll have to add you to the Femi-nazi distribution list…

      • Andrea

        But…do we have an AGENDA???? That’s all that matters! Without an “agenda” we are NOTHING!!

      • Kay_Sue

        Damn. I meant to add creating an agenda to the agenda at the last convention and I totally forgot…

    • KaeTay

      I don’t see it as trampling, I see it as surpassing in a mans industry (face it most politicians are men). We tech don’t have equal rights in the work force. Women are still payed below men who do the exact same job.

    • ChillMama

      Great commentary. I actually thought it symbolized how she couldn’t be stopped by petty hangers-on, but I take your point.

    • http://fairlyoddmedia.com/ Frances Locke

      Ah Time Mag. I think they’re trying to give the National Inquirer a run for their money.

    • arrow2010

      Hillary will be 68 in 2016, too old. Paul Ryan is the next President.

      • Shelly Lloyd

        Regan was 69 when he was elected. George H.W. Bush was 64 when elected.

      • Andrea

        Ok, let me 1st say, I love Hilary. I would be really happy if she became Madam President.
        But the age is a concern. I know we had had older Presidents. But I think times are different now. Thanks to the 24/7 news cycle, I think it is so much more physically demanding to be the POTUS now. I remember reading how she travel more than any other Secretary of State than anyone before her. The job demands it now more than it did in the past. That’s exhausting for anyone.
        I want to think she can handle because she’s pretty awesome. But still…

      • aCongaLine

        She’s gotta be smart in choosing a running mate- and she will.

      • Chris Meeks

        Paul Ryan? HAHAHAHA!

        Oh, wait, you were serious….

    • Pingback: Sexism for the win! Could prejudice bring it home for Hillary Clinton in 2016? | NEWS.GNOM.ES()

    • Pingback: Time Mag: “Can anyone stop Hillary?” Feminists: “You’re a sexist pig for even asking that question–how dare you?” | Stupid Girl()

    • Christina T

      Wrong, all wrong. This had nothing to do with sexism, you only think it does because you’re especially sensitive to that particular theme. The real interpretation that real people (not people so overly sensitive to sexism that they actually end up hurting the cause of feminism by being rediculous) will see is Hillary Clinton being an unbeatable frontrunner. You know, because she is the favorite. That other character could have been either sex, it just so happens that most politicians are men so it’s most likely to be a man.

      This article, though its heart is in the right place, only empowers sexists by giving them something to point to to prove that feminists are crazier than them. Plenty of stupid people fall for that argument every day so please stop making that argument for them. This was not sexist in any way.