Kate Middleton’s windy-day, bared derriere has sparked a silly bottomless debate that has become a tired version of The Feminists vs The Rest of ‘Em, so Tessa Miller takes on the slippery slope of non-slipness in her article on the Daily Beast. She writes:
In 1,000 or so words that do nothing but push feminism back a few decades, The Daily Beast’s Kelli Goff argues that Middleton—and all women, for that matter—should wear slips or weight their clothing to avoid revealing their bodies when the pesky wind catches their skirt. “But as ‘Bottomgate’ proves,” the author writes, “[Middleton] could benefit from an extra something under her dress, and an old-fashioned slip just might be the perfect fit.”
The old wrangle over more clothes (repression) versus less clothes (freedom from repression) has been invoked in order to argue for or against Kate’s lack of an “appropriate” cover-up. Writer Keli Goff, also on the Daily Beast, doesn’t give the topic a slip when she insists that Kate should have been wearing something, perhaps even an old-fashioned slip in order to avoid the wardrobe malfunction, while Miller basically makes the case of ‘take your underclothes and shove it.’
I am not quite seeing a feminist argument here, but rather, I see the wind, a vigorous updraft, and an accidentally bared butt that some meddling photographer happened to etch in digital form and spread ’round the Internet. So now the world is horrified that a revered royal rump has been splashed throughout the media and has thus become etched into the minds of the group-thinking, celebrity-obsessed riffraff, permeating their piddling minds to the point of torment. And so the debate goes on.
To wear underclothes or not to wear them, that is not the question. The point is – who the f*** cares? It’s an ass, people, and we’ve all seen an ass or two in our day. Go to any beach where loads of women are stuffed into tiny cloth triangles caressing pricey and painful Brazilian wax jobs that offer much more exposure than the royal updraft. Or go to Peopleofwalmart.com and you’ll see more bared and flaccid body parts in one place than you ever cared to see in any environment, let alone the retail sphere. And as Ilana Mercer points out in “Kate’s Keister,” as least Kate has a pretty ass as opposed to the bulging spectacles springing from the Kardashian Klan that conjures up visions of frozen cottage cheese wrapped with a too-tight canvas tarp.
To wear or not wear underclothes is not a feminist argument, nor is there one right answer to the questions being asked about the necessity of wearing boob or bottom protection. To wear or not wear some form of cover-up is a choice made by an individual, usually without much contemplation or strategizing, because sometimes you feel like it, and sometimes you don’t. It’s just not that complicated.
7:22 am on May 31, 2014 Email Karen De Coster