Advertising

A recent Washington Post op-ed that entitled "Melania and Ivanka Trump show the world what feminine power looks like" is being roasted for its definition of "feminine power."

Opinion writer Kathleen Parker wrote:

"Melania and Ivanka Trump stood as beacons of light in a part of the world that remains cloaked in the darkness of religious fundamentalism and oppression. Preternaturally beautiful, they seemed to glide as apparitions above the sea of dark suits and white robes and must have struck fear in the hearts of men whose culture demands that women be publicly invisible."

Advertising
I'd say Donald wrote the op-ed himself but it had adjectives fancier than "huge."
I'd say Donald wrote the op-ed himself but it had adjectives fancier than "huge."
Giphy

That's right, to be a "beacon of light" is to stand there and look pretty!

It gets worse:

Wordlessly, they projected strength, intelligence, grace — and a timeless wisdom that all women share.

Wordlessly—as in, silently—they looked "strong" because they wore expensive, light-colored clothes in Saudi Arabia. That's all it takes.

Call us old school, but we think "feminine power" should involve words, articulating smart arguments and advocating for rights and freedoms.

Advertising

Women are challenging this definition of "feminine power," which is the real feminine power.

Advertising
Advertising

Oh, and in addition to its retro definition of "feminine power," Parker's lens is pretty damn Islamophobic as well.

Advertising

We'd love to think that "feminine power" means to be quiet and pretty, but with Donald Trump on the loose attacking women's rights and grabbing genitals, it feels like we've lost the luxury.

Until we have that GIF of Simone Biles and Ruth Bader Ginsberg riding a tiger with a sword, this is what feminine power looks like.
Until we have that GIF of Simone Biles and Ruth Bader Ginsberg riding a tiger with a sword, this is what feminine power looks like.
Giphy