Conservative Hotties

by Henry Farrell on June 2, 2010

Via “Jonathan Chait”:http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/75247/the-conservative-beauty-paradox-explained, _Right Wing News_ is “running a competition”:http://rightwingnews.com/2010/06/the-20-hottest-conservative-women-in-the-new-media-2010-edition/

bq. One of the most popular articles at RWN last year was, The 15 Hottest Conservative Women In The New Media. So, when you have a big hit, what could make more sense than doing a sequel?

It seems to me a wee bit unfair that all them healthy heterosexual Republican gals (and, for that matter, the five or six Log Cabin Republicans who have stuck it out despite all) can’t get in on the fun. So let me propose an alternative competition to find the Hottest Conservative Man In The New Media. And by one of those funny coincidences, the eight finalists for this much coveted award are the members of the “distinguished panel of judges” that _Right Wing News_ has chosen to adjudicate which of the laydeez is the smokingest.1 Ladies and gentlemen, I give you:


Glenn Reynolds


Jonah Goldberg


Andrew Malcolm


Dan Gainor


‘Van Helsing’ from Moonbattery (artist’s depiction)


Alfonzo Rachel


James Joyner (who is actually a good bloke imo who really ought to have known better)

And remember! You can only pick _one._

1 It occurs to me that ditch-hurlers might want to point out in comments that I myself am not possessed of what used to be called matinee-idol good looks. This would be a wonderful way of missing the point, reinforcing it, or both.

{ 74 comments }

1

chrismealy 06.02.10 at 6:41 pm

This is easy. They all place dead last.

2

mds 06.02.10 at 7:29 pm

Well, honestly, Professor Farrell, as I understand it’s not as if you yourself are possessed of matinee-idol good looks. And to indulge in such blatant objectification of conservative intellectual luminaries? For shame, sir.

…Okay, Joyner it is. But only because of his old-school detailing.

3

Earnest O'Nest 06.02.10 at 7:38 pm

I like Jonah, he visualizes creepiness far better than this Van Helsing guy.

4

Tom 06.02.10 at 7:51 pm

The original competition appears to be unfair because “11) Liz Stephans from The B-Cast” is computer generated.

5

Hogan 06.02.10 at 7:54 pm

@3: yeah, especially when he’s awkwardly trying to throw a gang sign.

6

Earnest O'Nest 06.02.10 at 8:05 pm

You mean that he has more than three fingers? Creepier still.

7

Mise 06.02.10 at 8:11 pm

I’m just here to wow at the use of ‘ditch-hurlers’ in an international forum. Nice.

8

Bunbury 06.02.10 at 8:14 pm

Does Jonah Goldberg play Peter Griffin?

9

Substance McGravitas 06.02.10 at 8:43 pm

You forgot the author of the post, John Hawkins. Big omission.

10

BillCinSD 06.02.10 at 8:44 pm

I am voting for Eric son of Erick as a write in.

11

mpowell 06.02.10 at 9:25 pm

This is where the benefit of a collapse rest of post feature on the main page of your blog becomes apparent.

12

lemmy caution 06.02.10 at 9:43 pm

I am going to go with Alfonzo Rachel.

13

Anderson 06.02.10 at 10:17 pm

Van Helsing, definitely. Not afraid to let his beliefs show on the outside.

14

T. Paine 06.02.10 at 10:39 pm

None of the above.

The only thing that makes them smoke is their furious wanking.

15

Jack Strocchi 06.02.10 at 10:49 pm

O’Rourke once observed that you can tell how powerful a social movement is by the beauty of its female supporters. Every one loves a winner. I guess thats why he became a Left-wing hippie, to be at one with the flower children. Then jumped the fence to become a Right-wing yuppie and network with hard-bodies.

Fox sure has got alot of Right-wing babes on tap during the nineties when the US Right was on a roll.

Berlusconi said that “the Left has uglier women”. I am not so sure about that. My wife is somewhat more Left-wing than me, and correspondingly better looking, so to speak.

CT should run a comp on where the Left-wing lovelies are. Yes, I know, true beauty is on the inside, yada yada yada, But politics is, amongst other things, the organized quest for social status. So what does the scoreboard look like?

16

Left Outside 06.02.10 at 11:04 pm

You have Manatee-idol good looks?

17

Uncle Kvetch 06.02.10 at 11:08 pm

O’Rourke once observed that you can tell how powerful a social movement is by the beauty of its female supporters.

Yeah, he would.

18

Barry 06.02.10 at 11:48 pm

Jack Strocchi 06.02.10 at 10:49 pm

“O’Rourke once observed that you can tell how powerful a social movement is by the beauty of its female supporters. Every one loves a winner. I guess thats why he became a Left-wing hippie, to be at one with the flower children. Then jumped the fence to become a Right-wing yuppie and network with hard-bodies”.

‘Observed’, in the sense of ‘said’. Probably just freudian projection by O’Rourke, who jumped to the side that’d pay him better.

19

Area Man 06.03.10 at 1:11 am

This isn’t about female supporters, it’s about celebrities — women whose notoriety is due to selection by their fan base, not women who were picked at random out of a Tea Party protest. If you have a fan base that is paternalistic and judges women primarily on their physical attractiveness, then you will end up with attractive female celebrities. On the other hand, if they were being judged purely on their ideas and writing ability, their looks would hover around the median.

20

Timothy Scriven 06.03.10 at 1:16 am

Alfonzo Rachel being the only one who isn’t actually ugly, he gets my vote.

Sure, I’m missing the point, but I thought I’d give it a go.

21

Alex K 06.03.10 at 4:47 am

Gotta be Goldberg. That kind of radiant self-confidence can really help a young man looking for love.

22

terence 06.03.10 at 4:52 am

Jonah Goldberg – definitely. And anyone who says otherwise is either a communist or a fascist, or quite probably both.

23

KCinDC 06.03.10 at 5:09 am

Interesting that Skye from Midnight Blue Says is wearing a T-shirt from the West Virginia Zendik cult (which apparently survives by selling shirts and bumper stickers emblazoned with the “Stop Bitchin’ and Start a Revolution” slogan).

24

alex 06.03.10 at 7:45 am

Interesting crossover with this morning’s lead article in the Times Higher Ed, on the value of ‘erotic capital’ in social interaction:

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=411840&c=2

25

Andrew C 06.03.10 at 8:05 am

If I deplore the objectification of women that this contest exemplifies and also say you have looks to make a daughter’s mother weep with disappointment, may I have my cake and eat it too?

26

Walt 06.03.10 at 8:19 am

I had to click through the original article to understand what you were going for here, but this is fucking brilliant.

I have to go for Alfonzo Rachel. Though I have to otherwise disagree with Timothy Scrivens has it right: sincerely answering who is the best looking _is_ the point.

27

Marc 06.03.10 at 8:47 am

I’m with Anderson. Van Helsing. The appearance reflects the soul.

28

alex 06.03.10 at 9:08 am

Those Zendik folk sound rather cool; unless of course the laser-beams coming out of their eyes fried the brains of the reporter.

29

blueslacker 06.03.10 at 10:39 am

“O’Rourke once observed that you can tell how powerful a social movement is by the beauty of its female supporters.”

O’Rourke also once observed “Thanks for paying for my summer home, schmucks! Feel free to stand as close to the gate as you like, though if I’m pulling out of my driveway after an Irish breakfast I can’t promise not to run you down.”

Still, points for the apparently non-ironic use of “hardbodies.” Bateman, you doofus, you’ll get that table at Dorsia someday if you just keep the game going.

30

KCinDC 06.03.10 at 1:19 pm

More on Zendik, and a letter from a former member. Not that I really think the T-shirt means Skye knows anything about the group.

31

novakant 06.03.10 at 2:09 pm

“Blogging is Hollywood for ugly people.”

32

Naadir Jeewa 06.03.10 at 4:46 pm

I vote for Newman Jonah Goldberg.

33

8 06.03.10 at 6:19 pm

you mean CT Heroes?

yr a conservative, just lying

34

roac 06.03.10 at 7:23 pm

Did you make the picture of Pantload Goldberg so dark to try and stop him from running away with the competition? Typical left-wing fixation on equality of outcomes.

35

Sebastian 06.03.10 at 7:37 pm

Following #9 I’d have gone with John Hawkins, but since that’s not one of the options I’ll go with Glenn Reynolds –
you’ve gotta judge them by their own standards and he looks most like the time when Reagan was still alive.

36

Kent 06.03.10 at 10:42 pm

Something that never occurred to me before looking at that particular photo: Is Jonah Goldberg gay? That’s the gayest pose I’ve seen in a while, and he seems to pull it off naturally.

I can’t decide on a closing line:

“Not that there’s anything wrong with that!”

or

“Irresponsible to speculate? It would be irresponsible NOT to!”

37

Mrs Tilton 06.03.10 at 11:02 pm

Hawkins gallantly scratched, knowing there’d be no contest to any competition in which he participated.

Are right-wing women really smokiner than their left-wing counterparts? Possibly that’s an American phenomenon. Certainly the last time/place I paid any attention to that sort of thing (1980s Germany), smokin taz-Leserinnen were the rule, smokin JUlerinnen very much the exception.

38

y81 06.03.10 at 11:13 pm

Conservatives are much less prone to the dichotomizing of women as serious/sexual than liberals. Liberals tend to classify women as either serious (i.e., ugly, not sexual objects, can be Cabinet secretaries) or sexual (can be interns). The girls you wed versus the girls you bed. Wellesley versus Pine Manor. Etc. Thus, liberals can’t have this sort of contest about women in “respectable” roles, because “respectable” women don’t have sexual natures. Conservatives don’t see a conflict between being serious and being sexual.

Now I know hordes of outraged liberals will rise up and insist that Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards et al. did not dichotomize women as I have described. Bill Clinton thought Donna Shalala was very attractive and John Edwards is really interested in Rielle Hunter’s thoughts on public policy. Uh-huh.

39

Lemuel Pitkin 06.03.10 at 11:25 pm

Re 36, is there a word for something that does not even rise to the level of trolling?

40

Kent 06.04.10 at 12:30 am

I actually want to thank y81. I was worried my previous comment might have been found stupid, pointless, and/or offensive. Feeling better about it now!

41

mds 06.04.10 at 12:43 am

is there a word for something that does not even rise to the level of trolling?

Geligniting?

42

burritoboy 06.04.10 at 1:33 am

Alfonzo Rachel’s a reasonably good-looking dude. The rest of them are overweight schmucks who can’t even carry off a modified Brooks Brothers look. What’s the point of being conservative if you don’t make enough money to buy from Paul Stuart (I’m not asking for sophisticated retro styles from the likes of Garrick Anderson, but you should be able to get your fat ass into Paul Stuart or The Andover Shop)? Why not be a hippie, if you can’t even enjoy the pleasures of elitism (and wearing fine clothes is of course something an elite can and should do)? And they can’t seem to comb their hair either.

43

Delicious Pundit 06.04.10 at 3:01 am

Confidential to burritoboy: I love Paul Stuart and one of the few regrets I have about my showbiz career cratering is that I can’t afford it anymore. But I think James Joyner sort of carries off the B-squared look. Emphasis on squared: can’t these people wear an interesting tie? (Which reminds me that my late father, who was quite a clotheshorse for a rural educator, told me when I was about to go to London for the first time, “You’ll see the greatest ties in the world.”)

44

burritoboy 06.04.10 at 5:10 am

“But I think James Joyner sort of carries off the B-squared look.”

No, not really. He’s admittedly is cleaner and neater than the other guys, but his style is stiff – he reminds me a bit of a Mormon FBI agent (and that’s certainly not a good thing).

45

Walt 06.04.10 at 5:31 am

Mrs Tilton, right-wing women in the US are not, in fact, hotter than left-wing women.

46

alex 06.04.10 at 10:46 am

@43 – surely there are more of them in the South, where it is generally hotter than the coastal haunts of the latte-sipping elite; and thus, ipso facto, unless they are inside an air-conditioned building, on average right-wing women are hotter. To be depressingly literal.

To be less so, it would seem entirely logical that adherents of a set of beliefs that overtly approve of traditional sex-roles would pay more attention to manifesting their sexuality in the time-honoured visual ways; and thus if one were to make a simplistic and one-dimensional judgment based on visual appearances alone, right-wing women would be highly likely to be ‘hotter’, as measured by such conventional standards. Whether that means anything to you is the question.

47

chris 06.04.10 at 1:58 pm

@44: That would be a good argument if they were reptiles, but as mammals, I think the situation is more complicated. Furthermore, there’s a noted correspondence between age and political leaning which should be taken into account under either the temperature or attractiveness interpretations of “hotter”. I’m not sure if age correlates with body temperature, but for many observers it does correlate quite strongly with observed attractiveness.

If you’re moving beyond literal temperature, though, you immediately jump into subjective judgment and the question becomes unanswerable even in principle. Every time this subject comes up people argue over whether, say, Ann Coulter “is” pretty or ugly. But attractiveness doesn’t work as a unary predicate because it’s actually a binary predicate. “I’m attracted to Ann Coulter.” “Well, I’m not.” That wouldn’t even be an argument without the faux-objectivity of “is attractive” giving the disputants the impression that they have something to argue over.

48

alex 06.04.10 at 3:00 pm

Hmm, and yet there is such a thing as aesthetics, and notions of ‘conventions of beauty’; these do of course change across time and place, yet anthropologically one could identify what such standards were in a place such as ‘right-wing America’ and draw conclusions therefrom. As to Ann Coulter, the most that might be said, in the immortal words of Alicia Silverstone, is that she is somewhat Monet.

49

Barry 06.04.10 at 3:01 pm

Lemuel Pitkin @#37:
“Re 36, is there a word for something that does not even rise to the level of trolling?”

It’s just another data point in favor of my observation that the right *never* accuses the left of anything that the right isn’t already doing 10x as much.

50

piglet 06.04.10 at 3:20 pm

What kind of adjective is “smokin”?

51

chris 06.04.10 at 4:03 pm

anthropologically one could identify what such standards were in a place such as ‘right-wing America’ and draw conclusions therefrom

Not without a truckload of Platonism helping one paper over the differences, one couldn’t. Otherwise, one is inevitably going to get the accurate but useless result “tastes vary”.

Geometrically locating the center of mass of a pile of jello does not transform it into a coherent object, even if your calculations are impeccable.

52

alex 06.04.10 at 4:11 pm

Come, come, that really is too much. You will be telling us next that supermodels get their jobs because of their sparkling personalities, and that their faces are photoshopped on random whim. Wikipedia, for all its sins, had a rather well-referenced article on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Determinants_of_female_physical_attractiveness

53

Zamfir 06.04.10 at 5:10 pm

I think Henry has cheated a bit by choosing particularly dumb-looking photos. If you adjust for that, Gainor and Rachel would look OK, with Rachel probably winning.

Joyner needs a better tie. Also, can someone explain why Americans wear these pure-white shirts with strong ties? It’s a look that requires extremely fine shirts to work.

54

burritoboy 06.04.10 at 5:30 pm

“You will be telling us next that supermodels get their jobs because of their sparkling personalities”

The women whom the US right-wing likes (which I think IS a relatively coherent concept – they do like certain identifiable and predictable characteristics) don’t much look like fashion models and are actually quite dissimilar to current high-fashion models.

Beauty queens, yes, fashion models, no. I would agree that “attractiveness” is an incoherent concept generally, and that also applies to American liberals. It’s not incoherent for US right-wingers because they are now partially a regional party (of long-established white people in the South) and because they control a TV network (Fox News). Remember that beauty pageants are very important in the South, and serve many political purposes (high-status Southern men, particularly those aiming for political careers, specifically seek out beauty pageant winners for wives). Beauty pageant winners are often from prominent politically-involved families and having a beauty pageant winner as a family member is a significant status symbol. Also, beauty pageant winners are sometimes preferred (or have a leg up on others) in such opportunities as political interns and so on.

That is, those who determine the concept of beauty on the Right are actually a fairly limited group of men: the judges at Southern beauty pageants (and judges at Southern pageants are often prominent local politicians) and a small group of senior executives at Fox News.

Since American liberals don’t have this type of organized recognition of beauty (beauty pageants play a massively more limited role outside the South, for example), their concept of beauty is naturally much less coherent.

55

chris 06.04.10 at 5:45 pm

@50: The fact that some, or even many, observers’ individual preferences happen to coincide in *some* cases doesn’t make them an objective reality.

Any substantially large group will disagree to some extent on the relative attractiveness of a moderate-sized handful of people and leave you with results like “63% of respondents thought that Jessica Alba was hotter than Kirsten Dunst”. (Numbers made up to illustrate the point.) Do you really think it makes any sense to say that 37% of the people who answered that question were *wrong*? If 96% think that Jessica Alba is hotter than Ann Coulter, are the 4% wrong? Where’s the line?

IANA anthropologist, but IMO it would be seriously irresponsible anthropology to sweep all this under the rug.

Even if you overlook these problems and adopt majority rule as the arbiter of pairwise comparisons, that doesn’t much help you get closer to something you could use for *group* comparisons. At most, after extensive sampling and polling, you could wind up with a finding like “If you randomly select a liberal woman and a conservative woman, there is an estimated 63% chance that a majority of heterosexual men will rate the liberal hotter” — which is a far cry from the sweeping generality we started with.

56

Crystal 06.04.10 at 6:09 pm

I pick Jonah Goldberg, because of the giant disembodied, three-fingered hand about to yank his still-beating heart from his manly chest.

57

mds 06.04.10 at 8:21 pm

If 96% think that Jessica Alba is hotter than Ann Coulter, are the 4% wrong?

Yes.

58

Earnest O'Nest 06.04.10 at 8:30 pm

But not because it is 96 to 4.

59

Crystal 06.04.10 at 10:38 pm

@Burritoboy: yes, the beauty pageant culture is very much Southern. I have a friend who lives in Alabama and the stuff she tells me about the pageant culture is so alien to San Francisco-area me – the beauty pageants here are mostly men in drag or leather raising money for charity. I doubt that Fox is falling all over themselves to hire them.

But yes, the beauty the pageants are selling is a very bland, cookie-cutter (mostly) white version of good looks, “pretty” rather than “drop-dead gorgeous.” Sarah Palin is a great example – she’s not striking, Ava Gardner OMG gorgeous! She has very accessible (to her admirers) wholesome prettiness with a dash of sex appeal. I don’t think it’s “conservative women are hotter” but “liberal heterosexual men probably admire a wider variety of good looks” and “conservative het men have a more uniform, less diverse ideal.”

60

The Wrath of Oliver Khan 06.05.10 at 1:28 am

Re: photo #2 –

Damn, Paul Lynde sure got fat!

61

alex 06.05.10 at 7:29 am

@54, by ‘sweeping generality’ do you mean “right-wing women would be highly likely to be ‘hotter’, as measured by such conventional standards”? Because that sounds to me pretty close to what you’re saying. In any large-group selection process, there’ll be a curve of some kind.

You would also have to consider what question you’re actually asking, because requesting information on individuals’ personal preferences is not the same as asking them which subject conforms closest to their understanding of culturally-determined conventional physical beauty. Though whether anyone who’s actually interested in rating the ‘hotness’ of conservative women would be capable of understanding that distinction is, I suppose, a debatable point.

62

Mrs Tilton 06.05.10 at 7:37 am

Lemuel @38,

Re 36, is there a word for something that does not even rise to the level of trolling?

¿Cómo? Was it the taz reference? OK, make it konkret-Leserinnen if you must.

63

alex 06.05.10 at 9:15 am

The current 37 is meant…

64

Myles SG 06.05.10 at 3:47 pm

“(Which reminds me that my late father, who was quite a clotheshorse for a rural educator, told me when I was about to go to London for the first time, “You’ll see the greatest ties in the world.”)”

Quite true. It’s always a surprise to discover that in old-line London shops they actually carry whole lines of not just regular ties, but wedding and summer-party ties as well.

“What’s the point of being conservative if you don’t make enough money to buy from Paul Stuart (I’m not asking for sophisticated retro styles from the likes of Garrick Anderson, but you should be able to get your fat ass into Paul Stuart or The Andover Shop)? Why not be a hippie, if you can’t even enjoy the pleasures of elitism (and wearing fine clothes is of course something an elite can and should do)? And they can’t seem to comb their hair either.”

Most of them look like they need not just Paul Smith, but probably all the way to bespoke. Jonah certainly does.

“But I think James Joyner sort of carries off the B-squared look.”

He’s not close to skinny enough to wear the shirt collar (tab?) he’s wearing, and the tie is very questionable. Usual advice for his type is to get loads of custom-tailored button-downs shipped from Hong Kong tailors.

65

Myles SG 06.05.10 at 3:49 pm

And the easiest way to get decent Anglo-esque ties in the U.S. is to just buy the whole Tommy Hilfiger collection, which run at about $40-50 a tie around sale time.

66

Myles SG 06.05.10 at 3:53 pm

“Any substantially large group will disagree to some extent on the relative attractiveness of a moderate-sized handful of people and leave you with results like “63% of respondents thought that Jessica Alba was hotter than Kirsten Dunst”. (Numbers made up to illustrate the point.) Do you really think it makes any sense to say that 37% of the people who answered that question were wrong? ”

Dude, I don’t know what you are thinking, but I think Kirsten Caroline Dunst >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jessica Alba. Dunst is a goddess. Her performance in Elizabethtown defines hot. A goddess.

67

Lemuel Pitkin 06.05.10 at 7:56 pm

¿Cómo? Was it the taz reference? OK, make it konkret-Leserinnen if you must.

CT’s unique conversation-wrecking comment renumbering strikes again! Altho my remark would have been much funnier aimed at Mrs. T.’s 36, so I shouldn’t complain.

68

burritoboy 06.06.10 at 2:06 am

“But yes, the beauty the pageants are selling is a very bland, cookie-cutter (mostly) white version of good looks, “pretty” rather than “drop-dead gorgeous.” Sarah Palin is a great example – she’s not striking, Ava Gardner OMG gorgeous!”

Striking, Ava Gardner gorgeous is precisely not their definition of beauty on a day to day basis (they might admire that type of thing in magazines or media, but it’s not what they’re regularly encountering nor is it what they’ll reward in a pageant).

69

Michael Bérubé 06.06.10 at 4:26 am

I can’t believe there’s no love here for Andrew Malcolm’s fetching “come hither” look. Maybe because it’s “come hither you young whippersnapper and I’ll thrash you with my belt for playing on my lawn”?

70

Walt 06.06.10 at 8:27 am

come hither you young whippersnapper and I’ll thrash you with my belt for playing on my lawn

Hott.

71

mds 06.06.10 at 2:22 pm

“Playing on my lawn”? Is that what they’re calling it these days?

72

chris 06.07.10 at 2:09 pm

@Myles 64: The whole point of making up a middle-of-the-road number was to acknowledge that people would take both sides of that comparison, and that the fact that people take both sides says something about the comparison.

On the other hand, if I asked people which one was taller, there would be two major differences: first, a substantial number of people (even if familiar with both of the people involved) would say that they didn’t know, which amounts to acknowledging that there is something for them to not know. And second, if someone actually performed or looked up measurements, nearly everyone would accept that as conclusive (unless they thought the measurements were faked or something) — including a substantial number of people admitting that they were wrong and changing their minds.

Neither is true of a subjective quality.

73

Down and Out of Sài Gòn 06.08.10 at 12:49 am

Glenn Reynolds isn’t that physically unattractive. He could change a few things – his glasses, his hair, and possibly his diet. (Too much fatty food from the University of Tennessee staff cafeteria?) I suspect what turns off many is the shit-eating grin on his face. I don’t know how others see it, but I always looked at it as forced and a little desperate.

74

Aaron 06.08.10 at 6:53 am

If I were to be serious, definitely Alfonzo Rachel. dark skin + salt and pepper = mmm mmm

Otherwise Jonah Goldberg… I think he’s trying to do the ‘shocker’ but thought there were three holes

Comments on this entry are closed.