Nearing the end of 2007 can only mean one thing: it’s time for lists. The Most Inspirational, The Sexiest, and The Most Fascinating. Lists of Fill-In-The-Blank People of the Year are starting to hit airwaves and newsstands.
Glamour magazine is out of the gate with its “Women of the Year” profiles featured in the December issue. It’s not a surprise that not one strong conservative woman is featured. Thankfully however, neither are Senator Hillary Clinton or Rosie O’Donnell. And though both were left off the list the liberal tilt is clearly evident.
Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, is lauded as “The Role Model” for her boldness in continuing to live her life in the face of cancer and for her devotion to her family.
But Edwards is not the only wife of a presidential candidate who is facing health issues. Ann Romney, wife of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998 and is also extremely devoted to her family in addition to helping better the lives of at-risk youth. Yet Romney wasn’t chosen as a “Role Model.” Is it because her husband is a Republican candidate?
Lara Logan, chief foreign correspondent for CBS, appears as “The Truth Teller.” Glamour hails Logan for her “expose of horrific abuse at an Iraqi orphanage,” as they should, but failed to address other events that cast a shadow over “The Truth Teller” title.
Last February 60 Minutes ran a segment in which Logan made it appear as though large numbers of U.S. soldiers opposed the war in Iraq. The segment featured active-duty soldiers who signed a petition asking Congress for a “prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq.” As background information, Logan cited a December 2006 Military Times article that found “for the first time ever more U.S. soldiers oppose the president’s handling of the war in Iraq than support it.”
As Newsbusters reported, Logan failed to state that the same survey found “only thirteen percent of those surveyed felt that there should be zero troops in Iraq and Kuwait.” At the very least, Logan misled audiences. “Truth Tellers” don’t mislead the public.
Michelle Malkin, a syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor, has also reported from Iraq and is a much better candidate for “Truth Teller.” Last January Malkin freely admitted to going to Iraq as “a darkening pessimist about the war, due in large part to [her] doubts about the compatibility of Islam and Western-style democracy.” She however, did not let her own views shade her reporting and acknowledged the differing opinions about the war among the ranks. Malkin stated:
The troops I met scoff at peace activists' efforts to "bring them home now." But they are just as critical of the Bush administration and Pentagon's missteps -- from holding Iraqi elections too early, to senselessly breaking up their brigade combat team, to drawing down forces and withdrawing last year in Baghdad and Fallujah, to failing to hold cities after clearing them of insurgents.
For Glamour the bias wasn’t just in who made the cut, but also in who was ignored.
Dr. Miriam Grossman, the psychiatrist who dared speak out against the political correctness permeating today’s college mental health centers, could also be named a “Truth Teller,” but her kind of truth isn’t what Glamour wants to promote. Her book Unprotected explores how college health centers are failing women by not acknowledging that “hooking up” carries an emotional, mental and physical cost. Her book also explores the role religion plays in mental health, the consequences of abortion that proponents do not want to hear about, and the fact that motherhood is not something that can be delayed forever.
Grossman is empowering young women to make truly personally responsible and informed decisions about their sexual, mental and emotional health by providing information that is not found elsewhere. One would think a woman who took an enormous professional risk to speak real truth would be recognized by a women’s magazine.
Not every woman who reads Glamour leans to the left. But Glamour’s "Women of the Year" list perpetuates the myth that to be inspirational or empowering a woman must be a liberal. Conservative women are inspirational role models too – unfortunately the conservative readers of Glamour won’t find any on the pages of this magazine.
For a complete list of Glamour’s "Women of the Year," please click here.
—Colleen Raezler is a research assistant at the Culture and Media Institute




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
...
November 23, 2007 - 07:54 ET by tater...and you didn't even mention Nancy Pelosi.
Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns
Nor will they be buying the magazine
November 23, 2007 - 08:18 ET by PamThis is a sad commentary about what it takes to be considered a "strong" woman, in the eyes of editors that can't produce a magazine that is read by the average woman.
It's probably innocent.
November 23, 2007 - 09:18 ET by heldmywThey simply don't know anyone who knows anyone who knows a conservative man OR woman.
"Tiny Village Syndrome". There IS no one outside the walls.
Glamour magazine is not
November 23, 2007 - 09:50 ET by msh1973Glamour magazine is not read by the "average" American woman. Most of today's mags lean to the left. The only mags I still buy are Women's Day and Family Circle.
Speaking of magazines...how about Redbook? It has become so sexual (how to please your man stuff) that I quit buying it long ago.
Immature "liberals"
November 23, 2007 - 10:15 ET by iveseenitallWe've come to expect nothing more from the immature "liberals" in the MSM, in the schools,in the government, in your neighborhoods. Be vigilant; they walk among us.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
They are all getting nasty;
November 23, 2007 - 12:19 ET by motherbeltThey are all getting nasty; some supermarkets actually keep Cosmo behind a screen because of the blurbs and pics on the cover. I guess they finally listened to mothers who complained about kids' asking "Mommy what's an orgasm?" etc.
The whole culture is nasty, IMO. TV ads are worse. I used to cringe at having to explain to my 9 year old son what a "tampon" was. Now we have to explain to children what erectile dysfunction is, among other things. Not to mention an ad for Pepto Bismol where the dancers grab their behinds when they mention "diarrhea." How disgusting is that?
OK, rant over. For now. LOL
Motherbelt
November 23, 2007 - 12:25 ET by Free StinkerMB - The only channel I let the kids watch (when we let them at all) is Boomerang. Mostly 1960's cartoons and no commercials so it's more kid friendly than most everything else.
Even Disney channel has commercials and shows kids shouldn't see.
. . . and no matter how horrific the terrorist attack, it's conducted by losers. Winners don't need to hijack airplanes. Winners have an Air Force. --P.J. O'Rourke