First Lady Michelle Obama Gets The Cover For Glamour’s Women Of The Year Issue
Posted by: Catherine Strawn
Filed in:
celebs
10:10AM, Wednesday October 28th 2009
Michelle Obama is doing her part to save the struggling magazine industry by appearing on the cover of Glamour for its December Women of the Year issue. Editor in chief Cindi Leive writes on Glamour‘s website that the magazine is honoring the first lady’s “commitment to mentoring young women.” On the inside pages, Michelle is pictured with seven interns from the East Wing, and she gives women advice for reaching our goals:
“I was blessed throughout my entire career. I had people rooting for me. It started with my parents, but it extended to almost every teacher that I had. When I was a young lawyer, there were other women and men in the firm who took me under their wing. Look for those mentors, because sometimes mentors don’t find you—sometimes you seek them out. Oftentimes, they’re flattered and glad to lend a hand.”
And, even though the first lady always seems to be doing things for everybody but herself, she says looking out for yourself is important:
“I have always tried to put my kids first, and then ... put myself a really close second, as opposed to fifth or seventh. One thing that I’ve learned from male role models is that they don’t hesitate to invest in themselves.”
The issue hits newsstands next week, and we’re excited to read the rest of Michelle’s interview with Katie Couric, who has a new column in the magazine. This is the first time a first lady has been pictured on Glamour‘s cover in the magazine’s 70-year history. Do you think being photographed and interviewed for such a mainstream, non-news magazine hurts Michelle’s image at all? Or is she simply proving, once again, that she’s smart enough to appear in a red party dress on a women’s magazine cover, as well as influence change in Washington? [Glamour]
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
Jillybean
wrote on October 28 2009 @ 09:42 am: [report]
Good on her for putting herself a close second! It’s great to see a successful woman saying she actually has to be a little self invested.
I’m madly in love with Mrs Obama, she can do no wrong in my opinion. But what controversy could be generated by appearing in a fashion magazine?
ChoJinn
wrote on October 28 2009 @ 09:54 am: [report]
The equivalent of Brody Jenner getting “Man of the Year,” or Obama getting his Nobel for 17 days of work: unsurprising as it is disappointing. Being well spoken should be expected of our leaders and their intimate associates, not rewarded. Glamour can only find 10 other women in our country who do more than pose for pictures and shtup their husbands? Reading her interview, I keep asking myself “wtf are you talking about M?” Here’s your feminist acid-test Frisky, where is the collective groan?
Bee Mee
wrote on October 28 2009 @ 01:43 pm: [report]
I wonder where this “Michelle’s not feminist enough” collective was when the Clinton and McCain camps were dragging her through the mud labeling her as an angry black woman who hates whitey? Oh yes, they were stone cold slient. I also wonder why it was so quiet when Hillary Clinton left her job and went on to campaign for Bill?
So I guess the real acid-test for feminism is if it also applies to women you don’t like for whatever reason, or if it goes out the window and sexist attacks are permitted because you don’t agree with someone.
Also, black women have never has a problem being recognized as workers, but for some reason, were never though of as women, or feminine, or human… and still aren’t in so many situations. It is still pretty rare to see a black woman on the cover of a fashion magazine. Hell, I’m more likely to see a white woman in blackface on a cover these days. Feminism has some priviledge issues to work out.
I too, am disappointed… that some think they corner the market on feminism and insist on telling everyone else what it is and what it isn’t.
secretstevie
wrote on October 28 2009 @ 11:32 pm: [report]
Right on @beemee, i couldn’t agree more. Mrs. O actually had a very successful and lucrative career before becoming the first lady, why wouldn’t she be a great role model? Furthermore, Glamour is not exactly stinkin Cosmo. It is a pretty intelligent publication.
Plus I’ve said it before on this site and I’ll say it again, why are all women who are supposedly feminists expected to always agree all the time? We’re not some inexplicable collective whole! We’re allowed to have differing opinions! @ChoJinn, you are certainly allowed to opine that Mrs. O is not your cup of tea, but there is no need to insult, or declare me ‘not feminist’ for digging her and what she stands for. Back off.