[Ed. – Or something. It’s a little hard to tell what the article means to say.]
Still, if Clinton were a lesbian, I’d be proud to claim her fashion sense. Clinton embodies something many lesbians accomplish effortlessly: She dresses in a way that does not cater to, or even consider, the male gaze. Clinton has never sought to make herself a sexual object to please straight men, even when such men have mocked and insulted her for having the temerity not to.
Hillary Clinton doesn’t look like every lesbian, of course, because there’s no one lesbian style. In addition to many who “look straight,” or straight-ish, a huge variety of styles are recognizably queer but don’t look remotely like Clinton’s pantsuits. …
Wherever lesbian sensibilities diverge from straight expectations, they provide a hint of how women might choose to look if they weren’t worried about whether men found them attractive. … Sometimes this means being more colorful, more playful, and weirder than most straight women allow themselves to be. Sometimes it means being plainer and less adorned with frills and bows and jewelry, or trying items of male clothing and either recombining them with womenswear or adopting them wholesale. Sometimes it means showing less skin. Sometimes it means being louder, less afraid of being visible. Sometimes it means being practical and wearing comfortable shoes.
Hillary’s look is a practical one. She chooses outfits that are variations on a relatively narrow theme. Her clothing and hair are neat and well suited to her face and frame. She goes without excessive adornment and avoids showing much skin. Her suits are chosen to convey competence, professionalism, and authority rather than attractiveness.