ELLE Magazine is pushing for readers to check out their latest hit piece on Ivanka Trump: “Ivanka Trump Will Not Fix “Women’s Issues”—She Will Distract From Them
The problem with “exceptional” women.” This has to be without a doubt, one of the most embarrassingly petty, misleading pieces, dripping with leftist propaganda, that I have read (in a women’s “fashion” magazine in a very long time. In the article, they portray Ivanka Trump as a woman who hasn’t earned her stripes in the business world. Nothing could be more laughable. The article paints Ivanka (the same woman who was berated, just yesterday by a gay couple on the economy airline Jet Blue, as she sat with her children in coach-class) as some sort of a freeloader who was lucky to be born into Donald Trump’s gene pool. They go on to describe her as some sort of a white privileged princess who, despite all of her obvious accomplishments, has accomplished very little in life and should be mocked and ridiculed by the general public. But the most laughable part of the entire article in this WOMEN’S magazine, is where they berate her for not including MEN in her plan to help working women afford day care in America.
Here is the tweet put out by ELLE Magazine to advertise their hateful, misleading propaganda piece about Trump’s eldest and very accomplished daughter:
Here is an excerpt from the Elle Magazine article. Notice that there is no tab for “politics” listed at the top of the ELLE site:
For those of us who overdosed on Disney princess memorabilia growing up, good news: Thanks to Donald Trump and his legion of terrifying yet well-coiffed children, Americans are now closer to living in a monarchy than we have been since 1776. And Ivanka Trump—blond, pretty, well-mannered, given massive amounts of power over the citizenry thanks to nothing but her genetic makeup—is the closest thing we’ll get to a princess. Which is how we’ll all get to find out: Princesses are terrifying.
It’s not clear yet what role Ivanka Trump will play in her father’s administration. What is clear is that she will have one. It was reported Wednesday that she would occupy the White House offices usually reserved for the first lady. (Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks pushed back on this report.) Ivanka was initially tapped to join Trump’s two oldest sons as part of his “blind trust”—assigned the role of keeping the $3 billion conflict of interest that is the Trump Organization alive while her father was off presidenting. And yet, almost immediately after Trump was elected, she began holding meetings with foreign heads of state and hunting for houses in D.C. In subsequent weeks, Ivanka’s name was floated for every position from “climate czar” (although she has no relevant expertise re: climate change) to first lady (although Trump is married) to, most ominously, “women’s rights” and/or child care policy: “If you look at Ivanka—she’s so strongly, as you know, into the women’s issues and childcare…. Nobody could do better than her,” Trump told Fox News last Sunday.
First of all: Many, many people could “do better” than Ivanka Trump on “the women’s issues.” Then again, nearly every job Ivanka has been considered for is wildly inappropriate; as author/journalist Kurt Eichenwald noted, even that “blind trust” spot would likely require her to receive high-level intelligence briefings. (The problem here is that even knowing which deals create conflicts of interest would require her to have more information on U.S. foreign policy than any private citizen should.) No matter what her title is, Ivanka’s essential role remains the same: to integrate a very specific vision of exceptionalist white womanhood into the Trump brand and presidency. By presenting a very specific type of exceptional success, she is the Trump presidency’s built-in excuse for failing the rest of us.
Of course, Trumpism is unsurvivable for women who do not happen to be exceptional Ivankas. “Being the best mother you can be” probably doesn’t sound aspirational to a woman who’s lost her birth control due to the repeal of Obamacare and can’t abort her resulting pregnancy due to increased state abortion restrictions, lack of federal funding, and/or the overturning of Roe. The support staff who provide Ivanka’s soothing greige lifestyle—domestic and child care workers who are predominantly female—will not find their work-life balance enhanced by child care proposals that don’t cover the cost of caring for their own children, or by the lack of a livable minimum wage.
But before we get into the powerful symbolic role she’s set up to play, it’s worth revisiting Ivanka’s actual contribution to Trump’s “women’s issues” policy, namely the family leave and child care proposal put forth by Trump during the campaign. By many estimates, it was a sexist mess: The paid-leave portion of the plan provided leave only after childbirth, and only for biological mothers; it did not cover paternal leave, same-sex or adoptive couples, or parents who requested leave to care for a sick child. The plan was credited to Ivanka, with Trump claiming she’d personally begged him to introduce it.
The plan was also something that Ivanka appeared unable to defend, or even describe. When Prachi Gupta of Cosmopolitan pressed her on a controversial provision in a now infamous interview, Ivanka repeated her prior statements word-for-word several times and then abruptly ended the interview. “I think that you have a lot of negativity in these questions, and I think my father has put forth a very comprehensive and really revolutionary plan to deal with a lot of issues,” she sputtered. The point isn’t just that Ivanka Trump was defensive about “her” plan; the point is that she seemed unfamiliar with it. Nor did she seem familiar with the issue itself, outside of her few preset talking points. What, exactly, did she think the interview would be about?
Here is an excerpt from Cosmopolitan magazine (which is supposed to be a women’s magazine that focuses on women’s fashion and women’s issues),that take a nasty turn when they accuse Ivanka of not including MEN in her child care plan:
In your op-ed, you mention the pay gap for women exacerbates after they bear children, and one of the reasons for that is that mothers are usually charged with child care over men. I’m wondering — and this speaks to the maternity leave aspect of the plan — paternity leave is said to be a great factor in creating gender equality. So I’m wondering, why does this policy not include any paternity leave?
This is a giant leap from where we are today, which is sadly, nothing. Both sides of the aisle have been unable to agree on this issue, so I think this takes huge advancement and obviously, for same-sex couples as well, there’s tremendous benefit here to enabling the mother to recover after childbirth. It’s critical for the health of the mother. It’s critical for bonding with the child, and that was a top focus of this plan.
Eric Trump was forced to shut down his charity for kids with cancer over concerns that his donors may be attempting to gain access to, or exert influence over the President-elect:
Eric Trump, a son of President-elect Donald Trump, said on Wednesday that he will no longer be fundraising for his eponymous charity foundation.
“As unfortunate as it is, I understand the quagmire,” Eric Trump told The New York Times in an interview. “You do a good thing that backfires.”
Trump has faced criticism this week after it was discovered that his Eric Trump Foundation was sponsoring an auction for coffee with his sister, Ivanka Trump, who is expected to play a role in their father’s new administration. –The Hill