Interesting push and pull happening on the Twitters regarding Ms. Rempel& #39;s rather glamorous outfit.

I don& #39;t buy into the notion that men or women in the public eye can& #39;t be criticized for what they wear or how they present themselves.

I especially don& #39;t buy into the idea that women are somehow especially protected against discussion of their wardrobe choices.

We& #39;re either equals or we& #39;re protected, precious dolls about whom nothing negative may be said without inspiring calls of misogyny.

If Trudeau had a photo taken of him in a Tuxedo with a rhinestone vest and patent shoes, carefully posed, toe forward, preening a little, does anything think it would be out of bounds to remark upon it? That people here and in the press wouldn& #39;t fall over themselves to make fun?

This "she can wear what she wants" is certainly true and rings with the frustration of a hundred generations of being told what to wear and judged on it but when you fight for equality and win it, you don& #39;t get to keep the old patriarchal protections.

People may wear what they want.

I may have an opinion on that.

I& #39;m not making two sets of rules because that& #39;s what *I* thought I was fighting against.

Also, come on, when you do things publicly, knowing they& #39;re going to "go viral", you& #39;ve stepped into another arena.

This isn& #39;t us saying her blouse was too tight while she& #39;s doing her job, this is us commenting on a staged photo, a performance, she made of her own free will.

This is like talking about an actual "red carpet" performance (which is exactly what it was) which, whenever I turn on my television are being discussed ad nauseum, right down to the wardrobe critique.

So which is it? https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="🤷🏻‍♂️" title="Achselzuckender Mann (heller Hautton)" aria-label="Emoji: Achselzuckender Mann (heller Hautton)">