Interesting push and pull happening on the Twitters regarding Ms. Rempel's rather glamorous outfit.

I don't buy into the notion that men or women in the public eye can't be criticized for what they wear or how they present themselves.

I especially don't buy into the idea that women are somehow especially protected against discussion of their wardrobe choices.

We're either equals or we'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'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't get to keep the old patriarchal protections.

People may wear what they want.

I may have an opinion on that.

I'm not making two sets of rules because that's what *I* thought I was fighting against.

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

This isn't us saying her blouse was too tight while she'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?