聯晚這篇以「希拉蕊乳溝 募款做文章」為題的文章，在看慣辣鹹、迷你裙、曝露裝讀者眼中，可能沒啥特別看頭。更何況許多民主國家的國會，對議員們穿衣要求，都不做白紙黑字硬性規定，只要不過火、失禮既可。

*永遠的希拉蕊賣點*

但是環繞著希拉蕊的問題，永遠不似表面上的單純，特別在選舉拚總統氛圍下，永遠有賣點，更何況是「有所為」的刻意炒作。而希拉蕊「這次」的「乳溝事件」，從國會機構文化，特別是穿衣文化，與選舉性別操作來看，就更有趣。

印象中的美國人，開放、大膽、標新、立異。但是談到美國國會，在「維護機構傳統與尊嚴」大帽子下，產生的刻板內規慣例，特別是涉及性別問題的差別待遇，還真讓人開眼界。就是有這種環境背景，才能解釋去年(2006年)當眾院多數換手、民主黨當家主事，女議長裴洛西 (Nancy Pelosi) 的穿著打扮，會變成一時話題。

今年(2007年)夏天，參院內還為是否可穿露腳指鞋子大起討論，有趣吧。內規由坐在後排的Bench Lady 執行，如犯規，可是會被糾正，這些 Bench Lady 被國會助理與雇員們暱稱為「 SS Guards 」。各委員會內規更嚴，國防委員會男生廁所，就在會議廳外，女生如廁則必須走兩層樓，下到公共廁所，才能方便。

*不動聲色挑戰內規*

第一夫人希拉蕊進國會之後，變成最資淺的參議員，就是先學習內規與人為善，非常低調，還要學會為資深委員們或老牌大助理倒咖啡，身段柔軟廣結善緣。不過她穿褲裝酷裝，暗中挑戰內規，看在其它女性職工眼中，真是暗爽，因此也改變許多人對她的看法觀念印象。既融入，又創新，這是「Hillary in Congress」進國會學得的經驗。

*搶出現不擇手段*

但問題來了，要選總統拚初選，大家都要搶票，特別是女性票與傳統票。希拉蕊的「性別問題」就被人正反炒作，還被自己炒作。報載文章所提，那個 C-SPAN 參院辯論時間點是在本月中，而小露乳溝的背景原因，是因為當時拚初選對手愛德華茲 (John Edwards) 的老婆(Elisabeth Edwards)指控希拉蕊不夠女人，所以呢，前第一夫人就小露乳溝，證明「我是女人」，小柯總統還出來回嗆說「我老婆是真女人，呵呵， 你老公 (指愛德華茲) 也挺女人味的 !」。

*成功定框決戰關鍵*

7月23 日CNN/Youtube 辯論時，希拉蕊不但特別穿件粉紅上裝表溫柔，在回答網民「不夠女人質問」時，還風趣的說「I can only run as a woman ( 言下之意就是強調我是女人啊) .......... 但我要以最有經驗、最有領導能力、最….的候選人特性本質，來拚初選當總統 」。

但希拉蕊還是說自己很讚佩愛德華茲的老婆。原因呢，讓我告訴你。希拉蕊當然得如此回答啦，因為愛德華茲的老婆是癌症生還者。對具如此身分的政治人負面批評，不管內容對否，有強烈不仁慈失厚道觀感，會被民眾大扣印象分。但是呢，愛德華茲陣營的文宣強棒攻擊手，卻正是他老婆，唉唉唉! 。不過，希拉蕊耍乳溝作文章的伎倆，還是被媒體拿來說嘴。玩人者，人恆玩之，也是活該。

看倌瞧清楚了? 看出其中奧妙沒?Framing，永遠不似表面上那麼單面向、善良、簡單。老美拚選舉，可是花大錢、大時間、大人力，來研究「說自己是啥麼」、如何說、何時說、還得說得漂亮。因為，說的「好」、說的「對」、說得「有人信」，你……就……贏……啦!

選舉議題，包山包海。外行人「看熱鬧」，內行人「看門道」。在熱鬧與門道之間，考驗候選人與競選團隊的實力，還有選民的洞悉能力。您看有沒啊???

072307 CNN/YouTube Democrats Debate

希拉蕊乳溝  募款做文章

2007. 07. 28/聯合晚報/ 編譯彭淮棟 (綜合報導) http://udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR6/3947167.shtml

美國總統選戰最新頭號熱門話題：希拉蕊的乳溝。「華盛頓郵報」時裝版一篇論希拉蕊乳溝的文章，全美媒體和女界大不以為然，希拉蕊陣營說是「侮辱」，但也打蛇隨棒上，反擊之餘，拿來當募款文章。

本月18日，希拉蕊在國會參院院會侃侃批評高等教育學費過高，華郵時裝版(Style)刊出2006年普利茲獎「批評」類得主，時裝評論家蘿冰‧吉夫罕的文章，文章頭段就說：「18日下午(國會電視台)C-SPAN2上有乳溝展示。希拉蕊的。」

蘿冰根據她看到轉播畫面說，希拉蕊穿的上衣「低胸，有個微妙的V字形，瞄一眼就看得見乳溝」，「乳溝露出的程度並無不當，但的確在那裡」。

蘿冰說，希拉蕊一向全身「中性制服」，也就是黑西裝，選戰以來改穿一系列套裝和夾克，但乳溝未免「異常炫耀」。

希拉蕊陣營起初沒有當這是選戰好題目，發現媒體和女界對該文普遍反應負面後，才發動攻勢，27日在電子募款信上說：「各位相信嗎？華盛頓郵報寫了一篇746字的文章專談希拉蕊的乳溝。」

電子郵件說，希拉蕊當時在談學費，華郵文章不談理念，卻談她的身體，「殊為不當」，「侮辱人」。電郵話鋒一轉，用粗體字寫說：「衣著、化妝、乳溝，總統競 選真正重要的問題在哪裡？希拉蕊只為真正重要的問題打拼。」信文號召各界「反抗這種粗俗，以及把美國文化小氣化。請大家挺希拉蕊。」

蘿冰否認侮辱人，表示一個公眾人物在國會以如此儀容示人，令人訝異，「說乳溝無論露多少，在那種場不是問題，這種說法不對」。

男候選人的穿著也曾有人著墨，但絕少像蘿冰對希拉蕊這樣非議。紐約時報等全美媒體都報導這起風波，康乃狄克州「哈特福信使報」最尖銳，諷刺說華郵氣急敗壞 宣布希拉蕊展示乳溝，其實「希拉蕊有奶子，兩個。我們知道，因為我們是美國媒體，我們數過」，但請大家注意，希拉蕊當時是談教育。 

******

Hillary Clinton's Tentative Dip Into New Neckline Territory

By Robin Givhan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 20, 2007; C01

There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

She was talking on the Senate floor about the burdensome cost of higher education. She was wearing a rose-colored blazer over a black top. The neckline sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape. The cleavage registered after only a quick glance. No scrunch-faced scrutiny was necessary. There wasn't an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable.

It was startling to see that small acknowledgment of sexuality and femininity peeking out of the conservative -- aesthetically speaking -- environment of Congress. After all, it wasn't until the early '90s that women were even allowed to wear pants on the Senate floor. It was even more surprising to note that it was coming from Clinton, someone who has been so publicly ambivalent about style, image and the burdens of both.

The last time Clinton wore anything that was remotely sexy in a public setting surely must have been more than a decade ago, during Bill Clinton's first term in office when she was photographed wearing a black Donna Karan gown that revealed her shoulders. It was one of Karan's "cold-shoulder" dresses, inspired, Karan once noted, because a woman's shoulders remain sensuous and appealing regardless of her age.

Throughout Clinton's time as first lady, she wore clothes that were feminine and stately. But sexiness was not part of the image. Her second inaugural gown was by Oscar de la Renta. The original version of the gold lace dress had cap sleeves and a wide, jewel neckline. Clinton altered it so that it had long sleeves and a high, almost Victorian collar.

When she appeared on the cover of the December 1998 issue of Vogue, just after the Monica Lewinsky scandal had peaked, she wore another de la Renta gown, this one with a boat neck and long sleeves. She looked glamorous, regal and defiant. But one was not even tempted to mention the s-word.

By the time Clinton launched her first campaign for the Senate, she had found a desexualized uniform: a black pantsuit. Not a fitted, provocative suit, but merely an understated, flattering one. Clothes were off the table. End of discussion.

But as she has embarked on her campaign for president, she has given up the uniform. In its place has been a wide array of suits and jackets, in everything from dull khaki to canary yellow and sofa florals. Once again, she is playing the fashion field.

The cleavage, however, is an exceptional kind of flourish. After all, it's not a matter of what she's wearing but rather what's being revealed. It's tempting to say that the cleavage stirs the same kind of discomfort that might be churned up after spotting Rudy Giuliani with his shirt unbuttoned just a smidge too far. No one wants to see that. But really, it was more like catching a man with his fly unzipped. Just look away!

Not so long ago, Jacqui Smith, the new British home secretary, spoke before the House of Commons showing far more cleavage than Clinton. If Clinton's was a teasing display, then Smith's was a full-fledged come-on. But somehow it wasn't as unnerving. Perhaps that's because Smith's cleavage seemed to be presented so forthrightly. Smith's fitted jacket and her dramatic necklace combined to draw the eye directly to her bosom. There they were . . . all part of a bold, confident style package.

With Clinton, there was the sense that you were catching a surreptitious glimpse at something private. You were intruding -- being a voyeur. Showing cleavage is a request to be engaged in a particular way. It doesn't necessarily mean that a woman is asking to be objectified, but it does suggest a certain confidence and physical ease. It means that a woman is content being perceived as a sexual person in addition to being seen as someone who is intelligent, authoritative, witty and whatever else might define her personality. It also means that she feels that all those other characteristics are so apparent and undeniable, that they will not be overshadowed.

To display cleavage in a setting that does not involve cocktails and hors d'oeuvres is a provocation. It requires that a woman be utterly at ease in her skin, coolly confident about her appearance, unflinching about her sense of style. Any hint of ambivalence makes everyone uncomfortable. And in matters of style, Clinton is as noncommittal as ever.