Matt Drudge, on his Drudge Report, posted the above photo of Susan Sarandon with the caption, “SAG.”
The link was to this story, a really stupid one, about criticism the 69-year old actress is receiving for dressing this way to deliver an award at the Screen Actors Guild Awards.
The Drudge Report, I must note, is the favorite, go-to source for political news for conservative pundits.
The gag is per se nasty, ageist, misogynist, and creepy. Sarandon is roundly hated by conservatives for being an outspoken feminist and supporter of liberal causes. The “joke” is an ad hominem attack and a despicable cheap shot. Somewhere, someplace there might be someone who has standing to make fun of Susan Sarandon’s looks, but I don’t know of any. By the way, here is Matt Drudge:
One can debate the tastefulness of her attire, but Sarandon, as always, looks smashing.
24 thoughts on “Ethics Dunce: Matt Drudge”
She’s on my “Old Guy’s” fantasy team along with Rene Russo.
Ugh. A fedora? Why am I not surprised Matt Drudge wears a fedora? It’s said that clothes can tell you a lot about a person, and it’s no more true than in that photo. The Sarandon photo says nothing more than that she’s comfortable in her own body and aging gracefully – does Drudge think women over 40 should just dress in a mu-mu?
Meanwhile, Drudge’s parents apparently never taught him that you’re not supposed to wear a hat indoors. And maybe if he wasn’t so hateful to gay people, he’d have a gay friend to tell him that shirt is hideous. OK, I know I’m just being catty at this point, but people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
He’s got a real nose for news…
Are you sure that’s a fedora? It looks more like the mutant spawn of a three-way between a top hat, ten-gallon cowboy hat, and a straw fedora that just happened to be standing too close to the action.
To be fair, it’s not clear to me that Drudge is actually indoors in that picture.
To be fairer still, the fedora is obviously a trademark and a costume, as well as a throwback to old time reporters. Lots of old newspaper columnists used to have their photos with fedoras exactly like that, and I think that’s Matt’s point. The late Burt Sugar, a famous prizefighting reporter, was never seen or photographed in public without his fedora…he also had a cigar, usually unlighted:
I hope to look like Sarandon when I’m 69 — or 59 for that matter.
I was just thinking the thing about myself, Beth.
I think she would rock a fedora. I’ve seen many people wear them and look good. Everyone will sag eventually, but instead of criticizing something relevant, he shows he’s got no gas left in the tank.
She is, of course, amazing, and I can never take my gaze off of her eyes…most lovely eyes since Natalie Wood. Tough, smart, compelling actress too. Matt doesn’t look like he belongs in the same species.
I’ll take Goldie Hahn anytime Jack. Drudge’s post was a cheap shot but Sarandon can get lost for all I care.
They were in a movie together, and meshed nicely.
Actually I don’t care if she’s the sexiist 69 year old actress around. She has done some awful things, like implying Pope Benedict XVI is a Nazi.
Her politics are awful, and her former partner, Tim Robbins, was worse. So criticize her on that basis, not because she’s not quite as stunning as she was at 25, and isn’t ashamed of her body.
Why do we conflate exposing the body with not being ashamed of the body? She may not be afraid to show off her body (whether she should or not is another discussion) but that has nothing to do with shame. It has more to do with fashion or the desire to get a reaction.
When someone publicly displays their body, it is a reasonable assumption that they are proud of it, as indeed any 69-year-old woman in Hollywood or anywhere else should be who looks like SS. The criticism of Sarandon is pure age discrimination. If she were a younger actress with the exact same figure (I could list a lot of 30-year olds with “SAG” membership too), I doubt anyone would have objected. This wasn’t some grotesque Ginger Rogers/Mae West display of a badly aging actress being unable to accept her own appearance. If Jennifer Lopez had done this, I doubt anyone would have peeped. She’s an actress, and this is a show business award, not the Peace Prize. She is entitled to appear dressed as Raggedy Ann or a turnip, if that’s her mood.
So I guess I shouldn’t tell the story of how in law school a few of us used to call a professor with the unfortunate last name Boozang “Professor Boobs-hang” behind her back.
Boozang to Boobs-hang? That’s quite a stretch, Steve-O.
Not when you are 24, still haven’t been out working full-time, and hate the world.
And tend to slur all your speech to a garble . . . oh, wait a minute: early 20s, not really out in the world, drowning your sorrows . . . I get it. I get it. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Susan Sarandon looks terrific irrespective of her age or politics. I’ve noticed in general, men with a tendency to put women down for their looks or style are both misogynist & sexist. It’s a reflection & projection of the men’s own low self-esteem. From the pictures I’ve seen of Matt Drudge, he should look in the mirror & refrain from any commentary regarding anyone’s looks & stop letting clothing salesmen make a fool of him.
Yes, it’s unethical to single out Susan Sarandon for that outfit.
But what about the ethics of current fashion in Hollywood and the industry that enables Hollywood, mostly the press? In the last few years it has become an arms race (or maybe another part of the anatomy would be more appropriate) to see which actress can wear the least amount of clothing above her waist while posing for photographs. If Susan Sarandon were a standard issue, twenty-five year-old with a recently installed pair of perky build-to-suits and wore the same white jacket without a blouse or the weird, black undergarment (that looks like one of those blackout bars The Daily Mail editors place over nipples) no one would have said a thing other than how wonderful she looked. When did appearing in public virtually undressed become acceptable, not to mention fashionable?
What’s wrong with wearing underwear under outerwear and buttoning up a blouse or jacket at any age? And what’s wrong with being, and dressing as if, you’re a year away from seventy? I’m sure Susan Sarandon could look great in any number of flattering and tasteful outfits. And what’s wrong with only exposing your chest to someone with whom you are intimate while you’re in a bedroom?
And being an actress is no excuse. Hasn’t Susan Sarandon made enough money yet? Does she have to pretend she’s twenty-five? Does she have to dye her hair and have her nose carved up and have all kinds of fillers injected into her face? When, in Hollywood, is enough enough? I guess there aren’t any Buck Showalters in Hollywood.
I’d say it’s time for everyone in Hollywood to grow up, including the twenty-five year-olds and the sixty-nine year-olds. Ageism. What a nonsensical term to be applied in the context of Hollywood.
But I’m a dreamer. I guess I should just remember my college professor friend telling me (when I was a kid): “Most people don’t grow up, Bill, they just get old.”
As a woman, I would dearly love to offer some kind words for Susan Sarandon. But, though I appreciate her talent I cannot get beyond her politics, attitudes, general pompousness.
There is one thing, though. If Sarandon is proud of her bustline, she should show it off, and she did. It may not appeal to everyone (or many) but that’s her right. But don’t think for a quick minute that she did it without expecting and inviting comment. It was a statement. That a first reaction came from Drudge is unfortunate, but I’m sure there were plenty of other comments, too.
Lucky me: I am not as old as Sarandon, but don’t have one-quarter the “chest” she does, so revealing clothes don’t make me look like a wet-nurse. Thank you, God.