In the Sunday Styles section, Times fashion critic Cathy Horyn writes, "I promise, if Hillary Rodham Clinton ever runs for president, I will never write about her hair." In the sentence before, she says that commenting on the appearance of women politicians is akin to treating them "like an expensive piece of meat." The headline on her piece is "Everyone loses in this beauty contest."
Meanwhile, over in the Times Sunday Review section, Maureen Dowd has beaten Ms. Horyn to the punch. Ms. Dowd writes: "Hillary jokes that people regard her hair as totemic, and just so, her new haircut sends a signal of shimmering intention: she has ditched the skinned-back bun that gave her the air of a K.G.B. villainess in a Bond movie and has a sleek new layered cut that looks modern and glamorous."
I guess everyone loses in this beauty contest except for Maureen Dowd. But it's something for the Times to run both a column arguing that it's essentially sexist to write about Hillary Clinton's hair and a column about her hair.