Sprayed-On Tan Versus The Real Deal

A reference in my Sunday column to the famous Sarah Palin $900 spray-on tan – paid for by the Republican campaign committee – brought a stern rebuke among the reader comments.
A reader tagged Crissy wrote, “Really Fred. Spray on tan? Would you write that about a man?”
Of the many complaints about the media’s alleged sexist treatment of Sarah Palin, this one seems particularly weak. At least in Florida. Just ask our governor.
Charlie Crist, hardly gets a mention in the press without an offhand comment about his “year round tan” or (in the San Francisco Chronicle) “a George Hamilton quality tan” or “Grand Tan Man” (Pensacola News Journal) or “the man with a tan” (MSNBC), “great tan a perfectly tailored suits” (St. Petersburg Times), “perpetual tan” (Hotline), “permanent tan” (Fox News), “odd tan” (Daytona News-Journal), “nice tan” (Memphis Commercial Appeal), “very tan” (Miami Herald), “too tan” (CNN), “the perpetually tanned governor” (NPR), “perpetual tan” (New York Times), “I don't care how tan you are; next to Charlie, you'll look like Casper's paler cousin.” (Orlando Sentinel), “Looking more tan than Jimmy Buffett” (Tampa Tribune), “But for his leathery pallor, Crist might have blushed.” (Miami New Times), “impeccable tan” (Jerusalem Post), “ever present tan” (Sun-Sentinel), “super tan-man” (St. Pete Times),.
I guarantee, if any journalist in the state of Florida, found out the governor’s was indulging in spray-on tan treatments, $900 or $9, it would lead to gloriously over-wrought stories.

Comments

[tim]

No, the sexist thing is to assume the spray-on tan was for Sarah, and not for Todd.