On October 10, The Washington Times published an article ridiculing Representative Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez for her reported $300 haircut (including tip). The news outlet declared the story an "EXCLUSIVE" continuing that "Self-declared socialist AOC splurges on high-dollar hairdo." Of course, this blew up on both sides of the political spectrum, with her critics jumping on her for spending this kind of money at a salon and her supporters wondering why this was news in the first place.
As Quinta Jurecic pointed out on Twitter, "I regret to inform the Washington Times that women's haircuts are, indeed, unconscionably expensive." I personally can attest to this as someone who simply wanted a bad dye job fixed in my Wisconsin hometown. My bill was $220 before tip and I didn't get a haircut, so honestly, I'm wondering where AOC found such a good deal.
AOC fired back at the Washington Times, stating that "40 million Americans live in poverty under today's extreme inequality, yet the right-wing want you to blame Democratic socialism for their own moral failures. Our policies, like Medicare for All, advance prosperity for working people. They're just mad we look good doing it."
She then pointed the finger to statistics from Citizens for Ethics, who found that Mike Pence billed taxpayers $600,000 for gold outings. AOC commented, "Won't you look at that: Mike Pence used taxpayer funds - not personal ones - to spend several thousand haircuts' worth of public money on a visit to Trump golf courses. I wonder if Republicans care about corruption as much as they care about a woman's cut & color."
The main takeaway seems to be that an article of this nature would never happen to a male politician, and many have pointed out the scrutiny and rude remarks that fall on women in politics who don't keep up with their appearances.