…on Michelle Obama and her arms.

As the controversy on “the right to bear arms” that I blogged about on April 1 rages on…

…I love that she wore another sleeveless number to the Annual White House Correspondents Dinner and stayed true to herself.

I came across this interesting piece in the Los Angeles Times a few days ago. It explores the reaction Michelle Obama has received for her propensity to reveal her arms. The reaction has been mixed and numerous. The debate brings about issues about femininity and the beauty norm.

Here are a few excerpts:

First Lady Michelle Obama stands tall and regal in her official portrait, a double strand of creamy pearls around her neck, her figure clad in a fitted Michael Kors dress. But there’s one aspect of this seemingly benign photograph that’s causing something of a commotion, and it lies in that exposed 10-inch-or-so stretch between her shoulder and elbow. The first lady is buff, and she’s not afraid to show it.

Her curvy biceps have become something of a lightning rod for remarks from both sexes in a larger discussion of how much female muscle constitutes too much. While some praise Obama as a role model in a world gone obese, others say she’s gone too far in displaying the fruit of her workouts. Read one online forum comment: “There is nothing uglier than manly, muscular arms on a woman. Mrs. Obama should be hiding them instead of showing them off.”

Why do we care so much? The issue speaks volumes about how men and women view the parameters of femininity and strength.

“In some ways it’s kind of an old, tired way of thinking about women and power and boundary policing — when you can display that power and when you can’t, or when it’s appropriate,” says Sarah Banet-Weiser, an associate professor at the USC Annenberg School for Communication.

For Obama (who told People magazine she hits the gym almost every day), the decision to wear sleeveless designs that show off her physique sends a strong message, says Janet Lee, deputy editor of Shape magazine. “If she was at all self-conscious about her body, she wouldn’t put it out there.” And that may be intimidating and unsettling to some who are used to seeing first ladies more covered up.

From the get go, Michelle Obama has brought a new vision of femininity to the public forefront, one that is confronting and challenging to many and a sigh of welcomed relief to many others.  Personally,  I like it and I like her arms.

To expand on the previous post, I have included the photo gallery of AskMen.com’s top 10 out of their ranked top 99.  The lack of diversity is evident when these images are side by side.  Additionally, the uniformity of each woman’s look compared to Michelle Obama becomes even more lucid.

Not surprisingly, there was a tremendous amount of scrutiny paid to Michelle Obama’s inaugural wardrobe choices and the “message” each outfit was sending.

In addition to the fashion police riding up her train, Internet discussions tackled the question of whether or not Michelle Obama is “hot” or not.  Case in point, the website AskMen.com. The website has a series of “top” lists from that rank women.  There’s the “Top 99 Women: 2009 edition,” “Top 10: 2009 Top 99 Rejects” and “Top 10: 2010’s top 99,” to name a few.  But, you get the picture.

In each of these lists, there is very little variation and/or diversity.  Essentially, all the chosen women resemble one another and the women of color that appear conform to Eurocentric beauty norms.

Compare AskMen.com’s #1 pick, Eva Mendes, and Michelle Obama and the usual measurement of beauty and Michelle Obama’s departure and transcendence become clear.

Some of the comments to the questions AskMen.com posed, include:

Oi yiddo, you moron! She ugly as hell

OMG like a cow :-S

She kind of looks like a female version of James Brown. Anyone agree?

Baby got back, her hips are wider than my 60′ high def. She’s not even in the same ball park as Palin. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Beauty is only skin deep, ugly is to the bone

Michelle Obama, as the new First Lady, is a female role model unlike most that we’ve seen before.  It’ll be interesting what the cultural conversation and cultural response will be time goes by.

Will we see cultural changes?  Will she inspire young women to move beyond the confined boundaries of femininity that have been constructed?  Will the conversation tackle the unequal definitions and expectations that have historically existed and continue to persist in terms of which kind of women are considered feminine and what that acts and looks like?