Amidst their tireless pursuit of conspiring against conservative women, The New York Times published an entire piece titled "The Politics and Power of the Pregnancy Image," which spent pages droning on about "the power of the pregnancy aesthetic" and how the "MAGA women" (Karoline Leavitt, Usha Vance, and Katie Miller) embody MAGA's "idealized image of womanhood." With a focus on Usha Vance's recent podcast, Storytime with the Second Lady, the article comments on her form-fitting dress, noting, "She is wearing a stretchy coral dress that hugs her stomach, making what she is talking about very clear." The comment came after quoting Usha telling her husband, Vice President JD Vance, that he would soon have a new baby to read to.
The Second Lady was quick to respond to the article's absurd allusions with a post on X.
Now that we know the political significance of my $8.75 coral maternity dress from Old Navy, can’t wait to hear what the New York Times has to say about my elastic-waistband pants and compression socks! In the meantime, enjoy my pregnancy fashion (or lack thereof) and a good…
— Second Lady Usha Vance (@SLOTUS) June 24, 2026
She even followed up with the receipts, literally.
And here’s the receipt! pic.twitter.com/tgICmpbapQ
— Second Lady Usha Vance (@SLOTUS) June 24, 2026
The author, Vanessa Friedman, is a fashion critic who spent a considerable amount of time comparing the conservative women's pregnancy attire to that of Jacqueline Kennedy and Tony Blair's wife, Cherie. Friedman suggested the "MAGA women" are intentionally wearing more form-fitting clothing compared to their predecessors, who opted to hide their pregnancies in loose clothing. "Indeed, ever since Vance, Leavitt, and Miller revealed their pregnancies, their public appearances have showcased their growing stomachs," Friedman wrote.
The piece essentially suggests that the proudly pregnant women are pawns in a targeted optics campaign to give the "pro-natalist movement" its shape. In doing so, the piece alludes to the idea that Usha was persuaded to have a fourth child against her original wishes, citing previous interviews in which she said she felt three children would be enough. "According to Vice President Vance’s new book, 'Communion,' it was hearing from Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erika, that she regretted not having more children before her husband was killed that helped change Usha’s mind," Friedman wrote.
Recommended
The New York Times just cannot accept the concept of a woman being proud of her body's ability to create new life, much less the idea of her advocating for more of the same. The feminist movement is so ideologically gridlocked that it will resort to commenting on maternity outfits in an effort to condemn the notion of taking pride in motherhood and pregnancy. Usha's response was blunt, hilarious, and perfect. She immediately shut down far-reaching speculations with normalcy. She's not promoting some sort of trad-wife misogyny campaign — she's wearing an on-sale maternity dress from Old Navy, like every other pregnant woman in America.
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Townhall's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member