Glossed Over

Link-Packed Filler Post, Plus a Brief Discussion of Cosmopolitan's Hayley Williams Profile

Hi! So I’m a little frantic right now. I’m moving out of my apartment on Saturday, I’m hyper-caffeinated to work on a writing project with a looming deadline, I’m getting on one-way flight to New York on Wednesday, and I may or may not have spent all afternoon reading my high-school journals. (I’m moving! I have to go through my stuff!)

All of which should suffice as an overdramatic explanation for why posting will be slow around here for another week or two. 

I did manage to read the most recent issue of Cosmopolitan, which featured Hayley Williams of Paramore. 

Let’s discuss that Cosmo article, shall we? In particular, the passage about how William’s bandmates (male, of course) used to pull up her pants and write “Shave Me” on her legs. Which is indescribably awful, but you wouldn’t get that from Cosmo’s retelling, which relates this oh-so-charming anecdote as part of a “Hayley Williams becomes a woman” narrative, instead of in a “Who the hell are these guys to try to physically enforce beauty standards on a professional colleague?” way. 

The punchline, if you can call it that, is that Williams now has a tattoo of a razor on her leg “as a little reminder.” And if I have to explain how many millions of kinds of twisted that is, well, are you sure you’re reading the right blog?

So probably nothing I read in the next, like, fifty years is likely to top that, but here are some good things I’ve read in the last week. Hopefully, I’ll regain my normal thought processes once I arrive in New York on the 27th. 

• Anna Wintour wore hideous clothes in the 90s. Here’s proof.
  
  
• “‘Oh my God, if I dress my baby in the wrong thing, they’ll grow up perverted’”: Smithsonian magazine on the rise of gender-oriented colors.
  
  
• Cosmo embraces kink with its typical brio (along with a dose of slut-shaming and terrible advice). The Evil Slut Clique breaks it down.
  
  
• It’s that time of year! Allure has once again convinced a handful of vaguely famous women to pose nude in the interest of self-promotion -acceptance. Popsugar has the pics.
  
  
• The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority responds to accusations that a Miu Miu ad model was unhealthily thin, determining that her gaunt appearance was actually due to makeup and lighting.
  
  
• Comma ‘N Sentence has a lovely reflection on the first bare-legged days of spring.
  
  
• The Hairpin’s take on Marie Claire’s man blogger made me LOL. (And, BTW, their Friday Bargain Bin posts are pretty much my favorite thing on the internet right now.)
  
  
• And finally, my Twitter, where I share articles like this and other important things, like which painfully outdated song I’m currently obsessing over. 

Marie Claire's Marriage Advice for Millionaires

So! Hello. A lot has changed for me since I wrote here last: The most significant thing is that my husband got a new job on the East Coast. In just a few weeks, we’ll be packing up our cat and moving from a spacious two-bedroom in L.A. to a tiny studio in New York. And in preparation for the move, I’ve left my job.

With all these changes imminent, I eagerly flipped open Marie Claire’s April Couples issue. What timing! Surely with the stress of the move, my search for a job in New York, and the drastic reduction in our living space, I could use some level-headed relationship advice.

Unfortunately, Marie Claire should have required income verification for anyone planning to read “The New American Couple.” Not in a top tax bracket? Then this article is not for you.

One of the couples profiled is Sara Blakely, founder of Spanx, who works from Atlanta, and her husband, Jesse Itzler, Marquis Jet’s cofounder, based in New York. Here’s how they manage:

Not surprisingly, to make their warp-speed, frequent-flying lifestyle work, they rely on a team of minders: personal assistants, drivers, chefs, a 24-hour nanny on call, and “house managers” who ensure that, at any given time, there’s Diet Coke in the fridge, gas in the tanks, and clean sheets on the bed.

That’s clean sheets on the beds in four different houses, by the way. 

Meanwhile, Michelle Rhee, former D.C. schools chancellor, and Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson faced a challenge I’m sure we can all relate to:

Q: Why did you call off your wedding last September?

Kevin: We wanted to get married in Sacramento—the publicity would have been good for city business—but it quickly became a media circus.

Michelle: The local paper got a hold of our invitation and printed it. There were security issues.

And then there’s Sima Baran and Paul Robertson, whose occupations are rather obnoxiously listed in the article as “sailors on their 41-foot yacht, Leander.”

They’ve been sailing since October 2007 and plan to keep sailing for another year and a half. (That’s five years at sea, for those of you keeping track. FIVE YEARS.) Here’s how these nomads keep romance alive:

On Valentine’s Day 2010, we were in Malaysia, and Paul surprised me with local pancakes from a street vendor and a bouquet. We don’t have the “I’m too tired to fool around after work” dilemma. We have time on our hands, which is fun.

What a revelation! People who don’t work aren’t “too tired to fool around after work”? If only I’d known that my sex life could be improved simply by forgoing a paycheck and employer-sponsored health insurance!

Seriously, Marie Claire, who is this article for? Something like 0.002 percent of the population? (And are those people even reading Marie Claire? I assume they’re reading Millionaire Aircraft, Millionaire Fashion, and Millionaire Jewelry with a stack of sticky flags to mark their future purchases.)

On the plus side, the article contains a refreshingly honest recollection from journalist Lisa Ling and her husband, Dr. Paul Song, about going to marital counseling, and the article also includes Louanne Brickhouse, a Disney production VP, and Ilene Chaiken (The L Word producer), a nice break from the typical default heteronormativity of women's magazines.

Of course, Marie Claire tries to paint the couples in this article as the new American norm. And in some ways, this is good: interracial couples, non-hetero couples, women running companies? Yes! More of this in magazines, please!

But in portraying these wealthy couples as typical, the article fails to acknowledge that their solutions—hiring household staff, quitting their jobs to travel, even putting off a wedding due to press interference (guess neither needed to get married for health insurance!)—come not from great relationship skill, but from money and privilege. And that has the unfortunate effect of making the advice on these pages as out-of-reach as the designer clothes on the rest of them.

Marie Claire: Sorry, Ashley Olsen, You're No Astronaut

The September issue of Marie Claire is rife with fascinating women. There’s “Danger Junkies,” about an astronaut, a Kenya-based wildlife conservationist, and three other women with unusual professions; there’s “Nightmare in the Jungle,” about Clara Rojas, a political prisoner held captive in Colombia for six  years.

And then there is Ashley Olsen...who’s never left Earth’s atmosphere, but who was stuck on Full House for eight seasons. Close enough!

“Ashley Olsen Puts it All Together” is six pages of photos and two pages of text that couldn’t possibly be more pedestrian—Ashley is actually quoted saying “I love scaffolding.” Scaffolding! It’s as if the interview was conducted with a tacit acknowledgment that no one had to try very hard because celebrities are inherently interesting, although anyone who’s read the millionth iteration of Jennifer Aniston’s single-and-satisfied manifesto knows that’s decidedly not the case.

So what is the point of this profile, exactly? Your guess is as good as mine. Let's start with this:

…gazing at some hideous flowered overalls she was put in at age 6 or 7, she has to admit, “I remember really loving these.”

You don’t say! A 6-year-old loved clothes that she would never wear as an adult? Stars are just like us!

But only a celebrity could deliver this statement so utterly lacking in perspective that it’s borderline offensive:

“It was almost like I was in the army,” Ashley says. “School, work, homework, fly to New York, get in at 2 in the morning, do a morning show at 5 a.m., then another one at 7, then a radio interview at 10, you know?”

Yes, Ashley, that’s almost what it’s like serving in the army. Remember that time enemy troops opened fire on your convoy when you were headed to Good Morning America?

But at least Ashley shares some thoughtful commentary about fashion, right? Wrong!

My Feelings About This Midol Ad Are Not PMS-Related

This ad appears in the September issue of Marie Claire:

Normally, I’d write a derisive paragraph or two about how this ad pretends to be empowering and real but instead is just a stereotype-promoting fantasy dreamed up by some guy who thinks he understands women because he watched Real Housewives of New Jersey and once, in 1998, bought a box of tampons for his then-girlfriend.

But I think I’ll save my thoughts for when I’m on my period. Apparently, that’s the only time I’m saying anything worth listening to.

Is Marie Claire Just Messing with Us?

Marie Claire’s cover proclaims it’s “More Than a Pretty Face,” so you’d expect the content would reflect that slogan. Sure, the format has its limitations. No fashion magazine is ever going to be The Economist.

But some of the content in the August issue is brutally, unbelievably dumb—or, at least, seems to think we readers are. Is any of this for real? Was this issue ghostwritten by the staff of The Onion? And if it were, would any of us even be able to tell the difference? Below, my picks for three articles in the August issue that read like parodies of themselves.

1. In “Marie Claire Bulletin,” there’s a Supreme Court primer entitled “How to Talk About Issues You Don’t Understand.” The “shamelessly oversimplified” page even suggests smart-ass comments for use in conversations about abortion, gun control, and gay marriage. Because not only do you not understand, you have no opinions of your own! This is the magazine’s quip in support of gay marriage:

“At the last gay wedding I attended, the grooms’ tuxes were brushed satin, the centerpieces were Cattleya orchids, the palate cleanser was yuzu sorbet, and the DJ was Samantha Ronson. How could something so right be wrong?”

I don’t know. How could so many stereotypes fit into one sentence?

2. The cavalcade of stupidity continues with “Where the Guys Are,” for which the magazine “mined the latest census data” to find the cities with the highest ratio of available men to women. Did Marie Claire lift this article straight out of Cosmopolitan? Maybe! Is there an explanation why Columbus has so many single men? Nope! But the article does tell you how to dress to attract them. Also, I don’t grasp the premise—are we supposed to, like, drop everything and move to Seattle? Excuse me while I pack a suitcase so I can find validation in the arms of a man!

3. And let’s just start with the title of this one: “Hair to Get You Hired.” What helpful advice for those of us with absolutely zero qualifications or experience!

…a stiff job market means the slightest detail—even the wrong updo—can make or break your chances…

Translation: you can be hired (or not) because of your looks! I’ve heard that’s rampant in some industries—like, say, fashion magazines.

Never look like you spent hours getting primped—it suggests you’re not serious.

And never mind reconciling the preponderance of fashion and beauty content throughout the magazine with the advice to avoid looking overly groomed. Is Marie Claire serious? (Quick! Check the editors' hair.) Sadly, these features seem to be entirely straightforward. If they were satire, at least they would have been funny.

Marie Claire: OMG, You Guys, Mandy’s Getting Married!

So, Mandy Moore is on the cover of Marie Claire’s April issue. Is she appearing in an upcoming film? Does she have a new single? According to the cover, she’s accomplished something much more significant than that!

Engaged! [bolding theirs]
New soul mate, new sound

Oh, awesome. Clearly landing a man is two times as important as her new album since it merits twice as many mentions.

Sure, the article doesn’t focus exclusively on her private life—only six of the thirteen paragraphs are devoted to it! Which is, really, an amazing feat of journalism when you consider that she didn’t even get engaged until after the interview and got married the same day the magazine hit newsstands.

Naturally, the profile includes the obligatory query about the artistic influence of her high-profile relationships:

Even though she’s singing about the Merrimack River and jacaranda trees, there is also a tantalizing collection of yous crooned about with varying degrees of amorousness, ambivalence, and longing…Surely there must be clues in her music about her days and nights with the intriguing roster of men she’s dated—people like Wilmer Valderrama, Andy Roddick, Zach Braff…Alas, no.

Alas indeed! Which men are the subjects of these songs? Whose enjoyment of Moore’s tunes wouldn’t be enriched if we knew they were about the guy who played Fez on That ’70s Show? Every line must be ripped from reality! After all, artists can’t possibly be—oh, what’s it called?—performing.

Never mind, let’s discuss her current romance.

Then there is the 34-year-old rock polyglot, Ryan Adams; when he showed up at the Marie Claire cover shoot, they were cute together in the way of people who share a history and possibly a future…On February 11, they announce their engagement. June Carter and Johnny Cash without the dysfunction? I’m pulling for them.

How generous of the writer to approve of a relationship Moore consistently refused to discuss with him!

It’s not that celebrities' relationships are or even should be irrelevant—many have excelled at self-promotion via personal revelations—or that magazine writers should treat their subjects with total reverence. But relationships taking precedence (like, say, top billing on the cover) over professional accomplishments only serves to reinforce many outdated stereotypes that magazines like Marie Claire often philosophize against.

Was the cover designed to attract newsstand buyers? Undoubtedly. But even a cursory glance through the issue's pages is enough to see there are no in-depth disclosures about the Moore-Adams pairing. Marie Claire’s slogan is “more than just a pretty face"—but making the “more" all about men turns out to be way less.

Marie Claire Editors Were the Girls I Hated in High School

Hey, teens! Have no idea what you’d like to do with your life? So awkward and insecure you’ll attend your ten-year high school reunion with something to prove? 

Then Marie Claire’s November issue has just the thing for you! In “The Savvy Girl’s Guide to Surviving a Reunion,” the magazine lists some accomplishments—er, “accomplishments”—you’ll want to rub in your classmates’ faces. What better way to retaliate against that hateful Facebook bully than by wearing a hot outfit? Just pick one of this issue’s six personas (in bold below), plan your ensemble, and live happily ever after. Really, it’s that simple.

Look out, world! Behold the best and brightest of Marie Claire High School’s graduating class!

Budding CEO Status

Only smart people wear glasses, right? So if you had specs in high school, get ready to impress your classmates with your perspicacity…by wearing even more prominent, less flattering frames.

Remember those thick Buddy Holly frames everyone made fun of? They’re in.

And maybe once your erstwhile classmates hear how much money you hauled in last year, they’ll stop snickering about how unflattering your glasses are.

New Body

Were you the girl who had to walk her laps in gym class? The last picked for every game of badminton?

Wow everyone with a skintight dress and booties…

Flaunt it! All the guys you crushed on years ago now have bald spots and pot bellies, but that won’t stop them from getting hammered and slurring pathetic declarations about how they always thought you were beautiful back then. Be gracious. You’re more attractive than they are—therefore, you win at life!

Bun in the Oven

I’m going to quote this one without commentary. It’s just that ludicrous.

At the 10-year reunion, the entire girls lacrosse team chided your workaholism—you’d simply forgotten to have children, they sneered. Make like Angelina in a long jersey jumper that clings in all the right places, revealing your on-trend baby bump.

See what I mean?

Independent Streak

Were you a curfew-meeting, demerit-free, rule-abiding killjoy? What better way to demonstrate how you’ve learned to eschew convention than by wearing mismatched clothes and candy-colored heels!

The more you clash, the better you look.

That’ll show ‘em! Everyone knows wearing exactly what a fashion magazine tells you is the best way to demonstrate individuality. What a special snowflake you are!

Husband, 2.5 Kids, and White Picket Fence

Did you stay home with a stack of VHS tapes on prom night and graduate without having experienced a single kiss? Good news! Your existence has been validated now that you’ve somehow found some dude to pledge eternal devotion and impregnate you multiple times!

Coordinate your outfit with an element of your hubby’s without going full-on Jada and Will. A shell, pencil skirt, and cape pull together the whole smug package.

And everyone likes a smug married! Don’t forget to tell those bitches from the songleading squad about the darling thing little McKenna did at last week’s mommy-and-me yogilates class!

Hefty Divorce Settlement

There are excellent career prospects for a high school heartbreaker—you won’t need one. As an adult, men will actually give you money to break up with them!

…[show] up in your favorite fur coat thrown over a red-carpet-worthy dress—after all, your ex is paying for it.

Suggested cocktail hour conversation topic: divorce attorneys. If nothing else, you’ll be able to recommend the best one around.

But really, I don’t understand Marie Claire spending so many pages talking about high school reunions as if they’re events to be wary of. What woman wouldn’t want to spend hours trapped in one room with her entire high school graduating class reminiscing about the very best years of her life? Right?

Everything I Need to Know About Wasilla I Learned in a Women's Magazine

Never heard of Wasilla, Alaska, until a certain former mayor was vaulted to national prominence in August? Me neither! Ever anticipating our needs, the magazines have stepped up to fill in the gaps in our collective knowledge about the town and its most famous resident. According to this month’s issues, here’s what Wasilla is all about:

• Marie Claire features a Wasilla native in its “Savvy Girl’s Guide to Surviving a Reunion.” According to writer Michelle Tolan, the town is cold, wet, and packed with teens who enjoy deep-sea fishing. Tolan says “growing up in an unforgiving wilderness” shaped her and her classmates into “tenacious, spirited adults.” Which is great and all, even if she didn’t mention whether being able to see Russia affected their development.

• In Cosmopolitan’s “The Hot Bachelors of 2008,” Alaska’s representative is a brown-haired guy named Levi who hails from Wasilla. No, not that one.

• And in Glamour, which is where the image on the right appeared, Governor Palin’s sister Heather Bruce sits for an interview in “I Never Thought I’d Say, ‘My Sister, the Vice President.’” In this article, it’s clear that Wasilla isn’t that removed from the rest of the world: the veep nominee and her sister saw enough bad TV to learn the trick of taping off individual portions of their shared bedroom. Hmm, early evidence of isolationism?

The Elle Words: Lindsay Lohan, Leggings, and Lesbian Chic

With the release of her new line of leggings, Lindsay Lohan is making the public relations rounds. Lacking a fresh stint in rehab or a spate of late-night carousing to dish about, the mags this month confront a new facet of Lohan’s public persona: her rumored relationship with Samantha Ronson. Are they? Aren’t they? If two women in L.A. date and refuse to discuss it with reporters, are they in fact a couple? Only a publicist can say for sure!

But the unconfirmed nature of their relationship doesn’t prevent breathless insinuations in Elle and Marie Claire, two magazines in which Lohan appears this month. In theory, the alleged Lohan/Ronson assignation gives the magazines a chance to depart from their heteronormative ways and reflect the lives of a broader range of women. This should be a good thing, right?

Elle thinks so, because they just adore the way lesbians dress! From “Fashion News”:

Red Wing, the 103-year-old Minnesota maker of rugged outdoorsman boots, has finally gotten around to launching a women’s line. These black knee-high classics would go great with fall’s new take on lesbian chic.

And what better way to celebrate that “lesbian chic” than with a bit of sniggering about Lohan? From “Hot Child in the City”:

Until then she’ll have to rely on her favorite new bag—a birthday gift from her …friend DJ Samantha Ronson. [innuendo-relaying ellipsis theirs]

On one hand, I see no problem with calling out the inconsistencies between a celeb’s statements and their behavior. On the other, well, the article continues thusly:

She and Sam have been inseparable for months—providing the tabloids with kissy photos stoking endless gossip fires about their relationship.

Like Elle has provided a real counterpoint to the tabloids by discussing their relationship in a non-salacious fashion? For the record, their article about Eva Mendes—another unmarried female—doesn’t once mention potential lovers.

Marie Claire, to their credit, tackles the whole topic in greater depth and in a more straight-forward manner. From “You Don’t Mess with the Lohan”:

…[the bulldog in Lohan’s trailer] belongs to Samantha Ronson, the proto-scenester and DJ with whom Lohan is enmeshed, although she refuses to confirm no-brainer rumors that they are lovers. Lohan’s anecdotes are studded with references to Ronson…

When she tells me, with a giggle, that she’s looking to buy a house “with someone,” it just seems obvious who that someone is. But when I ask Lohan specifically about the relationship, she says, “Um, people can think what they want. I’m really happy, and that’s all that matters.”

Marie Claire seems to concur with that assessment, continuing for three more pages with little further mention of Ronson. Even better, in “My Rookie Year,” about the first year of marriage, two female newlyweds discuss their experiences alongside three hetero couples. It’s progress—and it’s smart business. Why not incorporate as much diversity as possible? There’s no sense in ensuring that entire segments of society will never identify with anyone in the magazine (or at least not exacerbating the current state of disenfranchisement).

Fashion mags have typically endorsed progressive views like pro-choice legislation and family leave laws. Their current incarnations are based on women’s sexual freedom and economic independence. There’s no reason they should be flummoxed by the notion of a same-sex couple—or, on a less cosmic level, by a celeb’s reluctance to discuss her relationship.

Maybe she’s missing the chance to cash in on Elle’s declaration of the “lesbian chic” trend, but Lohan is certainly not the first actress who doesn’t care to elucidate every nuance of her sex life in the pages of a national magazine. Isn’t respecting that—and respecting a variety of relationships—the chicest thing of all?

Women's Magazines Still Waging War on Our Wallets

I know, I know, money has become a regular topic around here. Here’s my pledge: I promise I’ll quit ranting about it as soon as the fashion magazines stop conflating luxury goods with sound investments. (So, probably never.)

Here’s the latest communiqué in the battle to separate women from their cash, from the “Editor’s Note” in September’s InStyle:

And yet there’s that tiny voice—OK, it’s a booming foghorn—in the back of your head telling you now’s not the time to shop. The economy seems dicey, at best, and any fiscally savvy woman worth her mutual funds (bad example, but go with me) knows that the sensible thing to do is bank that money for the inevitable rainy day. Or is it? After all, you don’t have to make all the trends your own, only the ones that work for you.

Oh, so I’ve been getting it all wrong! Buying a closetful of stuff you don’t need is profligate, but buying just a few things you don’t need is as good as earning interest.

I’m not saying women shouldn’t spend their money as they please on shiny consumer goods. (I certainly do!) But trying to pass off the purchase of luxury goods as financially prudent behavior is an untenable position—not to mention more than a little patronizing. It's more important to look on-trend now than to have an adequate nest egg? Really, InStyle? I need a pencil skirt more than I need those “rainy day” funds?

Apparently so! In the table of contents, they chirp that a $1,950 Prada bag is “worth it!”

Sigh. And over on Marie Claire’s “Diary of an MC Fashionista,” they helpfully deconstruct the appeal of ostrich skin.

Here’s why to invest in this hard-wearing luxury instead! (Hint: It lasts 30 years)

Well, there is an upside to buying ostrich: it’ll endure as long as the Visa bills do! (Slight exaggeration: If you charge Marie Claire’s recommended $6,500 Bottega Veneta bag and make minimum payments at 11% interest, that bag will be yours in just 25 years.)

And now, we can talk about something else, like how Jessica Simpson appears to be posing for her 11th grade yearbook portrait on the cover of Lucky. Is it just me?