Ridley notes that "there are flecks of gray in the mane" and "his face has grown more gaunt."

Two things:
1. Really? because he looks the same to me.
2. Who cares?

As the commenter known as "Railsplitter" writes on the Daily News site:

HA!! Every president has aged within the first year or two in their job! Look at Clinton and Dubya! Both aged like 20 years!!! Its not an easy job haters, and no one seriously expected him to clean up this mess he inherited in 10 months!

When is the sick obsession this society has with youth (or a youthful appearance) going to end? There was a time when politicians would powder their wigs — to look older. With age comes wisdom, experience and maturity. Admirable qualities in a leader. And let's face it: Would you rather he focused on cosmeceuticals? Or Afghanistan?

Ten Months After Inauguration, Stress Is Showing On President Obama's Face [NY Daily News]
Related:Sick & Twisted: "Anti-Aging" & "Cosmeceutical" Ads

In the clip above - we'll be doing a much bigger post on the documentary itself later today - Wells says that even though Allure extensively tests the anti-aging products editors recommend, they may not necessarily do what readers want, or expect, them to. She explains:

If it makes you feel good and you feel like you've got some tiny bit of control over this process, what's the negative?

Aside from issues of false advertising and wasting your time and money on pointless beauty treatments, the young woman in the video below illustrates the real problem with magazines like Allure hawking these products every month:

We find it pretty sad that she's internalized Allure's message that you should fear wrinkles to the point that she worries about it every time she drinks. But according to Wells' logic, her pointless avoidance of straws and water bottles will actually make her feel great about staving off wrinkles... until she succumbs to the natural aging process anyway.

Youth Knows No Pain [Official Website]

It is nearly impossible to avoid the anti-aging machine, an industry goldmine that cranks out thousands of products promising eternal youth, or, at the very least, a postponement of our natural progression into old age. There are creams to fight off wrinkles, creams to fight off crow's feet, injections to erase laugh lines, and surgeries to lift one's face up in order to create an illusion of youth. But is any of it really worth it?

Writing for the LA Times, Stacie Stukin explores the "youth in a bottle" phenomenon, finding that for many women, anti-aging creams are as essential as everyday necessities like toothpaste and deodorant. Even with the knowledge that many of these overpriced creams may not really work, women cling to them, choosing to believe they are working, if only for peace of mind." 44-year-old Sharyn Belkin Locke tells Stukin that she remains loyal to her pricey brand because she doesn't trust anything else, even if the product doesn't exactly produce the results it promises: "There are so many products out there that claim to do this or that. Do you really ever see that kind of difference? I never do."

I use a drugstore anti-aging cream that costs about 20 bucks and makes my skin feel really nice. It also doesn't burn my sensitive skin, which is a plus. I started using it at 25, in a panic, after I read that women should begin an anti-aging routine at that age to stave off the aging process as long as possible. I already have crow's feet and laugh lines, due to, you know, laughing a lot, and having an eating disorder for seven years didn't help things either. But after a while I realized that my skin was not improving because of the anti-aging cream as much as it was improving because I was maintaining a healthy weight and eating well. The internal changes I was making, versus the external, were what was showing on my face. I still have laugh lines and crow's feet, but I like them, and I don't use the cream to "fight off" the aging process anymore as much as I use it because, like Locke mentioned above, it's a nice moisturizer and I trust it on my skin.

I also got a reality check the last time I went to purchase a tube: while looking around the aisles, the Walgreens cosmetic counter woman called out, "Oh no, honey, teen skin creams are on the other side of the aisle." My first thought was, "Oh, snap!" My second thought was, "Oh, shit, she thinks I need Stridex pads. Do I have a zit? Where is it? Oh shit." You can never, ever win.

Dr. Laurence Rubenstein tells the LA Times that "There isn't a cure for aging because it isn't a disease. It's a natural and complex process that involves every system in the body." In other words, we're all going to age, no matter what we inject into our faces. There are, of course, ways to stop the aging process from happening too soon: quitting smoking, eating well, etc. But those things aren't easy for many people, and they certainly won't be boxed and sold at Bloomingdales for $200 an ounce.

Rebecca Seal of the Observer argues that even the most extreme anti-aging treatments aren't fooling anybody: "If you do get the pillow-faced look that's in vogue, you don't look better, you just look like someone who's had fillers in your cheeks and lips, injections in your brow, and perhaps a tiny little face-lift." In a youth-obsessed culture, the public is still quite aware of the difference between someone who is young and someone who "appears youthful."

I doubt that the anti-aging market is going anywhere anytime soon: beauty creams have been around for thousands of years, as evidenced by a recent discovery of a 2,000 year old cream in Italy that was comprised of "fatty acids in high abundance," the same "miracle ingredients" found in many of today's anti-aging creams.

Perhaps the best way to fight the anti-aging madness is to find a way to embrace the natural aging process while maintaining a sense of Perhaps if we celebrated older men and women in our culture as much as we celebrate 15 year olds, we'd all see that beauty isn't about a lineless face or a "youthful" glow, but about a face that tells a story of a life well-lived, a life of many laughs and smiles. My 84-year-old neighbor is one of the most beautiful women I have ever met, with stark white hair and bright blue eyes and a face that matches her deep, powerful laugh. She's also fiercely independent, quite wacky, and one of the strongest people I have had the honor of knowing. If they could bottle that, I'd pay a million dollars for it.

It's not as if I still don't get roped into the anti-aging madness every now and again—it's hard not to, especially when you see your peers jumping through hoops to maintain a younger appearance, and I'm sure as I get older, it will be even harder to have a "fuck it, I love my wrinkles" attitude 24/7. There are times when it feels like you'll be the only person with a wrinkle on her face in 50 years, though perhaps it we all concentrate more on protecting our bodies from the true ravages of aging by focusing on healthy habits to reduce our risks of cancer, heart disease, and osteoporosis, we'll find that a healthy interior will reflect itself on our exterior, as health, strength, and caring for one's body will provide the type of confidence that no cream ever could.

Eternal Youth Is An Ugly Obsession [The Observer]
Aging: You Can Hurry It, But You Can't Slow It [LA Times]
Youth In A Jar? Probably Not, But We Buy It Anyway [LA Times]
2,000 Year Old Cream Shows Aristocrat's Taste [MSNBC]

Sustainable Youth — which makes capsules did the study in conjunction with Kelton Research and found that "one in two (44%) women ages 25-44 would give up one tenth of their savings to look a decade younger forever, compared to 26 percent of those 45 and older."

Do you understand this data at all? It means if you are 25, and you have $500 saved, you'd spend $50 to "look" 15.

Or maybe you're a $35-year-old spending, say, $200 to "look" 25. We live in a world where that happens. Especially with ads like this in magazines:

I keep posting this one because it is so infuriating. The ability to halt time has not been "discovered" in a lab.

Other statistics from the study:

Over two in five (41%) women with a household income of $40,000 or more would give up 10 percent of their savings if it meant they'd look 10 years younger, compared to less than three in ten (26%) who earn less.
More mothers than women without children would give up 10 percent of their savings in order to eternally look a decade younger.

All of this is supposed to support Sustainable Youth's "value-priced" products, but what it actually does is highlight how sad it is that women chase the "anti-aging" dream.

When I posted some of the worst anti-aging ads in existence, one commenter admitted:

"I worked in this industry for 2 years as a copy writer. I was told to lie, lie and lie some more. Anything to get women to buy our products. I hated it..."

Another wrote:

"The sad thing about all these creams and lotions is that they do 'work' - for the companies and manufacturers. They sell billions of $/€'s this stuff every year. Next year and for many years to come there will be 'better', 'improved' versions that will sell very well too."

And yet, there were many comments on the post What If Women Weren't Afraid To Grow Old? in which women admitted to being afraid of growing old, of looking old. "I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting to look your best," wrote one woman. Another said, "I just had botox for the first time and I love it. I did it for myself, nobody else."

Botox doesn't last forever; looking your best doesn't have to mean spending a lot on "anti-aging" potions. But why would some women rather have the "youth" than the cash?

One-Third of American Women Choose Youth Over Savings [Breitbart]
Earlier: Sick & Twisted: "Anti-Aging" & "Cosmeceutical" Ads
What If Women Weren't Afraid To Grow Old?
Related: Sustainable Youth

First, the term "anti-aging" is lie, because from the moment you are born until the moment you die, you are AGING. No cream will stop that. Maybe "temporarily hydrates and plumps the skin to minimize the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles" isn't as catchy, but at least it's not a misnomer. In any case, have women become so used to "anti-aging" products that they are now looking for a "new twist"?

Almost all "cosmeceutical" ads have footnotes and claims from clinical studies. (Who do you think owns the "clinic"?) This ad is for "deep-set wrinkle repair," which you need, clearly, because your wrinkles are broken. Also, check out the "clinical results":


It's not just my scan — you'll see if you pick up a magazine — the pictures look almost exactly the same. This stuff is twenty bucks for 1.7 ounces.


This ad plays on the whole idea that "cosmeceuticals" are good for you because a doctor is somehow involved. This guy is "green" — see the leafy stethoscope? The pitch to use the product is marketed as "Doctor's Orders." Do women really believe you can get an EYE LIFT in a bottle? A closer look at the pitch:

See the mortar and pestle? Tricking you into thinking this is a "prescription" for what ails you? And this stuff is made from DMAE, which is dimethylaminoethanol, a compound which helps aging people's brains, but the research on skin is limited, according to Smartskincare.com. Still, you're not supposed to think about that — doctor's orders!

Lancôme has created something called Génifique, which is maybe a mashup between "genetics" and "magnifique"? The stuff is a "youth activating concentrate." It activates youth? Really? Like, yells out the window at kids to be less lazy? The copy reads, "Discover the skin you were born to have." Confusing! Don't I already have the skin I was born to have? This ad has four footnotes:


…None of which contribute to the clarity of the claims.

Being white — or as pale as possible — is the "ultimate luxury." That's the message in this Shiseido ad, where the model is so light she is fading into nothingness. The copy claims "Even bare, spots and freckles seem to fade from view." It's a skin lightener! And a quick internet search finds that users report "[it] makes my face itch like crazy" and "It made my face itch," and "The cleanser is ok… Everything else from this line was a waste of money" and "Didn't or doesn't do much for me... meaning, no actual 'whitening' effect and it also makes my skin a bit dry after cleansing." Good to know, since the cream alone is $54 for 1.7 ounces!

Another ad with a footnote, and this one clams that "in a very short time," you will see a "measurable reduction in the look of wrinkles." Emphasis mine; you won't actually have fewer wrinkles, but the ones you do have will look different. Also, the X in the logo again plays on the idea that this is somehow a prescription product; the name "professional" adds to the feeling that this shit is not for amateurs. Just a reminder: It's lotion. Skin cream.

You're broken! But don't worry. Rest easy. We'll repair you overnight.

From the Department Of Redundancy Department: "Ageless Intensives Deep Wrinkle Anti-Wrinkle Moisture." Say wrinkle again! They should call it "Wrinkle Cream For Wrinkles On Wrinkly Old Wrinkled Up Wrinkle Women. Like You."

The next ad may be my favorite, and the worst. It comes from Elizabeth Arden's "DermaTechnology Division" and has two footnotes. The copy points out different parts of a body, reducing one person to parts:

"Décolletage: Maximum exposure means dreaded age spots, fine lines and crepiness. Freckles are definitely not cute anymore."

And:

"Stomach: "Weight gain and loss. Childbirth. Need we say more?"

And:

"The Bottom Line: Loss of firmness and tone. Stretch marks and sagging. It's time to take a firm position."

The crazy thing is they're pointing all of this out on a mannequin. This woman is not even real:


And yet, even she needs a "total transforming anti-aging moisturizer." Sigh.


Earlier: What If Women Weren't Afraid To Grow Old?

Friends, you cannot stop aging. The second hand clicks by, time is a immovable force. We are aging constantly. And women who indulge in Botox and plastic surgery do not look as though they have stopped the hands of time; they generally look as though they have had a procedure done. In a piece for the Guardian, Kira Cochran calls out the celebrities who seem not to age:

Over the last 10 years, the public face of ageing seems to have changed completely, and many of the world's most prominent women hardly seem to grow older at all. It's not so much that they always look young, exactly, or that they have the tightly pulled skin of traditional facelifts. But they do look completely different to their non-famous peers. Where other women's lips recede, theirs stay mysteriously plump. Where others have laughter lines, they remain undimpled. And when describing how they stay so taut, the explanation is generally this. They moisturise. They drink water. They work out. They eat well. They avoid the sun. They don't smoke. Which is enough to make the average healthy-living woman wince while inspecting her own wrinkles.

While Kylie Minogue, Jennifer Aniston and Courteney Cox have admitted "trying" Botox, Nicole Kidman has said: "To be honest, I am completely natural. I have nothing in my face or anything. I wear sunscreen, and I don't smoke. I take care of myself. And I'm very proud to say that." Uh-huh.

Now, of course, it's understandable why a woman — especially in Hollywood — wouldn't want to age. The roles dry up, you get neglected, etc. As it is, actresses get asked to play the mothers of actors younger than they are. Cochrane includes this quote from Madonna: "Once you reach a certain age you're not allowed to be adventurous, you're not allowed to be sexual. I mean, is there a rule? Are you supposed to just die?" No, you're not "supposed" to die. You're supposed to buy into the fact that wrinkles = ugly; lines = hideous and gray hair = abomination.

It could be argued that celebrities are different; their careers and appearances are linked, so they should be forgiven for the injections and surgery. But what about the average woman, living in a society where she is inundated with images of these women who do not seem to age? Cochrane writes:

What does this culture mean for ordinary women? Well, for one, the beauty standard we're expected to live up to is, specifically, a surgical one - which is complicated by the fact that this is so rarely acknowledged. The result is that we are presented with image after image of women (and, increasingly, men) who are astoundingly unlined, and are forced to compare ourselves with them.

And we are forced to endure ads like this one:



If you don't use their product, you're clearly rushing to your 40th birthday, which, due to a wrinkle (heh) in time, will arrive sooner than if you do use their product, the dubiously titled "Youth Surge." But when it comes down to it, should women have to feel afraid of aging? Of looking old? Is there no room for reverence of the wisdom and experience that wrinkles and white hair signify? Cochrane believes that trying to look as young as possible for as long as possible means that as women, "we're bending to a viciously sexist and ageist ideal." "And, let's face it," she writes. "Obedience is never a good look." But what if women were not afraid to grow old? What if women were allowed to age as they wished? What if brands were shilled by Carmen Dell'Orefice, what if wrinkles were something to be proud of, what if a leading, A-list actress had a lined face and gray hair? What would the world be like? How much time and money otherwise spent on creams, potions and unnecessary procedures would be available for other pursuits?

Age Shall Not Wither Them [Guardian]

In the fashion world, a skinny 60-year-old who can carry Lanvin or Prada gracefully and doesn't have to confine herself merely to wearing the handbag because she can't fit into any of the (diminutive) sizes has as much cachet as a slightly plump, clueless 20-year-old, if not more.

According to Armstrong, former model Rachel Hunter singles out Teri Hatcher as someone who has clearly chosen "backside over beauty." Armstrong also calls women like Nigella Lawson, Oprah and Judi Dench "sitting beauties" who "have clearly decided to pamper their faces and let their bodies get on with it." She adds: "...fat women might have lovely, plump skin, but an out-of-shape body can be just as aging as a lined face." Have you taken a moment to absorb how shallow, superficial, sexist, ageist, annoying and sad this is? Are you wondering how it has come to this? And are you also secretly thinking which would you rather have as you get older? A great face or a fierce body?

Face Or Bottom: Can A Woman Have It All? [Times]

• Baby-faced baby mama Jennifer Garner will soon be shilling anti-aging products for Neutrogena. [WWD, 1st item]
  
• Urban Outfitters wants to be your new bff and txt u w all the l8test info 4 nu products + sales etc. Ttyl xo! [WWD, sub req'd]
  
• Trashy fashion designer Anand Jon (whose top celeb clients include, um, Paris Hilton and Paula Abdul) was arrested yesterday for 13 counts of sexual misconduct, including 3 charges involving a minor. [TMZ]
  
• Escada's re-opened Beverly Hills flagship's design sets to reflect its revised design sensibility, which is "young" not in "age, but attitude." Yes! Nipple slips! [LA Times]
  
• Rumors are circulating that billionaire Ron Burkle hopes to oust Garrard creative director/jewelry designer Jade Jagger for designer Steven Webster. [Vogue UK]