Loosely basing his piece on the Megan Fox/Diablo Cody film Jennifer's Body, William Leith argues that teenage girls hold all the power in high school, as they mature faster than boys do (this is called puberty), moving on to "painted nails and cigarette lighters and high heels and make-up bags" and "boyfriends with cars and jobs and money," while "geeks" like Leith continue to play with frogs and build forts in the woods. "I remember this moment exactly," Leith pouts, "All the girls you know seem to have become ten years older; they hang around with boys who look like men, which makes you feel even more of a kid."

In a piece that reads like something the class geek who became a bitter multimillionaire would read in a film based on a high school reunion, Leith then describes how he and his immature friends continued building forts and catching frogs while the girls ignored them and, you know, had lives of their own and adventures of their own, and waxes poetic about his dumb bonding adventures with the lads and how they all came out of the summer as grown men—the type the girls would finally notice.

It was then, Leith concludes, that he realized that being older meant that he could have whatever he wanted. "Soon, you will be one of the older guys," he writes, "The girls will no longer be out of your league. In fact, as you get older, there won't be a woman shortage - there will be a man shortage. Yes, you'll be sitting pretty. As a man, you'll get paid more, you'll be able to have children at any age, and you won't even have to get pregnant. Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it? If only we'd known."

In other words, Leith hit puberty and his douche switch was flipped to "on." Apparently, in Leith's view, young women also maturing due to natural processes were just power hungry things out to make young men feel bad about themselves who had no idea of the comeuppance that awaited them: thousands of years of male privilege in action! What a revelation!

I honestly have no idea what the point of this article is supposed to be. Does Leith want sympathy for being a so-called "geek" who had really good friends and good memories and ended up realizing that he is always a step ahead due to the penis in his pants? Is he trying to shame the teenage girls he grew up with for not paying attention to him (gasp!) and daring to mature at their own pace and live their own lives, regardless of how it affected him? Or is this entire thing just another excuse to remind women that some men will always take pleasure in rubbing their misogynistic bullshit in their faces? I believe it's a combination of the three. I'm sure Leith thought this whole thing sounded pretty clever, as opposed to smug and misogynistic. Oh, dear. If only he'd known.

Seduced By Megan Fox? It's Too Good To Be True [DailyMail]

What's particularly loathesome about the piece, by Jan Moir, is the sanctimonious tone, that actually has the audacity to pass mournful judgment on a ghoulish culture of celebrity death-eaters. "In the morning, a body has already turned cold before the first concerned hand reaches out to touch an icy celebrity shoulder." Nothing like what we're doing here with Stephen Gately, a 33 member of the Irish boy band Boyzone, who died last week in Spain, and whose death has saddened fans across the UK.

Moir, too, is deeply, deeply saddened. Take this supremely backhanded description of Gately's public sexuality, all couched in the terms of a respectful eulogy: "Gately came out as gay in 1999 after discovering that someone was planning to sell a story revealing his sexuality to a newspaper. Although he was effectively smoked out of the closet, he has been hailed as a champion of gay rights, albeit a reluctant one." Understandably reluctant initially, perhaps - the man was a member of a boy-band - but ultimately someone who made his 2006 civil union a cause celebre and was regarded as a role model for many young people.

His death was "mysterious" - that is, the family hasn't gone totally public with details, although his mother cites a hereditary heart problem. The Daily Mail doesn't buy it: that evening, apparently he and his partner had brought a young man home with them, and, they conclude, obviously something sordid was at work. Well, perhaps - maybe drugs were involved. Maybe there was an orgy. Maybe it was a case of celebrity excess. Whatever the case, however sinister and sordid the death - and please, Daily Mail, do let your imagination run wild! - it does nothing to justify the following paragraph:

Another real sadness about Gately's death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships. Gay activists are always calling for tolerance and understanding about same-sex relationships, arguing that they are just the same as heterosexual marriages. Not everyone, they say, is like George Michael.Of course, in many cases this may be true. Yet the recent death of Kevin McGee, the former husband of Little Britain star Matt Lucas, and now the dubious events of Gately's last night raise troubling questions about what happened. It is important that the truth comes out about the exact circumstances of his strange and lonely death. As a gay rights champion, I am sure he would want to set an example to any impressionable young men who may want to emulate what they might see as his glamorous routine. For once again, under the carapace of glittering, hedonistic celebrity, the ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle has seeped out for all to see.

Let's forget for a moment about these "gay activists" with their uniform opinions (Andrew Sullivan, for one, would be surprised to hear his views characterized this way). Let's forget about this straw-man litany of disillusioning celebrity civil unions (since straight celebrity marriages are all a model of decorum and old-fashioned values.) And let's forget about the disgusting poor-taste of using the death of someone - whose body, only today, was delivered home - as an opportunity for ham-fisted, wholly irrational and mean-spirited political sermonizing. All this we'd expect. What's truly vile is, throughout, the tone of commiseration, the "isn't it a shame that his death has proved civil unions are an evil sham, and that he was such a poor role model for the gay youth we care about so very much." They'd just love gay marriage to work - it's too bad they're just inherently sinful! Simple-minded censure is one thing; chilling forked-tongue hypocrisy is quite another. It's - how did a great writer once put it? - like poinous ooze, seeping out for all to see.

A Strange, Lonely And Troubling Death . . .[Daily Mail]

The NY Times has a piece about plus-size clothing with the subhead, "Fashion Reaches Out to Heavier Young Women." Haha! Really? No, not really. But the story touches on Beth Ditto's line for Evans, as well as Faith21 and Torrid.

The Wall Street Journal's got an article by Christina Binkley — who previously wrote about being overlooked by fashion because of her age — in which she discusses clothes for "curvy" women. Binkley writes:

By curvy, I do not mean obese, unless you think Marilyn Monroe was fat. Women of a certain shape, it seems, have been forgotten.

Binkley talks to Michael Glasser, founder of Seven For All Mankind, Citizens of Humanity, and Rich & Skinny jeans. She asks the burning question: Why does he (and so many other designers) create clothing to fit young, thin women? Glasser "threw back his head and guffawed": "Because they're hot!"

Turns out, Cookie Johnson, wife of basketball legend Magic Johnson is starting a line of jeans for "curvy" women, CJ by Cookie. As a size 8, she can't fit into most mainstream denim lines, which use thin fit models. Guess who Ms. Johnson's business partner is? Michael Glasser.

Then there's the always-classy Daily Fail, with the headline: "Fashion's Big Fat Lie About Kate Moss's Big Fat Friend: Size Zero Brigade Embrace A Token Chubby-Chops."

But while it's great that plus-sized fashion is getting attention, let's hope reporting about Beth Ditto isn't just a trend; here today, gone tomorrow. Because what really matters is whether the women who want — need — the clothes feel as though they're being included.

This from the Times:

"I've noticed lately that they are trying to make big sizes more into style," said Kathy Salinas, as she considered a zebra-striped Piper & Blue tunic at a Kmart in downtown Manhattan this week. "You see that at regular stores, not just the plus-size stores, and that's a good thing."

Fashion First, Whatever The Size [NY Times]
Making Fashion Fit The Form, For A Change [WSJ]
Fashion's Big Fat Lie About Kate Moss's Big Fat Friend: Size Zero Brigade Embrace A Token Chubby-Chops [Daily Mail]

Earlier: Beth Ditto Makes Plus-Size Clothing Fun, Sequined, 80s
On Beth Ditto, "Promoting" Obesity & Fat Shame
Are Older Women Ignored By Fashion?
Fashion Designers Are Small Minded About Plus Sizes

The Guardian's tongue-in-cheek story about the new Barbie is titled, "A Tattoo That Spells The End Of Civilisation." Mother-of-three Colleen Pope, from Bournemouth, UK, tells The Daily Mail: "Tattoos are common and if it leads girls to get one, they might regret it for the rest of their lives. It is dumbing right down — Barbie should be at the high end of fashion, not the chav end. Whatever will they bring out next? Drug-addict Barbie? Alcoholic Barbie?"

The truth is, Ms. Pope may be the only mom who is upset about the doll. Pope's quote was used in the Guardian piece, an article in The Sun and in this blurb (titled "Moms Livid Over Barbie Tats") on Newser. So the "livid moms" is really just one livid mom.

Writes one Daily Mail commenter, "Winston Churchill had a tattoo — does that mean he should have been disqualified from Parliament?"

In addition, as seen in this video by Mike Mozart of JeepersMedia, the tattoos are pretty innocent: there's a panda head, a cupcake, flowers, stars, butterflies, hearts and, of course, Barbie head silhouette. I'm pretty sure the temporary tattoos we used to get as Cracker Jack prizes were edgier.

Why the need to act "scandalized" that Barbie is getting (temporary, sticker) tattoos? Would anyone give a shit if GI Joe had them?

A Tattoo That Spells The End Of Civilisation [Guardian]
Barbie Given Tattoos By Makers To Mimic High-Profile Celebrities like Amy Winehouse [Daily Mail]
Anger As Barbie Is Given 40 Chav Tatts [The Sun]
Moms Livid Over Barbie Tats [Newser]
Totally Stylin' Tattoos Barbie – The Stink over Ink! [InventorSpot]

"What," asks producer and novelist Olivia Lichtensteinm, "is it like to live as a Fifties housewife whose life is dedicated to looking after her family?" We're glad she's taken on the brave challenge, because lord knows there's no one out there who actually lives the life of a stay-at-home mom, nor generations of parents and grandparents who actually lived the lifestyle and could talk about it. And besides, it always gives us such an accurate representation of a time period when people step into it without any of the assumptions, conditioning and social mores of the era!

Straw Man is established thusly:

We're transfixed by the programme's visual style, office manager Joan Holloway's hourglass figure, blonde suburban housewife Betty Draper's elegance, her adulterous husband Don Draper's smouldering good looks. All that meatloaf, whisky, illicit afternoon sex and brazen, carefree smoking...But what of this past we are hankering after? Are we looking at it through rose-tinted spectacles?

Hmm, yes, we do have a problem with idealizing the 1950s! You'd almost think we needed a raft of sophomoric cliched films decrying the suburbs and lives of quiet desperation that still somehow think they're revelatory...oh, wait.

For my experiment, I resolved to be bound by the following rules on 'how to be a good wife', which I found online from a home economics high school textbook published in 1954:

* Have dinner ready. Plan ahead, even the night before, to have a delicious meal on time. This is a way of letting him know you have been thinking about him and are concerned about his needs.
* Prepare yourself. Take 15 minutes to rest so you'll be refreshed when he arrives. Touch up your make-up, put a ribbon in your hair and look fresh.
* Clear away the clutter. Run a dustcloth over the tables. Your husband will feel he has reached a haven of rest and order.
* Prepare the children. They are little treasures and he would like to see them playing the part.
* At the time of his arrival home, eliminate all noise of the washer, dryer, dishwasher or vacuum. Try to encourage the children to be quiet. Be happy to see him. Greet him with a warm smile and be glad he is home.

Then there are the don'ts . . .

* Don't greet him with problems or complaints. Have him lean back in a comfortable chair or suggest he lie down in the bedroom. Have a cool or warm drink ready for him. Arrange his pillow and offer to take off his shoes. Speak in a low, soft, soothing and pleasant voice. Allow him to relax and unwind.
* Listen to him. You may have a dozen things to tell him, but the moment of his arrival is not the time. Let him talk first.
* Make the evening his. Never complain if he does not take you out to dinner or to other places of entertainment.
* The goal: Try to make your home a place of peace and order where your husband can renew himself in body and spirit.

Not surprisingly, the whole thing sucks. Not least because the author is apparently not in the habit of doing any household chores herself and delegates everything to a maid and her husband. (Although they have a housekeeper in Mad Men so this seems kind of arbitrary.) She then sets herself the task, for some reason, of making a dress. Hijinx ensue.

Ultimately she finds that debasing herself is demeaning and horrible, that her husband falls too easily into the role of lordly master of the house (which probably makes for a vacation from being full-time maid), and that doing housework is hard. But! It's not all bad! Doing your own work is, she finds, cheaper than paying someone. Treating people nicely (apparently something she only adopted for this week?) is a Good Thing, as is taking more trouble with one's appearance. Also, portions have gotten really big. But, overall, she finds the alleged myth of 50's perfection is overrated. Almost makes you think someone should write something called the Feminine Mystique...

My Week As A Mad Men Wife: Life As A 50s Spouse - With No Job, No Cleaner And Endless Cooking [Daily Mail]

Okay, that's a slight oversimplification... I think. The bone of contention is a tub of lipgloss that's arrived with the little girl's children's magazine. When she appears at the breakfast table with her mouth smeared red, her dad panics at the thought that his baby is growing up and being seduced by the big, bad sexualized world. Quoth he,

I will concede that, knowing Bridie would be our last child, I have clung to her babyhood rather more tightly than I did with our older girls. Yet I wouldn't attempt to hold back her natural development. But at the same time she has been born into a world permeated with a creepy and sinister sexualisation of children. She is being brought up in a society where shops sell padded bras to girls who have yet to grow a bust. And one that sees supermarkets forced to withdraw mini pole-dancing kits from their toy sections.

Mom Rachel rebuts,

And while I do, of course, abhor the modern marketing trends that inarguably sexualise our children, I don't believe that having a predilection for pink lippy will see our toddler pestering me for a pushup bra any time soon. Which is why I couldn't share Carl's dismay the other morning when Bridie covered her face in lip gloss in between mouthfuls of Rice Krispies... Of course, I'm appalled when I see a seven-year-old carrying a Playboy pencil case into school, and dismayed by the little girls, no older than five, who play in our park in sequin crop tops and horribly short skirts.But I don't believe there's any harm in little girls liking makeup. That is something that will only change when we big girls go off the stuff, too

To an outsider, the situation seems perfectly clear: yes, kids are too sexualized nowadays and no, there's nothing particularly sinister about a little girl smearing lip gloss on her face - especially after we're inured to the baby pageant circuit's penchant for forced fake-bakes and hairpieces. But what is a little weird in this debate is not the little girl's behavior, which seems age-appropriate enough, as the parents' expectations for her inevitable maturity. Here's what the dad, Carl, says about his two older girls, 13 and 10: "Bronte and Merrily are obsessed with mobile phones, make-up, shopping and boys. I find myself mourning the days when they believed in Santa and the tooth fairy." Their mom concurs: "Yes, the older girls might be mad about shopping and boys, but they also work hard at school, do their chores and are nice to have around, which seems a good balance to me." Shopping and boys, at ten, does seem precocious, and, by the way, kind of within the parents' purview. They're still fighting the battle with the youngest daughter, but at ten the childhood fight is lost? They treat this as a universality, but ironically, maybe the fact that they take it for granted is what's problematic. If this is what the three-year-old will be into in just a few short years, I kinda see why the dad is sad about it; and why the mom thinks it's no big deal. Tragic? Not at all. But their idea of "girlhood" is different from mine.

Should We Let Our Three-Year-Old Girl Wear Make-Up? [Daily Mail]

Apparently 22-year-old Dominique Fisher met 24-year-old Wayne Robinson at a Blackpool club. The two did lines together and agreed to meet up the next night, where they allegedly hooked up, did more drugs, drank a lot, and, respectively, passed out and carved name, patterns with a "Stanley knife." According to the ever-reliable Daily Mail, "Mr Robinson woke to find his body decorated with a star on his back, 'Dominique' written on his upper right arm, and slash marks on his left arm and shoulder." Upon seeing which, he freaked out and left.

She accused him of taking stuff for her apartment; he told the cops she'd carved on him. The judge made the determination that both young people were completely irresponsible and that Fisher has issues. As a result, she was found guilty of a single charge of "unlawful wounding" and walked free.

Said his honor,

"I'm quite satisfied in the time that followed in your flat both of you had a great deal to drink and took other substances, including Valium, and both of you were in no fit state to be doing anything... If you persist in drinking too much and taking drugs, strange things happen such as happened in this case and must not happen again."

There is something so elemental and primitive about the act of marking another person that such stories always arouse interest: it's no coincidence that Ashley Todd chose to mark herself with a carving (the infamous backwards B) when she was trying to arouse outrage. As in the case of Todd, and Fisher, the act of carving is seen as a symptom of real disturbance, surely because of the inherent violence, the permanence, perhaps the uncomfortable inversions of romantic tropes like initials on trees. While we are aware of cutting as an act of self-violence, it's shocking to be confronted with the act in a form we can't ignore. Maybe on some level, too, we are horrified to think of mistakes - bad decisions, regretted nights, things done under the influence — which we'd choose to regret, being forever memorialized. I'm sure this guy is.

Woman Who Carved Her Name Into Lover's Arm During Drug-Fuelled Fling Walks Free From Court [Daily Mail]

Apparently researchers asked 100 women in their 40s and 50s to look at photographs of women. According to the Fail, "It found that those who had reached the menopause were more likely to agree that good-looking women were 'attractive'. In contrast, those who had not yet reached the menopause were more likely to say they disliked the woman in the photograph." Haha, I mean, duh, we're all just ready to claw each others' eyes out in order to guard our men! Unless we no longer have our periods and then we're just benign old crones waiting to die.

Apparently researcher Lisa DeBruine told the Daily Fail, "Post-menopausal women are taking on a completely different role in society. They have a change in their balance of hormones which changes their lifestyles. They go from needing to find a mate and competing with other females to wanting to become heads of the community.This change means that they will view the attractive women they once saw as rivals as friends. They will still want to nurture them or mother them but they won't see them as threats." Despite perpetuating these stereotypes of older women as sexually impotent, the Fail will also have you know that it is totally not sexist, because it points out that "Other studies have shown men are just as likely to be bitchy as women."

But! Fun fact from Live Science: guppies and gorillas also go through menopause. This makes sense, as Koko is way less bitchy now than she was in the 70s.

Why Women Become LESS Bitchy As They Get Older (And Yes, It's To Do With Men) [Daily Mail]
Women Mellow With Age [Live Science]