According to the Times of London, Japan is in the midst of a veritable explosion of such "girly men," men who don't live up to traditional Japanese standards of masculinity. Of this group, also called "herbivorous males," Richard Lloyd Parry writes,

Definitions vary, but the new herbivores could be described as metrosexuals without the testosterone. Although most of them are not homosexual they have in common a disdain for the traditional accoutrements of Japanese manhood, and a taste for things formerly regarded as exclusively female. Girly men have no interest in fast cars, career success, designer labels and trophy women. Instead, they hold down humble jobs, cultivate women as friends rather than conquests and spend their free time shopping at small boutiques and pursuing in Japan what is regarded as a profoundly feminine pastime: eating cakes.

And supposedly they're a Big Deal. A Japanese designer is marketing a line of skirts and "lacy tops" for men. Another company is selling a line of men's bras, although apparently some gender divisions persist — Parry describes the bras as "designed with manly simplicity, free of lace and frills." And Megumi Ushikubo, author of Herbivorous Girly Men Are Changing Japan thinks two thirds of Japanese men between 20 and 34 have "herbivorous tendencies."

Of course, half the point of a trend piece is to record and perhaps stir up terror at the trend's inevitable destruction of society, and Japan's girly men are no exception. Parry quotes sociologist Masahiro Yamada, who says, "I worry that herbivorous boys are the future of Japan. As young Japanese men become more timid and more averse to taking risks, it will affect the energy and vitality of the society." But the epidemic of girly men, if epidemic it is, may have more specific and more interesting consequences than a loss of "vitality." Slate's Alexandra Harney was actually on the case back in June, and she writes that "grass-eating men are alarming because they are the nexus between two of the biggest challenges facing Japanese society: the declining birth rate and anemic consumption."

Girly men are supposedly uninterested in sex, though some speculate that they simply have bad "communication skills" caused by too many video games and not enough family interaction. Whatever the cause, no sex means no babies, and Japan is suffering because of its shrinking population. Girly men also don't buy a lot of expensive things. It's interesting that a love for "designer labels" is seen in Japan as traditionally male — Harney says herbivores are "more likely to buy little luxuries than big-ticket items." Much like America's vaunted post-recession frugality craze, girly men are scary for Japan's economy — if they won't buy expensive shit, who will?

When you look at it this way, being a girly man seems like a kind of rebellion. Self-identified herbivore Yoto Hosho tells Harney, "We don't care at all what people think about how we live," and his lifestyle does seem like a reaction against certain social pressures. Make money, buy cars, have a kid — it's a pretty familiar prescription for a mainstream existence, whether here or in Japan, but its steps may be geared more toward a particular idea of a healthy society than toward actual personal fulfillment. After all, shoring up a declining birthrate doesn't sound like the most compelling reason to have a family. And now that making money has become more difficult for Japanese men, it's no wonder they're not as enthusiastic about spending it. Maki Fukasawa, an editor and writer who coined the term "herbivorous male," says,

When the economy was good, Japanese men had only one lifestyle choice: They joined a company after they graduated from college, got married, bought a car, and regularly replaced it with a new one. Men today simply can't live that stereotypical 'happy' life.

Sound a lot like what's happening in America. The recession and dwindling job security have made certain male roles — provider, consumer, progenitor — more difficult to step into. In Japan, men are responding by rejecting those roles. Maybe rather than trying to return to a bygone era of buying and babies, Japan and America should accept a more frugal, perhaps smaller population and new definitions of success. The girly men, it seems, already have.

Girly Men Of Japan Just Want To Have Fun [TimesOnline]

Related: The Herbivore's Dilemma [Slate]

This is a fascinating look at a dying industry, from the days of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, when most garment workers were Jewish and Italian immigrants, to subsequent union organization, to 7th Avenue's glory days, in which the garment business was the biggest employer in New York City. The film has a strong bent towards the labor angle, and at times the juxtaposition and runways and sweatshops can feel manipulative. But it's also effective - and the contrasts are that stark and that tragic. The facts are black and white: from 1965, 95% of American clothing was made domestically; in 2009, all but 5% is outsourced overseas. The film gets into a number of the causes - deregulation, changing sensibilities, weakened unions, and increasing alienation from the day-to-day business of making clothes. We meet figures from the old guard - a hard-as-nails old-time shmatta exec, various craftspeople being put out of work - whose world is basically obsolete. Says one cutter, "The CEO is not a garmento, he's a numbers man."



Part of the change came from the 1980's emphasis on aspirational designer labels - as epitomized by Ralph Lauren's faux-WASP fantasyland.



And, of course, there are the other casualties: third-world laborers. It's interesting to see the range of attitudes, from pragmatism, to "conflict" to denial. Case in point: Kathie Lee.


The documentary drives home how far we've regressed in unflinching terms. (This clip is upsetting.) With the industry trapped in limbo between fast fashion and aspirational high-end, it's what one labor organizer terms "a race to the bottom" whose casualties, both here and abroad, are very high. A schedule of upcoming showings, here.

[Daly City, October 16. Image via Getty]

DALY CITY, CA - OCTOBER 16: A woman carries a pillow and sleeping bag as she lines up in the parking lot of the Cow Palace for the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA) 'Save The Dream' event October 16, 2009 in Daly City, California. Thousands of people lined up for the NACA Save the Dream event for assistance with having their mortgages restructured to avoid foreclosure or an auction sale of their home. NACA has held events throughout the U.S. with over 180,000 people seeking help with their home loans. The event runs through October 20 and is expected to draw over 55,000 participants. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Actually two investigations: Jonathan Birchall of the LA Times reviews Why She Buys and Women Want More, two books on the 50% of the American population that apparently controls 72% of the spending. This statistic alone (from the second book) explains why Wal-Mart directs its ads at moms and not dads. But while Women Want More also posits that women's spending will help end the recession, neither book seems — at least from the review — to offer much concrete information about women's buying habits.

Why She Buys, by Bridget Brennan, is apparently "fun and anecdotal," and the author tells a little story about rejecting a sports car because the cup holders are too small. Brennan isn't swayed by the dealer's "dismissive response that Europeans don't drink coffee in the car" — but really, who would be? This tidbit doesn't really show that women like cupholders or creature comforts, as much as it shows that they don't like bad salesmanship.

Women Want More, by Michael J. Silverstein and Kate Sayre, seems to offer slightly more hard data. Using a study of a study of 12,000 women in 21 countries, the authors find, according to Birchall, that, "'Demands on time' are the top challenge for 47% of respondents; 72% say their mother is the dominant person in their lives; 42% are made extremely happy by pets but only 27% by sex." This is potentially interesting data, but except for the first statistic, it's not clear how these numbers affect shopping. The authors also break women down into six consumer "archetypes," including "fast tracker" and "making ends meet." Unfortunately, Birchall doesn't really explain these archetypes, or what and how they buy.

Part of the review's vagueness may stem from space concerns, but its unintentional message is that despite their research, none of the authors actually have that much to say about why women buy things. It's tempting to respond that women just buy for the same reasons men do, and that it's pointless to break down consumer research by gender. However, given that most companies still use the "make it pink" philosophy of appealing to women, it would be nice if they had a little more data on what women actually want. Corporations may feel that women's buying preferences, like their sexuality, are unknowable and shrouded in mystery. But while some women may buy for different reasons than some men, our reasons are no more difficult to understand.

Of course, for all shoppers, motivations differ according to the purchase at hand. Very different thoughts go through my head when I'm picking up toilet paper than when I'm, say, shopping for a new book. But all the same, I'd like to offer those hapless consumer researchers a little help in understanding the complex female brain. So taking a page from Latoya, I'll list a few general things that convince me to buy an item:

— I need it (toothpaste, soap, MetroCards, beans)
— I want it (books, dessert, an LP record with owls painted on it)
— it sucks less than what I currently have (electronics)
— it's pretty (dresses, art exhibition postcards I will promptly lose, NOT electronics)
— it's cheap (headbands with cherries printed on them and long weird tails that are maybe supposed to tie under my chin)

And here are some reasons I don't buy stuff:

— I have no money
— it has a big fat logo on it
— part of it breaks off in my hand
— it has Bible verses printed on it (especially true if product has nothing to do with religion)
— a salesperson is pushing me to buy it

Feel free to add your reasons.

Getting A Handle On What Drives Women To Buy [LA Times]

It's easy to see why layaway died: quality gave way to quantity, people wanted instant gratification and, perhaps most significantly, the notion that you shouldn't buy something when you couldn't afford it camed to seem as antiquated as a 78, only less fun. Indeed, it would be hard to find a neater corollary for the Collective Responsibility and ensuing collective chastening than the reintroduction of the unglamorous, plodding system.

Says the Post's DeNeen L. Brown, the system "taught us delayed gratification" along with important and basic lessons about fiscal responsibility. It had nothing to do with impulse-purchases and the luxury of buyer's remorse. The want you felt for such things was stable, wholesome, responsible, well-considered. And naturally these duller virtues don't have the glamor of the momentary high that's proven to arise from "shopping" - layaway is really the anti-shopping. There's also no sense of trespass. It's not cute. Carrie Bradshaw, that embodiment of excess, didn't mete out money monthly. And, funnily, putting something on layaway - admitting you want something beyond your means, that this object is very important to you, can feel more consciously materialistic - bourgeois, even! - than a frivolous round of purchases that can be consigned to the back of the drawer and forgotten. Because then, it doesn't really matter to you. Layaway was our parents' parents. Shopping was the modern way.

And as in so many things, we're being pushed on fast forward, through the perpetual adolescence and genuine liberations and simultaneous heedlessness of our parents' generation back to the necessities of the Greatest. But as is also true in so many things, we're not suited to it, and if layaway is a handy metaphor, well, how will we handle it? It's funny: for a lot of people my age, this sort of patience is a quality we associate with childhood, when things are placed beyond your reach and budget. And you saved and you considered and if you really liked something, maybe you could wait the long months to Christmas or your birthday. And this felt right, but it was also understood that these were a child's restrictions. And so now, in that way and other ways, we're children and we're old folks and we're broke, and layaway means acknowledging all that. On the other hand - sometimes a couch is just a couch. Or so my grandparents would have said.

In Back Of The Store, A Return to Patience [Washington Post]

Fashion is often accused of being beyond parody because it does such a good job on its own. Lately, especially. It made waves when Erin Wasson declared that the vagrants in Venice Beach were her fashion inspirations ("The people with the best style, for me, are the people that are the poorest...I'm like, oh my god, you're pulling out like crazy looks. They pulled shit out of like garbage bags") - but it turns out she was prescient! Now, according to the Times, everyone from designer Keanan Duffty to the September W have come out in support of homeless style - never mind that they were probably inspired more by what was clean, warm, and available than the runway trends. And that's in the cases where the muses are not being "inspired" by chic mental illness and substance abuse! Unlike the Bush family, they've apparently never seen Zoolander.

The objections are almost too obvious to enumerate. As when Galliano unleashed his parade of bums in straitjackets, words like "out of touch" and "exploitative" spring to mind with the agility of a tipsy Roberto Cavalli. The solipsism of casting someone else's survival in one's own aggressively superficial terms, on the other hand, nearly defies language. Now, let it be said that while I'm perpetuating the lumping-together of Scott "Sartorialist" Schuman's controversial feature of a homeless man with these other incidents of pov-sploitation, in fact I do see a distinction. Schuman takes thousands of pictures a year, of people whose looks catch his eye, not all of whom are fashionistas but many of whom merely, be design or otherwise, bring something interesting to their outfits. To not have pictured the guy he did would, arguably, have been self-conscious and patronizing. Lots of different people can have style, and Schuman treated him as an individual. This is a crucial distinction.

What struck me most while reading the Times piece was how not merely how out of touch this all feels - but how out of touch it is! If this wave of homeless chic is a nod to the recession, well, what about the fact that homelessness, as we've been told, has a new face? Sure, many people "look" homeless as we understand it. But if anything, the recent financial turmoil has been characterized by the number of middle and working-class casualties, people who might not look "homeless enough" to qualify as a fashion inspiration, but who are also dealing with very real and growing problems of being without jobs and homes. In a sense, this full-scale embrace of the classic "beggar" aesthetic is practically nostalgic: a look back at a time when rich was rich and poor was poor and everyone dressed for his role. Now, the lines are blurred, and for the people actually living the life of these muses, life probably involves a lot of shades of gray - whether or not that's big for Fall.

Aware Of The Homeless? Well, You Could Say That [NY Times]
Homeless Chic Comes Full Circle [BlackBook]

A Whole New Meaning to Homeless-Chic [FashionWeekDaily]

Changing Face Of Homelessness [Washington Times]
Youth Homelessness In America [Suite101]
Face Of Homeless Is Changing [SeattleTimes]

[Chicago, July 29. Image via Getty]

CHICAGO - JULY 29: Demonstrators protest in favor of jobs they hope will be created by the construction of a Walmart store on Chicago's Southside July 29, 2009 in Chicago, Illinois. Walmart has been fighting to build another store in the city since 2004 but has failed to win approval from the City Council. There is currently only one Walmart within the Chicago city limits. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

The Matryoshka, or nesting doll, has long been both a major export and recognizable Russian icon, iterations running the gambit from the traditional nest of identical, diminishing sisters to a nested roll-call of Russia's leaders, often ending in a miniscule czar, or Lenin. It's as much a part of the kitsch landscape as the Eiffel Tower or the Statue of Liberty, and yet, it seems the economic crisis, lax tourism and falling oil prices are posing a threat to the Matryoshka - makers and sellers report that sales are down more than 90%. So dire are the industry's prospects that the Kremlin has stepped in, stating that it would place a 1bn rouble (about $28 million) order for matryoshka and other traditional handicrafts, with an eye to giving them out as gifts. But given that the government is predicting no economic recovery until at least 2010, this may be a mere band-aid.

Despite its storied place in Russian lore, the nesting doll is by no means a traditional peasant craft: it's said to date back only to 1890, and to have been based upon a Japanese souvenir doll portraying Seven Gods of Fortune. A painter named Sergei Maliutin was inspired to create a Russian version, and working with a craftsman, created the first Russian nesting doll for Children's Education Workshop-Salon in Abramtsevo. The name "Matryoshka" is derived from the popular old Russian peasant name "Matryona," and her outift and sarafan mimic traditional festival dress. An industrialist presented the Matryoshka at the 1900 Paris World Exhibition, and the rest is history.

Whatever its antecendents, the nesting doll has become a true showcase of the turner's skill: truly fine Matryoshkas are valued for their thin sides and the number of 'nests,' and the best ones are painted with the precision of a Russian icon. To say that the industry has employed generations of artists is no exaggeration, and the appeal of the doll need not be explained to any child who's felt the familiar squeak of the wood under her hands and waited with baited breath to see just how tiny the dolls will get. And as devastating as the industry's death would be to thousands of artisans and producers, it's equally hard to imagine a world without the "Russian doll" metaphor. In addition to technical terminology -"Matryoshka brain," or the paradigm of Matroska media-container format - the Russian doll metaphor is a cottage industry amongst slapdash journalists and writers everywhere. A neat shorthand for many-layered complexity, the metaphor also manages to invoke the enigma-wrapped-question-mark appeal of the inscrutable east, with none of the earthy stench of the similar "onion" comparison. Will "nesting doll" somehow end up in the morgue of words that are used and not understood, its origins extinct and anachronistic - alongside "brass monkey," "Sam Hill" and "worth its salt?" Say it ain't so! The only upside we can find is the inability to describe any of Mel Gibson's various love interests as "Russian Dolls" - apparently a major challenge for The Media.

Can The Russian Doll Survive The Recession? [Independent]
Russian Bailout Covers Nesting Dolls [USA Today]

Related: History Of Russian Nesting Dolls [Russian Crafts]

• Sarah Palin is going to skip this weekend's White House Correspondents Dinner because some town in Alaska flooded and she needs to appear like she's committed to this "governing" thing. [Politico]

• Michelle Obama knows the difficulties of maintaining one's work-life balance as a working mom, but (jokingly) said that it would be helped by everyone getting a full-time staff. [Washington Post]
• Equally difficult? Getting the Kindle to pronounce "Barack Obama." It currently refers to him at "Black Alabama." Can we live in a post-racial society if even our robot overlords voices are racist? [NY Times]
• In an article that Kindles around the country would mispronounce, Barack Obama announced his plans to increase funding at the FDA. [Reuters]
• He is not, however, going to fund needle exchange programs because that's condoning drug abuse in the same way that providing condoms to people promotes promiscuity! [Huffington Post]
• Pat Robertson has announced that gay marriage will lead to the molestation of children. [ThinkProgress]
• Whoa: Even Ann Coulter thinks Bill O'Reilly is a sexist piece of shit. [ThinkProgress]
• The economy is still fucked, as 10 banks failed the Administration's stress tests. [BBC]
• Unemployment is almost at 9 percent now. [NY Times]
• But Dick Cheney doesn't think Republicans should change a thing! [ThinkProgress]
• Orrin Hatch will vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor if Obama nominates her to the Supreme Court because she had the gall to point out that lots of laws — like the Miranda Law, say — were actually made by the courts. Apparently acknowledging the obvious is too liberal. [Politico]

While many industries are feeling the pinch, ballet dancers are taking the recession especially hard. Says the Washington Post,

Among the larger companies, New York City Ballet has let 11 dancers go, Miami City Ballet has laid off seven dancers in addition to getting rid of live music, and San Francisco Ballet has laid off six dancers. American Ballet Theatre is not laying off dancers; instead, its dancers union agreed to substantial contract concessions.

Of course, cultural institutions across the country are suffering, largely because donations are down, with many big spenders presumably in extremis. The Metropolitan Opera's once-healthy endowment is down by two thirds, and the company's cutting salaries and productions. The New York City Opera, meanwhile, is operating on a shoestring budget and a skeletal schedule. Opera companies and orchestras around the world are employing new tactics and cuts to keep their heads above water in a time when entertainment is often one of the first luxuries people cut.

Ballet dancers are at even greater risk, however, because the windows of their careers are shorter to begin with. It's a youth-oriented profession in which dancers are recruited right out of their teens and a young performer can't afford to lose the most fruitful years of a career in which she and her family have invested thousands of hours and dollars. Like professional athletes, dancers are at the whims of health and luck, and must balance a single-minded focus with the ever-present knowledge of the profession's precarious nature. Unlike athletes, though, professional dancers don't pull down an enormous salary, and except in the case of real stars, don't have the same kind of economic safety net.

But the jobs just aren't there. Unless one's at an institution like the School of American Ballet, the job market is as bleak as in any profession going, leading many of them, as the article states, to turn to whatever freelance dance work they can pick up - or another career path altogether. One imagines that along with physical discipline, dancers are tacitly taught to accept the pain, rejection and vagaries of the job. But usually there's an expectation that this will at least come from dancing. It is either heartening or depressing, then, to know that a ballerina just won Australia's So You Think You Can Dance.

Dancers Face A Tough Time to Land On Their Feet [Washington Post]
Board Eats Endowment, Gloom Deepens At City Opera [Bloomberg]
Royal Opera Recruits Domingo To Ride Out Recession [Reuters]
Metropolitan Opera Faces Cuts, Its Leader Says [NY Times]
Talia Fowler Wins So You Think You Can Dance Australia [News.com.au]

Having been shamed, pilloried, mocked, rich guys' wives are rallying. Some are cashing in. Some are confessing. And all of them are dressing for a new world.

Writing about her book tour for the upcoming Hedge Fund Wives, Tatiana Boncampagni, in this weekend's Financial Times, says, "Most of the women I know whose husbands or boyfriends work in the industry have become sudden acolytes of internet shopping and J Crew; and black blazers, white blouses, and two-toned ballet flats are proliferating. Think Michelle Obama, minus the Thakoon."

"Confesses" some TARP wife to Portfolio last month:

I haven't even looked at spring clothes; God forbid someone catches me out in something new. Keeping up with fashion seems somehow decadent in this new era, like getting Botox injections or catered dinners. Like so many others, I'm shopping in my closet. I've bought exactly two things this year-makeup and panty hose. If I buy a present for someone, I have the package sent to their home. I don't want to be spotted climbing into a taxi, laden with Bergdorf Goodman shopping bags.

The formula, it's clear, is one part social conscience, one part keeping up appearances, one part somber mourning dress, and two parts valiant remorse. And of course, there's a big dose of old-fashioned Wife in the mix. Says TARP wife (she of the "confession"): "I'm trying to buck him up and not complicate his life. The last thing he needs is unpleasant publicity, so I'm learning to fly so far below the radar that I have perpetually skinned knees." Adds a Texas doyenne, " "Mainly it starts with the husbands," who have made it known, "If you can't eat it, don't buy it."

While downgrading from exorbitant to expensive - Chanel to Tory Burch, Cafe Boulud rather than Daniel - doesn't win a lot of sympathy from us rank and file, we can imagine the shared guilt of a government bailout and involvement in a national free fall is more galling than the classic Hard Times of depression-era legend. Resentment and schadenfreude don't make giving up those opera tickets any easier. But it's also true that an essay like this one is a far cry from bootstrap-pulling, and living off the fat of the land even in lean times can only garner so much sympathy.

My family has friends who've been cleaned out, and both husband and wife, who had not had to really work before, have found work at, respectively, a non-profit and an Eileen Fisher... and feel very lucky to have done so. They are in their late 60s. This kind of thing is not uncommon either, I'm guessing - we all have a lot of friends who have taken the recent hardships on the chin - but to carry on requires regarding one's life not as bathed in pathos and drama - or, necessarily as a professional "Wife" of any description - but as a series of matter-of-fact challenges that must be mastered. And if you don't view yourself as a victim, the telling doesn't make for much melodrama. Or, sorry, the "confession." Even if getting dressed is a lot easier.

What A Hedge Fund Wife Looks Like These Days [FT]
Confessions Of A TARP Wife [Portfolio]
Former Rich Lady Gets Deal to Write Enraging Book [Gawker]

Earlier: How To Dig Gold & Infuriate People: DABAs Get A Book Deal?

In today's Times, Michelle Slatalla and her family attempt a Staycation. Hilarity - and some relaxation - ensues, but at the end of the day? Vacation, this ain't. I get it; we all do. In these financially strapped times, and sans vehicle, the idea of exploring your hometown with the wondering eyes of a relaxed tourist sounds appealing indeed.

And I've tried it, I have. I've set aside full weekends for work-free fun. And it just felt like sitting around the house. I tried, but it reminded me of "camping" in our living room when I was a kid. Or, worse, I felt a terrible pressure to get out and do things, lots of things, all the shows and exhibits and restaurants I'd marked in the paper. When you go somewhere new, being there is half the battle; the very novelty is relaxing. I have a pair of friends who had a "staycation" honeymoon, taking a week off work and exploring the outer boroughs of New York. They loved it. But then, they have a really nice apartment.

There is an idea I've been kicking around with a few friends: a staycation apartment swap, in which we switch neighborhoods for a couple of days. Hence, novelty, change of scene, break in routine. The pitfalls are obvious. For one thing, not everyone wants people - especially friends - up in their private business, discovering - at best - how disorganized the closets are. The other issue is that, inexplicably, no one seems to want to vacation in the heart of a dangerous neighborhood far from subways, which makes the "swapping" part problematic. So to heck with "staycations"; the real phenomenon? "The Parental Bed and Breakfast."

Our Hawaiian Holiday Without, Well, Hawaii [NY Times]