<![CDATA[MagHag - Jezebel Comments]]> <![CDATA[MagHag - Jezebel Comments]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I was thinking that very same thing this afternoon. I love the programme but this film thing is getting on my nerves. I don't give a crap if they hate each other.

BiBiVirtue

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> *ehem*. Beginning

MisfitMolly

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> ehem* that's beginning

MisfitMolly

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I agree. I EFFIN LOVE Sex and the City. I was there from the begging before it got popular. Sunday @ 9 was my time of worship. With that being said, I really think they shouldn't have made a movie. I have heard some gossip about a second movie. If that happens... I'll cry.

MisfitMolly

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Meg: @VegasDarling: Oh, you WOMEN, always yapping and yapping and yapping. The only way to get you to shut up with with brute force.

Fuck this noise. What other overexposed cast could this happen to? Oh, none, because this is the only all-female cast out there.

Grrrrrr.

formerlyzivah

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> mmmm....free beer.

HelloFeralKitty

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @miele: LOLing at "cosmo swilling, giant flower pin wearing, cupcake eaters"

LvV

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> One more thing. I'm not a fan of cosmo swilling, giant flower pin wearing, cupcake eaters trying to emulate their favorite show but then again I don't hang out with trekkies either. Any trickle down influence a show has is usually uncool and annoying so why get so up in arms about SATC fans in particular.

miele

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I love SATC even though I know it is often cringe inducing. I can't help it! I love that the hero is selfish and talks about herself all the time and that they all dress like a closet exploded on them and keep a straight face while doing it. Aside from all that I think the show was good because the characters some how came through as genuine. Ummm... I'll stop ranting.

miele

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Macloserboy: I guarantee you the Voice has done something like that with a local pol or developer, but I can't for the life of me remember who.

They've kinda shifted the tone of cover images since the buyout, though -- for a couple months there it was weirdly skin-heavy. I would love to have seen commenters here talk about the Ultragrrl-as-Joan-of-Arc / cleavage-burned-at-stake one.

briardahl

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Gee why don't you tie them up as well? This will be loved by the women haters.

sugarbear11

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Antoher asshatty attempt at snarky "humor" from Time Out, Inc. Like when Donald Trump had "bought" and was "running" and had a whole new editorial "section" in Time Out Chicago for its April 1 issue. Which came out on March 27.

Mego

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Macloserboy: I'm sure it's possible, I just don't recall seeing one. My reaction to this cover is based on a history of womens' images being visually silenced for a long, long time. Taking away their voices, etc. It happens all the damn time, without most people giving it a second thought, and it reeks of "shut up, bitch, know your place."

shavethatsoulpatch

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @bonsaiiiiii: I am so not into pork; it is so easy to ruin and also very easy to doctor up if it is ruined. It's not only the white meat of meats, it's the white wine of meats.

brendastarlet

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @grood: I disagree. Haven't we seen a cover with Al Sharpton or Guiliani gagged up? Or are these just my Photoshop fantasies?

Macloserboy

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Not a big fan of seeing women silenced on a magazine cover -- even when they should be.

KillMeNow

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I dig the "No Sex!" headline since it sticks out from countless magazine covers that scream SEX on the magazine rack. Bring on the pork 'n' beer, goddamnit.

Cam/ron

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Ugh. I don't think they're making a statement about women with this cover. I think they're making a statement about THESE women, or the characters they play. Not every picture of a woman, duct tape or not, is a statement on womankind in general.

And yes, as a New Yorker, I am sick of Sex and the City, this stupid marketing campaign, giggling groups of women ordering cosmos in bars, and Time Out New York.

ediebeale

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Khrushchev: SATC + Free beer = men actually going. Their PR needs to get on that.

theruraljuror

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> If they're so "tired of SATC" and so ready for it to go away, why the hell did they give it a cover?

Dumbasses.

Chocolate Sex Bunny

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @JessicaLovejoy:
I volunteer to adorn KD with my *ahem* self after you take her dress...

YourGoldKeith

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @NefariousNewt: Oh! I don't know! It's totally possible. Isn't that different, though? Like, the duct tape is being used to convey a message to facilitate AIDS awareness and whatnot? And this is just..."somebody shut those goddamn whores up already!"

What's next? Hog-tying the ladies from The View on the cover? Boo.

SBJ

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Macloserboy: I think if we're limiting it just to Time Out and/or New York-centric media exposure, it might be hard to come up with an example. However, can you imagine some publication running with an image of, say, Reverent Wright on the cover with duct tape over his mouth? I just don't see it happening.

shavethatsoulpatch

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @SharonTaint: They wanted to, but pork's publicist demanded final approval over the cover image.

ihateyourescalade is an east coast elite

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I wish they would shut up about this damn movie.

midnightdrive

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> they really should've given pork the cover.

SharonTaint

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Macloserboy: Ha, yeah, I was trying to think of the same thing -- a man who's needed an overexposure moratorium. The first thing to mind was when English press got bored of reporting Pete Doherty's drug arrests and ran whole "YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT PETE DOHERTY ANYMORE UNLESS HE DIES" notices.

briardahl

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I'm sorry but this whole cover offends me. First of all, they're profiting through displaying the same old sexuality and media hype about sex and the city, even though they pretend that sex and the city is too overdone, they're still profiting from all the women who're going to pick up the magazine to know of what caused the dissenting opinion. The mere image sells and they know it!

Second, the duct tape is not just not sitting well with me. I couldnt be more infuriated! Its first of all a symbol of shutting up those "old hags" and their stupid opinions about men and society. Personally, I dont find SatC to be a very feminist endavour but at least it has some sense of women's rights to which make my sitting through some episodes at least bearable. Neither am i a flamming fan of the show, but I at least appreciate the discourse. Shutting up symbols of powerful women in our society, symbolically for the cover is basically sending a message to all women of like caliber and who aspire to be like the SatC characters, and showing them their place. According to advertising feminist theory, duct taping, or women with covered mouths but who are also displaying their sexuality and their availability, as surely the SATC women are doing, are rendered the represented into mere objects who have no personal agency of any sort, who are there merely just to be looked at, innert objects for a masculine gaze.
The duct-tapes second symbol of rape, and its use in criminal acts is just as horrifying and patronizing. Zippers, as some readers said would be just as disturbing since I dont find it very endearing rendering women into ziplock bags.
Seriously, do something!

nata

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Sisters still look fierce.

I'm more tired of hearing about the democratic race. Give me frivolous SatC nonsense any day.

Doomsday

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Meg: Gag balls could work as well.

BloggyMcBlogBlog

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> NYC was always called the "The Fifth Lady" of SATC and think SJP actually said it when she won an award for it.

That said, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate concerning the "duct tape outrage" and ask if there's been a recent over-saturated male image connected with NYC to be gagged over? If not, the argument doesn't make much sense. But yes, it's very much a bullshit "have our cake and eat it too" cover. I seem to recall one magazine putting an over-exposed celeb on the cover while swearing that person was nowhere to be found inside the magazine.

Macloserboy

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Meg: Yeah, but I could remember Twilight Zone: The Movie.

NefariousNewt

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I don't like the duct tape either, it's nasty and brutish. (I hate Time Out New York. Their recent hurlworthy sex issue was filled with the unsexiest mofos I've ever seen in my life. What can one expect from a mag who has twirp extraordinaire Jamie Bufalino as a sex columnist, though.)

This cover is also megadumb -- people in NYC aren't annoyed at the sound of Carrie, Miranda, Charlotte and Sam's voices, we're annoyed with this film's endless promotion, with SATC tours, cosmos, Manolo Blahniks, the Magnolia Bakery ...

LvV

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> It's an adaptation of 1984. They misinterpreted the whole "Junior Anti-Sex League" sash, though.

tscheese

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Um...since when do mags honor something they're tired of talking about by giving it the cover?? This is kind of one of the best press plug for the movie so far...and I still can't wait to see it!

noire.fiere.fierce

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @NefariousNewt: Hey, Twilight Zone: The Movie was around before The Matrix!

Meg

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @brendastarlet: pork has been having it's moment for too long in the stupid offal obsessed New York culinary scene.

bansaiiiiii

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Also, I think ball gags would be more appropriate for that group.

VegasDarling

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> wow, pork is really having its moment.

brendastarlet

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> And I agree - something about the duct tape is not sitting well with me. It just gives me too strong of a menacing "We'll make you shut up!" vibe to it.

VegasDarling

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @hatepaperdoll: Your. Crap-a-rama.

hatepaperdoll

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> "1,965 Ways To Enjoy Your New York, Carrie Free"?
But I thought New York was Carrie's boyfriend?
Time Out is encouraging New York to step out on its lady, it is the Ashley Madison of magazines.

New Yorkers to Carrie: If New York is you're boyfriend, he wasn't last night.

hatepaperdoll

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @theruraljuror: Well, now with these mixed messages, I only want to see the movie while drinking free beer.

Just kidding. I am going to be first in line for that masterpiece.

Khrushchev

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I am going to break into Kristin Davis' house and raid her wardrobe. White lacy dress - you're givin it to me.

VegasDarling

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Skinny Bone Jones: Actually, wasn't their a shoe company marketing campaign that had famous people with duct taped mouths? I seem to remember it had something to do with AIDS, and I saw the ads everywhere when I walked the NYC streets, but I can't remember who did it...

NefariousNewt

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Kristin Davis looks like she's wearing a metal surgical mask. egads!

spekkle

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Meg: Could be worse -- could have erased their mouths, ala The Matrix. Freaky!

NefariousNewt

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> This should totally be under the "Photoshop of Horrors" category. And I'm just talking about Sarah Jessica Parker's face.

kookla

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @es-ki-mo: OK, now that's just unrealistic!

NefariousNewt

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Khrushchev: That's the first thing I saw, and what will lead me to purchase the mag. I'm over SATC coverage but am totally psyched for the movie. I just want to see what all the hype is about.

theruraljuror

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> When the fuck is the last fucking time they did this same exact shit to a foursome of men, huh?

YAH, FUCKERS. I DIDN'T THINK SO. NEVER.

This shit pisses me off.

SBJ

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Meg: totally agree. The red circle with the line through it always works, too.

es-ki-mo

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @Meg: Yeahhh...it feels totally wrong. Zippers, however, would be comical and reminiscent of "Beetlejuice."
In other news, Carrie is wearing an outfit that doesn't make me vomit! Alert the media.

bananastand

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Um, I want free beer, please.

Rhody

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> You know, I would have said we were too SATC saturated, too. But I'm feeling a little touch of old style, second wave feminist rage. Nobody puts duct tape over an image of a woman!

M.Wyeth

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Duct tape over the mouth makes me uncomfortable -- even if I agree with the sentiment. I don't know, I'd rather they used little zippers.

Meg

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> ITS - damn you es-ki-mo! didn't you learn anything in grade school?

es-ki-mo

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> @hortense: Ah, but there is Free Beer at the top, leading us into salvation.

Khrushchev

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> The photoshopping on Kristin Davis is just odd. . .well, the whole thing is odd

hfree

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Maybe Teen Vogue will put an 85 pound model on it's next cover with the headline 'Enough Already - we love 'em, but they're just too thin.'

es-ki-mo

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Wow, Sex and the City, Pork Snout, and James Frey. That's an Axis of Evil if ever there was one.

hortense

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Mmmmffph! Mmfff. Fffmm ffpphm mmff. Mmmph.

tscheese

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Dear Kristen Davis;

I AM NOT PLAYING WITH YOU. JUST GIVE ME THE DRESS ALREADY.

JessicaLovejoy is voting for Kodos

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> I agree...enough already with the SATC!

KathrynwithaY loves Joan Collins

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> yeah that makes perfect sense.

BaconBandito

]]> <![CDATA[MagHag]]> Wow, is there a "duct tape" setting in PhotoShop now??

Inflatable

]]>