Brooklyn, she is a squirrely strange beast. A land of artisinal cheeses and small-batch decorative axes. She is also a land where men occasionally deign to tuck their long hair into buns. This is newsworthy, so says The New York Times, which has devoted more than a thousand words to exploring the not-actually-a-trend tremd. It seems a writer for the paper visited a Brooklyn bar and saw two bartenders there who preferred wearing their long locks in a bun, rather than a hair net.
But really, how do you make this exotic hair bun — on a clunky, squarish man’s head, no less? Keep reading »
I was losing sleep over the New York Times’ careless factual error on their article about college students with Aspergers who are navigating the perils of an intimate relationship. How dare they mix up two My Little Ponies? Not only do they have totally different personalities, but Twilight Sparkle and Fluttershy look nothing alike. Fluttershy is yellow with a pink mane and Twilight Sparkle is a lavender unicorn with a pink and purple mane. The Times needs to get their act together or I am no longer going to be able to trust them as a journalistic institution. Thank God they caught this one. [Coke Talk]
As my 68-year-old, Fox News-watching, Republican-voting father tells it, once upon a time you could compliment a woman in the workplace. You were allowed say “nice dress” or “you look nice today” and it was not a big deal. Everyone would smile pleasantly and go back to clacking on their typewriters. Then the ’70s came along. Hairy-pitted fists were raised and all of a sudden you were afraid to say “nice earrings” out of fear you’d be thrown in the pokey. Or, as the tone of his voice insinuated, you’d be accused of “sexual harassment.”
I wish I were exaggerating this narrative, but I am not: it’s a real conversation I had with my dad last weekend when we chatted about the accusations against Herman Cain. I also wish that the New York Times op-ed written by Katie Roiphe had not misrepresented sexual harassment as boneheaded-ly as my nearly-septugenarian father does. But, sadly, that really happened also. Keep reading »
New York Times, just quit it. Nobody is buying your purported claims that men are now wearing high heels. Because they are not. THEY ARE NOT! As everyone knows, a New York Times trend story is what happens when a New York Times writer or editor has a friend that does something quirky. All the sudden, it’s a trend. It’s not a trend. Still, writer Tricia Romano does a very good job of stretching her acquaintance with several heel-wearing dudes into a puff piece on the allure, the appeal, the sexy luxury of men wearing heels. Keep reading »
Whitney Cummings scored prime real estate this weekend on the interview page of The New York Times Magazine. As a Whitney fan and someone who is really excited for “Whitney” and “2 Broke Girls,” her two new shows, I was super-psyched. Then I read the rude, douchey, and sexist questions by interviewer Andrew Goldman and wanted to throw a hot latte at him. Instead of asking about comedy or acting, Goldman nailed her with at least three questions about being attractive and the perception that pretty girls must sleep their way to the top:
AG: On those Comedy Central roasts, your fellow comedians liked to joke about how you slept your way to fame. How accurate is that criticism?
WC: If sleeping with people worked, I would be doing it. Do you know an example of anyone who’s ever slept with a producer or whatever that has gotten them anywhere?
Great answer to a rude question, Whitney. Alas, the Q&A then worsened. Keep reading »
Cutting edge paper thing The New York Times has uncovered a thriving underworld in Brooklyn, full of women who have taken up needles and thread for this thing called — what is it called? — sewing? Apparently, these sewing wonders, make their own garments! At home. By hand. This is a trend, this people making their own clothes thing. Crazy, I know. The Times agrees, and found the time to profile Sarah Kate Beaumont, who sews clothes out of her Park Slope apartment. Sarah Kate, who “majored in English literature at Bryn Mawr College, where she rode a unicycle in leggings and a skirt,” sewed several items of clothing “as an experiment of self-reliance and artistic whimsy,” and now it’s “a way of life.” Some (the Times actually) might say Sarah Kate’s “whimsy” and “self-reliance” are just reflective of Brooklyn’s independent spirit, its burgeoning, itching (like an STD) desire to be seen as an separate entity from Manhattan. Yes, because Brooklynites are always living their lives as a metaphor. But others (again, The New York Times, natch) might argue that the back-to-sewing movement is simply an extension of the “back to the land” pioneer movement. We say: this is not a trend. Women be making their own clothes since the beginning of times, idiots. Next week, in part two of the Times series on The Sewing Trend, a little show called “Project Runway”! [NY Times] Keep reading »
I have to say I’m dismayed by an upcoming piece in The New York Times Magazine by Rebecca Traister. Let me first say: I love Rebecca. She’s been the women’s political issues writer for Salon.com for nearly forever and last year she published Big Girls Don’t Cry: The Election That Changed Everything For American Women about the 2008 election. She’s been a personal mentor to me over the years and someone I’ve always respected and whose career I’ve hoped to emulate.
But I wonder if her recent piece on the current state of feminist activism in general, and SlutWalks in particular, in the Times magazine reveals a generational rift of opinion. Is it individual? Is it generational? It’s hard to say. But there’s no debating that there isn’t a word in the English language more controversial than “slut.” It only helps to multiply that controversy when feminists often virulently disagree about it. Keep reading »
“Below the neck, Ms. Handler is arranged along old-fashioned lines. Writers have described her as a California surfer type, but the truth is closer to the fantasy. In person, without makeup, her body has the pre-silicone lushness of a ’60s Playmate.”
WTF? Regardless of your opinion on the comedienne Chelsea Handler (I love her, mostly), writer Cathy Hornyn’s third paragraph of her profile in Sunday’s New York Times is aggravating as all get out. Yeah, Handler is attractive. But what’s the point of describing her body? Is the author trying to imply it’s helped Handler in her success? (Whether it did or not is debatable.) Even if one does think Handler’s attractiveness is salient to the article, it really pisses me off that Hornyn referred to her subject as “Playmate”-like before even mentioning her successes as an author and TV show host. Would an attractive male comedian’s body be mentioned in the third paragraph of a NYT profile — or at all? [Personally, I thought the entire profile was snide. -- Editor] [NY Times] Keep reading »
Starring Bill Cunningham, Anna Wintour, Annette de la Renta, Iris Apfel, Tom Wolf, Kim Hastreiter, Patrick McDonald, Michael Kors
I know a woman whose life possibly peaked when she was snapped by The Sartorialist. Me? I’m gunning to catch the eye of Bill Cunningham from The New York Times‘s Sunday Style section, who has been photographing street style since Scott Schumann and Garance Doré were but eggs in their mothers’ wombs. Bill Cunningham, who turned 80 while the documentary “Bill Cunningham New York” was being filmed, dropped out of Harvard in the late 1940s and began working as a milliner, making hats for New York City’s elite. Then a friend handed him a camera and Bill’s eye for style bloomed. Now he’s the beloved street style photographer — a cultural anthropologist, really — for the Times. As someone — perhaps Anna Wintour — says in “Bill Cunningham New York,” while everyone else who works in fashion is standing inside the tents during Fashion Week snapping pics of celebrities, Bill Cunningham is outside on the sidewalk taking photographs of the regular people. Keep reading »