Sarah Jessica Parker -- that woman is mannered to the hilt! It started becoming distracting in the later years of Sex and the City, so much so I could barely watch scenes with her in it, and then I saw her on Letterman around that time and she behaved in the same cutesy affected way! Ugh ... so unbecoming.

I guess what irks me to no end (and that's putting it mildly), is how Broadsheet (and other so-called feminist undertakings) fail to see how maybe, just maybe, women themselves are part and parcel of the problem sometimes, and therefore our own behaviour needs to be examined and discussed objectively. Case in point -- the whole torture porn evolution in movies today as mentioned in my previous post, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

It is frustrating when many "feminists" refuse to see women's own contribution to some problems out there (like the battle of the sexes that rages on) ... as if somehow if you dare to reasonably question women's accountability and responsibility, then somehow you're a "traitor" to sisterhood (as I no doubt am seen now, she says wryly).

And so it goes.

... calling bullshit on this (as per my previous post).

Below is a more realistic take on what went down in that Fox special:

http://watching-tv.ew.com/2009/08/19/octomom-the-incredible-unseen-footage-nadya-suleman-seems-incredibly-irresponsible/

Did MEW even see the footage where Nadya gleefully recounts how she locked her mom in the trunk of her car and drove around erratically just to scare her, and all the while her mom is screaming to be let out? I can't even comment on how disturbing that is (and of course, how the hell a mother could allow to get locked in a trunk in the first place).

Her older kids look unhappy most of the time, and one of them is even hitting her and cussing her out ... THIS is a sign of kids that are loved and cared for by a loving, caring mother??

A few months ago, my hometown paper published an article about a rise in rampant misogyny and hostility towards women as seen in recent movies viewed at the Cannes Film Festival. What was arrestingly interesting was that this highly insightful piece was written by a man, a man who called bullshit on male directors who were promoting torture porn at the expense of women, and the WOMEN THEMSELVES who were willing participants in all this (i.e. as actors portraying the female victims).

I urge those of you who are interested in seeing REAL issues about feminism discussed to read this enlightening piece:

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/642245

The next few days I eagerly scanned Broadsheet to see if any of their staff would pick up on this article and have a worthy discussion about it. Nada. Zilch. Of course now it makes me wonder, was it because the article was written by a man, and thus summarily dismissed? Wouldn't be surprised, shameful as that is.

Instead, we get this bozo bullshit about Octomom, and, oh, yeah, groundbreaking news about whether we can have opposite-sex friends when in relationships.

Broadsheet and MEW, you've done a great disservice to women everywhere when you focus on trivial crap like this (far from the first time this has happened).

This column and its various writers have officially become a hot mess of a joke.

... encouraging in the sense that women out there are really outraged at her blatant and over-the-top retouching hatchet job on Kelly, and many have written in to condemn her and to let her know they've canceled their subscriptions. They know when they are being talked down to and manipulated, and are there to tell her they are more intelligent and discerning than that. About bloody time.

I for one hope this Lucy creature gets fired. This woman has no business being the head of a magazine that purports one to "embrace their real self". My God, she can't even embrace her own real self when I read about her laughable attempt to cut down on her hips (i.e. retouching them) in one photo of herself that was taken after she ran a marathon. Apparently even in that instant she thought her hips looked too ginormous and ordered her photo editors to slim them down. Jesus. I was curious about what she looked like and she's as skinny as they come (with sinewy, veiny arms to boot, the type that have been overworked, over-tanned and over-exercised so that they are rendered unattractive, ugh), so I can't imagine exactly what she needed to "lop off" to make her hips look better. Again ... Jesus.

Her blog in defence of the obsessive retouching she did to Clarkson is bizarre and her weak arguments (not to mention that hip-retouching anecdote) make her look worse than before. And her readers have rightly called bullshit on her, which I applaud.

There is no way that in this instance, there was just a little retouching done to iron out wrinkles, blemishes, etc. Kelly's face has a pointed chin where there was absolutely none before, hell I think they even gave her a new nose! ... and her arms/waist/hips/thighs all look far too slimmed-down when compared to recent videos of her. It is such a blatant and obvious manipulation of her real figure to be denied or ignored. They have robbed her of any of her unique charms and beauty, and made her a soulless, plastic, smiling Barbie.

So it's very encouraging that people are finally fed up of this horseshit celeb-picture-perfection business that's been going on, and maybe, just maybe other EIC's will think twice before they go crazy with the photoshopping.

But ... am not holding my breath.