Eric Alterman linked to the review yesterday and prefaced it by saying that Bruni was gay. I don't why Alterman would know that(beyond that he's a media critic) or if it makes a difference to the larger impact of the story if the average reader doesn't know it. Knowing that "fact" though does change how one reads the story, the perceived tone changes from leering to tongue in cheek, more awed by the spectacle than titillated. It also explains the following exchange between Bruni and one of the "hostesses".

-I was getting my bearings. “Mahogany,” I asked, “do you know where you’re going to?”

-She didn’t miss a beat, noting the reference, summoning the singer, and moving on to another of the dreamgirl’s hits. “I’m ... coming ... out!” she sang, waving her arms, wiggling her hips. Mahogany and I would get along just fine.

The only thing Bruni really proves in his review (other than the quality of the steaks at the Penthouse emporium) is that he likes boys better than girls. Lighten up on the poor guy, folks.

they could easily fit into a Jacuzzi

Because clearly women are still useful for some post-gustatory hot-tub sexing, even if the poor dears can't handle a laser spatula.

Chef Barbie says "Tee hee, modern cooking is hard!"

Actually, there had been, at least according to popular imagination a long standing belife amongst the high end culinary schools of Europe that Women had no place in the kitchen.

Whether or not this was ever an accurate description, or not, it might have lead some female culinary artists to other fields, or specialties.

As to women in hightech cooking...I can imagine a boys club mentality existing, or female chefs presuming one exists, but that seems not to be the point.

Women's lack of position in high end cooking is undoubtedly cultural (either real or imagined) and not related to the work itself. I can only imagine that in American cooking schools, this cultural bias is even less of a factor.

As to the second story...anyone who eats food in a strip club is asking for something. I don't know what, but the very notion of being able to pass a health inspection seems improbable to me.

The steakhouse review is seen in some circles as a continuation of a spat that started when Bruni gave Jeffrey Chodrow's steakhouse a 0 star review- Chodrow took out a full page ad in protest, and suggested that the review was a personal attack. By giving another steakhouse (in a strip club) a better review, some people are of the opinion that he's trying to twist the knife a bit.

It seems that Broadsheet is looking for offense where there is none. Bruni's review, while overly pun laden, was clearly tongue in cheek about the atmosphere of the place. It's not a fair reading at all to suggest he was simply ogling the strippers. His overall review seemd pretty balanced.

I was first introduced to the drink of butterscotch schnapps topped with Bailey's Irish Cream on New Year's Eve in Sydney Australia in 2005. They called it a "cock sucking cowboy" there.

I thought it was part of a resturant reviewers job to not only decribe and critique the food, but also to describe the ambiance, the service and other such things relating to the entire eatery. Am I wrong? The point of a strip club is to ogle women, is he not supposed to describe what it's like eating in a strip club because it offends?

As for high tech cooking, well it may be interesting and of course the only knowledge I have of it is what I saw on Top Chef and a small segment on Anthony Bourdain's travel channel show, but frankly, the idea that my food has been touched by dry ice, xanthum gum, liquid nitrogen, ect does not appeal to me at all. I don't want my dessert oozing a fog. Plus there are fewer female chefs overall, I think it's because women overall have been raised to cook for themselves and others, so why choose it as a career? So out of that small pool, how many women are really going to be interested in a new cooking style and couldn't it also be that plenty of female chefs see this new high tech cooking as a flash in the pan? One that customers may be facinated with for a while, but may pass as time goes by?

The sad thing about this post is that it perpetuates the very idea it is attempting to repudiate. Women who choose to get into high tech industries often find the environment more accepting, not less. That men "dominate" high tech is a matter of numbers, not expectations. So I would argue that "dominate" is the wrong word. Perhaps you meant the more statistic-overtoned "predominately"?

As for kitchens... long hours, low pay, the threat to relationships, the gender-based expectations (I was "mean" when I said the same things to my workers that my male counterpart said to them); I'd say the lack of women in the field isn't because of technology, it's because the kitchen is a brutal place to stay in long enough to pay your dues.

Being a high-end restaurant chef, high tech or not, is an extremely family-unfriendly profession. It's the nature of the beast. When restaurants are at full swing (evenings and weekends) is when most kids are out of school or traditionally-timed preschool or day care. Just try finding regular day care from 3-11 p.m. Tuesday through Sunday nights. Not easy, without spending a fortune on a private nanny. Add in a spouse who works a "regular" job who you'll never see, and it's pretty hard.

It's not to say that restaurants should change their hours (not gonna happen), or all female chefs should marry at-home dads (would be nice but again not likely). It's just that it's a very difficult profession to combine with having a family if you ever want to actually see them when they're awake. Whether or not that keeps women out, who knows... but I'd hazard a guess that it's a contributor.