Girl Trouble.

The New York Times--in the Fashion & Style section--asks wherefore art the next Gloria Steinem, then wanders into the question why Steinem in the first place, and lets Rebecca Traister (among others) answer with "she was figurehead chosen by the media for complicated reasons.  She was young and white and pretty, and she looked great on magazine covers."  Here's the link:  http://tinyurl.com/7fmnguy



Wanna eat crackers in his bed,
better bring the juice box.

In not unrelated news, the New Yorker's Hendrick Hertzberg feels the need to announce that neither Sarah Palin nowadays nor Julianne Moore playing Palin back in 2008 pass his saltine test. But Palin back in the day, oh, baby:  "The tempestuous Alaskan's tousled pile of hair, her liquid eyes and stylish glasses, her childlike window-washing hand wave, her (to my ears) musical voice, her lips...I'm sure I wasn't the only man, even the only male Democrat, who was mesmerized by her corporeal and sonic affect....In 'Game Change,' Julianne Moore... doesn't quite get the flirtatiousness, the seductiveness, the juiciness--the magic."  (Hertzberg's emphasis, not mine.) 



Hertzberg isn't specific in his complaint about Palin's lack of sexiness nowadays, only that "the past couple of years have not been kind to her."  Here's the link:  http://tinyurl.com/37heys

Since there have been no changes in Palin's physical appearance, one can only surmise four years have drained her of her juiciness.  Good to know.  And I totally understand.  Like for example, see post below:  George Clooney has a gray beard, and so does Mr. Hertzberg; Mr. Hertzberg's glasses are quite stylish.  I'll bet he's got a real come hither wave.  And yet, and yet.