I, for one, am happy for the laddie magazines. They have managed to take an "old media" format and make it relate to a whole new generation of young men, by condensing everything they love about the internet* into something light and portable enough to carry with you on the plane. And unlike our father's "men's magazines" it's not outright porn. If you're seen reading one at the airport, you are perceived as edgy, but just a little bit pervy. And then only in that "I'm not a scoundrel, I'm a nice man"-Han Solo sorta way.
Before you argue with me ladies, picture the following: you have a broken ankle** and you enter a packed gate area at the airport. Only two seats are available, both next to young men reading: one is reading "Maxim" and the other is reading "Barely Legal". Which do you sit next to?
Exactly.
Despite my laddie-fandom (and - full disclosure - subscriptions to two) I still have a problem with lending them any sort of academic gravitas with respect to being barometers for the minds of men. Just because I read them doesn't mea
n that I think they should be lent any more credibility than women's magazines. Just like how I don't interpret the latest issue of Cosmo as a window into the psyche of the GF. Mostly, it's just as laughable as the latest issue of FHM.
Which gets to my point. Since when has FHM's "Top 100 Sexiest Women" become a gold standard for hotness? I mean, there are no doubt a couple dozen magazines that list similar lists*** but none of them command the headlines like FHM's list. I knew this was getting out of hand when the publication of the list was big enough news to show up on the Yahoo! frontpage headlines section (see image).
Why is FHM the last word in sexy women? If you ask me, the fact that Jenny Macarthy is in the top 10**** automatically raises questions about the validity of their survey methods. One might hypothesize that perhaps they erred by unknowingly interviewing gay men, but I doubt they can stomach Macarthy's "antics" either. Besides, gay men are still pretty good at spotting hotties, from the few I've known. More likely they all conspired to throw off the results by voting en masse for Jenny Macarthy - thereby proving that even straight men don't know a good woman when they see one. And since I'm now blogging about it in a rage, I guess it worked. Touche my well-dressed and manicured friends. Well-played!
Oh well, perhaps this is the end game for old media, where institutional publications like The New Yorker, Utne Reader, and National Geographic get pulled down into the mire and all start coming out with their own top 100 lists. But I hope not, photoshopped pictures of Sylvia Plath in the bubble bath are just wrong...
* e.g. 4th-grade potty humor, pictures of scantily clad attractive women, ads for penis enlargement
** So no long-term standing
*** Including Cosmo, probably
**** Higher than Catherine Zeta-Jones *and* Eva Longoria? Puh-lease!
Before you argue with me ladies, picture the following: you have a broken ankle** and you enter a packed gate area at the airport. Only two seats are available, both next to young men reading: one is reading "Maxim" and the other is reading "Barely Legal". Which do you sit next to?
Exactly.
Despite my laddie-fandom (and - full disclosure - subscriptions to two) I still have a problem with lending them any sort of academic gravitas with respect to being barometers for the minds of men. Just because I read them doesn't mea
n that I think they should be lent any more credibility than women's magazines. Just like how I don't interpret the latest issue of Cosmo as a window into the psyche of the GF. Mostly, it's just as laughable as the latest issue of FHM.Which gets to my point. Since when has FHM's "Top 100 Sexiest Women" become a gold standard for hotness? I mean, there are no doubt a couple dozen magazines that list similar lists*** but none of them command the headlines like FHM's list. I knew this was getting out of hand when the publication of the list was big enough news to show up on the Yahoo! frontpage headlines section (see image).
Why is FHM the last word in sexy women? If you ask me, the fact that Jenny Macarthy is in the top 10**** automatically raises questions about the validity of their survey methods. One might hypothesize that perhaps they erred by unknowingly interviewing gay men, but I doubt they can stomach Macarthy's "antics" either. Besides, gay men are still pretty good at spotting hotties, from the few I've known. More likely they all conspired to throw off the results by voting en masse for Jenny Macarthy - thereby proving that even straight men don't know a good woman when they see one. And since I'm now blogging about it in a rage, I guess it worked. Touche my well-dressed and manicured friends. Well-played!
Oh well, perhaps this is the end game for old media, where institutional publications like The New Yorker, Utne Reader, and National Geographic get pulled down into the mire and all start coming out with their own top 100 lists. But I hope not, photoshopped pictures of Sylvia Plath in the bubble bath are just wrong...
* e.g. 4th-grade potty humor, pictures of scantily clad attractive women, ads for penis enlargement
** So no long-term standing
*** Including Cosmo, probably
**** Higher than Catherine Zeta-Jones *and* Eva Longoria? Puh-lease!
Comments
Yes, KC, I agree that Kate, Kiera, and Scarlett are all lovely. Nice picks.
That Scarlett girl... great-looking and I love her name. Anyone named Scarlett is all right by me.
Therefore, it can in no way be considered as authoritative a study as that done by People magazine.