Mag fail of the week: Grazia predicts Aniston break-up

Tickling me today: this week's edition of Grazia magazine, getting it very, very wrong with their cover story featuring everyone's favourite anguished spinster, Jennifer Aniston.

For those of you who haven't heard (or couldn't care less), it was reported on Monday that Aniston is now engaged to partner Justin Theroux. The news came too late for Grazia and its doom-mongering cover, telling us of "Jen's turmoil as Justin runs back to ex" (no doubt with quotes provided by "a source close to the couple").

The Sad Saga of Lonely, Childless Jen is Grazia's absolute favourite topic. One minute she had it all (aka Brad Pitt), the next, she was divorced and he was shacking up with scarlet woman Angelina, knocking her up just months after his divorce was finalised. Since then, Jen's embarked on several relationships, with the magazine's staff fervently hoping every time that she'll find happiness and, of course, have a baby, providing the ultimate two-finger salute to the globe-trotting humanitarian team of "supercouple" Brangelina and their six children.

Never mind about the rest of her life - Aniston is defined by her supposed quest to find a man, bag the all-important husband, and have a baby. The news that "yet again", she's back on the shelf when a break-up occurs is picked over relentlessly. Will she emerge back on track and determined to one day have it all, or "worryingly thin and sad"?

With Aniston now set to head down the aisle, Grazia will have to come up with some more positive headlines. Saying that, I'm sure we can look forward to gems such as "Bridezilla! Jen vows to have her dream wedding - AT ALL COSTS!" and "Desperate Jen cancels hen night to save her relationship". Let's hope they can, at least, get it vaguely correct next time.

Miss Representation tells it like it is

A new film exposes the way representations of women in the media lead to under-representation of women in positions of power. And it's long overdue.

"You can't be what you can't see". The words jump out at us from the screen in the trailer for Miss Representation, a new film exposing and challenging the media's portrayals of women and girls, which is causing a stir in the US since its broadcast premiere last week.

Written and directed by Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the film interviews teenage girls as well as famous faces like Condoleezza Rice, Nancy Pelosi, Rosario Dawson and Gloria Steinem in a quest to show the public just what's so wrong about the way the US media treats women and girls and what sort of effect it's having on their lives. Its findings are depressing, showing that while women continue to be seriously under-represented in politics, business and journalism, they're continuously judged on their looks, age and weight. Its aim is to get people thinking about just what is so wrong with all this.

"I'm hoping that we can start the discussion, and actually the discussion turns into action around valuing women in our culture. And that's huge," said Siebel Newsom in a recent interview.

Even if you haven't watched the trailer yet, with its footage of bikini-clad women in music videos interspersed with derogatory newspaper headlines about women politicians, you can probably reel off a list of the ways the media and popular culture makes it abundantly clear what us women are good for. We're the eye candy, the gender whose worth is bound up in how "sexy" we are. We're the bitches and the backstabbers and the lovers of "catfights". The "yummy mummies" and the "slummy mummies". The bosses from hell and the boardroom "ballbusters". When we go into politics, the newspapers run stories on our dress sense and cleavage rather than our achievements. Men turn up at our public appearances holding banners saying "Iron my shirt".

How is this making the women of the future feel and what's it doing to their ambitions? Miss Representation reveals all. It reveals how such toxic imagery is making girls and women feel devalued and ignored - as one teenager says, it's as if no-one cares about their brains, only their looks. It reveals how girls' dreams and ambitions change over time, as they find themselves trapped in stereotypes of what a woman should be and treated accordingly by boys, trapped by the perception that "feminine" or "like a girl" means "inferior".

It feels as if a film like this is long overdue. We've seen the reports on the value of really including women and raising them up to their full potential. The positive impact when they participate fully in the workplace, in the making of laws and the running of nations. And yet in countries like the US and the UK - countries seen as leading the way in other areas - women are being let down badly.

The way we're guaranteed to get media attention is by taking our clothes off. Of course the reception will only then be positive if we adhere to certain beauty standards, otherwise our "imperfections" will be raked over. Keeping our clothes on doesn't make us immune either - we're encouraged to judge and snipe from the off at unflattering cuts, visible body hair and unsightly bulges.

I hope the film will really make people think and start productive discussion about how we can combat these messages about women. All too often I think they're accepted as a fact of life. Even when people aren't happy about it there's a shrug of the shoulders and a roll of the eyes: that's just how the media is, right? Wrong. Something has to be done - and thankfully, Miss Representation isn't just a film: it's also a campaign.

By signing up through the organisation's website, you can become a Social Action Representative, download materials for use in schools and universities (US/Canada only) and access a conversation guide to help you bring up the issues the film raises with your family and friends.

I for one am excited about the impact all this is going to have as more people watch the film and are moved by its message. If taking action would mean more girls reaching their full potential and not being afraid to show who they really are, would you do it? By refusing to buy into and take notice of the stereotypes that bring us down and patronize us every single day, I think it's possible to effect change.

Check out Miss Representation on Facebook and Twitter for more news.

This post originally appeared on BitchBuzz. Photo via guelphguy's Flickr

Stripping off in the fight against discrimination

If a group of women pose naked to "fight" ageism and sexism, how much does it achieve?

The problem with ageism on television is that it's also one of those issues that disproportionately affects women. Women who find themselves sidelined and taken off camera once they're a little more "mature". Women who are told they might want to try wearing more makeup to minimize their wrinkles, lose a few pounds and get a more "youthful" haircut.

At the same time, male presenters of advanced years continue to grace our screens, often accompanied by a much younger female presenter (see the pairing of Bruce Forsyth and Tess Daly on the BBC's Strictly Come Dancing for a start). Older men on television are "distinguished". Older women are "past it" and caricatured as hags.

The problem of women being sidelined as they reach middle age has, in the past few years, reached the stage where one television presenter, Miriam O'Reilly, has won an employment tribunal against the BBC on the grounds of ageism, and it has been reported that the BBC has settled out of court with 12 other women presenters.

In 2010 former newsreader Selina Scott spoke out in the press about the problem of sexism and ageism on television. This year, a group of presenters and actors are going one better in their quest to prove that middle-aged women have a place on screen.

In a magazine interview and photoshoot this week, Loose Women presenters Sherrie Hewson and Andrea McLean, along with actors Beverley Callard and Gillian Taylforth - who range in age from 41 to 61 - discuss ageism on television. In the feature for Best magazine's "body image issue", they talk about feeling passed over for roles because producers think they're too old and because few storylines are written about women their age.

"In TV, it's OK for men to be 50 or 60, but for women it's very difficult. Older actresses can feel put by the wayside," says Taylforth.

The best, however, is yet to come. In the photos accompanying the story, the four women are seen posing naked. Tastefully naked, I might add, covering up breasts and with strategically placed legs. The point, of course, is to show that while they may be middle-aged, they've still "got it". That producers may sneer at their wrinkles, but they're embracing the way they look because it's a natural part of getting older.

There's just one thing. Isn't it telling that you'd never expect to see a group of male actors and presenters "stripping off" in a bid to prove they're still worthy of airtime? Can you imagine George Alagiah or Terry Wogan getting naked, revealing what clothes size they take and the secrets of their exercise regimes (as the four women do) while discussing ageism on television? You can't, because it would be ridiculous.

It's only ever women who end up having to do the whole "Look! I've still got it!" routine for the media. Men never have to go through the whole charade - why would they? Women having to prove themselves shouldn't be our reaction to the problem of discrimination. It should be seen as part of the problem.

It's pretty sad, to be honest, that the first thing that comes to find when the media wants to focus on a major issue of sexism and ageism involves targets of said sexism and ageism stripping off to "prove" themselves worthy contenders in the "fight" against such discrimination. It's similar to when the newspapers profile groups of businesswomen and insist on "sexy" photoshoots, or when they run features on sportswomen and show them in lad's mag-inspired poses, talking about their love lives (of course!).

On one hand they're trailblazers and role models, on the other it's still part of their job to be hot when required, lest they run the risk of becoming one of those women in the public eye who's derided for having a "mannish" haircut or wearing unflattering jackets.

I do think there's a lot to be said for attempting to promote satisfaction and body confidence among women of all ages and so I can see why Best chose to run the feature. It's good that it's getting more coverage outside the usual news stories of women in television suing their employers. Plenty of people are probably going to see it as a light-hearted bit of fun - so Calendar Girls!

But what I'd really like to see is the problem tackled in a more imaginative and truly positive way. There's so much work to be done and I wonder how much of an impact women "stripping off" can have outside of providing tabloid fodder and further ingraining the difference between the way men and women in television are expected to look and act.

Let's not fight ageism and sexism with more sexism, albeit sexism that's wrapped up in a chummy, encouraging, Gok Wan-esque package.

 This post originally appeared on BitchBuzz. "Home made Botox" photo via Emanuela Franchini's Flickr.

Guest Post: Hey! Tabloids! Leave Those Kids Alone!

I’d like you to come with me for a moment and enter stage left on every Scout leader’s most disliked experience. It’s raining, your scouts are trying to strike camp. And somebody somewhere is having some kind of “issue”. Odds are a couple of the lads have had a “full and frank exchange of views” and are right now squaring up to each other. Or else somebody has dropped something heavy on a painful part of their body. Kids are great at picking their moments.

“What’s up?” I trot over to the site of the commotion.

“It’s R,” someone says. “She’s not well”.

R is slumped on the floor looking, for want of a better word, like death warmed up. Her worried looking patrol leader (a senior 13/14 year old scout for the uninitiated) and a couple of her friends are stood next to her. R looks pale and is pretty tearful. I deal with it, the gathering crowd are shooed away and I find out the story. In short she’s knackered. She’s knackered because she’s been on the go for the last 3 hours, but unlike the rest of them quietly went without breakfast (and that is to my discredit for not noticing). A mug of hot chocolate and a slab of kendal mint cake later and she is back up and running with her blood sugar back to where it should be. Spot of first aid on camp, not a big issue you might say.

Actually it is a big issue because R is 12 years old and scared of getting fat. And she’s not alone.

As it happens the above is fiction, it would not be appropriate to recount events about a real child, yet it isn't a total lie. It's based on several similar incidents that both I and fellow Scout and Guide leader friends have dealt with. Luckily I have never had to deal with any child with a full on eating disorder, although I know others that have. Yet from what I have seen I don't think it will be long before I do. It may end up being a boy (pressure on boys to be perfect is growing but that is another story for another day) but most likely it will be a girl.

How has it got to the point that I, a 32 year old man, am scraping 12 years girls up off the floor because they are not eating enough? I don’t think that there is a simple answer to that, the reasons are pretty complex, but one of those reasons is, I am convinced, the media obsession with female celebrities and what they look like.

Shortly before Christmas the Daily Mail published this article about Megan Fox. It seems she had the audacity to lose some weight and was a bit thin for the liking of the Mail. It wasn’t that long ago that another celeb was too fat for the Mail (complete with oh-so-subtle comment about curry and pint deal at her local). It doesn’t even have to be the fat/thin thing to get the tabloids (or indeed sometimes the broadsheets) going. It includes almost constant stories about how any woman in the public eye looks, how they dress, what surgery they’ve had, what they’ve done with their hair, ad nauseum, ad infinitum. It seems that what women look like has become the only topic in town.

At the time of writing, on the front page of the Mail website there are no less than 27 stories about what various women celebrities look like, and 3 about men (plus one about Romeo Beckham - don’t think he counts as a man just yet does he?).

And it is not just the tabloids, it’s women’s magazines, men’s magazines, TV shows, broad sheets, websites, you name the media source and it’s there (with the possible exception of radio). It seems like there is a never ending drip feed of the same message, “you have to look perfect, you have to look perfect, you have to look perfect”. And that drip feed hits home every where, from mature adults through teenagers and now to frighteningly young kids.

The result of that does not always result in kids keeling over from lack of food. It manifests itself in a number of other ways. It’s the girl that won’t go canoeing because the wet suit makes her look fat, or won’t use sunscreen because she has to have the perfect tan. And on each occasion you wonder where such a young girl is getting the impression that she has to look perfect, that it really would be a disaster to look anything other than perfect. And time again I come back to the media. Looking at the fronts of magazines in WH Smith, every one of the women’s magazines seems to be obsessed with the latest diet and the shape of whoever is the celeb of the moment. Doesn’t X look amazing for losing weight? Isn’t Y struggling to fight the pounds? And so on and so forth.

Of course the attitude of some boys doesn’t help either (and yes, in Scouts we do crack down on it), yet even some of the attitudes of teenage boys, treating girls simply as sexual objects which is appearing at an increasingly early age can be traced to the media and in particular the grossly irresponsible "lads' mags".

There are of course women who use their body image to make money, as is their right, but we are not talking here about the portrayal of professional models or those who deliberately court attention. It is those constant stories where celebs are snapped while on holiday or out shopping or in the park with their kids, the constant media intrusion that worries me. Those stories show that yes, the glamorous actress does sometimes walk to the corner shop for a pint of milk wearing a hoodie and no makeup, just like we all do. Yet rather than any hint that this is totally normal behaviour girls are told that this is weird, you can’t possibly do that! And so impressionable young girls get the impression that they have to look perfect (whatever that means) all the time and start to worry when they don’t.

I don’t write this pretending to have any answers, I don’t really know where you begin trying to change the whole sorry mess (although on a personal level I hope that organisations like scouts and guides provide an environment where kids can learn that there is far more to their self worth than what they look like). I don’t know what you try and change first or how. But until something does change I guess I’ll just carry on scraping 12 year old girls up off the floor.

This is a guest post by Akela. He's a left wing, enviromentalist, Christian, cheese-eating, football-following, real ale-drinking Scout Leader with a serious dislike of the tabloids. A wannabe children's writer, he used to blog regularly but now just surfaces on other people's blogs instead.

The Daily Mail and the Sidebar of Judgement

Last week Penny Smith, writing for the Daily Mail, asked 'Why do we women hate our bodies?'. Several of my fellow tabloid-watching bloggers pointed out the hypocrisy of the Mail's obsession with asking this question (look back through the archives and you'll find several similar stories published over the past couple of years). I must admit I haven't been visiting Mail Online much recently. It's probably been good for my sanity. But following Smith's piece going up, I've been interested to see how the site does absolutely nothing to help the way women might be feeling about their bodies.

The famed Mail Online sidebar has always been the Sidebar of Judgement, the place to go if you want to laugh at women in 'unflattering' dresses or disapprove of average-sized people daring to wear bikinis while pursing your lips at Suri Cruise's lost childhood and Kerry Katona's Ultimate Bad Mother status.

But as the paper publishes columns lamenting poor body image among modern women, the Sidebar of Judgement, dare I say it, appears to be getting worse. There's no longer any variety in the women's interest-flavoured stories it features. It's a relentless rotation of judgemental pieces about cellulite, stomach flab and weight loss. Top story today features 'real women' creating Kate Moss's look in order to show that they have better backsides than she does. Give me strength. But there's more:

- 'I work out seven days a week... but I still have jiggly thighs and cellulite,' admits Kim Kardashian
- So that's why Cher Lloyd looks the picture of health - she lives on greasy portions of chips
- Teen Mom 2 star Jenelle Evans makes for an arresting sight (in a bikini... not at court, that is)
- What a knockout: Sucker Punch star Abbie Cornish does scantily-clad sultry shoot for GQ magazine
- What happened to Nicole's legs? Scherzinger goes for the wrinkly look in mismatched boots and dress

Yesterday the Women's Networking Hub tweeted:

Has disordered eating for women and girls become the norm, as entrenched behaviour patterns are now granted as acceptable?

This is a good question. The phenomenon is certainly being fuelled in part by the attitudes of media aimed at women, with the way it constantly judges the body, insinuates that our bodies, as they are naturally, are unaccpetable and encourages unhealthy and drastic diets as a means of achieving confidence and acceptance. As a result we categorize all food as either 'good' or 'bad'. We justify eating a chocolate bar by saying that it's okay, we'll go to the gym later, or we'll only have a small dinner. We gravitate immediately towards the 'low fat' or 'light' sections when we go to buy a sandwich for lunch whether we're overweight or not. We discuss it and we treat all this as totally normal, totally ordinary attitudes towards eating and sustaining our bodies.

There's a familiar series of events involving celebrity women and the media. Step One: the woman, who does not adhere strictly to the accepted 'thin but curvy' body type, is picked over and ridiculed by the papers, magazines or blogs. Step Two: she loses weight and said papers and magazines run triumphant features on her new found confidence and happiness. She'll be wearing a bikini or a corset and grinning. Step Three: she'll put a bit of weight back on. Step Four: she'll appear in one of these papers and magazines solemnly discussing how that weight loss was unhealthy for her, how she exercised far too much, how she made herself sick or took diet pills or barely ate. And people will shake their heads and tut about the negative influence of the media.

All this will be chronicled in the Sidebar of Judgement.

Beyoncé - Fierce & Feminist?

In a world which constantly pits women against each other and expects us to want to bring our fellow females down, we don’t see many magazine pieces extolling the joys of supportive female friendships.

That’s why it was awesome to read Beyoncé’s latest ‘tell-all’ interview - with the Mail on Sunday’s YOU magazine, no less - one which has since been picked up by several other news sources who have gleefully picked up on the fact that an global superstar seems to have admitted that she’s a feminist.

Interviewing Beyoncé, Jane Gordon mentioned to her that she thinks she’s a great role model for young women because of some of the ‘strong’, ‘independent’ messages in her lyrics (hey, let’s not get into a debate about that right now). The singer/actress/internationally-acknowledged queen of fierce replied:

“I think I am a feminist in a way. It’s not something I consciously decided I was going to be; perhaps it’s because I grew up in a singing group with other women, and that was so helpful to me.

“It kept me out of so much trouble and out of bad relationships. My friendships with my girls are just so much a part of me that there are things I am never going to do that would upset that bond. I never want to betray that friendship because I love being a woman and I love being a friend to other women.”

She went on to say:

“I think we learn a lot from our female friends – female friendship is very, very important. It’s good to support each other and I do try to put that message in my music.”

The old ‘feminist’ question is a popular one when it comes to celebrity interviews. The answer isn’t always an encouraging one, whether this means a resounding ‘definitely not!’ or a tentative ‘yes’ which is quickly played down by a snappy assistant (oh hi there, Kate Winslet).

So it’s always nice when someone as famous as Beyoncé actually elaborates on their answer in such a positive way – a way which may not be impressively intellectual or reference a shedload of influential books or thinkers, but a way that we can all relate to and that is so important.

It might seem ridiculously simple, but the power of female friendship and supporting each other through life’s trials is enormous. It’s not a message we hear too often these days, when every other magazine feature is about bagging the perfect man or getting rid of ‘toxic friends’ and the tabloids are reporting the latest ‘feuds’ between female celebrities several times a week as proof that we’re inherently nasty.

But in a world where so many people – or newspapers, or books, or films – want to bring us down and belittle us or paint us as ‘catty’ and ‘bitchy’, the very fact that we can be a good friend to other women – and that this is a positive and life-enriching thing – is really vital to making the world a better place for women.

Through friendship we’re able to share experiences, help each other and teach each other. As a teenager I had a few bad experiences with high school female friendship dramas and I’m sure the majority of us can relate to that. But as an adult – and particularly in the years since I’ve identified as a feminist – I’ve come to realise just how important sisterhood is. Being a good friend has become something that’s important to me.

I’m not naïve, I don’t think it’s necessary and even desirable that we all agree with each other and get one with everyone all the time. That wouldn’t be realistic.

There’s been a couple of occasions recently when I’ve been sat in a room of women all supporting each other and building each other up and thought “this is the greatest feeling – look at how much we can achieve when we are united and look how much we have to offer each other”.

In talking about the power of supporting other women through friendship - and the happiness this can bring - Beyoncé has sent out an important message which we all need reminding of sometimes. It might be slightly cheesy, but admit it, you just felt some love for ‘your girls’ (or women, if you prefer).

This piece originally featured on BitchBuzz.

Daily Mail: Getting Creepier By The Day

Now we all know that the Mail is a newspaper that loves to denounce the sort of women who wear tight or revealing clothes, whether they're immodest 'ladettes' or women in the public eye who should know better than to do something as 'unprofessional' as wear a short skirt. But it's just as quick to fill its website with stomach-turning, downright creepy pieces on the latest starlet to show some skin.

Consider if you will today's Mail Online. You can ogle Dannii Minogue as she 'shows off her curves in a tight vest'. You can salivate over Ashley Greene as she 'wears nothing but body paint in a sizzling new ad campaign'. Can we call this news? Or just an excuse to feature a lot of pictures of women wearing very little. In recent months things seem to have got worse over at Mail Online, with story after story after story featuring women in 'revealing bikinis/dresses/skirts/lingerie', 'flaunting their figures' and providing 'tantalising glimpses' of their 'perfect curves'. If it wasn't so sad, it would be hilarious that the newspaper which disapproves of just about everything has a great line in features which wouldn't be out of place in a lads' mag.

No matter how hypocritical it gets, one thing stays the same. When the Mail does a story on those terrible women who go out drinking in short skirts, commenters can't wait to weigh in with their opinion on how shameful, how depressing these women are. When the Mail does a story on a woman 'flaunting her figure', commenters can't wait to weigh in with criticisms about her body. Ashley Greene gets a good slagging-off for her 'droopy boobs' (clearly these people have minimum experience of breasts) and 'wonky nostrils'. Yes, you read that correctly. Someone has taken issue with her wonky nostrils. The debate over Greene's body rages on for 154 comments. People who don't like it are denounced as 'prudes', 'feminists' (ha!) and 'moaners'. Occasionally, someone can't quite believe the ridiculousness of it all:

"Is this zoo mag or femail from the Daily Mail?"

Exactly. Of course we all know Femail features are often little more than an excuse for women to make judgements about other womens' bodies and looks, so maybe the two aren't so different after all.

On Saturday, however, the Mail plumbed new depths of creepy with its piece on 15-year-old tennis player Laura Robson. 'Flirty love', begins the headline. The story talks about the 'rapport' between Robson and her doubles partner, 22-year-old Andy Murray, claiming that's she's 'sweetened his mood' and mentioning that Murray is 'newly single'. Remember, 'Daily Mail Reporter', that's a 15-year-old you're writing about. And you're insinuating that there's something going on between her and a 22-year-old. All this in a paper which just loves to get itself in a tizzy about underage sex and young girls having 'inappropriate relationships'. Thankfully most people commenting on the story seemed just as disturbed.

Should we be surprised? After all, this is the newspaper which has a worrying obsession with chronicling the clothes, makeup and exploits of three-year-old Suri Cruise. She may not have started school yet, but little Suri can 'stop traffic' in her high heels. And when she 'ventures out on a chilly night with bare legs', it's cause for a story not dissimilar to one the Mail might produce about a soap star or a member of Girls Aloud. Are you overcome with distaste yet?

If the Mail spent less time creeping us out, maybe its attempts at real news would be a bit more credible.

Why demonising Kate Moss is hypocritical

I'm pretty sure this is being said here, there and everywhere so apologies for being late to the party but I was busy all weekend at Reclaim The Night and travelling to and from London. Here is a bonus picture of me looking a bit damp and wearing my fabulous marching hat. Anyway. Kate Moss. I missed the initial uproar over her "nothing tastes as good as skinny feels" comment, only managing to catch up with it last night. People have been (quite rightly) pointing out that actually, plenty of things taste as good as skinny feels, at the same time as lambasting Kate for her 'irresponsible' comments and accusing her of fuelling the eating disorders of young women. So far, so predictable.

But all these outraged people, intent on blaming Kate for the misfortune of every eating disorder sufferer the world over, have generally failed to point out one thing. While she did make an ill-advised comment which just happens to be the mantra of many eating-disordered people, it's a comment that isn't so very different to the message pushed on us every day by television shows, magazines, books and plenty of other celebrities. They may not use those exact words, but everyone knows it's what they mean.

When I worked with women's magazines, one thing I used to notice was the very narrow weight range that was 'acceptable' for a celebrity. I remember an interview in which a member of Girls Aloud bemoaned how 'fat' she felt when she weighed her heaviest - 112 pounds. I remember a soap star telling a journalist that she weighed 125 pounds, but hurriedly 'justifying' such a weight by adding that much of that was muscle and was down to all the time she was spending at the gym. Admitting you weigh 125 pounds without justification is only acceptable if you're a reasonably tall celebrity, known for your 'curves'. And by the way, 'curves' means 'larger than average breasts'.

That was three years ago, but of course nothing's changed today. Women's magazines fixate on dieting to the point that the 'advice' they give about avoiding snacking and 'naughty' foods isn't so different to the tips you'd find on a pro-eating disorders website. In this month's Elle magazine, Kate Hudson is quoted as saying:

"I'm pretty solid, actually. I'm not, like, 110 pounds. But I'm probably heading towards that."

Maybe we should be grateful for small mercies - at least the interviewer went on to point out what a particularly 'Hollywood' definition of 'solid' that is.

Oh, and I bought a muffin from the canteen at work recently. The woman serving me tutted and said "Naughty naughty!" as I paid for it. This isn't the first time I've been admonished for buying something sweet from the canteen. Oh no. On purchase of a packet of Minstrels last year, the woman who took my money told me they would make me fat. Yes - one packet of Minstrels: a lifetime on the hips. Try as you might, you can't escape the implication that enjoying what you want, when you want is very bad indeed. Or at least something to berate yourself for, promising to work extra hard at the gym later because you ate some chips for lunch.

Kate Moss may have said it, but plenty of other people, publications and companies imply it with everything they do. Let's not demonise one model and ignore the rest. Doubtless, Kate is a role model for many young women, but young women take inspiration from plenty of other sources. For the media to display outrage is just hypocritical, not least because for them it's yet another opportunity to indulge in a favourite past-time - cricising a famous woman and the way she looks.

Part Two of On Marriage to follow this week, hopefully.

Cheering us all up during this miserable weather

Viggo Mortensen for Flaunt magazine. Apart from the obvious attractions, the fact he's so interesting and eloquent really intrigues me.

Kate Winslet's assistant: FAIL

I love Kate Winslet. I enjoyed reading Kira Cochrane's interview with her in today's Guardian.

Then we get to this:

While preparing to play April, she read The Feminine Mystique, by Betty Friedan, the 1963 feminist classic that lifted the lid on a generation of educated, 1950s women, condemned to housewifery, and deeply unhappy...

...I ask whether she liked the Friedan book. "Yeah, I did. God, she was a feisty chick." Does Winslet feel that she's a feminist? "I think I probably am, aren't I?" Her assistant hurriedly adds, "In a loose, unofficial kind of way," but Winslet continues to ponder. "I think I probably am. I mean, not in a bra-burning way. But I think I am a feminist, yeah."

Good grief, wouldn't that be a terrible thing for a celebrity to admit to: being a feminist. Clearly her assistant felt that such a label would be bad for Winslet because us feminists are all mad, bad, deeply unpleasant women. 'A loose, unofficial kind of way' indeed.