Emasculation and Yobbofication

The following was triggered by a discussion about cinematography somewhere else and by the trend that a growing number of films, which do not feature homosexuality AS SUCH, include "gay sex" scenes.

This has many different implications. I filed it firstly because of its general political implications (i.e. the submission under PCness) at Roncesvalles, then because of the emasculation aspect at TMDSC. However, having digested quite a number of pictures in the course of my modest research, I believe it's something about which The Evil Style Queen ought to have a say as well.

I don't even own a TV set, hardly ever go to the cinema, and buy a DVD only if it's become cheap enough, so I am usually years behind, but I have never found that a disadvantage. However, I find this case of yet another offputting "in-our-face" strategy of the "gay" lobby worth a comment. Homosexuals are a small minority (although they are working hard on changing that) yet the heterosexual majority is FORCED to acknowledge their sexuality now it's featured in mainstream films.

This is not new but still topical:

DANIEL CRAIG is urging movie bosses to revolutionise the JAMES BOND franchise by including a gay scene involving the superspy in the follow-up to CASINO ROYALE. The heart-throb actor has also reportedly told studio chiefs he is prepared to film a full frontal nude scene to please both his male and female admirers. He says, "Why not? I think in this day and age, fans would have accepted it."

So the perversion and corruption has already gone far enough for a (presumably) straight man to want to appeal to his female AND MALE "admirers" (in a sexual sense). Now come, all you straight people and tell me that the thought that a nude display of your body might "please admirers" of the same sex does NOT make you puke your guts out.

As an (important) aside: The fact alone, that an insipid blonde weasel like Daniel Craig was able to acquire "heartthrob" status and is considered "rugged" speaks for itself. He is, to speak in James-Bond-terms, neither breathtakingly handsome like Roger Moore...

...nor breathtakingly male like Sean Connery...

...just breathtakingly irrelevant.

 Let me tell you, dear corrupter-media, THAT is "rugged"...

...and NOT a dull drip like Daniel Craig, even though he must have auditioned that "tough-guy-expression" in front of the mirror countless times.

And he has just an average physique as well, if that. How anybody who ever saw the pectorals and other assorted muscles of a Lloyd Bridges can find the remotest pleasure (whether aesthetically or sexually) in a nonentity like Daniel Craig is beyond me. Notabene that men in the past weren't afraid either to show that they had chest hair, different from the neutered men of today.

Lloyd Bridges in Sea Hunt.

Daniel Craig in ... well, whatever.

In this context it ought to be mentioned that in America a population-wide decline in men’s testosterone levels during the last 20 years can be noted, which is not related to normal aging or to health or lifestyle factors. In plain English: They don't have an explanation for that. This decline is consistent with other long-term trends in male reproductive health, such as decreases in sperm quality, increases in testicular cancer or cryptorchidism. The societal neutering of men has gone a long way and has now safely arrived in the body.

No doubt, watching Daniel Craig in the buff will lower the average male's testosterone levels by another 10 percent and the female sense for and understanding of male quality even more. Lloyd Bridges in bathing trunks looks not just infinitely more manly, but even more classy and gentlemanly than Daniel Craig in a three piece suit. I guess we've found ourselves not just in a spiral of emasculation, but in one of yobbofication as well, and both is not a bit funny.

And it just occurs to me: Those phenomena may well be related.

Grovelling Slobberingly over Sartorial Disasters

This article at the CNN website is so bottomless, intransigently, mortifyingly and impenetrably pig ingorant, not to speak of slobberingly grovelling, that it defies belief:

What makes Michelle Obama's style so exciting? It's youthful, accessible and irreverent.
What about: juvenile, cheap and tasteless?

Case in point: the wow-worthy Peter Soronen gown she wore to this week's state dinner honoring Mexico. We're still talking about it, and how she consistently pulls off enviable looks with ease.
Oh my God! SO mind-bogglingly embarrasssing!

Here are 10 lessons we've learned so far from our very fashionable first lady:

1) Wear bold colors: Mrs. O isn't afraid of brilliant purple, lush green or even a sparkling electric blue, as we saw at Wednesday's state dinner."

There's always somebody who will say, 'I wouldn't have worn that color,'" she once told Time magazine. "...But if you're comfortable in the choice and it resonates with you, then all that other stuff -- it's just conversation."

We love that she breaks out of the usual litany of black and beige, especially amongst the sea of neutrals favored in Washington, D.C.

In a much older entry I have commented on her and the sartorial choices of her predecessors. (Or is it now her predecesseresses?). No sea of neutrals there. Wasn't it Mamie Eisenhower who loved pink so much? Everything, but EVERYTHING, to pick up the turd of Michelle Obama's fashion sense at its clean end.

One doesn't choose colours because they are "bold", but because they match the colours of the wearer. Not to speak of the fact that the "sparkling electric blue" dress looked like a bin liner.


2) Choose a versatile hairstyle: Obama's modern bob is sleek, flattering and can handle fun curls (as seen at the state dinner) as well as it can the occasional up-tuck.

"The hair is just like any other accessory," her personal hairstylist Johnny Wright told us. "Some styles are made for hair only when it's blown-out straight. You want a cut that's made for both curly and straight looks." Once you have the perfect cut, the styling options are endless!

I am skipping this because the inherent pitfalls of racism are too many. Besides, it is, different from the other points, and probably for a good reason, so nondescript and statement free, that "Well, whatever" is probably the best answer here anyway.

3) Wear clothes that flatter: With arms like hers, going sleeveless is a no-brainer. Well, that's true. Funny, must be a typo. Obama also favors flattering knee-length skirts and structured jackets. Know your body and embrace it: "I've learned to go with colors and cuts that look good on me, that I'm comfortable in," Obama told People magazine.

If one is comfortable with a style that is obviously meant to frighten an entire kennel of pitpulls witless and think that's flattering, than she's right. A first step to a sane, flattering look would be to cover up those freakish, developed-to-scare trapezius- and various other assorted shoulder and arm muscles and choose dresses half a size bigger.

4) Try new labels: Starting inauguration day, when she chose a Jason Wu gown for the ball, the first lady has been a staunch supporter of up-and-coming designers, including Jasmin Shokrian, L'Wren Scott and Prabal Gurung. While we all have our favorite designers and stores, being open to new labels helps keep a wardrobe exciting.

Well, yes, exciting. Doesn't Jason Wu design exciting wedding dresses for drag queens? And that was exactly how that inauguration ball gown looked, a wedding dress for a drag queen, not to speak of the rest of her third-world-chic. Anything not to appear American, not to speak of elegant and classy, which probably goes by nowadays as "exciting".

5) Don't fear prints: From a graphic print dress by Diane Von Furstenberg to a peppy floral dress by Thakoon to a gorgeous violet and green scarf from Prova, Obama has proven she can fearlessly navigate prints like a seasoned fashionista. If you're new to prints, start incorporating them slowly, pairing tonal patterned separates with solids.

DO fear prints! Full Stop! Never be seen near them or you'll look like Michelle Obama.


This flowery shirtwaister is something in which my mother (87) wouldn't want to be seen dead. But stick a label on it like "Diane von Whatshername" and low and behold it's "peppy" and "gorgeous" and God knows what else, lowerclassismwise.


No self-respecting cleaning woman would wear anything like that at work, let alone socially, in Germany, and we are not known for our peachiness.

6) Work with a personal shopper: Chicago store owner Ikram Goldman acts as Obama's personal style whisperer, vetting flattering looks and helping her curate a very chic personal style. Many stores feature a complimentary personal shopping service - take advantage of it!

Not in a thousand years if it makes me look like Michelle O.

7) Mix high and low: There are as many pieces from J. Crew in her wardrobe as there are from Lanvin. A true style icon knows when to splurge, when to save and how to mix and match the high-end with the bargains. "Some of my favorite summer dresses are from Gap and H&M," she told People.

Well, yes. And it shows.

8) Support American brands: Proving she truly supports the American dream, Mrs. O's wardrobe is packed with pieces from first and second generation Americans like Thakoon Panichgul, Narciso Rodriguez and Wu. She's also a fan of accessible Americana labels like Gap and Talbots.

What a shameless attempt at selling Mrs. O.'s agressively thirde-worlde style as "supporting American brands".

9) Stock your wardrobe with cardigans: From J. Crew to Junya Watanabe and Moschino, Obama has a wardrobe full of cardigans. Take her cue and pair them with everything from skirts and blouses to glitzy gowns.

No I won't.


This is so incredibly ugly in every single respect, colours, cut, shape, skirtlength, whatever, that even the chef looks more dapper.

All these outfits are so unbelievably awful on so many levels, that the cardigans don't really make much of a difference.

10) Anchor your look with signature pieces: For Obama, that means belts and pins. "It's amazing what you can do to dress up an outfit with a big belt or pretty pin," she told People. She cinches belts over coats, cardigans and blouses. They add a personal touch to each look and highlight her curves. As for her brooches, she advised "The View" audience: "Put a little pin on [the dress] and you've got something going on!"

With those stomach-garotting belts she just emphasizes the fact that, while she is tall, slim and trim, she hasn't got the anorexic figure a woman needs to get away with belts, specifically with the wide belts she so likes. Instead of looking slim and trim, she looks like a cross between a zeppelin in a condom and the Michelin man. As for her pins and brooches: they may not be, but they are looking cheap, which applies to the rest of her ethnic bling as well.

This is probably the most awful one among the many Michelin man belt pictures I found. It makes one mistrust one's eyes. Why on earth is she doing that to herself? I thought she had advisers.

This is a seriously nice informal outfit in every respect. It even becomes her colours. But why on earth had she to spoil the elegant line with that belt? Why would anybody strangle one's figure like that? If anything, she emphasizes the fact that she is not impeccably slim.

The bin-liner dress with that bejeweled garotte around the midriff is a case in point as well, or the grotesque outfit with the cardigan and the bow (both above).

Yes, Michelle Obama's dress sense is execrable. "So what" one could say now. And yes, it is not all that interesting, seen as an isolated phenomenon. But it isn't. What IS interesting (and disturbing) is the reaction of the American (and international) public to this. How can anybody with a clear eyesight and no brain damage even begin to compare Michelle O. with Jackie K.

For Heaven's Sake, Americans, get a grip! That woman is as much a "fashion icon" as Dzenghiz Khan was a pacifist. The Obamas are just serving as a catalyst to the frightful lowering of standards — and that goes far beyond Michelle’s execrable sartorial taste.

Are there just awful pictures of her around? By no means, others are just hard to find, and I have a hunch that is, because they are perceived as rather less juvenile, cheap and tasteless youthful, accessible and irreverent -- "exciting" -- by the bowing, scraping and drooling media.

Here is one:

This is how she can look when she's not wearing the things for which she is so praised by CNN and other debased corrupters, such as strapless dresses exposing her bodybuilder physique, Micheline-man belts, ugly prints, oh-so-casual cardigans and tacky bling.

Anything not to appear classy.