Anyone who knows me will know I hate the Daily Mail and anyone who’s stalked my blog will know that my favourite type of post to write are those in which I take my feminist leafblower and rid ‘sidebar of shame’ articles of their misogyny. Because this isn’t journalism, if anything, this is the work of a thesaurus and a review of Milan fashion week who’ve met over fondue in the First Dates restaurant and decided to give the whole ‘news’ thing a go. We can use last week’s headlines for evidence: Now you see, I don’t know who Jess Impazzi is (although after a quick Google it’s actually Impiazzi, which shows that the DM’s priorities are clearly not with the poor girl’s identity) however it sounds a little bit like my porn star alter ego. What amazes me most about this headline- other than ‘why have they written about this?’ but that doesn’t count because that’s my reaction to all these articles- is where can you buy a bikini that isn’t ‘barely there’? Like, surely that’s the point. You’re not going to hit the beach in an argyle jumper and bell bottom jeans (unless it’s Blackpool, or the 70s). When it comes to swimwear the point is usually the less tanlines the better so what I think DM meant to say is:
Sticking with the bikini theme, how excited the DM’s photographers must have been when Lottie Moss turned 18. They must’ve sat in their office, all the lights on like Times Square on New Year’s Eve and waited for the moment they could sexualise yet another celebrity child. What scares me most about this headline is the acknowledgment of how young she is, okay 18 may not be a child anymore however you qualify to be treated at the NHS children’s hospitals until the day before your 19th birthday, so actually she kind of is a child. If she wants to share her holiday I’m sure she can do so, unassisted and unsexualisingly, on her Instagram.
As you will have noticed (‘busty’ and ‘teeny tiny’) the Daily Mail are big adjective fans. Note: Leggy. Yes, that’s right, people have legs. Granted, perhaps the writer is a double amputee and that would justify the awe to an extent, but if the paper isn’t mature enough to know not to take pictures of children, then I’m pretty doubtful that they’d hire disabled people- unless it was to write an article about the plunging neckline on the dress of the woman pushing their wheelchair. Why is a newspaper telling us that people have legs? Or, more importantly, why isn’t Leo- who’s actually taller than his girlfriend- described as LEGGY too?
The Daily Mail have a big thing about couples, in fact, often they overshadow a woman’s success by mentioning something irrelevant. Like her partner. Regardless of which side of the Chloe/Khloe debate you stand on (my mum and I are on different ones and it’s pretty problematic) Chloe won an award. Now, I don’t know what they’re made of these days, but I’m pretty sure the piece of plastic on her mantelpiece will last a little longer than her current relationship, but regardless, her win shouldn’t be time limited to the moment that her boyfriend is mentioned. Telling us he supported her is literally common sense. This isn’t about him.
Of course, it wouldn’t be an accurate representation of the sidebar of shame without mentioning BRALESS or MAKEUP-FREE so here we go. Right on cue.If Heidi’s makeuplessness and bralessness has been mentioned does that mean we’re right to assume her partner is wearing both a bra and make-up? Or are men exempt from this microscope level of scrutiny? This is what I mean when I talk about make-up as an expectation because, as much as I like to believe otherwise, look at how the media treats women that don’t wear it. More significantly though, you can’t even tell she’s not wearing a bra. I mean come on. That print is the ultimate nipple disguise so rather she stated her nudity upon stepping off the plane or someone’s been doing a little too much zooming in. Everyone knows it’s a crime to look nice at an airport anyway. For now, the Daily Mail is a mess of misogyny and men’s take on celebrity gossip and, realistically, they don’t look as if they’re going to change anytime soon. But at least we can hope for a day when they can write about women without mentioning their body parts/partners/clothing and be aware of the fail whale journalism in place at the moment.