Gawker: styles

Fancy Ladies Acknowledge Recession By Letting Themselves Go

Sheila — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:16:29 EST

Certain ladies once spent thousands monthly on "maintenance." But what a difference a global recession makes! The same people who claimed they simply couldn't live without their Botox are now deriding it as an extravagant waste.

To paraphrase Nora Ephron, it only takes about two months of going without until you start looking like a homeless person.

But financial times are changing all of that: “Cosmetic surgery is going to become the new S.U.V., something that you can do without, that is less justifiable for you and your family,” says a doctor in the NYT's Styles section. Natasha Singer, who wrote today's article, "Putting Vanity on Hold," had filed a dispatch last summer about how there was no price to be put on looking good, Beauty Regimens Reach for the Gold Standard." Shall we compare them?

THEN:

“Depending on how much Botox and the pricier stuff you get done, when you add in hair care, nails, face and body, it’s got to be between $2,000 to $3,500 a month,” Ms. Oliver said. In Los Angeles, she added, such grooming is considered basic maintenance.

“If you are high maintenance, you could spend a lot more money,” Ms. Oliver said. “I can think of a couple of people where $3,500 a month might be low.”

NOW:

“There comes a point when you are putting too much time and money into your vanity,” said Peri Basel, a practice consultant in Chappaqua, N.Y., who advises cosmetic doctors on marketing strategies. “For me, the vanity issue is: Where does it stop? If you are going for buttock implants, do you really need that?”

And then there's this case study: Amy Krakow, a public relations exec who was interviewed for both pieces. In today's, she said:

She recently changed her hairstyle to include bangs — a camouflage technique that allows for fewer Botox injections, she said. “I’ll change my hair colorist,” Ms. Krakow said. “I’ll give up my crazy Japanese hair straightening. I’ll stretch out my Botox. I’ll even go for fewer plastic surgeries. But I do have to look good in my business. I look younger, therefore I can represent younger and hipper clients.”

And what did Ms. Krakow spend in June of 2007?

Twice a week: hyperbaric chamber, 30 minutes or more, $150 Weekly: manicure, 30 minutes, $15 Twice a month: pedicure, one hour, $50 Monthly: facial and eyebrow shaping, 75 minutes, $275 Every six weeks: hair cut, two hours, $180 Every six weeks: hair color, two hours, $125 Every four to five months: Botox, $450 Twice a year: hair straightening, five hours, $500 to $600 2005-6: tummy tuck, buttocks lift, liposuction of thighs, thigh lift, chin lift, upper eyelid lift, neck lift, arm liposuction, $60,000

We're guessing the hyperbaric chamber (to keep the skin soft) had to go. As a concession-recession, I vow to give up my every-other-week $8 Chinatown manicure. It's the least I can do.

How to Build Your Own Trend Piece

Sheila — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:08:12 EDT

If you can find a bunch of loosely-connected references to a certain subject floating around the zeitgeist, you can write a trend piece! Today's "Move Over, My Pretty, Ugly Is Here" in the NYT's Styles is the pitch-perfect example. A truly bad, meaning typical, trend piece can be broken down into pure science. The first thing you need? A contrarian question or statement! ("Is ugly the new pretty?") Got that? Here's a step-by-step checklist to writing the rest:

Now that you've got your contrarian question or statement, the Times editors are going to be on your ass about getting facts and "proof" of this trend existing. Not as highly anecdotal as the Observer, though—you'll have to call in all sorts of experts. Ask yourself:

Is there a snappy historical quote for the top of the piece? Yes—Winston Churchill's infamous, "I shall be sober tomorrow, whereas you will still be ugly."

Is there a recently-published scientific or academic paper? On ugliness, several. "Ugliness has recently emerged as a serious subject of study and academic interest unto itself... 'It hasn’t been politically correct to talk about uglyism, said Anthony Synnott, a professor of sociology at Concordia University in Montreal, who is publishing a paper next month on ugliness." Also: "Researching the phenomenon of Ugly Betty, Madeleine Shufeldt Esch, an adjunct assistant professor in communications at Tulane, contributed a paper, 'Ugly Is the New Beautiful,' to a meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Media."

Is there a cultural reference? Yes. Shrek, the lovable scary green monster and a television show, Ugly Betty, which ABC promoted with a “Be Ugly” campaign stressing self-esteem for girls and young women."

Is there something being litigated? "Few laws prohibit employment discrimination based on lack of attractiveness, although some plaintiffs have pursued cases under broader statutes..."

Is there something corresponding to your contrarian statement/idea going on in the art world? A new exhibit at the Met, or a new book? "Last year, the Italian novelist and critic Umberto Eco published On Ugliness, a 450-page book largely devoted to ugliness in art."

Is there a "to be sure" paragraph near the end that basically negates the entire article? "Indeed, [Ugly Betty’s] star, America Ferrara, is universally considered attractive..." Also, last line: "“I think there was a brief ugly moment,” Ms. Esch said. “But it may have been a passing fancy.”

Is there an inappropriate ad/article placed nearby? Previous page: "Looking Good: the Sequel."

Steampunk

Sheila — Thu, 08 May 2008 12:48:37 EDT

Steampunk! According to the NYT's Thursgay Styles, it's a "subculture that is the aesthetic expression of a time-traveling fantasy world, one that embraces music, film, design and now fashion, all inspired by the extravagantly inventive age of dirigibles and steam locomotives." They describe steampunkers as fusspots with a taste for gaslight-era style: "he owns a flat-screen television, but he has modified it with a burlap frame. He uses an iPhone, but it is encased in burnished brass." But steampunk's been around for a while, of course. Despite the length of the piece, glossed over is the fact that this hot new movement started with a book called the Difference Engine—in 1990!

Steampunk isn't completely about clothes and accessories; it's an offshoot of the science fiction genre cyberpunk. Author of cyberpunk novel Neuromancer William Gibson (coiner of the word "cyberspace") collaborated with Bruce Sterling for the classic steampunk alternate history novel The Difference Engine, set in Victorian Britain. Just saying!

Anyway, it must be reaching a critical mass: the recent 24th Chaos Communications Congress, a hacker event, had steampunk as the theme for their ball. And a steampunk store? Open soon in Manhattan. You'll be able to finally buy a brass case for your iPhone.

I just realized: our new offices are totally steampunk—check out the vintage reception desk!

Steampunk Moves Between Two Worlds [NYT]

[Photo: Kit by Nadya Lev Photo]

Rakish Men in Vests All Up In the Clubs

Sheila — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:51:21 EST

It's Thursday, and what's back in style this week, according to the NYT Styles? For certain men, vests "feel right again." (Did they ever feel wrong?) A few important points: the three-piece suit's "strength is also its weakness," but standing alone, the vest "kicks things up a notch." Vests were at Christmas parties, and are all up in the clubs. And also! Vests let men show off the size of their "drop," a sort of sexy waist-to-chest ratio. Perhaps most importantly, "you can feel your cellphone vibrate in it much better than in your jacket." What else has the Styles section proclaimed back for men in the last year?

Well, how about neckties, and short pants and Bermuda shorts, plus actual shorts, and dressing like it's 1992, and tweed, and artisanal fragrances, and fur-lined hoodies and trapper hats.. Oh, and collared shirts, and slim suits, natch. Try wearing all of these things at once! [NYT]

[Photo: Tom Ackerman]

What The Hell Is Cintra Wilson Talking About?

abalk — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:00:19 EDT

New York Times Critical Shopper stand-in Cintra Wilson takes a look at Phi, the Soho clothier that "showcases the artistry of the meticulously trained Norwegian designer Andreas Melbostad." Then it gets less penetrable: A reader dared us to translate the piece's most harrowing paragraph.

Art Deco is the dominant gene in Mr. Melbostad's inspirations, which fuses the utilitarian ur-sport of 1920s Chanel with a lean toward severe New York sophistication. A Poiret tendency toward Japonisme is evident, as is a smattering of glam-rock anarchism. But, like the best yacht-faring flappers, Phi never indulges to the point of going overboard: it is hot artistic nasty with a clean martini taste, which retains masterful poise even while dancing on the table. In less controlled hands, it might plunge into louche Weimar territory, but Mr. Melbostad sidesteps the vulgar and obvious.

So, uh, no. Maybe they should call the store PhD.

A (Very Poised) Dance on the Table [NYT]

Sixties Styles, Eighties Times

abalk — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:20:43 EDT

Last Thursday, the Times' Styles section told us that fashion was taking its cues from the eighties. It also told us that fashion was taking its cues from the sixties. Which is it? As of today, it's apparently the sixties. Fine with us, so long as it never ever ever goes to the seventies. Because that decade was a fashion partial-birth abortion.

Another Summer of Love
For Those Who Missed The 60s Or Just Can't Remember
The Only Thing Missing Is Bananarama [NYT]

How That Styles Disabilities Piece Went Down: An Imagined Conversation

abalk2 — Mon, 14 May 2007 10:44:05 EDT

TRIP GABRIEL's DEPUTY: You know what's super hot right now? Disabilities! Amputations, C.P., mental problems... you can't turn on a TV without seeing some handicapped hero. Whaddya say we do 1500 words on it. Show how people with disabilities no longer feel the need to hide it. They're proud, they're strong, etc. You know, something really uplifting, celebrating the triumph of the human spirit over adversity.
MIREYA NAVARRO: I'm on it. And let's go unexpected, and do it from L.A.!
TRIP GABRIEL'S DEPUTY: [To photographer STEPHANIE DIANI] We want it to be cutting-edge, but it should still say Styles. So see if you can find one of the hot amputees and get an upskirt shot. Let's shift the paradigm here, people!

Clearly, Frankly, Unabashedly Disabled [NYT]

'Styles' So Mean To Cream Cleaning Green

Emily Gould — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:41:20 EDT

Pity poor rich lady Sloan Barnett. All she did was ask a totally reasonable question— "What can we actually do to make a difference on Earth Day besides buying a Prius?" and answer herself with a totally reasonable answer. She is buying the environmentally friendly products made by a company called Shaklee, which her husband and others recently bought for $310 million. "This is the grass-roots way to help save the world," Barnett told the guests at her Shaklee party, who included Melania Trump, Jessica Seinfeld, and the Times' Ruth La Ferla. One of those ladies kept butting her nose in people's business and asking pesky questions, however!

"Did [Seinfeld] plan to reduce her own carbon footprint by selling off a few of her possessions? 'What I have and what I don't have is not something I talk about,' she said." But Barnett was, perhaps ill-advisedly, more honest with herself and the reporter. "Concerned with carbon emissions, she is about to replace the Barnetts' two family cars with hybrids. 'I turn the water off when I'm brushing my teeth,' she said. 'I'm always learning, I'm always trying to improve.' Still, she has no plans to reduce the family's significant carbon footprint by, say, selling the Manhattan second home. 'I'm not a perfect person,' she said. 'I'm not the greenest woman in America.'" It's almost as if Ruth was trying to make these women look foolish! That's so not in the spirit of Earth Day. We all of us do what we can. —Emily

The Cream Is Cleaning Green [NYT]

Trip Gabriel: About Getting His Kids Out Of The House

abalk2 — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:18:57 EDT

We cannot get enough of Trip Gabriel, the Times Styles chief who perked us up this morning with the big wang-off. Sure, his recent turn on Ask the Editor gave us a better idea of what the Styles sections are about—not getting and spending!—but what of the man himself? What of his inner life? His hopes and dreams? We turn to the alumni notes for Andover, that famous bastion of egalitarianism nestled near the Shawsheen River.

I had the pleasure of lunch with Trip Gabriel in N.Y.C. in October, and this is his response: "Classmates, take warning. Our secretary invited himself to lunch while on a business trip to New York and put the arm on me to contribute news to this column. It could happen to you. In fact, the lunch was a pure pleasure. Steve was on his way to Parents' Weekend at Andover, and I took the opportunity to pump him about what it takes to get a kid in these days. I have twin sons, eighth-graders, and these are the years when I am raising my contributions to the annual fund. Just a coincidence, of course. When I mentioned a much-read Wall Street Journal article this summer about a decline in boarding school applications because baby boom parents want closer ties to their children, he sputtered, 'Wimps!' Exactly. This is the news: We live in Pound Ridge, N.Y., a countrified suburb with a hardware store, one barber and a wine shop. What else do you need? I am in my 11th year at The New York Times, where I edit the 'Sunday Styles' section and its recent spin-off, 'Thursday Styles.' I take the train home most days after long hours at the office, but I learn through my sections what it is like to dress up and stay out all night. I'm looking forward to a visit from my roommate, Seymour House, whose son Martin now attends the Putney School in Vermont." Finally, Trip noted he would like to hear from Mike Castro, Bill Crawford, Ken Ehrlich, Clint Fisher, Mike McLaughlin, Peter Stevens and Ben Thompson.

Good lord, we've finally figured out what boarding school is for: Turning Jews into white people! —balk

Class Notes 1970s [Andover]

'Styles' Serves Up A Big Bowl Of Spotted Dick

abalk2 — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:50:07 EDT

You know, there's no better way to undermine those silly jokes about Styles being "the gay section" than to run a giant collection of crotch shots in the paper. Still, we can probably have some fun: Let's play favorites! We're partial to first row, right. You?

But What if You Get Hit by a Taxi? [NYT]

How That NYT 'Old Men With Babies' Story Went Down: An Imagined Conversation

abalk2 — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:55:42 EDT

"In December 1996, inspired in part by [Tony] Randall's well-publicized late fatherhood (his wife was 26 at the time), I wrote an article for The New York Times about men having children at a stage in life when their peers were usually contemplating a move to Florida or their next cardiogram. One proud papa dubbed them start-over dads, or SODs for short.... Under the circumstances, it seemed natural to check in with some of the same fathers 10 years later to see how they are faring in their eighth or even ninth decade."

[Phone rings]
SMALL CHILD: Hello?
TV: Hi, this is Tom Vinciguerra from the New York Times. Is your daddy still alive?
SMALL CHILD: [Weeps into phone]
TV: Great, thanks! Bye!

He's Not My Grandpa. He's My Dad. [NYT]

Trend Piece Trips Over Its Own Formal Conventions, Loses Heart Halfway Through

lneyfakh — Sun, 08 Apr 2007 13:08:00 EDT

Today's Sunday Styles leads with a story by Alex Williams called "Rise of the Takedown," which claims that "heckling" is no longer considered the business of hooligans—that it has become, thanks to YouTube and other important cultural factors, a mainstream mode of criticism and personal expression.

Now, normally we wouldn't go to the trouble of letting the air out of a Swiss-cheese-and-sausage trend piece—everyone knows by now that these things are basically not real—but in this particular case, we feel compelled to chime in. After all, despite yesterday's brief, tween-inspired moment of positivity, the tradition of heckling is a pretty important one for the Gawker brand (and—respect your elders—maybe even vice versa!). It's not so much that Williams gets it wrong in this article, but that she doesn't even try to feign any curiosity in ~~her~~ his claim.

His main thesis comes in paragraph four. It says that heckling, as a social phenomenon, has recently changed—that before, hecklers were marginal figures, "often drunks or crackpots, tolerated (just barely) by polite society, like litter on a city street," but now, they are "self-styled cultural assassins" who are bolder and less content to "merely snipe from the shadows." Williams reports that this is also the main idea behind a forthcoming movie called "Heckler," the presumed peg for this piece, which argues that hecklers are getting more brazen and more vicious because of "the culture of blogs and online user reviews."

Well, okay. Hecklers are everywhere and they are sometimes harsh. How does Williams illustrate this? By listing everyone who has ever said a mean thing about anyone in a public or semi-public venue. Under Williams' parameters, this seems to include people who have cracked wise at comedy clubs, written blogs, written comments on blogs, written articles in magazines, or reviewed movies on RottenTomatoes.com. Also people who have voted for Sunjaya on American Idol. Williams' experts—the director of "Heckler" and a psychologist from Johns Hopkins—say it's because on the internet, "hate sells," and that the "internet meanness" as practiced by "media gadfly blogs" has bled into public discourse.

There you have it, then: the claim has been asserted, handily brought to life with a few anecdotes, and finally verified by a couple of articulate scientists. The only thing left for this trend piece to do is turn its gaze backwards and send its roots down into history. So Williams proceeds:

As a tradition, heckling predates YouTube by centuries. In Shakespeare's day, audiences were expected to hurl insults, if not rotting fruit, at the actors onstage. In Colonial America, Crispus Attucks and others at the Boston Massacre in 1770 helped spark the American Revolution by lobbing epithets like "lobster scoundrels" as well as debris at red-coated British troops, only to find their volleys answered with musket balls, said Nicole Eustace, an assistant professor of history at New York University.
Heckling as an extreme expression of free speech has thrived ever since — and politicians from Abraham Lincoln to Theodore Roosevelt to Lyndon B. Johnson have had to duck the verbal grenades launched at their appearance and policies.

This is where things go wrong for Williams: indeed, the abundance of material he offers as part of his de rigeur history lesson seems to neatly contradict the basic point of his article about how this heckling thing has only just entered the mainstream. If trend pieces have a winning formula—and, of course, they do—then Williams seems to have been foiled by the very same tricks of the trade that allowed him to glide through this assignment so firmly on automatic.

The main trouble is that for all his random, unrelated examples—sports fans shouting at players, Michael Richards, and "macaca" are apparently all pieces of the same puzzle—Williams doesn't say anything about Mystery Science Theater 3000, a show about robots who watch old movies and mock them. Now, your weekend correspondents never watched this show—the kids who did were only slightly less unappealing than the Monty Python fans—but according to IMDB, it ran from 1988 to 1999 and spawned a feature film in 1996. Doesn't that qualify as a definitive, or at least notable, moment for the "heckler as star" transition Williams is trying so half-heartedly to will into existence?

"But I don't wanna sound mad, I feel marvelous," etc.—LEON

'Styles' Vic Sugar And Spice, Unless You're Close To Deadline

abalk2 — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:31:45 EDT

Mary Ann Giordano, the victim of that Styles-bashing, can apparently dish it out as well as she can take it. Our inbox is abuzz with stories about how's she wonderful and motherly, etc., but, under deadline pressure, can be sort of a bitch. "I know one veteran reporter who started to have panic attacks because Mary Ann was coming down so hard on her." Also? She's apparently... a kickboxer? "She could have bounced skinny mini-Wintour across the room," said one emailer. That kind of restraint is admirable. Maybe Anita "Bonecrusher" LeClerc was just in a bad mood because she hadn't eaten lately or something. —balk

Earlier: 'Styles' Catfight: Perp And Vic Pics

'Styles' Catfight: Perp And Vic Pics

abalk2 — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 14:20:33 EDT

Here they are, direct from the Times' internal facebook, your Styles combatants: At left, style editor Anita "Bonecrusher" LeClerc. At right, her boss, Mary Ann "Candybowl" Giordano. This doesn't look anything near a fair fight. And how mugshotty is LeClerc's photo? It's almost like they knew something like this was gonna happen. Sadly, this has drained the sexual component out of the story for us. Now we're just stuck thinking about that poor old lady in Queens who was assaulted and robbed. What kind of sick person attacks someone who looks like our aunt? —balk

Earlier: ROWR! Catfight At The 'Times'! Trip Gabriel Breaks Up Hot Girl-on-Girl Action

How That 'Slim Suit' Photoshoot Went Down: An Imagined Conversation

abalk2 — Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:35:55 EST

"No, no, no. You are looking WAY too straight. Gay it up for me a bit, will you, love? Like, really stereotype the hell out of it. We want to say, 'Look at me, I am the biggest ass-drinking 'mo in all of creation.' I want you to pretend there are cocks to left of you, ballsacks to the right. It's a room full of rimjobs and you're the guest of honor. Perfect! [Click.] Alright, people, we've earned our pay today."

Slim Suits: The Attraction Is Physical [NYT]

Thursgay Styles: My, What Big Package You Have

suki — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 13:19:52 EDT

Last week, Styles caught you up on the underground trend of slutty Halloween costumes. This week, Bradley Melekian point us to the latest urban object of desire: men in uniform, specifically, delivery men in shorts.

Ask most women what a modern-day sex symbol looks like, and you are likely to be greeted with a description not of a brooding movie star, but a smiling cleanshaven man with a toned muscular frame, a brown uniform shirt and a year-round dedication to wearing shorts.

Ah yes, what women has not daydreamed about being swept off her feet, thrown in the back of a delivery van and then, you know, signing for a package. Fantasies about what brown can do for you is prevalent in popular culture - why, just five years ago, there was that episode of Sex and the City where Samantha got it on with the delivery boy.

This is all by design, of course - couriers encourage their drivers to stay in shape and offer incentives for working out, though they insist it's for productivity and injury prevention.

What really completes this piece, though, is the sidebar item showing the U.P.S.-recommended stretches. If we didn't know any better, we'd think the Times was trying to turn us on.

'Industrial Athletes': Men With the Goods [NYT]

Thursgay Styles: Cinderella, She Seems So Easy

abalk2 — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:10:18 EDT

Writing the world's five thousandth piece about slutty Halloween costumes, Stephanie Rosenbloom shrugs her shoulders and offers up an acknowledgment that should pretty much accompany every Styles article:

The trend is so pervasive it has been written about by college students in campus newspapers, and Carlos Mencia, the comedian, jokes that Halloween should now be called Dress-Like-a-Whore Day.

Still, nice to see that they're finally crediting sources.

BONUS Great Moment in Journalism:

IN her thigh-highs and ruby miniskirt, Little Red Riding Hood does not appear to be en route to her grandmother's house. And Goldilocks, in a snug bodice and platform heels, gives the impression she has been sleeping in everyone's bed.

Also nice:

Many women's costumes, with their frilly baby-doll dresses and high-heeled Mary Janes, also evoke male Lolita fantasies and reinforce the larger cultural message that younger is hotter.
"It's not a good long-term strategy for women," Dr. Tolman said.

There's so much going on here you may just have to read the whole thing.

Good Girls Go Bad, for a Day [NYT]

Vows Section Relaxes BMI Standards

Jessica — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 17:30:03 EDT

The Vows in yesterday's Times was particularly special. Per usual, the featured couple was connected in some way to the who's who of society (in this case, designer Nicole Miller), and the manner in which they reached their union was predictably "aw"-inducing (ultimatum, break-up, reunion), as is required by all Vows features. But there was something different about yesterday's bride and groom, Pamela Taylor and Eames Yates. Mr. Yates suffers from a condition rarely seen in Vows: Mr. Yates is fat.

The Times treads carefully around this sensitive issue:

• "Nicole Miller and her husband, Kim Taipale, arranged a blind date for their two 'loudest and biggest friends' — Pamela Hughes Taylor and Eames Hamilton Yates."

• "Mr. Yates, 50, who is oversize and over the top in every way..."

• The couple were "known as Wild Pam and Big Eames. He even lost some weight with her."

Pamela Taylor and Eames Yates [NYT]

Cathy Horyn Busted for Promoting Senseless MisShapes Agenda

Jessica — Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:30:10 EDT

Last Thursday, in her personal piece de resistance, Times fashion critic Cathy Horyn could not overstate the sheer awesomeness of haute whores and popular DJs the MisShapes, stating that their Bolivian-slim frames and bowl-shaped haircuts had influenced Dior Homme designer Hedi Slimane's July runway show. Slimane, however, took issue with the attribution:

On Friday, the designer faxed WWD to set the record straight. Slimane said he culled inspiration from the emerging music scene in Southend, London. "There must be some conflict of interest I am not aware of," Slimane stated. "I would gladly own up to being inspired by something if it were the truth, but Ms. Horyn's reporting seems not to be based on fact and it makes me question what's behind it."

Thursgay Styles reporting not "based on fact"? How curious. So what's behind Horyn's MisShapes obsession? Is it her longing to revive her deeply buried, lost youth, redefining her past by floating through the present as a chicly gritty nightcrawler, thus fashioning herself an existence in which Horyn is finally cool enough to sit at the punk rock lunch table? Or maybe she's just a closet Eastpak fan.

Memo Pad [WWD]
Earlier: Hey, Have You Heard of These MisShapes Kids?

Hey, Have You Heard of These MisShapes Kids?

Jessica — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 09:55:07 EDT

It's Fashion Week, so Thursgay Styles has plenty of ground to cover: the "cascading" spring styles, seating at the shows, the sweater-jacket as a fall staple...and the MisShapes. Really? The MisShapes? How fascinating! Who are these downtown darlings you speak of?

Oh, we're kidding. OF COURSE WE KNOW WHO THE FUCK THEY ARE. Was their presence in the Sunday Styles investigation into rose-fucking-ay not enough? Was Cathy Horyn not satisfied to simply take Princess Coldstare, put her in balloon sleeves and compare her to Edie Sedgwick? We're flabbergasted. MisShapes? In Styles? Really? Again?* What could they possibly tell us that we don't already know?!

"Gawker has been saying there's a backlash for more than two years," Mr. [Geordon "Leotard Fantastic"] Nicol said.

No, no, Leo-Fan. We have been wishing for a backlash for more than two years. Just wishing. Your fabulosity is our dream deferred. But hey, someone's gotta play the music for Tory Burch.

Cool, at Least for a Few Minutes [NYT]

*This "article" marks the 10th MisShapes appearance in just under one year. Happy anniversary, you haute whores!