Stuck in the 1950s

I’ve been doing a bit of travelling over the past few days, which has involved browsing magazine stands to find something nice to read on flights. I usually read science or running magazines, but I do browse the trashy women’s mags, to see what kinds of things I am missing out on. I’m not completely sure who Kim Kardashian is, but I’m under the impression that she’s obviously very important for reasons unknown. I was quite surprised when I saw the following cover story of the November issue of the Australian Women’s Weekly:

I don’t need babies to be a success“. This is their headline? I was disgusted for several reasons. 1) that the magazine felt this was sufficiently ‘controversial’ that they wanted to put it as a headline, 2) that this actor (I’m not familiar with her) felt the need to say this in the first place, and 3) that today, in 2011, a woman’s success is still measured by the number of progeny she has.

I selected my favourite trashy magazine, NewScientist, and I headed for the gate lounge. Bah.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s