'WP': 'Men's Vogue' Is Unsuitable for Reading, Wiping
The Washington Post's Magazine Reader, Peter Carlson, takes a look today at Men's Vogue, and it seems he — how to put this gently? — despises it and all it represents.
Where to start? With the lede, we suppose:
Human history is, among other things, a compendium of bad ideas — monarchy, communism, Prohibition, the designated hitter, the XFL, reality TV. And now, the folks at the Conde Nast magazine empire have added another horrific idea to this wretched list:
Men's Vogue.
And it just goes downhill from there:
The very name is a truly moronic oxymoron, like holy war or garlic mouthwash. ...
Why? Wasn't one Vogue enough? Was there a groundswell of demand for more Vogues? Were men and teenagers besieging the Conde Nast building, wearing Armani suits and chanting, "We want our own Vogues," while pumping their meticulously manicured fists into the air? ...
Of course, what all this boils down to is that Men's Vogue is a "wish book." Like the original "wish book" — the Sears catalogue of a century ago — Men's Vogue is a publication for people who want to drool over stuff they'd love to own. Unlike the old Sears catalogue, however, Men's Vogue does not double as an alternate source of toilet paper — its pages are way too slick.
Got that? Men's Vogue isn't good enough for Peter Carlson to wipe his ass with.
That's our favorite new insult.
