Yesterday, Vogue editor Lauren Davis' assistant and socialgay Peter Davis' boyfriend Paul Johnson-Calderone told the Observer that he had been prevented from participating in a "The Hills"-esque reality show called "Frenemies" with Unruly Heir flak, heir Kristian Laliberte, by Conde Nast rules. The same piece implied that Paul and Kristian "were at one time quarreling over the hot pash" of Peter. We wondered what Kristian had to say about all this. Turns out: A lot!

"Emasculated? We'll See!" was the headline of the Page Six item this morning that basically told New York magazine's Vanessa Grigoriadis to watch what she said about that venerable gossip institution, because the males of Page Six would totally rape her... except maybe not because she's so darn hairy and ugly. Charming. Not to mention completely out of proportion! Grigoriadis's claim—that the column was "emasculated" after former Sixer Jared Paul Stern was accused of trying to blackmail supermarket magnate and (whatever, alleged) Radar investor Ron Burkle, wasn't even that controversial. And Richard Johnson's move to cover his ass by whipping out his dick, as it were, seems to have completely backfired.

Last week's New York Press cover story about New York Times reporter Deborah Solomon's perhaps less-than-ethical methods reminded some of her other subjects of their own negative experiences with the Q&A queen. Particularly irate was one Christopher Knight, longtime Los Angeles Times art critic and 2007 Pulitzer Prize finalist.

Howie Kurtz, Washington Post media critic and author of "Reality Shows: Inside the Last Great Television News War," tells blog BigHeadDC that he'd be glad to meet with New York Press editor David Blum over similarities between Kurtz's book and a 2005 afterword to Blum's 2004 book. (Both the Kurtz and Blum books report, in similar ways, that Dan Rather threatened to take the Killian documents story that led to his dismissal from CBS to the Times if the network didn't promote, let alone run, the piece.) Kurtz has claimed the anecdote as a scoop. Speaking to the New York Observer last night, Kurtz described himself as "a fanatic about attributing information," but said he wouldn't mention Blum's book in any future editions of "Reality Show" because "since he got the information directly from [Josh] Howard, it didn't matter that the story had already been used elsewhere." Would Blum be open to a meeting? "It depends on the shape of the table," he told us.

In one of the odder contretemps of our time, New York Times perfume critic Chandler Burr has gone off on gossip sheet Page Six over their description of Out magazine as a "gay-lifestyle mag." Says Burr: "'gay lifestyle' is a purely political term with a purely political meaning, and it's simply, factually inaccurate." We're siding with him on this: Out is obviously a "gay lifestyle magazine" but it is not a "gay-lifestyle magazine." We find Burr's understanding of hyphenation and compound adjectives rather unspeakably hot, and now we would very much like him to criticize our perfumes, if you know what we mean, wink wink. But more importantly: Is the "gay lifestyle mag" in trouble? Its ad pages are looking rough.

For a brief glimpse of a moment last week we genuinely liked Lance Bass. He'd just given an interview with New York mag's party hobbit Jada Yuan in which he A) bitched accurately about the NY real estate market B) dissed astutely Justin Timberlake's new restaurant and C) copped admirably to being the worst dancer in 'N Sync. "I've been a few times," he said about Southern Hospitality. "But it's really up there. The Upper East Side? I'm not in college anymore." Now Bass claims that he said no such things and he's demanding a retraction.

Lexicographer and editor Grant Barrett rips the Wall Street Journal a new one over their horriful trend/scare story today on the devolution of Americanlish and the rise of chat-speak and how the kids are destroying all things and whatevs. The story includes this choice bit: "'There used to be a time when people cared about how they spoke and wrote,' laments Robert Hartwell Fiske, who has written or edited several books on proper English usage, including one on overused words titled 'The Dimwit's Dictionary.'" Oh was there, ya slaggy old bit popper?

You've heard about that Obama girl video, right? Everyone's talking about it. But is it harmless fun or an insult to womanhood's long struggle to be considered equal to men? It's an issue driving a wedge between even the closest of friends—for instance, Huffington Post media critic Rachel Sklar and Star editor-at-large Julia Allison. We've obtained a transcript of a recent (private) clash they had on the subject, and we make it public here because, well, it's very important. Whose side are you on? The answer might surprise you!

"As documents of sheer snotty bitchery go, it belongs in a hall of fame alongside... umm... Socrates'rebuke of Alcibiades in the Symposium," we said the other day of KCD publicist Bonnie Morrison's email to Coutorture blogger Julie Fredrickson, who'd complained that her inability to purchase a ticket to Monday's CFDA gala constituted a "pay for play" scenario. But was Bonnie actually being a bitch? Also, do we actually know what our own classical allusions mean? According to Fashionista's Faran Krentcil, the answer to at least one of these questions is a resounding "no."

"Maybe there wasn't room for both of us in the big city when we were both gossip columnists, but I had moved on... I wanted to say I'm sorry," wrote former gossip columnist turned Hampton Style editor Deb Schoeneman in a soul-searching article in March's Playboy. She was referring to her feud with Page Sixer Paula Froelich (pictured), who she'd just spent the latter half of that same article sorta trashing. But was the apology, weak (and merely indicated) as it was, accepted? Based on an item in today's Page Six, it sure seems like it.

Balthazar and Pastis owner and possible presidential candidate Keith McNally added further flame to his feud with New York Times restaurant critic Frank Bruni when the Dining section printed McNally's passive-aggressive letter to the paper today. We've already posted the draft, but the published version emphasizes the point that even William Grimes, "the last male restaurant reviewer for The New York Times," gave more stars to chick chefs. But in his femiladyist comparison, McNally neglects to mention any of the Times's female restaurant critics (Mimi Sheraton, Ruth Reichl, Marian Burros). Does McNally think only men can be sexist? There's a complicated word for that, isn't there? —Josh

Big news regarding the Most Important Intellectual Catfight Of Our Time Of This Week! Earlier, a glorious victory was declared by liberal punditron Eric Alterman in his dispute against Time's Ana Marie Cox, Gawker and the generals in charge of Guantanamo. Or something. We lost track of what he's pissed at a while ago. (Background! There was a party in D.C.—words were exchanged, various muddy accounts were published from each side, then a transcript emerged from the trusty New York Observer.) At one point yesterday Alterman used the phrase "GawkerGate," which was utterly hilarious. OMG, someone questioned our newspaperlikeness! We're weeping. Now Chris Lehmann, not at all incidentally a spouse of Ms. Cox, has chimed in with a really vicious unpacking of Alterman's speech acts, revisions, and various blusterings. It's a really sweet read for those who love supremely bitchy and over-the-top eviscerations. Which is all of us! Frenemies no more!

In between their predictable outbursts of fanciness and sycophanciness ("she's a darling. a stylish one too." "she's so darling"), the Socialite Rank commenters (by the way, the real Socialite Rank mystery = who are the Socialite Rank commenters?? Seriously!) seem to have come across an intriguing discrepancy. On an unrelated post today, commenter 'nan' writes: