I've always been a little perplexed by the plastic shields that they put over magazines in grocery store check-out lines. Not perplexed in the "what are they there for" way (that much I get), but in the "do we
really need these?" kind of way. It's always seemed a little Fahrenheit 451 for my liking but, I can imagine that the salacious headlines on the Enquirer might not be what you want your four year old kid looking at when you stop at the store for milk and a bottle of wine wine. Nothing that oh, I don't know, a little parenting couldn't counteract but since I know how much parents just love to get parenting opinions from those with no children, I'll just let that go.
On my way out of the store the other day (with my wine and milk) I noticed that cover of Vanity Fair was shielded.
 |
| January 22, 2012 |
This struck me a little odd since Vanity Fair is a pretty main-stream, reputable
publication, you know, the kind that former Presidents and Pulitzer Prize winners contribute to on a regular basis. It's the kind of magazine that can sustain you through an entire two hour plane ride, unlike US Weekly which, while enjoyable, barely gets me through take-off.
It seemed a little out of the ordinary that its cover would be so risque as to require censoring so I peaked under the cover to see what half-naked pop star had to be hidden and oh my...
 |
| January 22, 2012 |
keep those fully clothed, men in their mid-forties under wraps! Thank goodness that we have a plastic shield for this one because it's magazine covers like this that threaten the sanctity of marriage in this country.
1 comment:
Perhaps they were concerned that middle aged housewives would drop their eggs upon seeing the hotness embodied on the cover, and have too many clean-ups in aisle 6?
Post a Comment