Teenage Wasteland
June 23rd, 2007 by 
Caroline Spector
Last year when I was at Conestoga, I went across the street to pick up some stuff at Vann’s. Vann’s is this discount market that has an unusual supply of esoteric foodstuffs as well as more pedestrian goods.
While I was standing in the checkout line, I started looking at the magazines. Little did I know what lay there that could strike dread in the heart of a vicious crank like moi.
See, there were these teen magazines. By that I mean magazines that were ostensibly aimed at teenagers, but would actually appeal to the “tween” crowd. (Tweens are ten to fourteen-year-olds. They’re considered a separate demographic. Ain’t marketing wonderful?) What caught my eye in the magazine I actually bought was a collection of small pictures at the bottom of the cover. Pictures of – sweet nattering Jesus – Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan.
You know, there are some things that just should not be sold in Barbie-pink to eleven-year-old girls. And two of them are Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan.
Even a year ago, before the endless rehab trips and the jail sentence for driving while being a massive asshole, I thought it was inappropriate for these “celebutantes” to be paraded on the pages of a kids’ magazine.
In a two-page splashy spread (wow, there’s a choice of words) the fabu editors gave chatty dish about the “feud” between these two appalling examples of femininity.
When this was published last year, there were multiple videos on the Internet of Miss Hilton engaged in X-rated activities. At the time, it boggled my mind that anyone would think these two skanks were appropriate material for polite conversation, much less decide to include them in a magazine aimed at a teen and pre-teen crowd.
Good grief, these women are known for flashing their vajayjays as if a naked undercarriage were a new fashion accessory, like a great pair of Manolo Blahniks. (And when I say naked, I mean really naked. Yea Gods.)
(When I was thinking about writing this piece, I called Denton up to see if he thought I was going too far:
“I’m thinking of writing a piece about vajayjays,” says I.
“I’m not wild about calling them vajayjays,” says Denton.
“Well, what would you call then?” I ask.
“Cooters.”
Howard Waldrop will be so proud, thought I.)
The thing that really strikes me about this freaky glimpse into media devoted to teenage girls is how massively schizophrenic it is. In this same issue where the Hos of Babylon were featured, page after page was devoted to the current teen/tween rage: High School Musical.
Those of you without teenagers or preteens might not have heard of this movie. It started out as made-for-TV movie. It was produced by Disney and ran on The Disney Channel. It ran over and over and over again on The Disney Channel.
It has turned into a mania.
The movie is actually very sweet. The stars of the movie are sweet. Far as I know, not a single vajayjay, er, cooter exposure among the cast members. (Not even the boys.) The way these actors were portrayed in the magazine was sweet. And yet, there they are sharing space with two of the most yucky trollops to come down the pike in years.
Is it any wonder that in a post-feminist world, girls are still growing up with issues? Issues with boundaries. Issues with weight. (Did I mention that Nicole Richie was also featured? The woman is the poster child for Anorexia.) Issues with what it means to be a woman in America here at the dawn of a new millennium.
And there is J-14 Magazine helping them along.
Ew.
Posted in Brad, Caroline, Daily Life, People, Pop. Culture | 
June 23rd, 2007 at 9:50 am
Oh, now I feel old again. I have never heard the word ‘vajayjay’ before your enlightening post. Thanks ever so much, Caroline.
Following your link to slang words for The Magic Place, I kind like ‘punani’. It sounds so Kama Sutra.
I also heartily endorse the sentiment expressed in this common saying: “If God didn’t want us to eat punani, then why did he make it look like a taco?”
Last, and most — At last weeks meeting of the Thursday Night Video Club, Troyce played this clip: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/13/tommy-chong-on-the-colbert-report/
It’s possibly the funniest and most sane take on the Hilton brouhaha that I’ve seen. Colbert is holding himself together by nothing but willpower through most of Tommy Chong’s responses.
June 23rd, 2007 at 11:14 am
Oh, my God. I clicked on the Richie link and now I feel sick to my stomach.
Good rant, Spector.
June 23rd, 2007 at 1:16 pm
As the proud owner of a tween and a teen, I’ve seen these magazines. The mere sight of them on the checkstand racks makes me rant. Fortunately Sarcasm Girl, as befits her title, is far too ironic to be interested in any of this shit. Younger Girl, who is far less cynical (tho’ she’s working hard to catch up to her sister, I doubt she has SG’s natural talent for irony) has briefly been drawn to the bright-n-shiny aspects of magazines like J-14, which has led to many useful conversations about why I think such magazines are repulsive. Fortunately YG is something of a law and order freak, and finds the whole Paris Hilton flap stupid. And she and I, who thought Lohan had some talent back in the days of The Parent Trap, mourn the fact that the girl’s Stupid Social Tricks appear to have taken over her life.
YG also detests High School Musical, or at least the frenzy that has grown up around it. Come to think of it, maybe her irony filters are kicking in after all.
June 23rd, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Oh, and I also think punani is an excellent synonym, though it does sound rather like something that should be served with rice and raisins. To each his or her own, I guess.
June 23rd, 2007 at 2:09 pm
I like saying ‘hoo ha.’
June 23rd, 2007 at 2:28 pm
Punani with rice and raisins and raita. Yummmm!
June 23rd, 2007 at 9:46 pm
What Mad Said about Lohan.
I’m still trying (not to hard, obviously) to find One Night in Paris, but all the descriptions of it indicate that it would be a great video to use about how boring heterosexual activities can be—and how boring one can look doing them.
HSM is a phenomenon, to be sure—it was our eldest’s favorite present this year—but the current interviews make it clear that the touring cast are having relationships. Between the several versions of the original, the pending sequel, and HSM on Ice (think “Crash Nebula on Ice” without the anomie) it looks as if DIS plans to continue destroying the long-term value of its properties. Can’t tell if that’s a good thing.
On the larger issue, I fear you’re just falling prey to the increase in available marketing. If there weren’t Teen People (oh, wait, there isn’t any more) and the like, there would still be “what a horrible turn for a child star” pieces. Remember Britney, Brooke Shields in the mom-released-my-transcript days and before, and all the myriad drug/alcohol (that’s redundant, I know) problems of the Mason Reeses and Anissa Joneses and Linda Blairs that were just as available for tween viewing in Tiger Beat and the like.
The tweens I grew up with were reading (or at least looking at the pictures in) TB and the like. That they’ve got their own magazines now doesn’t mean the fare has changed.
June 23rd, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Wow, I just can’t compare Tiger Beat and Bobby Sherman to J-14 and Paris Hilton. (And might I add that Hilton was used in other parts of this issue of the mag as an example of how to dress!)
I fear I’m going to stray straight into fuddy-duddy territory here, but when TB was in its heyday, I doubt that Linda Lovelace would have been a featured celebrity between its, er, covers.
This has nothing to do with marketing, this has to do with editorial irresponsibility.
June 24th, 2007 at 1:42 am
Dear Ms. Spector: I am quite certain that I did not say “cooters.”
I believe what I actually said was “hey-nonny-nonnies.”
June 24th, 2007 at 2:03 am
Tiger Beat and its ilk were fairly benign, as I recall, but isn’t that because the culture at the time was manipulated by a publicity machine that was run by film and TV studios and record companies (rather than publicists out to make sure that their clients get the maximum notice)? The companies were invested in keeping their artists’ images clean so that they didn’t lose business; even with our current culture wars, people are generally more tolerant of failure. Hell, in the 50s my lefty-liberal Greenwich Village school threw Mary Travers (of Peter, Paul and Mary) out her senior year when she became pregnant; Ingrid Bergman couldn’t get arrested on film for some years after she left her husband for Roberto Rossellini. There was a cost professionally and socially for acting outside the norm. Not so much any more. And antecedents of the prurient interest in the fuck-ups of the stars and the lipsmacking “she’s getting her comeuppance” subtext of so much celebrity reporting now can be found in the old fan magazines of 30 and 40 and 50 years ago, but very watered down.
The thing I remember about Tiger Beat (or whatever it was I saw when I was 11) was that it seemed, even then, to be pitched relentlessly to promote the downhome wholesomeness of the stars, in a weirdly corporate way.
Course I only read one or two of them, and thus my sample is not representative, and I may be talking out of my ass…
June 24th, 2007 at 9:55 am
Madeleine,
I wasn’t a Tiger Beat reader either, though I did see them at a friend’s house. Yes, they were relentlessly clean-cut and in a most unrealistic way. (And I never undrestood the whole Donny Osmond thing. Ick.)
There has always been a prurient side to the news. Hearst made a fortune pandering to it. But a distinction was made between real news and celebrity gossip. And you’re right, careers were ruined because of transgressions we would find banal today. (Probably the biggest gossip story of the 20th century, pre-OJ, was the affair between Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. Not only did it not destroy both of their careers, it made Taylor the highest paid star of her time. And she was even accused of “erotic vagrancy” by the Pope.)
My core problem with this magazine is that there was a craven indifference to the message being sent out to the intended readers. I don’t care that it was 2006. I don’t even care if the readers know that Hilton has a sex tape. By featuring her as if she were a standard to be achieved, they were sending a god-awful message to their readership. I don’t believe in unrealistic wholesomeness, but I do believe that when you feature someone editorially in a positive light, you’d best have some standards. A spoiled, ignorant, slut whose claim to fame is the accident of her birth and the promiscuity of her sex life isn’t what I think parents really want their daughters to aspire to.
June 24th, 2007 at 9:59 am
Denton,
You are a big fibber. You even said not to throw down punani as it would confuse the masses.
So there. Nyah nyah.
Your father is a hamster and your mother smells of elderberries.
June 24th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Caroline–I totally agree. It’s why I (who am generally the world’s most laissez-faire parent) don’t let such magazines in the house. I think it’s all a part of a larger cynicism: seeing kids (and particularly tween girls) as a huge market segment who can be sold all manner of crap. The baby-slut clothes that are marketed in some stories to this age group are stunning, and not in a good way (this occasioned some interesting discussions with YG about the semiotics of clothing, and why a “Will Party for Beer” t-shirt is sending a larger message than thirst). Many tweens want so desperately to achieve teenhood (more fool they) that they go for the clothes, the culture, the gossip that looks most sparkly and grown-up and fun.
On the other hand, I’m almost equally squicked by the “keep your child so innocent she doesn’t know where babies come from” market–which is far from being a solely religious segment. When I hear other mothers talking about how sweet their 13 year old looks, it’s usually unconcious code for “I’m dressing my child like an American Girl Doll.”
There has to be a middle ground, but it takes a lot of work and negotiation, which is exhausting. And its in that exhaustion zone that stuff like J-14 weasels in.
PS: what’s wrong with smelling of elderberries?
June 24th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
erotic vagrancy
(What is it?)
June 24th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Madeleine –
I don’t know how anyone navigates modern social “norms” and still manages to raise well-balanced kids. My hat is off to you.
The thing is, at some point our children stopped being, well, children and started being considered consumers.
P.S. Have you ever smelled elderberries? Ew.
Steve –
I think erotic vagrancy means having wild rumpy pumpy with someone other than one’s spouse. Or she was just too hot. I dunno…
June 24th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Being a teen myself, I’m glad I’m not drawn to those kinds of magazines. I often feel sick to my stomach when I see all those anorexic girls on the covers. Standing in line, I tend to get worked up. My mom does too. Then we rant together on our way back home and T.N. eventually says, “Can you guys shut up already? You’re giving me a headache!”
June 24th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
Rach can chime in as she wishes, but I think that both she and I have been totally oblivious to this tweener-teener-mag phenomenon.
We get all of our information from the InterTubes.
And she’s never seemed to give a single damn about popular culture, as far as I can tell.
I know more about Paris Hilton than I want to, simply because this crap is freaking unavoidable. Being famous for being shallow and narcissistic and completely plastic-looking. Ick.
Lindsey Lohan, on the other hand, during her voluptuous phase, surgically enhanced or not, was….juicy….
June 24th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
I guess I’ve only smelled the dried ones, which were merely slightly musty smelling.
June 24th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
When I was in my early teens, I was likely still reading Famous Monsters of Filmland (thanks, Forry). So I don’t have much in common with this lot of kids at that age.
On the other hand, given the bleak future this generation of teens is being handed, I can hardly blame them for being shallow and narcissistic. I mean, if by chance the world doesn’t go completely to hell in a handbasket they can work on substantive later.