In and Out Lists

By now most people would agree that fashion magazines are toxic. They constantly spread the gospel of shallowness, irrational consumism, selfhatred and dissatisfaction with one's body, and evangelize about eternal youth, but in addition to all these things, magazines also spread the Bullying Gospel. With lots of pictures of products many of which are out of the reach of the middle class (unless you are willing to starve for a month in order to get a dress that won't be in next month), many of them also provide readers with a list of things they are supposed to look down on. From last season fashion to skin conditions (like oily skin, as it came out in this month's Cosmopolitan), or personal choices, such as deciding against make up or prefering leather to synthetic materials or the other way around.

Some of these magazines also include articles about bullying and mobbing - and some of them are rather good - which makes it ironic that they prepare their readers not only to stand in the face of bullying while arming them to become fashion bullies. Could it be that niceness and tolerance don't sell? Certainly their advertisers wouldn't be happy if one of these big name magazines were to subscribe to a rational spending philosophy. what would happen if they were to say to their readers that they don't need to buy more clothes, and that polishing their shoes is perfectly okay, there's no need to buy new ones. Certainly, if they weren't egging readers to spend the money they don't have on buying new clothes they don't need every month, what would they fill their pages with? Then again they may be able to fill pages with sex tips, as some of them seem to be fond of doing.

Be it as it may, fashion magazines should be a little bit more consisten about what they publish, seek to stop firing intolerance and bullying. We have enough already, born from insecurities and corruption, we don't need anymore born from what glossy pages might suggest. Of course, we shouldn't place the whole blame on magazines, for the primal blame is to be placed on the readers, the people who take these lists, these suggestions without questioning, without measuring what these shallow lists give to their lives, how they affect the quality of it and what it makes of them.

Censoring the lists isn't the solution - that's just as dumb as censoring books and movies, as if the audience were uncapable of making their own decisions - but we can demand magazines to be more sensitive, more rational and watch what they publish, while advising the audience to ponder on the information, take it with a grain of salt and decide rationally if it is worthy of consideration or not. Yes, today's world learns from Internet and MSN news, they place Miley Cyrus in the same level as President Obama, and many don't even know who Ben Bernanke  or Alan Greenspan is. They know about Selena Gomez, but not about Angela Merkel or Francois Hollande. This is a world about deception, carelessness and shallowness, but that's also up to you. 

Remember the List of 13? Well, start up one or include in your next list a specific task about something you want to pay attention to, to become aware. Read about your country's history, decide to read an article a day about economics or social issues, or watch one news show. Decide to broaden your horizon by visiting local museums or art galleries, maybe a local cultural fair. There are options and they are all up to you. And as you mingle among different people, you'll realize that there's no In and Out in the world, that people who dress funky might be more interested in the soul, that there's a message in the way people hold themselves, and interpreting them go far beyond brands and fashion.