Like A Tiger

I do not care about this recent Tiger Woods affair car-crash whatever thing. I also did not care about the Premier of South Australia having an affair last week, or whatever that was. I mean, I don't think I ever used to care about "celeb adultery shock!" stories, much – but lately I've been more than uninterested, I've been damn well anti-interested, to the point that celebrity sex scandals are actually repelling my interest.

Is it just me? I know that famous people's extramarital affairs used to be much more of a big deal, years ago, because extramarital affairs used to be much more of a big deal in general, years ago . . . Until the 1970s, divorce was always scandalous and/or nigh-impossible; sex scandals could literally bring down a government. Fair enough these stories were well newsworthy, then.

Today, though . . . how is adultery still worth a broadsheet's front page? Is it really news? I mean – what's the divorce rate, these days? I'm 28 now, and I'm almost the only person I know whose parents aren't divorced. Only a minuscule fraction of marriages last from the vows 'til death without being interrupted by adultery and/or divorce. Shouldn't it be a hell of a lot more newsworthy when famous people don't have an affair and/or break up?

This is the gist of my rant: adultery is BORING. Adultery is ROUTINE. Adultery is EVERYWHERE, even if some people still refuse to admit it. So can't we just assume that most famous married people are having affairs, and then forget about it? With rare exceptions, adultery has no bearing on anything that the famous person is actually doing in the public sphere. And it's none of our business, right? Look, I enjoy reading about (some) famous people, I totally understand the impulse to learn the "private" details of their lives; it's a neat thrill, sometimes. But adultery just isn't doing it for me, anymore. Adultery is dull, predictable and petty; it's not exciting, it's not even sexy. It leaves me feeling vaguely glum. I'd rather know what Tiger Woods eats for breakfast than know the state of his marriage, and I don't really care what he eats for breakfast. I don't even play golf.

I DO NOT CARE about Tiger Woods's marriage.

However. I did find this Chinese news report rather intriguing:

(via Pajiba)

The Onion's version of events is compelling, too.

Am I in a minority of one, in not caring about celebrity adultery? Am I being too old-fashioned, or too new-fashioned, or just daft?

/end rant

MICHAEL JACKSON IS UNDEAD

Friday Is Out Of Context

Let's say you saw this on the cover of a magazine.

When you think of alimony, do you think of circus laundry? Personally, when I think "weapon of female revenge" I think of something a little more literal, but I suppose that's maybe a generational thing? You tell me, magazine readers of the past – what the hell is up with you people?

For increased context, here's the complete picture: cover of Coronet magazine, May 1952. (Found via.) Note that this issue apparently sold well enough to justify at least one printing of two and a half million copies. Note also that the complete picture still fails utterly to link the elephant-watches-man-hang-circus-laundry image with its "Alimony: Weapon of Female Revenge" headline, in absolutely any way. Was there a last-minute editorial change? Were they trying to appeal to that lucrative men-who-fear-women-but-love-the-circus market? Am I missing an important visual metaphor, or something? Help me out, seriously.

This Friday Is Out Of Context Thoapsl Says: An ex-wife is not an elephant in the room.