because body snarking is the hot hobby for 2010

Dear lord. The fact that there's an article about it is bad enough (and I love the way they emphasise the 'disgusting' at the end!) but some of the comments on it are just beyond. . .

They range from stupid ('she shaves her armpits for hygiene reasons but doesn't think leg hair makes you hotter?' ?!?!?) to horrifically rascist and nasty.

Who would have thought people could get so upset about leg hair?

The obsession of American society with making women look like prepubescent girls (except for the big breasts) is one that I find deeply worrying.

Though not as worrying as the (fortunately rather less common) one with making prepubescent girls look like ten-dollar whores.

we're all supposed to look like Barbies -- smooth, hairless, big boobs, tiny feet -- no feelings.

What I don't get is Ken. I've never heard anyone say Ken is sexy. Now if Ken had sloppy hair and five oclock shadow... but as it is, he looks like he's going for a job interview, not a fashionable dance club.

Paul, of course Ken isn't sexy. Ken has nothing to do with sex, in the sense of human beings feeling a natural attraction toward one another on physical, emotional, or intellectual levels.

Ken happens to be male for one primary purpose: to teach young girls that a relationship with a man is one of the commodities they must pay for, if they don't want to be considered failures. Just like they have to buy the appropriate outfits for Rock Star Barbie, Astronaut Barbie, or whatever, if they want to imagine the doll (and through her, imagine themselves) ever experiencing a choice of different life paths.

"They" must pay for? (snark) Flash backing to Married with Children's Kelly: He's rich! He's handsome! He's the ex-husband of my dreams!