At the start of this new decade, from the pulpit of his occasional, grandiose New York Times column, Bono called for the "return of the automobile as sexual object." He was referring to the lines and curves of the cars themselves, but it's no secret that car manufacturers have long relied on the marketing strategy of placing their wares in close proximity to beautiful women for a little borrowed allure. The pretty-girls-using-transportation motif may have moved elsewhere lately—bike blogs are filled with photos of cycling ingenues, in it for love rather than money—but for most of the 20th century, it rested solidly with the auto. So a history of the women used to sell cars doubles as a shorthand history of the evolving tastes of consumers—in women and cars, and how best to objectify both. Margery Krevsky's Sirens of Chrome: The Enduring Allure of Auto Show Models, a Mini Cooper-proportioned coffee-table book, is a visual romp that's a bit short on narrative, context, and criticism but so seductively fun to look at, you won't care. And that fact tells you about all you need to know about how the car-model thing works, right?

Click here for our bonus slide-show of auto-show models.

(Images courtesy of the Archives of the Chicago Automobile Trade Association and the National Automotive History Collection at Detroit Public Library, used with permission of the author.)

Tags: auto show models, book of the week, marketing to women, modeling, models, objectification, sirens of chrome

Today, discount designer retailer Gilt kicked off its “wedding weekend,” three days of sales themed around nuptials. Bargain-hungry brides can scoop up steals like an embroidered Alexander McQueen gown for $3,999 ($11,950 originally) and Sergio Rossi strappy sandals for $199 ($770 originally)—or they could before those items were sold out.

But there’s still a lot to choose from on Gilt, which got us thinking about the pros and cons of online wedding shopping. Sure, sales on sites like Gilt are incredibly attractive—but even if it’s drastically discounted, spending $3,999 or more on a dress that might not fit is a huge gamble. Trusting an online retailer to outfit you on your big day could be as big a mistake as making an awful wedding Web site.

Would you ever buy a wedding dress online? Below, Double X writers weigh in.

Jessica Lambertson: You know, a lot of the wedding dress process is getting it fitted and resized. I think if I really knew I loved the dress, I would consider buying it online. If it's a steal, it's a steal! I can use the money I saved to make sure it fits right!

Ellen Tarlin: Well, first of all, I would never buy a wedding dress, period, since I find the whole patriarchal traditional princess-for-a-day fantasy sexist and appalling, but if I didn't, yes, I probably would buy a wedding dress online because 1) if you are not of completely unreasonable size, it is often about the fitting, and 2) I am just that impulsive about buying things online. Can they be returned?

Nina Rastogi: The Gilt wedding dresses aren't returnable (at least, the few I clicked on aren't). It doesn't seem so far-fetched to me ... after all, I bet lots of brides who know they want a schmancy designer dress have already tried on enough that they know what cut they're looking for and how various designers' stuff fits them. The online part doesn't faze me; I buy most of my clothes online these days. But buying something that expensive when it's not returnable and you have to make a decision in, like, four seconds in order to beat out the rest of the shoppers ... I'm not entirely sure I could pull the trigger on that.

Dana Stevens: Ellen, I would never buy or wear one either, but I have other fantasies that are no doubt just as girly and absurd as being a princess for a day, so I can't begrudge anyone the desire to walk up an aisle in tulle. With a lot of advance footwork about the designer, the fabric, etc., plus the knowledge that you were getting it fitted anyway, those deals seem hard to pass up. But even $3,999 for a dress you can never wear again ... all I can think is how many trips to cool places that would buy.

Rachael Larimore: I know there must exist at least a few women who would eat ramen for a year to afford a $4,000 dress, but something tells me that most women looking for such a dress can afford the cool trips IN ADDITION to the dress.

Amanda Marcotte: I suppose the way to do it is to ask whoever is going to alter your dress for advice and take it. Personally, I had hoped this recession would reintroduce the concept of the small, humble wedding.

Hanna Rosin: No, never. The whole arc of the wedding narrative is fantasy interrupted. You dream up something and then life—in the form of wilted flowers, nervous groom, bossy mother-in-law—ruins your dream. This is the premise of more than one reality TV show. And Gilt—all of Internet shopping, in fact—plays so perfectly into that. You know what I'm talking about: Zappos shoes that squish up your feet. A Bluefly sweater that sags off your shoulders. The dresses might look beautiful online, but God knows what they'll look like on your body. Save your money.

Tags: gilt, online shopping, shopping, wedding dress, weddings

Tracy Clark-Flory gives all the arguments for why it's a bad idea for Georgia to ban race- and sex-selective abortions, as a bill that passed out of committee in the state legislature this week would do. This whole subject is tricky, becaue the notion of an abortion done because a woman doesn't like the race or sex of her fetus makes most of us recoil. That's, of course, why the proposed legislation is a good move from a pro-life point of view. Consider also the context for the bill, which Tracy gets right:

It's important to look at this measure within the context of a recent push to reframe the abortion debate as a battle over racial discrimination. Last week, I wrote about how the Endangered Species Project, which is backed in part by Georgia Right to Life, alleges a "black genocide" at the hands of Planned Parenthood and uses African-American babies as anti-abortion propaganda. Both the bill and the ad campaign are built on the same false premise: That the higher abortion rate in the African-American community is the result of a racist conspiracy by medical providers and pro-choice activists (as opposed to, say, the end result of social manifestations of racism -- like poor healthcare and sex education -- which Planned Parenthood actually works to address). The only evidence they have offered up of such a conspiracy has been thoroughly debunked.

Who else is behind this false idea that abortion providers are linked to a black genocide? The NYT reports that a "new documentary, written and directed by Mark Crutcher, a white abortion opponent in Denton, Tex., meticulously traces what it says are connections among slavery, Nazi-style eugenics, birth control and abortion, and is being regularly screened by black organizations." Crutcher's intended audience might want to take a look at what he's written about President Obama. Starting here on his blog: "Besides being a Marxist, Barak Obama is the most rabidly pro-abortion, morally defective and completely unqualified person to ever be given the keys to the Oval Office. This man is thoroughly evil and I have little doubt that we are likely entering into the most dangerous period in the history of our country." See, too, here and here. Crutcher also says that the "pro-life movement is, by far, the most peaceful socio-political movement of its size and tenure," comparing it favorably with the civil rights, labor, and anti-slavery movements.

There have been several reports on Life Dynamics, the group Crutcher founded. Kathy Seward Northern of the Ohio State law faculty describes a “1992 antiabortion manual the group distributed [that] urged support for abortion malpractice lawsuits ‘to protect women, but also to force abortionists out of business by driving up their insurance rates.’ ” Yale law professor Reva Siegel, who is a friend, picks up on this and did more digging in a 2008 law review article—here's the link.

Photograph by Photodisc/Getty Images.

Tags: abortion, georgia right to life, mark crutcher

I was raised in a time when parents were forcing their kids to take Japanese lessons, the better to welcome our coming Asian overlords. It always seemed strange, and we all pretty much forgot about it when Japan went into recession and we found other nations about which to fabricate existential crises. But I get it now, Japan. Our parents were right to fear you. It was never about cars or teamwork. It’s way deeper than that. Because while we were frittering our time away with Etsy, making baby hats and cake toppers, Iwasa-san “heard the voice.” “Take action this year,” it said.

The inspirational direction was so loud, she looked around for its source, she said.

"I went outside and looked at other people, wondering if they heard the same voice," Iwasa-san says. "But they didn’t seem to hear."

Iwasa-San found a needle and thread. And she took up the stuff of our childhood dreams and spun feral nightmares. Consider the Anne of Green Gables cat costume, which subverts and negates, in the delicate placement of curly red yarn atop the dark eyes of feline death-stare, every image Lucy Maud Montgomery ever conjured. The decadent Versailles collection is, if possible, even more disturbing. In her cross-catdressing propaganda film, Cat Prin! The Cute Show, Iwasa-san reports that “most of the ideas came from a world apart from our dimensional reality” and her responsibility is to “materialize these received images.” And Iwasa-San isn’t just interested in dressing her own cat, Prin. No, she wants to spread the cat clothing-plague through her freakish Web site. Judging by her own words, she will not take no for an answer:

You need to dress a cat. And you will say to a cat together with a family. "It has changed just for a moment." You will pass pleasant one time.

Photograph of cat in "young lady blouse" from petoffice.co.jp.

Tags: cat clothes, nightmares

There is an implied mystery in the coverage of White House social secretary Desirée Rogers’ firing that I would love to have cleared up: Was Michelle Obama jealous? The two women were old friends. At the White House, Rogers described herself as the “eyes and ears of Mrs. Obama.” From the outset, Rogers did not seem like a Washington type: She used New York ad-speak to describe the president (Brand Obama). She posed in outrageously expensive clothing and jewelry for glossy magazines. She attended fashion week with Anna Wintour. From there, the narrative could have gone two ways. Michelle and Desirée could have bonded as the tough, fashion-forward Chicago sisters in a dull, alien city. Or Michelle could have decided that there was only room for one of them. And lately, Rogers seemed to be really stepping over the line. Look at her poses in this Wall Street Journal profile. Note the dress, which a First Lady could never get away with. See how Michelle’s garden becomes just a backdrop for Desirée’s fabulousness. See how Desiree shows off her own beautifully toned arms. Note the opening tone of mythology: "Desirée Glapion Rogers is the descendant of a Creole voodoo priestess named Marie Laveau Glapion."

Photograph of Desirée Rogers and Michelle Obama by Alex Wong/Getty Images.

Tags: Desiree Rogers, Desiree Rogers fired, Michelle Obama

—Meg Whitman’s oil and gas investments may compromise her candidacy for governor of California. [LA Times]

—Dozens of vodka-swilling Brighton Beach natives plead and push their way into auditions for the Russian version of Jersey Shore. [NYT City Room blog]

—Women can now experience the freedom of peeing upright with a new flushable paper funnel. [Salon]

—Sources say that Obama officials fired White House social secretary Desirée Rogers for being too fabulous. [New York Times]

—Despite a mountain of evidence promoting longer school days, states are cutting back on full-day kindergarten programs. [The Daily Beast]

—A bill recently passed in Georgia outlawing race- and sex-selective abortions, further stripping away women’s reproductive rights. [Salon]

Tags: abortion, brighton beach, california, Desiree Rogers, education, jersey shore, kindergarten, Meg Whitman, politics, white house