Dakota too young for Cosmpolitan?

DAKOTA DOES COSMOPOLITAN  . . . Oh, boy does she ever! I don’t read Cosmopolitan. Probably my single most salient exposure to the torrid world of Cosmo is from a Seinfeld episode, the one where George’s mother catches him masturbating in the living room with an issue of Cosmopolitan. This magazine seems like a trashier more lurid version of Woman’s Day. Instead of casseroles and how to decorate your home for a Crack’n Kwanzaa Christmas. We are offered up a plethora of non-stop sex. Sex, sex, sex, this month’s issue seems to be no exception.

       Honestly folks, I’m more than a little bit disappointed with Dakota. Do they know the girl is still only 17?  Cosmopolitan seems like such a trashy tacky tatty vehicle to unveil her new found sexuality.  I always thought  she possessed a bit more je ne sais quoi. Personally, I’d be embarrassed  to be associated  with such scandalous salacious tag lines as: “Um, vagina are you okay down there?” and “His best sex ever.” *sigh* It’s with a wink and a nod and no amount of calculated cynicism the editors of Cosmo chose to wait until the strategic month of February before allowing Dakota to  grace their cover.

     Surprise! Dakota turns eighteen on February 23^rd    2012. What an amazing marvelous  wonderful zeitgeist one month makes! Prior to February Dakota was nothing more than jail bait, the mere lust and fantasy of  frustrated ephebophiles everywhere. Apparently eighteen makes all the difference. Open the flood gates! Do I see a Maxim spread anytime in the future? Perhaps a bawdy revival of Oh Calcutta? Daniel Radcliffe certainly couldn’t wait to shed his Harry Potter image and appear naked in Equus.

     I find this whole turning eighteen thing a  highly specious, laughable convenient contrivance.  It isn’t like a girl’s sexuality is a light-switch, off one moment and suddenly on the next. Oh, in case you haven't noticed, Dakota is a beautiful girl; do I dare say she was a beautiful girl in 2001. I knew she was a beautiful girl then and she’s grown up, blossomed to become a beautiful and sexually attractive young woman. Nothing really changes on February 23^rd @ 12:01 except a few disingenuous people out there will suddenly feel a whole lot  less creepy—finally free to express their pent up sexual frustration.  

         

Fanning sisters for W magaizine

            One of our favorite pictures. Dakota and Elle turn up the heat for W magazine. Why these two girls haven't made a movie together is beyond me. It seems such an obvious casting choice, the two sisters certainly generate plenty of chemistry as well as do I dare say enough concupiscent passion to raise a few eyebrows. Elsewhere, there's trouble across the pond. Dakota finds herself embroiled in a advertising scandal over her Oh Lola! campaign.  The ads for Marc Jacob were  banned by the UK Advertising Standards Authority for being “salacious,” too sexually provocative.

     Then there's 14-year-old Chloe Moretz, who doesn’t shy away at all from her jail bait image. I might even go as far as to say she revels in it. The poor dear doesn't seem to be able to go near a red carpet without flashing that ridiculous duck face “come hither” salacious pout. What’s up with young girls these days? Do I detect a greater trend here? We find ourselves in the grips of a forbidden epidemic: The  sexualization of our American youth. What with the marketing of slutty Bratz dolls to our  pre-teens, the  message is clear: You can look but do not touch. I should  think neither Miss Fanning nor Miss Moretz is so naive as to not know exactly what they're doing. *sigh* Sometimes I pine for the good ol’ days. I miss the old Dakota. Whatever happened to my fresh-face pig-tailed Fern? Excuse me while I go get some ice.