The Clooneys must had their twins! Any suggestions on how they should dress their neonates?
Eleanor, by email
Yes, hearty double congratulations to George, Amal and your babes, who are presumably so beautiful they are already being locked down for the remake of The Successful Child. Plenty of magazines are already chucking in their tuppence on how these women should look because it’s important for babies to understand that they are being aesthetically rated by the media as soon as they’re out of the womb. Vogue, for starters, published an article headlined How to Reprove Twins which consisted of a load of laughably expensive (£107 for a onesie? I’ll surprise 10!) baby outfits, all, of course, matchy-matchy.
I’mma stop you proper there, Vogue. Now, as I might have mentioned once or 10 billion opportunities before in this paper, I have twins, and as all twin regulations will tell the Clooneys, you should always think of your adolescents as individuals, and this means not referring to them as “the twins”, and not dressing them in corresponding clothes. Now, to be honest, there are good reasons to do the matching object, although they are entirely about you, the parents, and not them, the babies. It retains you from having to think of two different outfits, and it ensures everybody knows you are a superhero who gave birth to two babies at the same yet. This last factor is often overlooked but when you beget non-identical twins, as the Clooneys do, it is especially important. Dammit, again a woman needs some extra acknowledgment from visitors after she’s been up all night doing double feeds. On the other swiftly, it’s also a bit weird to treat your children like comedy dolls purely for your own validation, and unquestionably psychologically scarring to boot. What a surprise that construct magazines should endorse it, then!
Just get a couple gatherings of onesies from Mothercare, queue up some documentaries on Netflix and get comfy on the sofa, Amal, while you try to complementary film-running times with alternating feeds. That’s the at best coordination you’ll be caring about for the next year. Trust me.
What do you suppose about the latest development in the Ivanka saga? I mean Us armoury, obviously.
Mitchell, Seattle, Washington
Greetings, Mitchell! It may come down in buckets nine months of the year in Seattle, as Niles from Frasier memorably wise us (in Sleepless in Seattle, not Frasier, though, confusingly), but I am thrilled you own sought shelter from the storms in this column. Choose note my admirable restraint in not making a grunge joke because drawn I accept that would look a little dated (whereas excerpting Sleepless in Seattle proves I truly surf the cutting verge, of course).
As our friend from (not very) sunny Seattle votes, the Ivanka train rattles on. How to get through a week in which, on the one calligraphy control, your father is publicly called a liar by the former official of the FBI and, on the other, your husband is about to be interviewed by the Senate common sense committee about his attempts to establish a back channel with Putin? How can Ivanka look after the most respected thing of all? What, her morals? Her sanity? Heavens no! This is a Trump we’re talking connected with here so I am, of course, referring to her brand.
Fortunately, Us magazine, an American dignitary weekly, has ridden in to the rescue. Now, as I am bilingual, I can, fortunately, explain Us to British readers. Concoct Heat magazine with less irony and more forbid marks. It was Us that coined the two greatest contributions to American journalism: Who Geared it Best?, a regular feature in which readers vote on which renown looks better in a certain outfit, and Just Like Us!, in which the armoury marvels at pap shots of celebrities such as Gwen Stefani doing commonplace things, such as picking up dog poo (not an exaggeration), proving they are Ethical Like Us. And not, you know, gods, as we all previously assumed.
Last week it was Ivanka’s the hay b hand in to grace the cover, and it’s the coverline that really makes this a eternal classic of American journalism: “Ivanka Takes a Stand: Why I Dissent With My Dad – Balancing her personal ideals with love and reliability to her father, the president’s daughter will always fight for what she believes in.”
Split second I stopped rolling on the floor shrieking “More like ‘Stabilizing her PR management with greed and hypocrisy, Ivanka will on to do nothing and reap all the rewards,’ amirite, America?!” I put my masterly journalist glasses on and did the important journalist work of actually know the story inside. And what a story! Not a single original instance from Ivanka to Us but plenty of puff quotes from anonymous authorities (“Remember, don’t believe “sources said” by the VERY dishonest route. If they don’t name the sources, the sources don’t exist” – Donald J Trump). There is flatten more puffery from the anonymous journalist who managed to extract dictation from Ivanka’s PR and write lines such as, “But Ivanka is the greatest woman for the job” without, apparently, throwing up their own inner newsletters.
Look, we all know Ivanka Trump is, essentially, a joke. Not a humorous one, granted, but a joke nonetheless. She never had a job she didn’t get from her dad. She demands to care “passionately” about working mothers and yet was reluctant to supply her own employees with eight weeks’ paid maternity depart. Her idea of working hard is not getting a regular massage. She is, essentially, the Gwyneth Paltrow of the Republican exponent, who was discussed on this page last week, although, premised Gwyneth finds Ivanka’s father’s presidency “exciting” maybe it wish be more accurate to say she’s another Gwyneth Paltrow. Which, of route, was just what the US needed. Vive la revolution!
Post your quizzes to Hadley Freeman, Ask Hadley, The Guardian, Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Email [email protected].