Hmm

[Trigger warning for domestic violence.]

So there's this asshole named Danny Dyer, a 10¢ celebrity who writes (wrote) an advice column for the British men's magazine Zoo, and he's been sacked from the gig after he advised a heartbroken ex-boyfriend who wrote seeking counsel: "I'd suggest going out on a rampage with the boys, getting on the booze and smashing anything that moves. Then, when some bird falls for you, you can turn the tables and break her heart. Of course, the other option is to cut your ex's face, and then no one will want her."

Somehow, this swell advice made it into print, via what Zoo is claiming was "an extremely regrettable production error," which I believe translates roughly into: "We had no idea that everyone would get so upset about a little disfigurement joke! Sheesh!"

Which, in some twisted way, is understandable, given that Danny Dyer's hot advice has previously included the suggestion to a correspondent who complained about his girlfriend's abundance of pubic hair: "Maybe set light to the muff hair. That stuff goes up quick, like a thatched roof."

Why, one wonders, was advising setting a woman on fire met with yawning indifference, but advising slashing her face resulted in massive blowback, Dyer's immediate dismissal, an apology and a donation to Women's Aid from the magazine, and their promise to dedicate the space where his next column would have run to awareness-raising about domestic violence…?

Don't misunderstand me: I believe the reaction to his slashing advice was spot-on. I'm just wondering why his ignition advice did not elicit the same reaction.

Maybe it was just a matter of this recent affront catching the attention of the right information maven, from whose network spread an infectious indignity. Maybe.

Or maybe not. Because it hasn't escaped my notice that the advocated cruelty which was ignored admonished a man to violently take care of a woman's unruly public hair (enforcing the Beauty Standard), whereas the advocated cruelty that sparked outrage admonished a man to violently ruin a woman's face (subverting the Beauty Standard).

It's certainly interesting, that.

Of course, it's entirely possible, ahem, that's just a coincidence.