Before I tell you about the Pink Junkies (that growing tribe of otherwise sentient women who can't resist pink), I should admit that I'm not a very "pink" person. Too apologetic a shade for my liking, too passive, too "Don't worry, I won't bite."
In my experience, good men enjoy being worried; they quite like a woman with bite. However, even I have to accept that these days, pink is everywhere -- mobiles, barbecues, music sound systems. There are even pink Handyman tools, and Fly Pink, "A boutique airline designed especially for women" that has its very own pink airplanes.
It's like a pink Midas touch -- everything that can be touched (or, more to the point, merchandized) is turned pink, and the pinker it is the more women clamor to buy it. In this way pink isn't just a color any more, it's a lifestyle choice. Where the Pink Junkies are concerned, one could even call it a drug -- hen-party heroin for the masses.
One cannot help but wonder who allowed this to happen? Who let pink back in? For the longest time, pink was frowned upon as the color of gender conditioning, the hue that would make Barbie dolls of us all. Pink was also the working woman's Kryptonite -- wear it and you were corporate toast. Then slowly, imperceptibly, the rules fell away, and a good thing, too.
What's so awful about little girls loving pink? Ditto the teens, staggering out of high street chains with armfuls of pink sparkly every-thing. Much more worrying is that, these days, it's not just young girls -- it's grown women who are turning our pavements into churning oceans of girly pink. How often recently have I seen groups of women, in their thirties, forties and beyond, sashaying along in baby-pink velour tracksuits, or hot pink leggings, shrieking into bubblegum-pink phones.
Everywhere you look, grown women dressed up as little girls. It's horrifying. And bewildering.
It's not even as though every woman looks so pretty in pink. (It's a fine line between dewy youth and the full-blown Baby Jane.) In fact, only an elite set of women (and the occasional style-smart gay man) can do pink with aplomb. One example is glamor model Jordan, whose wedding was such a display of pink "shock and awe" one could only applaud.
The only surprise was that she didn't have husband Peter Andre dyed pink. Here was a woman, one of the very few, to make pink seem ultra-sexual and powerful: "You want pink, big boy, I'll give you pink."
Sadly, with most women, pink has entirely the opposite effect -- neutralizing them, taking away their edge.
And maybe for some of these women, that's the point -- as if, in these gender-blurred times, pink has become a short cut to express old-style softness and femininity.
It could even be that extremely tough women use pink to deflect attention from their true colors -- ruthlessness, ambition, drive. As in, "Yes I just broke your balls in that business meeting, but I'm wearing pink, so I'm lovely really."
Delving into the psychology of pink, questions must be raised. Could it really be the color of choice for those women who yearn to be like little girls again? Is being infantilized in this way the new female bliss? Tellingly, maybe, they're rumored to be shifting an awful lot of pink merchandise to divorced and separated women. What does this say -- that when reality bites hard, so hard it draws blood, it's time for a woman to reach for the pink stuff? Because then you are transported back to a time when everything is fluffy and pretty, and there are no monsters under the bed (or in it).
In which case, maybe one should call time on the tyranny of the pink junkies. One hears that some women have taken to hiding their pink phones when they are doing business, proving that there may be such a thing as "pink shame."
And so there should be. After all, when was the last time you encountered armies of grown men decked out in sailor suits, sucking their thumbs and wailing "Mummy?" The female of the species had better put pink in its place -- just a color after all, and hell on earth to keep clean.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath