Guilty Pleasures

I know I am not the only one out there has been following the newest nanny gate story. Lucky Spinster weighed in her vote here -- her post includes links to both the blog in question and the subsequent NY Times column.

LS was then quoted amongst others here.

I read the article, I found it engaging. I then read the nanny's comeback -- they both have worthwhile points. One more she said/she said in the game of human relations. What sets it apart from every other employment relationship gone wrong is they both chose to write about it in their respective venues. And since they both wrote about it I really don't think either can claim the moral high horse.

What bothered me about the aftermath of the exchange were comments like this, calling for the end of the Modern Love column.

Because, okay, I'm going to admit it. I love Modern Love.

And in a world where our opportunities for observance of ritual are rare indeed, my Sunday Times reading is one that I cherish.

Yes. I start with the Sunday Styles. I do. And you know what? It is the SUNDAY STYLES. It is meant to be frothy and palatable and totally indulgent and hoorah for that. It is not completely ridiculous like People magazine or Cosmo, you can read it without feeling like you have to hide it from all of your bougie-bohemian intellectual friends, but still - IT IS THE STYLE SECTION.

1. I start with the wedding pages. I do. I couldn't care less about wedding dresses or ceremonies or whose father is the CEO of what company. I like reading how people met. I like reading the VOWS column. I don't know if I ever want to get married, but I love reading the wedding pages of the Sunday Times. There. I've said it.

2. Then I move on to Modern Love. And yeah -- so some of the pieces are meaningless or self-indulgent, but if you don't like them then don't read them. Everyone is so quick to judge the Times, and no, it is not a flawless paper, and yes, it drives me nuts too when they "name" a new phenomenon or trend that has actually been around for a year or two, but really, it is a good paper, probably the best in our country, and if you want to see what a paper can be then read the Hagerstown Journal. And you'll realize how good you have it.

3. When I finish the Style section I move on to Travel and read about place that I can't afford to eat at and how to get there from places I can't afford to stay at in countries I can't afford to fly to.

4. Then I go to the Magazine. The article on "framing" this week was very interesting, and I am already listening to how John Roberts is being "framed" for the liberals. The stress is continually on his pedigrees: education and qualifications. Because the liberal elite like education. And qualifications. We trust degrees.

5. Then Arts. Sometimes I read it, sometimes I just look at the pictures.

6. Then, finally, if I get around to it I read the News and the Week in Review. IF I get around to it before like, Wednesday of the next week. And if I don't I DON'T READ IT.

So does that make me a bad person?