Skip to main content

New girls' mag Kookie promotes an unpalatable message - you can't be intelligent and enjoy frivolous things

A brand new girls' magazine is being launched at the end of the year and there won't be any fashion, beauty or celebrity pages. Neither will there be any ads.

Kookie has been launched by mum Vivien Jones who said she was unable to find a single magazine suitable for her own teenage girls to read. The 50-year-old, who has worked in magazine publishing herself, believes magazines aimed at girls have too narrow a focus. They are too driven by celebrity, shopping and gossip and come accompanied by 'pink plastic tat'.

As a result she decided to embark on launching her own magazine, aimed at promoting a girl's self worth. Kookie will be available quarterly from December and will kick off with an interview with Darcey Bussell and an illustrated feature about the record-breaking aviator Amy Johnson.

There is undoubtedly a problem with the magazines currently aimed at teenage girls, but I feel Kookie goes too far the other way. The very point of a magazine is to provide a piece of glossy escapism, so what is needed is not a magazine which completely bypasses all frivolity but combines a measured amount of fashion and beauty with some more thoughtful, inspirational content.

Kookie's decision to interview Darcey Bussell is exactly right. Teenage magazines, and indeed adult ones, would do far better in choosing to feature famous people who have become celebrities on the back of their achievements rather than simply appearing on a reality show. Girls' magazines are simply holding up a miniature mirror to the issue of celebrity for celebrity's sake, which has dumbed down our culture for far too long.

Where Kookie, in my opinion, is wrong is in completely ignoring girls' wishes to read about fashion, beauty and relationships as it is a natural part of growing up and finding out where you belong.

Of course an unhealthy obsession with how one looks should not be promoted by any magazine. It is all about how the information is presented. Completely leaving any discussion of these topics out would be just as perplexing. For some girls this will be their only source of information and they will simply look elsewhere, such as the internet, where there is no regulation of content.

The message girls should be getting about fashion and beauty is that it is a bit of fun – it feeds into self-expression and dressing up - but it should not completely rule your world. Then there is the instructional side which all girls need, even if it comes down to a step-by-step skincare routine, especially for teenagers. Help them look after their skin and their confidence levels will increase and they won't feel the need to trowel on the make-up.

And I do take issue with this idea that you cannot be an intelligent, deep-thinking individual and like fashion and beauty at the same time. Does the fact Claudia Winkleman writes a style column for The Times each Sunday make her any the less witty and sharp? Does the fact broadsheet journalists such as Sali Hughes and India Knight write about beauty mean we should dismiss their equally well-written articles on politics?

Kookie has very good intentions. It wants to raise girls up from the mire of celebrity drivel and open up their minds to greater things but this shouldn't be done to the complete exclusion of 'pink plastic tat'.

And to be honest, what I can't quite understand is why Ms Jones didn't encourage her teenage daughters to read more books instead.


Comments

  1. IMO, like most things in life, getting the balance is the best approach. My girls love following celebrities, beauty products, shopping (especially in charity shops) but they also read books and watch nature programmes...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Bake Off style icon and a feline emblem of women's emancipation

The world of British politics has been dominated by the wave of sexual allegations pouring out of Westminster this week. So much so, there has been hardly any talk of Brexit. Perhaps we have left. Has anyone noticed a lack of hummus on the shelves of Tesco? But I, rather unfeelingly, digress.
MPs across all political parties have received accusations of a sexual nature against them, ranging from inappropriate comments and misplaced hands to sexual assault and rape. Prime Minister Theresa May has pledged to unite with all other party leaders next week to discuss what must be done to clamp down on this behaviour and deal with the current allegations appropriately.
Of course there have been numerous critics - those who believe we are in some way being unfair to male MPs by bringing these sexual transgressions to the fore. That a man will never be able to chat a woman up in a bar again if we persist in allowing yet another male-dominated area of society to be exposed as misogynistic and …

Older women are missing the point when they say millennials need to 'toughen up' in the face of sexual abuse

It takes a certain type of woman to come out during what can only be seen as a revolutionary time for women's rights and complain. But that is exactly what a number of older, prominent female figures have done since the sex scandal broke at Westminster and it leaves me puzzling, in the most colloquial of terms, 'whose side are they actually on'?
The pervasive idea amongst the women I refer to is that what is going on in the House of Commons as we speak is nothing but a moral panic led by the millennials. They claim that it all comes down to the younger women, who make up much of the MP's staff, not being tough enough to fend off the comments and misplaced hands of their bosses.
They further claim this is some kind of 'millennial revenge' by younger women who carry around with them a sense of disgust towards anyone over 40. Furthermore, they say, women of their generation had a far more robust attitude to men behaving badly, compared to the 'fragile' …

MP's vote on Brexit is a 'con', Johnson's apology a sop, but Theresa May's condemnation of Russia was a triumph

It has been called a 'staggering climbdown' by some but the truth of the matter is, the Government's 11th hour decision to allow Parliament a vote on the Brexit deal is just another example of Tory trickery.
David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, announced yesterday (Monday) that the final Brexit Withdrawal Bill would be presented to the House of Commons as an Act of Parliament which could be voted on in good time before we leave the European Union.
This was initially seen as a major victory on the part of Labour MPs and Tory rebels who have been calling for several months for Parliament to have their say on the Brexit deal. Davis had previously said there would not be an opportunity for MPs to vote as they anticipated work on the deal would be going on until the last minute before exiting.
But alas the devil is always in the detail and it quickly emerged that whilst MPs will be able to vote on the deal, they will not be able to have any say in the case of a no deal Brexit – …