Turn for the worse

I was in one of those little magazine/tobacco shops, when I happened to read the cover of a tabloid. The headline was "Kirstie Alley: 240 lbs., too fat for sex!" Poor Ms. Alley: the headline was accompanied by an unflattering photo of her, looking like a bear standing on its hindlegs about to pounce.

So it might be that it's been a while since I've been in a regular old supermarket and seen the headlines of the tabloids by the cashiers, and this is normal now. But "too fat for sex" seems to be over the top, doesn't it? 1. OK, she's fat...but she's probably not actually too fat for sex -- I'm sure it's still physically possible 2. with what authority does a tabloid establish this kind of weight threshold? 3. not to mention if we read 'sex' as meaning gender too, a whole other set of issues...

Defending Kirstie Alley isn't really my point...It just really struck me as particularly mean spirited, a step beyond decency, even the bounds of deceny we might imagine for tabloids -- "FAT" seems to be OK. But too fat for sex is prescriptive.