It's probably the dream of everyone with an eating disorder to have your cake and eat it (or maybe not have your cake and not eat it). But I'm starting to see a pattern emerging with the Hate's attitude towards diet, weight and celebrities.
On the one hand, they're very keen to try and wring their hands about eating disorders. There have been a few very well written anorexia pieces recently. Unfortunately for the authors of those pieces, they've often appeared just millimetres away from a story slagging off someone for being too tubby. So what's going on?
Let's look at two stories in the Hate today. I must warn you now that one of them has been written by Liz Jones. You may, therefore, just by clicking on the link, start experiencing feelings of nausea. Read a couple of sentences and that may become explosive diarrhoea. Complete the whole thing and you may find yourself lying down on a train track with a teddy bear, crying softly, waiting for it to be all over. Just don't say I didn't warn you.
Anyway, what does Liz 'Fucking' Jones have to say about things?
Super-skinny legs are sick not sexy but they are worryingly becoming the norm for young women
Worryingly becoming the norm? Wow, I didn't know that actually. That's useful information. I'm assuming that Jones is going to bring us the details of the scientific survey that show us that to be the case, rather than simply recounting a few examples of thin women who are celebrit... oh.
She's considered one of the beauties of our time. Former model Lisa B has dark glossy hair, flawless skin, perfect features and...hideously skinny legs!
Thin woman in 'has thin legs' shocka!
It would be easy to say this photograph beggars belief, but, sadly, it does not, as there are similar shots of so many women, including Teri Hatcher, Amy Winehouse, Kate Moss, Victoria Beckham and Sarah Jessica Parker.
You see, it's a worldwide trend because SIX women have skinny legs. Do you see?! Mind you, I wouldn't call all of those women 'young'. (Miaow!)
I concede that, perhaps, Kate Moss has never been on a diet in her life, and that Amy Winehouse's emaciation is "fuelled" by addiction, not an iron will.
But you do not get thighs like these unless something extreme and health threatening is going on in your life.
So what are you saying, Jones? I scent the faint whiff of something being hastily legalled in all that balls, but I could be wrong.
Previously, I have attacked on these pages the all-powerful casting directors and stylists who dictate the "look" of the designer catwalk shows. So today, I think, it is the turn of the glossy magazines to take some of the flak.
One of the recommendations of the Model Health Inquiry was for magazine editors, fashion directors and art directors to announce some sort of moratorium on the excessive use of air brushing.
In fact, very soon, members of the Association of UK magazine and Periodical Publishers (PPA) are to meet the inquiry's chair, Baroness Kingsmill, and members of the British Fashion Council to discuss how magazines can operate in a more responsible manner.
As shit a journalist as Jones is, it's hard not to agree with her when she says that magazines, who choose the 'look' of women as being consistently and repeatedly thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, often impossibly thin, are responsible for some societal pressures on women to conform to an unachievable standard of perceived beauty. Even men's magazines photoshop women ridiculously to give them impossible anatomy, because tiny legs are supposedly seen as being attractive.
But... if Jones were really so concerned about the way that publications presented body image to their readers, wouldn't she be just as annoyed at this intrusive load of old trash that appeared in a daily newspaper today?
Rotund Robbie Williams gains a few pounds... and a new girl
You may remember that I think Bobby Billions is an execrably awful talent vacuum who should be roundly ignored for the rest of his life, and that anyone who thinks in any way, shape or form that he has ever contributed anything to the world other than an inane wrongness should be committed to a secure unit by sundown; but that still doesn't mean we should point and laugh at him for being not entirely svelte.
Robbie Williams recently claimed that he was to give pop to become a full-time ufologist (someone who studies UFOs) - but he has clearly found interests closer to Earth.
Fatty food, by the looks of his expanded girth, and a brunette called Suzanna.
The now portly singer, 34, who is worth an estimated £130m, was recently spotted cosying up with his new love interest Studio City in LA after a game of golf with family members.
The sheer cattiness of these pieces is remarkable. So what if someone slightly famous has had a couple of pies? Is that really worth talking about? Is it really worth getting long-lens pap pictures of someone so you can mew and growl about how slightly imperfect they are by your incredibly bloody high standards? Where is the news? What is the interest? How does this benefit anyone other than the parasite who took the pictures and the witless goon tapping away at a keyboard in Docklands?
You will have guessed, of course, the name of the publication which printed this load of utter codswallop: the Daily Mail. So it's time to return to what I was saying at the start. What is the Mail doing? Does it genuinely worry about the body image messages it sends out, or does it relish slagging people off for being too fat, too thin, too whatever for them? Where's it coming from?
I think the answer could be more subtle than simply that they are a bunch of scumbags who will write anything so long as some berk somewhere is willing to read it, though that's not a bad place to start.
Feigning some concern for men's and women's appearances - while at the same time ripping into them when they do not match the Mail's Procrustes bed of perfection - has a twofold value. Firstly, of course, there's a huge amount of people who deep down really do worry about body image, and who are insulted and upset by the mainstream media's messages. They will find something to cling onto when the Mail blames the internet, 'pro-anorexia' websites and nameless magazines for the problems with body image, particularly in women.
And the second value is that, whenever they may be challenged about the nasty, vile, dirty, shitty, finger-pointing, childish nonsense about celebrities' weight, in which they indulge every single day of the year without ever giving a shit about the consequences or the messages they're sending out, they can say ah, but look, every now and then we publish something that pretends to care about the way people look. See? We're not such bad coves really.
Except they are. And they always will be. The articles worrying about women's weight and body image aren't the other pan of the scales that balances out the evil that gets written in Femail and elsewhere. Nothing balances that out: you either write it or you don't. The Mail does. It chooses to do so. And it does it without apology or concern for what it's doing. And no amount of occasional articles giving the impression they actually do give a fuck about body image will ever change that.