Imagine rich Wall Street guys starting a campaign telling everyone that money doesn't make you happy and "doesn't move you forward in life." Similarly, Beyonce has a big chuck of pretty capital, and it's served her very, very well, and moved her forward in life quite a bit, over and above what her talent capital would…

Beyonce is a semi-conscious mannequin that probably goes for weeks at a time without making a single decision regarding anything.

Sorry Dodai, this is sort of silly. It's color correction. It has always been done at half way decent photo labs; before digital even. Seriously I should know I did it for a living.

it's basic color correction. Yikes, mountains out of molehills!

Color correction has more to do with improving the quality of the photo than anything else. This isn't a comment on baby George's natural rosiness, it's just art direction. Carry on.

Agreed. Looks pretty basic to me.

Color correcting is not really "photoshopping" in the internet sense of the word. It's pretty standard for ANY photoshoot to at least touch up the lighting/color if it can add warmth. It's not like they pageant-ized him or anything.

Not much in the way of photoshopping. It was just filtered (and the eyes touched so they were not overly dark). The same picture could have been taken with a different camera filter. The reasoning, of course, is that the original was deemed too "washed out" for newspaper stand and design comfort. maybe one could…

Pretty sure they just upped the coloring of the whole picture. It is, after all, a magazine cover. I don't see any actual photoshopping here.

The camera's white balance was set to "AUTO", so it didn't give a correct color representation. The photographer/editor decided to add some red and yellow to a very blue photo. It's not a tweak, it's a correction.

Am I the only one who read that as "US Taco Co. And Urban Tampon"?

Totally. :) She's very beautiful, and super fit too.

Not to detract from the awesomeness of Julia Louis Dreyfus - but it's called Photoshop. :)

She's unfortunately ambiguous in that statement and I suppose we can both agree she should have been clearer.

While letstalkaboutit666's tone is rather Oscar the Grouch, it's quite true that he/she is actually the one who ISN'T missing the point. Several in this thread are misreading Feinstein's point. It's a misreading that is ultimately ironic, in fact. Why in the world should anyone assume she's suggesting previous tickets…

Warren is an outsider, she's the real fucking deal. She would balance out some of the cynicism I feel for Hillary, who is uber competent but too cozy with some special interests like big Ag, Big Tech, and the banks.

Thank you. I'm horrified by this!

Ah, the answer to sexism is...more sexism. When women and predominantly homosexual men in the fashion industry throw waify models around, it's horrible and men need to stop forcing unrealistic body standards on women. When men are being held to unrealistic body standards? It's awesome, because look at those abs.

Sixties' James Bond was a weakling compared to Daniel Craig's muscle-bound version of the spy.

This article is so fucking depressing. How is the objectification of men a false equivalency? What is the difference between breasts and butts and abs and biceps? They are all sexualized body parts. What an anti-feminist article this is. I'm a fat dude, who has been desperately trying to achieve an inguinal crease to…