Zara Hanawalt
Stop whispering, start talking: sharp, sassy takes on life in a female body.
Actually, Maybe Right Now is the Perfect Times for the 'Devil Wears Prada' Sequel
I’ll admit it: As a recovering magazine industry girlie, The Devil Wears Prada has always inspired a touch of anxiety in me. I can still remember what it felt like to be surrounded by people who very much upheld toxic hustle culture. The magazine industry, at least as I remember it, exemplified the type of work culture we’ve finally grown critical of, and when I heard that we’d get a sequel of the movie, I wondered how it would address this cultural shift. In an era of finally recognizing toxic bosses, how would the film’s iconic bad boss Miranda Priestley play out?
The Devil Wears Prada is a fairly realistic look at what really went down in the offices on some of your favorite glossies back in the aughts. But why make a sequel now, when hustle culture has been confronted, when the magazine industry is dying, and a full 20 years after the original film?
Once I started seeing commentary about the sequel roll in, though, it made perfect sense. We’ve overcorrected hustle culture so much, we’ve veered into the moment of romanticizing tradwife content.
The Devil Wears Prada is essentially about working for a boss who demands so much of you, you have to sacrifice your personal life — or in Andy Sachs’s case, your romantic life. The sequel isn’t a cautionary tale about what happens to women to do that. Instead, it’s a celebration of the upsides of putting career first. I don’t love extremes, but sometimes, in order to tell a story, you have to really go there. And in a time in which women are receiving regressive messages, maybe this storyline is important.
Andy Sachs, as people are pointing out, is happily single and childfree in her 40s. Instead of warning women to not ever prioritize their career for fear of “ending up miserable and alone”, the sequel says “there are actually wonderful possibilities for women that have nothing to do with taking the traditional path”.
I am someone who did reject hustle culture. I got married, I had kids, I left the bustling world behind for a more flexible career, one that allows me to be a very present, hands on mom.
That was the right path for me. But you know what? We have enough representation of this path. Let’s take a moment to shine a light on this sequel for spotlighting another equally valid one.
Ask Clara:
"What are the criticisms of hustle culture?"
The Mental Load of Mother’s Day and Lifelong Social Conditioning
In the early days of May, I often receive this question: “So what are your Mother’s Day plans?”.
Here’s the thing, though: As a mom of young kids, I firmly believe that Mother’s Day plans are none of my business, at least not until the actual day rolls around. The reality is, though, women are still carrying the mental load of Mother’s Day — just like we’re carrying the mental load of…most holidays. Even the ones that are supposed to be about us.
In my opinion, moms deserve to relax into the plans (rather than orchestrate them) on Mother’s Day. We ought to be the ones considered, not the ones considering everyone else’s needs on this one particular day. That means we don’t need to be the ones making the brunch reservations, or ordering the flowers, or choosing the gift.
Yet clearly, moms being the architects of their own special day is the default, which is pretty clear based on the way so many people ask moms like me what I am planning, not what my partner is planning for me.
This is so much bigger than a maternal issue or a Mother’s Day issue or even a holiday issue. It’s a gender issue.
The fact of the matter is, we socialize girls and boys differently. We expect different things out of girls. We raise them to consider everyone else, to anticipate needs, to give and never expect anything in return.
And what does that create? A generation of women who have to steer the ship, to think about everyone else, only to be told that if they want something for themselves, they have to make it happen on their own…or at the very least, communicate these expectations very, very clearly.
I’m tired of that. This Mother’s Day, let’s let women rest. And more importantly, let’s change the culture that expects so damn much out of them...even on the days that are meant to be about their enjoyment.
Ask Clara:
"How are women socialized differently?"
Ultra-processed Foods Are Linked to Dementia Risk in New Study. Here's What I'm Taking From It
Listen, we know we shouldn’t be eating tons of ultra-processed foods. But for many of us, I think, the exact danger feels a little hard to pinpoint…as does the real definition of what an “ultra-processed” food actually is. On top of that, well…we face a lot of conflicting narratives about what we should and shouldn’t be eating.
But here’s yet another reason to fear super processed foods: A recent study links even a small increase in ultra-processed food intake to an increase in dementia risk.
The study, which was published in the Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring journal, involved the analysis of over 2,000 adults. According to the study, each 10 percent increase in ultra-processed food intake is associated with lower attention scores and higher dementia risk.
So why is this important? Well, taking this study’s findings into account matters in middle age, long before we reach the age when these issues typically show up. We’ve all heard that ultra-processed foods can increase our risk of developing several health conditions (diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease, etc), but the idea that diet can really affect brain health is newer, as noted by the researchers. And the fact of the matter is, for younger women, those long-term risks feel less pressing than thinking about how our diet affects us in the shorter term.
Does this mean eating a bag of chips every now and then is going to predispose you to dementia? No, not necessarily. But this study does something important: It encourages us to start thinking about how we want to age right now, and to start looking at nutrition, not just as a way for us to get our bodies to look a certain way, but to protect our long-term health.
I, like most women, have spent so much of my life being told that what I eat matters because it affects how I look. How it impacts my body’s size. But this research is eye-opening: As I approach middle age, I need to start thinking more about how I want to age and view nutrition and food as one factor — though certainly not the only factor — in how my life unfolds from here.
There’s a lot to unpack in this study, and as always, it doesn’t prove an exact cause and effect, nor does it change the fact that sometimes, we have to go for the convenient, processed meal or snack.
Here’s what it does, though, for me at least: It encourages me to think about food as something that can have a profound impact on how my body and my brain age over time. In a time when food and weight are being so closely linked, it's an important reminder: Food doesn't have moral value, but it does potentially have the power to affect how we age.
Ask Clara:
"What are ultra-processed foods?"
Wait, Am I Entering My Swim Dress Era? And Why Do I Feel So Weird About It?
It’s hard to get on social media around this time of year and not come across content about getting your body "ready for summer”. I know I’m lucky in the sense that I’ve always had a somewhat healthy relationship to my body and food, but this has just never been my thing. I’m more of the “you get a beach body by having a body and going to the beach” mindset.
But I’m also not the person who is going to wear the teeny tiny bikini no matter what. I absolutely look for swimsuits with “flattering” properties. I want my midsection to look smoother, my legs to look longer, my insecurities to remain under wraps…all that jazz. My two-piece days are over, and these days I’d rather be covered up. It’s just what makes me feel more comfortable, literally and figuratively.
Recently I’ve been feeling the urge to invest in a swim dress…and I’ve been surprised by how weird I feel about this. Maybe it's because I used to make fun of my own mom for wearing one, but something tells me there's something deeper going on.
I am 38 years old, I have two kids, and let's just say I’m not hitting up any hot Vegas pool parties these days. My swimwear is more about function than anything else, and obviously, a swim dress gives you the kind of coverage that lets you move easily (and…less self-consciously?) in a way a regular suit just doesn’t.
At the same time, I wonder if I’m giving in, or maybe even giving up by embracing the swim dress.
Am I looking at swim dresses because this is truly what I want, or because I feel like this is what I “should” do as I approach 40? Am I doing this for my own personal swim style, or for the purpose of hiding my body away? Where do we draw the line between dressing in a way that makes us feel more comfortable and dressing in a way that makes the outside world feel more comfortable?
I think I also feel like stepping into the swim dress era feels like stepping into a new era of womanhood. An era that feels…more serious? More…preparing for perimenopause-y? More…the-world-tells-women-of-a-certain-age-to-disappear-and-be-ashamed-of-their-bodies-and-I’m-listening-to-those-messages-y?
I don’t know. Maybe this is way too dramatic a take, especially because I am seeing so many swim dresses that I genuinely find really cute.
Will I make the leap this year? Maybe. Time will tell. Stay tuned for an update…and let me know if you have a swim dress you’d recommend.
Is This Beauty Trend a Recession Indicator...or a Sign That the Cost of Womanhood is too High?
In 2024, influencer Valeria Lipovetsky shared that her life quality improved drastically when she stopped getting her nails regularly.
Recently, finance guru Vivian Tu shouted out this video, saying she’s also ditching the manicure habit. For her, the value it brings to her life isn’t worth the monetary value…so she’s forgoing frequent manis in favor of only getting her nails done ahead of special events.
Lipovetsy’s original video is older, but in the past few months, I’ve been seeing a lot of people suddenly start breaking their regular nail appointment streak, opting instead for clean, natural nails. This feels a little ironic: We’ve moved past the clean girl aesthetic and have started embracing something a bit more effort-forward on a larger scale in the fashion and beauty world.
Yet counterintuitively, natural “clean girl” nails are coming back. Plenty of people are also theorizing that this isn’t just a beauty trend, but a recession indicator.
For the past year, people have been theorizing that the shift many women are taking towards natural nail styles is a sign that people are tightening up their spending in preparation for the economic downturn. That’s nothing new, but we need to talk about just how high-maintenance and costly the standards of womanhood are — because nobody is really taking the conversation there.
It almost feels like we have to give each permission to change these standards. Like it’s not enough to say “this doesn’t feel worth it to me”, it has to be something other women are all feeling and saying on a large scale.
Now, people are saying that forgoing getting your nails done is okay. It’s becoming trendy. But what about the long-held standard that women always have groomed nails? And groomed hair? And makeup done? And clothes that fit that ever-changing trend cycle? And botox and skincare and hair dye to cover up grays, and all the other things?
This is the point here, IMO — not the acceptance of natural nails or the potential recession indicator of it all. Women are held to such high standards for how they groom themselves, and this isn’t just expensive. It’s also a lot of time, a lot of work, and a lot to manage. And the thing is, it always has been. And no matter what the trend cycle dictates, it probably always will be.
Ask Clara:
"What is the pink tax?"
So…Fruits and Veggies Can Increase Your Cancer Risk Now? Huh?
A recent study found something surprising about young, healthy, non-smokers who have lung cancer — in short, people who don’t fit the typical profile of lung cancer patients.
The research, which comes from USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, found that some of the surveyed patients had healthy diets full of fruit and vegetables. So what gives? Could the things we’ve historically been told are super healthy….actually increase our risk of getting cancer?
Not necessarily. This is one study. It looked at one group of people. It doesn’t prove anything about the link between fresh produce and lung cancer.
But the researchers call their findings counterintuitive…and according to an abstract for this study, this raises questions for them. They surmise that there could potentially be some unknown environmental factor at play here, and researchers point out pesticides used on produce as a potential explanation for this link.
Once again, though: Remember that one study doesn’t prove anything. There’s no reason to banish all fruit or all vegetables from your life right now.
Here’s what is so hard about all this. We are constantly being told something different when it comes to health and wellness, and it already feels impossible to keep up with all the shifting advice. Now, we can file this under “one more thing for us to wonder about” — because this study honestly brings up more questions than answers, and it seems even the researchers are scratching their heads a bit.
I’m not a medical expert, but I am a journalist who has covered a lot of health research. I can’t offer any advice on the health of it all, but I can help you sort through information, because so much of my job as a journalist is just that — combing through information and figuring out what is worth holding on to and what isn’t.
And here’s my take on this particular research: We don’t have evidence that fruits and veggies are going to increase your risk of developing lung cancer. This study creates something for the researchers to attempt to learn more about…not something for us to stress over.
Ask Clara:
"Are pesticides bad for your health?"
Hilary Duff’s New Fitness Campaign Has a Deeper Meaning
In an era of skinnytok and ultra thin bodies, Hilary Duff is doing something different: She’s partnering with Ladder, a fitness company, and she’s speaking up about how she’s choosing “stronger, not smaller”.
This shouldn’t feel revolutionary but…it kind of does.
Again, we are in a moment of shrinking bodies. People are using GLP-1 drugs even if they don’t need them for medical reasons for the express purpose of shrinking their bodies. On social media, women often frame deprivation as discipline. And strength training, after a brief moment of popularity among young women, seems to have fallen out of favor again. Now, women are turning to things like walking and pilates out of fear of getting “bulky” or looking “masculine”.
But Hilary Duff is here to say no. That’s not a thing — certainly not a thing to fear. “[I] grew up during that time where all of us were trying to, like, disappear and be waifs, and that’s not natural for my body and for most of our bodies, especially as we endure [hormonal changes, pregnancy and motherhood],” she said during an interview with TIME.
“Stronger, not smaller” has become the takeaway message from the campaign, and Duff calls it an “impactful statement”. And you know what? It is.
Focusing on getting stronger affects not just how our bodies look , but also how they function and age. As a woman who grew up during a time when women were encouraged to never lift weights because it would make them look “bulky”, I loved that strength became a major focus of women’s fitness about a decade ago…yet now, the focus has gone back to being as tiny as possible.
I’m not the only woman who finds Duff’s campaign incredibly important, especially right now. Across social media, I see posts from other millennial women gush about how beautiful this is. It finally feels like a step in the right direction to so many of us.
Alex vs. Alix and the ‘Girls are Fighting’ Narrative
Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve heard about the long-running feud between Alex Cooper and Alix Earle.
If not, a 101: Alex Cooper is the founder of the wildly popular podcast Call Her Daddy; Alix Earle is a mega-influencer. Cooper signed Earle to host a podcast on the network she created, the Unwell Network. But people quickly picked up on the fact that there seemed to be a rift between the two women…and recently, Cooper confirmed the feud in a social media post.
And in doing so, she kind of set the internet on fire. But this isn’t about their feud, because ultimately, we have no idea what actually went down. What this is about is the cultural fascination with a "catfight". A female frenemy story. With two women who are more successful and powerful than the world believes women have any right to be going after one another.
It’s not just Alex vs. Alix proves this. Recently, people began buzzing about a potential feud between reality stars Kaitlyn Bristowe and Jessi Draper. Bristowe immediately poured water on the flames to show that this feud was actually completely fabricated, and in doing so, she (correctly) pointed out that the public is constantly “feral” and “foaming at the mouth” to find a fight between two women. And you know what? Yeah. She’s right.
Think about all the female frenemy stories we’ve been fed. Think of the chokehold they’ve had on the masses. Even in cases like this one, where there’s not much there there, the public is just transfixed by stories of women fighting…and it all goes back to the way we as a society love to gleefully take down a woman, any woman.
And when we get to pit two women against each other? Well, that's practically our national pastime. Even if we don’t have all the information (in cases like Alex v. Alix, we really know almost nothing), we run with what we have, we spin narratives, and we assign blame and labels. This cultural fascination doesn’t seem to be going anywhere anytime soon…but isn’t our energy better used for more important things?
So if you were looking for my take on who is the hero and who is the villain, you won’t find that here. What you will find is the question: What are we really accomplishing with this never-ending string of female rivalries that turn into entertainment?
Call it Cringe, But I Say Infertility Awareness Week Still Matters.
Last week, I was at a mom conference where I met several other women who have twins (in case you didn’t know — Rescripted was founded by two amazing twin moms and I happen to be one as well!).
What struck me about this experience, aside from just the sheer volume of other moms of multiples? Some of the follow-up questions we received. “Were they all IVF twins?” one person asked. And listen: I’m really happy we’re talking about these things…but that still feels to me like a strange, slightly invasive question. Because while normalization of these issues is really important, so is sensitivity around them.
Some of the moms shared that they’d had their babies via IVF, while I added that mine were born via IUI. What came after that were lots of follow up questions about what these processes actually entail, with lots of comments along the lines of “oh, I had no idea about this!”.
I get that most people don’t understand the intricacies of infertility. But when you’re in a room full of mothers, women who have been through pregnancy and postpartum, (though not necessarily infertility, of course), the lack of larger cultural awareness around what infertility truly looks like is a bit staggering.
Increasing infertility awareness is so important. When you actually go through infertility, the amount of information that is thrown your way is incredible. The mental load of it is incredibly heavy, and when I was going through it, I kept thinking “thank god I came into this experience with a base of knowledge — this would have been even more overwhelming if I hadn't.”
That base of knowledge didn’t come from public awareness of infertility issues (because that doesn’t exist), it came from working as a journalist who wrote about reproductive health. Thanks to that, I didn’t have to learn all about this wild testing process, all my treatment options, and about a million acronyms on the fly. I could just sit in the incredible emotional overwhelm of it all as opposed to feeling like I had to take detailed notes at every appointment.
But the value of infertility awareness isn’t just about serving people who will one day go through infertility, it’s also about cultivating more sensitivity around these issues, which is so desperately needed.
I know a lot of people roll their eyes at things like "Infertility Awareness Week”. But here’s the thing: Awareness campaigns can work. See: How incredibly far we’ve come where infertility awareness goes.
Ten years ago, nobody really talked about infertility at all. Now, we’re in a place where a room full of mothers can meet for the first time and openly talk about what it really took for them to have their families. We’re in a place where celebrities are openly sharing their stories. We’re in a place where sites Rescripted exist.
We’re getting somewhere. We’re just not there yet.
Emma Grede's Comments are Going Viral and I Don't Know How to Feel
Emma Grede is an incredibly impressive woman. Let’s just get that out of the way. She’s a boss by any measure. And she’s getting really honest about something women have historically been punished for saying: That you actually can’t have it all.
Grede admitted that she’s a “three-hour mom”. If you want an extraordinary life, you have to get comfortable with the fact that you just can’t be there for every single moment, she says.
And you know what? She’s not wrong.
As women, we have to make choices. Because while the world would probably function better if women could clone themselves, and while we do tend to be fantastic multi-taskers, we are bound by the laws of…you know, physics.
So yeah, I like that Emma Grede admitted this. I imagine many women, especially moms, breathed a sigh of relief when they heard it. At the same, her comments are calling into question what it means to be an “ambitious woman”.
Ambition in women is already a fraught idea (see: The absolutely bonkers “ambition gap” discourse). Women still do disproportionate amounts of unpaid labor. It’s a nice thought to say you can subvert the norms, but it’s also not always realistic — and when we allow the kind of hustle culture Grede exemplifies crawl back into the conversation, we end of up with a population of exhausted, overworked women — because they’re doing more to be taken seriously in the office, and more to stay afloat out of it.
It’s also worth noting that Grede is skeptical of remote or flexible work, which are especially good for women, and even more so women of color. She argues that visibility and proximity are key to success, and she’s not all wrong. But she’s also dragging us back rather than propelling us forward to a place where we can embrace the idea that women can still crush it even if they’re afforded more autonomy and flexibility. We have enough data and commentary to point out that these things are good for women.
So yeah, I like the honesty from Grede. And I get it: If a man said these things, especially about how much time he spends with his kids, nobody would bat an eye. Ultimately, Grede is talking about massive success, the kind that requires major sacrifice.
My take? The comments about how she runs her own life are good. But some of the large-scale cultural things she touches on? Well, I could do without them.
Ask Clara:
"Is remote work good for women?"