That's the question that attaches to the following passage:

Here are some things you can do at the Maryland Renaissance Festival: You can drench a wench. You can hurl hatchets at tree stumps with red targets painted on them. You can ride elephants. You can participate in a game called rat-pucking, punting stuffed-rat toys across a lawn toward the gathered apron skirts of a matron assigned as the target. You can buy little puffy-tipped horns and walk around for the rest of the day with them attached to either side of your head, and no one will look at you funny. You can coast down a long wooden slide. You can't carry a sword, or even a realistic-looking fake, but you can buy a dull-edged wooden one to go with your knight's hood. You can attend lectures about Tudor-era crime and punishment, or medieval fashion. You (meaning you, legal adult) can walk around drinking a beer in what feels like a small town.

Well, the answer may not surprise those who've been following the new Washington Post Magazine.

Read More "Is It an Ad? Or Is It WaPo Mag?" »

Washington is turning on all its institutions! The Burgundy Revolution is no longer stopping at Dan Snyder's door! (Though Sally Jenkins' column is.) TO WIT:

1) Washington Post Magazine chat turns into TOTAL BLOODBATH! Readers want to know: WHY DO THE ARTICLES LOOK LIKE ADS? WHY DID YOU USE THOSE FONTS? HOW IN THE HELL DID SECOND GLANCE MAKE THE CUT? Editors stammer, run inside, toss a Chuck Brown feature off the parapets. It's not gonna work!

After the jump, more evidence the whole town is going Montecore.

Read More "Morning Roundup: Pitchforks and Torches Edition" »

Over the past couple of weeks, I've been busy reporting stories about the Washington Post Magazine, which this week debuts a brand-new design and content scheme. In the course of my inquiries, I requested an early look at the new product. The request was denied.

Read More "Post Leaks New Mag to FishbowlDC. Great Move!" »

A seasoned consumer of news had every reason to furrow a brow at the XX Files column in last week's Washington Post Magazine. The first-person essay touts the author's one-woman campaign against kiddie thieves in a local pharmacy.

Here's a sampling: "As the child scurries past me with his pilfered beverage, I reach out for the hood of his coat. I pull him in and press my hand on his back. 'Put it back,' I say. Though he's the one in trouble, my own heart races. A whimper seeps from his mouth; a gurgle of stuttered syllables follows. 'I'm s-s-orry. I'm s-sorry,' he repeats."

It's a powerful, well-told episode, but how do we know it ever happened?

Read More "Why Did the Washington Post Magazine Run Another Wanda Fleming Column?" »

Matthew Mendelsohn isn't upset with Washington Post Publisher Katharine Weymouth, even though she may well have scuppered his 10,000-word piece on a quadruple amputee. She's still a good friend, he says. "I don't want Katharine to be exposed to this story."

His feelings about Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli aren't nearly as charitable. "Marcus should quit while he's ahead," says Mendelsohn.

Read More "Freelancer to Brauchli: Quit While You’re Ahead" »

This week, Erik rolls up his sleeves and calls foul on the In Towner (for yet another god-awful headline) and the Atlantic (for some classic hash & rehash).

Brrrr.

This week's shocker: Erik actually enjoyed "One Ring Circus" from the Post magazine's wedding week edition. Wonder what the Sexist would say....

Meanwhile, the burning question: will the In Towner ever see "the warm side of [our] divide"? Tune in next week to find out....

Trouble viewing? Try the YouTube version.

Last week, the Washington Post Magazine debuted the "XX Files," a weekly feature that will spotlight personal essays by female writers. The first piece was awesome---a story about how bullshitting can land you naked in a Finnish embassy sauna, by local poet Sandra Beasley. In an online chat today, Beasley and Washington Post Magazine editor Sandy Fernandez answered some questions about the new column.

Beyond the usual fanfare and old-middle-school-classmate appearances, the chat also featured questions from readers wondering if designating a feature specifically for women writers was a bit, well, regressive:

Falls Church, Va.: Isn't XX Files a bit of a throwback to the days when Style was the "For And About women" section? In 2008, do we really want to present women's voices as something Other---something separate from "normal" voices---to be segregated and literally put in the back of the magazine?

and

Washington, D.C.: Is it just me, or does the XX Files read a bit like those old "Women's Sections" I've read that newspapers used to have? The ghetto's updated for the times, but it's still a ghetto.

Fernandez's response: "I think there is a limiting aspect to 'ghetto' that isn't there for 'XX Files.' In the olden days, they said the Style section was a ghetto because it was the 'only' place in the paper that published women, or published on topics of interest to women. These days, we welcome women in all sections of the magazine. Except for Gene's page--that's strictly a Gene ghetto."

I think the feature's great; I'm interested in any writing about women's issues that manages to avoid "When Your Boobs Act Weird" and "The Girlfriend Habit That Will Deepen His Love" territory. What do you think: Should the Post send this feature back to the kitchen?