Sad, if true, rumor: We're hearing that Jane magazine, which provided us so much joy with its coverage of boobs, has apparently folded. A call to Editor in Chief Brandon Holley resulted in our being informed that she was "in a meeting." Wonder what that might be about. UPDATE: The ad people just got back from a short meeting at which they were told the news. And as for the shuttering of the mag, Radar hears the same. UPDATE update: A friend hears from an employee: "It's done, everyone is packing up and has to be out today."

• Remember a time when you would have been excited to see a picture of Britney Spears' naked boob? Us neither, really. [Egotastic]
  

Heidi Montag and Amanda Bynes, before and after. [Fug Yourself]

Gina Gershon was molested by a ghost when she lived in a haunted former brothel. Also, check out her underboob. [Hampton Style]

Summer is nearly upon us. Now necklines begin to plunge, friendships morph into something more and then combust. Hipster parties begin to smell worse and worse. But maybe the most crisisey crisis we face is what to do with those pasty thighs, blindingly white from their months in hibernation. For too long we've been taught to hide these trunks in shame. But isn't it time to accept this no man's land for what it is? Are they not beautiful pillars of chunky marble holding up your torso? Send your pasty whites to thighs@gawker.com along with your age, first name and a little about what your pasty thighs mean to you. It's a movement, people! After the jump, we'll show you some of ours so you show us yours. —Josh

• Jane mag's website: pioneering women's health education, crusading citizen journalism, or homemade amateur porn site? Maybe all three! Boobs! NSFW and porny kind of but also not? [Jane]
  

Searching for a handy way to tell whether or not you're an asshole? See which of the Babble commenters' reactions to this picture of Maggie Gyllenhaal providing her infant with nourishment you agree with!

Once in a great while a post here comes along that inspires so much commenter imbecility that we want to make redundant each and every person who posts a "quip" in it. Unfortunately, that's a pain for us to code, so we've just picked five people from this week's nightmare.

We were so sad when we read Brandon Holley's editor's letter in the famous boob-containing new issue of Jane. (They took pictures of ladies' boobs!) "Unfortunately, someone on the list (yes, we know who you are) decided to circulate the names of these women — which we intended to keep anonymous — to a Web site," Brandon wrote. We're just "a Web site!" Sad already. Also, we thought it was sort of shady (but admirably deft!) the way Brandon glossed over the whole "we accidentally sent out a list of everyone's contact info, complete with phone numbers, to all boob shoot participants" aspect of events. Anyway, she continued: "The blogger bragged about having the list and threatened to print it once our issue was out. The idea was to embarrass our volunteers and make them worry about being scrutinized." Bragged! Threatened! We so did not!

The TMZ (it's sort of like a DMZ, but full of Anna Nicole!) tells us that "The Hills" star Lauren Conrad will not be splaying her parts on the YouTubes with a sex tape anytime soon. Sad day for new media and democracy! Apparently her official relations partner, a cyborg curiously named Jason Wahler, is either too mean and nasty for hard-core pornographers to agree to purchase the sex tape or, he couldn't get it up. We think it's more likely that there were no boobies on the tape. Boobies + internets = profit!

"A low-cut top helps me get my way. I use that more often than I'd like to admit," "Brooke, 28" tells Jane in their new Guide To Boobs. Here's her rack. Compare and contrast with that of one Brooke Parkhurst, the Belle of the Big Apple. Note that right-side mole! If our hunch is correct and those are her hooters, what a remarkable bit of Conde synergy from Brooke, who is the newly-appointed cooking/lifestyle video correspondent for Conde Nast's Elasticwaist.com.

Hooray! It's finally here! As you recall, our own Intern Stephanie reported for us live from Jane magazine's boobtacular photo shoot, and now the day has arrived when you'll be able to guess which of the boobs are hers. (Hint: her name is "Stephanie.") After the jump, we've taken the feelings that these tittie-pix gave us and transformed them into art. Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of Top-Free activists, such pictures are still not considered safe for most works.

We are sad and sorry to report that the photoshoot for Jane's Guide to Boobs has, as of now, been canceled " due the inadvertent release of the list of participants," even though, as WWD reported this morning, only 4 of the amateur titmodels dropped out when the list went public. Does this mean that there will be no boob guide? We would be sadder still if this was so; we often find ourselves in dire need of boob guidance. And, well, $50.

'Jane' mag is shooting for its May "Guide To Boobs" this coming weekend, as we heard, and they've selected 53 lucky young ladies to come in and get topless for 50 bucks a piece on Friday, Saturday and Sunday at the Noho Studios. (That's $50 each person, not each boob.) Unfortunately, they've sent out the list of participants to all the participants. It's just like the ladies room in there! They love to share. Anyway, there are more than a few Conde Nast girls on the list, a few local newspaper gals—including one nubile young photo editor— and a musician or two. Boobs a-plenty! Tell you what—we'll just hold on to this list and play mix and match later. You know, when we see the goods. Ooh, maybe on eBay?