The Washington Post had a big article on the front page of the Style section yesterday on the fixie fashion craze. The title "Look Ma, No Brakes!" unfortunately focused on the fact that some fixed gear cyclists choose not to have brakes, which is true, legal and not the same as not having a means of stopping.
Anyway, this is the paragraph that most commenters decided to focus on, asking if they could take the brakes off their SUV and talking about Darwin Awards and such.
I've never ridden a fixie, but I do get it. It's like trying to ski a double black diamond slope or raft Class V rapids, you do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard (as they say). There are other advantages, like some people think that a fixie is less likely to be stolen and with fewer parts there are fewer parts to break - making the bike more reliable which is good if you ride a bike for a living. You have more control at slower speeds (so I've been told). Etc... I could also see it as a certain statement about ones skill - despite all the predictions of doom, I've never read a story about a cyclist on a fixie getting killed, nor have I seen research pointing to them as more dangerous.
There is not much news in the article, though it did get a lot of coverage in and of itself. (Here's DCist). It's bad enough to see the Post get scooped by the NY Times in 2007, that could just be the fashion lag between NYC and DC, but the Gazette already covered this too - and like two and a half years ago.