Thursday, July 3, 2008
America's Got "Talent"
NBC obviously uses the word "talent" in its loosest sense... The "oopsy doopsy" afterwards is just ridiculous.
How Does This Even Work?
I just need to share this. I just bought a dress for a wedding- low slinky back. Cute if I must say so myself. Anyways, I was planning on going "commando", but figured I would search for a "low rise" underwear and came across backless underwear. Backless underwear? That doesn't even look comfortable. In fact, this looks worse than those "strapless" thongs that I posted a while back... Who really wears something with such a plunging back and doesn't just go commando? But if you must, buy at Backless Lingerie.Someone Couldn't Have Possibly Been Paid For This Ad
Is this ad serious? Guess what? If my birth control method fails I am not going to "Be Calm." I am going to freak the f**k out. Note that this "calm" collected chick is throwing the "ok" sign, which is the universal sign for "yeah, right" and "F**k You" in Brazil.However, I guess that's not an issue for me, because I'm abstinent... as a bolt of lightning comes crashing through my office.
AM or PM?
Heidi Klum, in an apparent confusion, has elected an "all PM" ensemble in the dead middle of the day.The gem in this photo, however, is her friend's guffawing face...
Bond No. 9 Obsession
I call Bond No. 9 my love at first whiff... I wear Bond No. 9 "Eau de New York" and "Saks Fifth Avenue", but the choices really seem endless- especially when you consider you can custom mix them at Saks in New York. It's pretty pricey already, but do you really feel like spluring? Then, try these limited edition versions of Bond No.9's Bryant Park, Bleecker Street and Stars Nuits de Noho. It will set you back a pretty penny (65,000 of them to be exact ($650.00)) but I think it's well worth it if you have the cash-- after all, they're adorned with 5,280 individual Swarovski crystals and they smell as good as they look!
Why Look Normal? That Would Be Too Human, I Guess...
Check out this month's Cosmo featuring Ms. Scarlett Johansson. Looks good, right? Now looks specifically at the waist the magazine's art department whittled for her. Is ScarJo curvy? Yes! Does she have, as seen here, a waist that is only a smidge wider than her neck? No.
And we know this because M. LeBlanc at Bitch Ph.D. did the research. When seen "in the wild," Scarlett's midsection is that of a normal, fit human being. It's only on the cover of Cosmo that she takes on the dimensions of Betty Boop. Oh, and also as she cleverly points out her left arm is smaller and shorter than her right arm. WTF.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
