Forum posts made by dancing_doll

Well... I have actually donated some Abercrombie stuff to Goodwill/Salvation Army. The homeless comment was ridiculous.

As for the sizing - most designer/boutique/brand sizes are much smaller than the mass-marketed basic brand stuff at Walmart, Target etc. Abercrombie's sizes aren't out of the norm on that one and they aren't outrageously small either. A&F has always been about selling a 'cool kids' brand though - from the store lighting/music/noxious-fragrance shopping experience to their advertising look and the models they use. Admittedly I used to wear a lot of it in my teens and early twenties. I still like some of their basics. They're nice clothes, well made (their vintagey sportswear/sweats in particular *are* amazing quality) and I like the fit.

The CEO is obviously a bit douchey, but it's probably the unspoken sentiment of a lot luxury brands, so it is what it is. A brand of clothing is just that - a brand. It's up to them to decide the styles, sizes, look. If you like it, buy it, if you don't, then don't. Same as bars with dress codes and velvet ropes. Yes, they'd probably make more money if they catered to every single demographic but the idea of 'exclusivity' is obviously making them a pretty penny. It's just a different business strategy.

If he offers to 'give up Lush', nothing stops him from dutifully deleting his current profile and creating another one without you knowing. If trust is an issue (and it obviously is here) then don't even think of getting too emotionally involved. Enjoy it for what it is (if you are enjoying it) and don't place expectations on it.

Ill go get some weed shall I? ;-)

Actually it was ecstasy that time...

Was it not weird the first time it was suggested? Or the first time you did it?

Maybe a little. I was pretty high though, the first time I did it.


As others have already said - it's about turning on the guy and feeling like a dirty girl. Not everything has to be reciprocal when it comes to sex, but I don't see why this shouldn't be.

I actually like the blue-check - it's clean and simple (and one of my fave shades of blue!). More importantly it also conveys a 'recommended read' to me without giving it the same level fanfare of a yellow ribbon. It shouldn't look on par with an EP award ribbon. It shouldn't be a medal or something too fancy that looks overtly similar to the EP, so for that reason I like the differential colour palette and simple design.

The red book icon is really cute but to be honest when it's up next to an EP ribbon it looks so similar it's hard to tell which one symbolizes the more important honour, especially to someone who is new to the site.

Just thought I'd throw my thoughts into the mix, as a person seeing them fresh. I wasn't involved in the original decision-making process but I was perfectly happy with the blue box when I saw it appear.

part of the issue here, is the personality. for some reason, people HATE Ms Jolie. they still blame her for 'breaking up America's perfect marriage of Brad and Jen'. I bet real money that, if Jennifer Aniston had come out and had the same thing done, people would be 100% behind her, but because it's Angie, it's a different reaction.

I totally agree and I just don't get it. I've always been Team Angelina. She does so much as far as Hollywood stars go with her UN humanitarian services, financial donations to various causes and disasters. She said once that she recognizes that she makes 'stupid amounts of money' for what she does and she's the first celeb to step up to the plate and dish out tens of millions of dollars for relief/charity causes and gets directly involved with her time and efforts. She raises her family quietly - tries to stay out of the general limelight. She is one of the few in Hollywood that will always get my total respect. If you look at this track record of what she's accomplished I don't understand how anyone can hate on her, other than just random jealousy.

So she broke up Brad and Jen. Big deal. That marriage was doomed way before Angelina showed up on the scene. If Jen hadn't been the uber-likeable golden girl from Friends, nobody would have cared either way.

Her mom died of cancer, but what was her mom's lifestyle? Did she smoke, have a bad diet?


Her mother, Marcheline Bertrand, was an actress/model and seemed to lead a reasonably healthy lifestyle. She struggled with ovarian cancer for 8 yrs before she finally died at age 56. Angelina's grandmother died at 45. AND... she has the BRCA gene. That's a lot of things against her chances to remain cancer free for life. Sure she could have taken a 'wait and see' approach until she's actually got cancer cells growing within her and then go for rounds of chemo, hope to go into remission and continue to be hypervigilant if she manages to catch it early but the stressors that come with all that are very real.

There's also the chance of something going misdiagnosed - especially if she has dense fibrous breasts that make mammograms more difficult to read. At least this gives her some peace of mind and that can be worth a lot on its own - to not have to worry - to not have to contemplate the accuracy of mammograms or whether this year is "the year" that she'll need to have chemo and deal with a serious health battle. Sure, other health issues can arise in anyone - but, damn - 87% is a scary stat.

Obviously she's not suggesting women rush out to get this done just because there's breast cancer in the family. But hey - it's her choice to have it done. Christina Applegate did the same thing a few yrs ago but with less media fanfare than this. It's obviously a personal choice, just as any elective surgery is - whether it's for cosmetic of preventative health reasons. In Angie's case she's watched the agony of seeing family members die and doesn't want to put her own family through the same thing.

I'm surprised people have issues with it. It's not like this is a bill to force all women with BRCA or familial histories to do this - she made the choice and then shared it with the public. No big deal. I doubt women will be storming their surgeons' office to get the same thing done on a whim. We're not children - we can take responsibility for our lifestyles and choices, and yes, even those options that we maybe can't afford, without indulging victimized tantrum-throwing lapses of logic because of it.

I applaud her decision, I know it couldn't be easy to do something like that, but it makes a lot of sense. I have to say though, while it's the right decision for her, we shouldn't draw the conclusion that it's right for everyone. I mean, she's really wealthy, and therefore is thoroughly unconcerned with insurance coverage or the cost of treatment. But what about those of us who are? Besides the fact that I'm sure such a preventative procedure wouldn't be covered by most insurance policies, I wonder if getting tested for that gene might cause an insurance company to jack up the premium (or deny coverage altogether) if and when they find out you're positive for it.

Testing for the BRCA genes is extremely expensive right now because one company holds the patent on it - which is ridiculous. I get that they wanna make their due cash, but it's a potentially life-saving test that should be made available to more than just the uber rich. I believe it's currently in Supreme Court to have this changed. That would bring the testing costs way down and could become an option for insurance coverage.


Edit - this makes you appreciate when Banting sold the formula for insulin for $1 instead of cashing in on it by selling to one high bidder pharma company who could have then had a monopoly on it's production. He wanted it to be available to everyone who needed it. I wish philosophies like this were more of the norm when it comes to science and medicine.

I think she made a courageous decision. An 87% chance is extremely high and that gene mutation is very rare - even among familial high risk groups. I heard she's also planning to have her ovaries removed as well as a preventative precaution. Losing her mother when she was only in her '50's was really traumatic for her and I can totally understand her decision to be proactive in a case like this.

Might be a bit different for prostate cancer since it affects one's sex life etc. But Angie's obviously done with having her kids. And breasts and ovaries aren't going to make a difference to her quality of life. Why should she take that chance of something getting missed along the way when chances are abnormally high that she's going to develop this and then require chemo and other difficult treatments. Why have it playing in the back of your mind constantly? Taking your risk from 87% down to less than 5% makes all kinds of sense to me. I'd probably do the same.

I'm a big Angelina fan and her decision really just makes me even more impressed with her inner strength and life outlook.

It's up to you - nobody here is going to be able to tell you yes or no.

If he's doing it, I agree it's only fair if you get the same privileges.

I was friends with a couple that did this (although neither traveled as much as you're describing) - it was basically the no-tell policy for out-of-town fun. It started out well but blew up about a year later and they split. Inevitably she ended up having feelings for one of her fuck-buddies.

Every couple and every situation is different though. If you're in an open relationship (re him having his fun), then I don't see any legit argument about why you shouldn't get to do the same. If that's the question - then yeah, I think it's fair.

The rest of the matter on whether it will ultimately hurt the marriage or not is just rolling the dice. It's impossible to predict.

Congrats on the stellar review! :)

I've been listening to this soundtrack all weekend. Best soundtrack I've heard in a long time. It's a bit of an eclectic mix of songs and sounds but they all fit seamlessly within the movie. It gets the blood pumping for today's modern audience that conveys the excitement and thrill of that party scene at that time, but just using different updated sounds. I thought it worked well, given the style of the movie and direction. People who have issues with the soundtrack will inevitably find their base issue with Baz Luhrmann's vision - some like it, some don't. It's a contemporary flashy adaptation so purists are going to hate it. But back then, that whole scene was considered flashy so the intended impact on today's audience works.

On the soundtrack, Lana Del Rey is the standout for me (although I'm a huge fan already). Also loving The xx, Florence and the Machine and Fergie's track is damn sweet.

Have to admit I hated the new take on Back to Black. Amy Winehouse would have been perfection on this soundtrack. Such a shame she's not around anymore. :(

Sometimes. It also depends on how I feel about the guy.

Yes - but only with certain groups of friends and it comes up more when talking about fuckbuddies, one-niters or flings where no detail is spared once we're deep into the drinks. With BFs and long-term prospects there's usually a bit more discretion unless the guy is particularly brag-worthy.

What's up the nursing home residents who could see the backyard of this house and observed the suspects "walking" their victims naked, with collars and leashes in the back yard? What's up with that?



Maybe they thought he was into BDSM.



On a more serious note, I hope these fuckers get wrecked in prison. I can't believe all three brothers were all sufficiently psychopathic enough to carry this out and keep it going for a decade. You'd think one of them would have cracked at some point or developed a tiny smear of conscience.

I actually had no idea pubic hair could grow this long. Do they just tuck it down each pant leg or something? Or what kind of industrial strength granny panties would they need to wear to pack all this away otherwise - some of these women have it growing past their knees. So disturbing.

These are developed countries (with decent sized populations) where when people go missing, it's actually noticed and reported. From there, patterns of killings can be analyzed and detected and it's easier to solve the puzzle and attribute a bunch of killings to one person.

In many other highly populated, third world countries, it's a lot easier to go undetected. People go missing all the time and nobody breaks a sweat over it. There's probably plenty of serial killers at work, but it's easier to fly under the radar, especially with corrupt justice systems and lack of media to create awareness and fear among the public.

Within a developed country you can see this same phenomenon at work when a serial killer targets prostitutes, drug addicts and fringe members of society as his victims. Usually the guy has to kill at least 25+ of them before the police and public start to notice or even care. On the other hand, if a serial killer has a penchant for pretty middle-class college girls, he's going to get noticed a whole lot faster.

In general, I think it's a bad idea (for all the reasons already mentioned).

I also suspect that for those choosing this 'hidden' option that the number of their comments will decrease in general and people will be even less inclined to offer any kind of constructive criticism because the 'hide' option is a signal that the author is sensitive to this.. so I think it will kinda work in reverse of what it was intended for. Having said that, if it's still important to a writer to be able to do this, then I'm not up in arms about denying them this. But they should be aware that to a casual reader it will basically look like the author has turned off commenting in general and the reader may be inclined to just bypass the whole feedback process and not be bothered with it at all.

1. You are in the friend zone.

2. Her initial distancing from you was because you made it clear that being 'just friends' wasn't an option because of your feelings. She was respecting.

3. As time has passed, she is probably going through shit with her new BF and/or life in general. She misses your friendship . She is hoping that you can now have perspective on everything and things can return to normal (ie. before you confessed your feelings).

4. Situation still stands the same as far as I can see it. If you can't be 'just friends' with her, then I would not rock the boat.

5. Good luck.

Aww.. her reaction was sweet.

I couldn't have done it same day though (or week or month).

Congrats, Danny! I'm sure this one is going to be a hit. The synopsis alone makes it sound like a real page turner! :)

http://painfulpleasures.com/body_jewelry/gallery/Adult%20Toys/adult_149_chart1.jpg

I've been wanting one of these too but in the clear/diamond coloured crystal. So pretty!

Master Alduras uses RACK (Risk Aware Consensual Kink) with full waiver of liabily to injury/loss of life and limb contracts which he believes are irrevocable.

These 'contracts' are not legally binding. Loss of life or limb? I would be interested to see how Master Alduras does when he meets the real Masters of prison life. BDSM contracts and consenting to illegal acts of violence do not allow someone to operate above the law when it comes to human trafficking, grievous assault or death. Just ask the infamous Armin Meiwes about how his theory of having his victim's 'consent' held up in court.

That whole video and the concepts behind it made me sad. On one hand, one can argue about 'consensual' decisions but on the other hand self-mutilation, suicide, addiction, not taking one's medication when they are mentally ill are also consensual decisions but most people would argue about intervention in these cases for the person's well-being. In other words consensual decision-making is only as good as one's own mental health. There's a cult-like quality here that seems to prey on the weak and vulnerable under the guise of belonging, protection and ego-fulfillment. Very disturbing.

I went with 'A' - because it's always been my favourite grade.
Plus it's front of the line in the alphabet.
Oh, and my name starts with A.
Plenty of rational reasons.

Yes, one was a phys ed teacher (30 y/o) and the other was a sports coach (28 y/o).

'Pieces of cum' ... Hmmm... Are you sure you weren't eating her boyfriend's jizz that had pooled up and dried up in her panties? Not to freak you out or anything, but yeah - you never know what's in a person's panties when you randomly pull them out of a hamper.

Onto your second question - I would not mention it. Unless she's kind of a super-freak or you've hooked up with her in the past or have had a very flirty friendship with her, I'm thinking she would be creeped out. It's not so much the panty sucking itself (if it had been consensual) but the invasion of privacy. My first thoughts would be uh oh - was he constantly going through my stuff doing pervey things and fixating on me. Some things are better left unspoken.

Actually, the size of the ass doesn't matter. As long as you can make those muscles twitch properly, a twerk is a twerk. And twerking takes about the same amount of effort as kegels your first time learning,...it's just the attention is focused on your ass. After that it comes naturally, and you can do it without much effort...unless you're going for the whole one cheek at a time thing. Not that I know from experience...

Yeah, it just doesn't look the same. Basically it's a form of krump. Technically I think anyone can do it to some degree, but it seems to work best with certain body types. The girl in that vid was damn impressive though.

can a couple rekindle after both were caught cheating???

If there's *any* lingering resentment or anger over it, it will come out in other ways and affect the relationship. That's what happened to me when I took back an ex-bf that had cheated. I thought I could forgive and forget but there was lingering distrust and resentment that showed up in some subtle (and some not so subtle) ways in the first six months after we got back together. Finally he called me out on it and we talked and I realized that I had to find a way to put it behind me and not keep subconsciously punishing him for it. After much effort on my part, things finally normalized. Until a couple of years later when - go figure - the fucker cheated again. Habitual cheaters are just wired differently.

In your situation, you've technically set a precedent for cheating being the default behaviour when the relationship is on the rocks. Yes, you can come back together and try to repair and re-energize the relationship and will likely have some success for the first while. But inevitably things will probably slip if you don't fix the underlying issues, and that urge may be there again and since you already did it once, it's always easier the second time around. Proceed with caution.

If I don't wear a bra it's usually because I'm home or I'm out at night in a top/dress that isn't meant to have a bra worn with it and provides some general level of support. With certain fitted halters for example, it's easy to get away without one.

My jaw will drop if anyone picks option #2. Periods aren't that big of a deal other than a minor nuisance.