|
| I'm an avid tennis fan and watch it religiously especially when the Grand Slams come around. It's not a sport that I have any hope of learning (I have 0 hand-eye coordination) so I can only watch in awe at the athletes who smack the heck out of a tiny green ball. Over the years, however, it seems that more and more talk has been about the fashions that debut on the courts, rather than the abilities and play of the athletes.
This change perhaps started with the heavily publicized images of Anna Kournikova back in the day and Maria Sharapova now, both players on the court and models off the court. What they wear gets splashed all over the pages. Other players have also received much press over their outfits, namely the Williams sisters with their often flamboyant dresses.
Personally, I've never had a problem with what anyone wore on the court... until the French Open this time around. There's no dress code at the French Open unlike Wimbledon (where all white is required), so people can wear anything, but what Venus Williams decided to wear this time around was shocking. Her black corset-like dress with red trim looks almost completely see-through, even though it isn't. Was the inspiration Victoria's Secret? Eek.
  Oopsies! (Nude undies, but it looks oh-so-bare!)
| | |
| Travel alert: If you're planning on going to Naples, IT anytime soon, perhaps you should stay away from their pizza.
It's been reported that the owners of thousands of pizza shops and bakeries in the southern Italy city may have used wood from caskets to keep ovens burning. Because Neapolitan pizzas are traditionally supposed to be baked in stone brick ovens with an oak-wood fire, pizza parlor owners and bakers are suspected to have purchased and lined their ovens with wood purchased from the thieves and grave robbers who steal USED caskets from local cemeteries. Obviously the local gangs who run the businesses entice the merchants with significantly lower priced wood than what they would normally pay for wood that, you know, you'd chop off a tree.
This report made me gag a little in my mouth. What do you think of this whole affair?
| | |
| In the last several yrs, there's been a significant backlash from the government and public over ultra fatty and other less-than-healthy offerings from the food industry. There's been a push for greater clarity over what we're actually putting into our bodies. Hence, the laws requiring calorie counts to be posted. The growing awareness of the obesity epidemic in our country has also led to laws that reduce the sodium content in our foods.
Obviously, the food industry (especially fast food) isn't going to take all of this lying down. KFC's new Double Down burger has turned into one of their most successful product launches in years. Burger King is pushing out its new Fire Grilled Ribs this week in select markets. And so, in deference to proper political protocol (yay, alliteration), certain pockets of our country are pushing back... hard.
Santa Clara County, CA recently passed a law banning any toys or promotional items that are bundled together with high caloric kiddie meals. Meaning... yes, no more toys in Happy Meals. And really, that makes me (and a lot of kids) unhappy. I understand the lawmakers' intent: do away with the toys that attract kids to eat unhealthily as a means to make them form better eating habits. But I'm quite skeptical as to the actual effect of this ordinance.
It's the parents that are usually purchasing the meals for the kids. And more often than not, it's not for the toys... it's for the convenience of fast food or the smaller portion sizes of the kiddie meals. The toys just happen to be a bonus, a welcome distraction for the kids.
The last time I was traveling, I saw an obviously stressed out couple with their 3 kids (ages approx. 5, 3, and 1ish). They had packed fruit snacks ahead of time and some formula for the baby but when the kids started screaming (as kids do when they're tired and cranky), the dad rushed over the McDonald's to pick up a couple Happy Meals. The kids settled down after they feasted on chicken nuggets and got new toys. Even the baby got in on the action, as the mom broke down fries to feed to her.
Now, that isn't something that I would personally choose to do. My parents allowed us fast food only as a treat maybe once in 6 months. But I understand why some parents would serve up this stuff to their kids more often. Ultimately, it's the parents who are paying the bills and choosing what to give their children to eat. Do we really need to punish the kids (by taking away their Happy Meal toys) for choices that they can't really control?
What do you think of this matter? Do you think that the lawmakers were right in banning toys in high caloric kids' meals and why? Do you think there's a better way of introducing healthier eating habits to children?
| | |
| That is, the gap between one's front teeth. I have a couple of friends who've always been troubled by the space between their front teeth. I guess they were teased about it in school and what not, so it still bothers them to this day. Whenever they pose for pictures, they often smile with their mouths closed.
But I'm all about embracing who you are to your fullest. Besides, having a gap between your front teeth in the 14th century signified that you were an extremely sexual person. (Probably the only thing I remember from my college English classes.) Mrrroww. Also, in many African cultures, the gap meant both wisdom and beauty. It is said that some men in these cultures refused to marry women WITHOUT the gap. Yeah, that's right.
Love it, embrace it, flaunt it!
How do you feel about the gap between people's front teeth? Do you think it's sexy or something to be fixed?
| | |
| You can't help who you fall in love with. That's something that movies, books, and whatever else tells us. But what if it's a family member? What if... it's your grandmother/son?
This is exactly what happens in this real-life story, which in my eyes could only have been torn out of a really bad romantic novel. Basically, a woman had a daughter at a young age and gave the daughter up for adoption. The daughter grows up and has a son who didn't know of his mom's adoption until he was 18. His mom passes away from cancer, and he goes looking for any remaining blood relatives and after 3 yrs, finds the only one... his 72 year old grandmother.
It's a tearful reunion and next thing you know, they're in love and want to have a baby together. They got a donor egg and found a surrogate that was open-minded enough to accept the whole thing and carry the baby for them.
Frankly, I find the whole story incredibly disturbing. Putting the whole age gap aside, he's still her biological grandson. And even if they never knew each other before, well, she's still his biological grandmother! The thought of it just makes me queasy.
What do you think of their story? Do you think that you just can't help who you fall in love with?
| | |
|
