BlogHer - cosmetics - Comments

Isn't it smart?!

LDIVA — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:06:22 -0500

And I think it would be even better-suited for mascara, hope that's next...

ldiva xo

That timestrip is genius

sassymonkey — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:03:16 -0500

I kinda want to buy it just for that. Genius!

Sassymonkey and Sassymonkey Reads.

Excellent point!

Jeanne B. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:34:31 -0500

Very good point about not going overboard with the bronze -- that's why I'm thinking more about the lighter golds and the turquoises.

Jeanne

- The Periodic Elements of Style: http://periodicstyle.blogspot.com

Two of my favorites, too!

Jeanne B. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:31:36 -0500

Thanks for the vote! I'm pretty sure that either 1 or 5 is going to be on my fingernails... Maybe I'll flip a coin!

Jeanne

- The Periodic Elements of Style: http://periodicstyle.blogspot.com

If you're doing a bunch of

DD — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:22:27 -0500

If you're doing a bunch of bronze-y accents in your make up I would shy away from more bronze on your nails. It might start to look like you're becoming a bronze statue. Personally, I like the antilope as wel, or any other pinkish variation.

~DD~ at Punch Drunk

My picks

ZooLoo_Samantha — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:05:41 -0500

My vote is split between number 1 and number 5. Good luck with your decision. I am sure any of these colors will go beautifully and it will all come together very well for the wedding. Samantha Shipley
blog.zooloo.com

Lipstick!

Beth Engel — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:18:21 -0500

I refuse to leave the house without it, and since it's so easy to carry - plus the creamy lipsticks are not liquids so no worries there - I always carry several tubes with me, in different colors.

You know when people ask you "what's the one makeup item you just can't live without" - for me, that's lipstick. :)

My name is Beth Engel. I've been running my own online business, Epic Merchandise, where I sell personalized, engraved gifts, since 2003.

HIS body HIS decision

TLCTugger — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 16:21:28 -0500

>> there needs to be full consent involved <<

And since not one national medical assoiciation on earth endorses routine circumcision, the only person with the moral standing to give that consent is the owner of the genitals in question.

>> Terms like "intact" or saying that the baby's foreskin is on his penis "where it belongs" sound judgemental to me. My boys are circumsized for religious reasons. I know the bloghers are not trying to sound intolerant. <<

I really don't like the word tolerance. For example if you say you tolerate gays let's be honest you're saying you disrespect what they're up to - in most people's definition of tolerance.

I have total non-judgemental tolerance of someone's religion when it comes to believing what they choose to about things which can't otherwise be known. But tolerance has nothing at all to do with ignoring human suffering. We don't "tolerate" female genital cutting when people try to do it in our society. It's SO illegal that you could choose to use a sterile pin to draw a single drop of blood from you daughter's genitals - for reilgious ceremonial reasons - and spend 10 years in jail as a result.

Yet we are supposed to tolerate the amputation of over half a male's sensual nerve endings and about 15 square inches (in the adult) of exquisite sexual interface? I'm so sorry, I can't tolerate. I must condemn it. I'm personally affected and offended by it.

Bare Escentuals

fittothefinish — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:10:30 -0500

Even though it can be a little messy to travel with, I just love, love, love these powdered foundations. I'm not that into makeup, but when I tried these products I was hooked. (And no, I don't have a stake in the company!)

Diane

www.fittothefinish.com/blog

Just a plug

Langer Loksh — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:19:54 -0500

for keeping an open mind. The big bucks/wrinkle cream idea strikes me as unethical (and sort of yucky). I wish I had been informed. However it would not have changed my mind about circumcizing my two boys. Terms like "intact" or saying that the baby's foreskin is on his penis "where it belongs" sound judgemental to me. My boys are circumsized for religious reasons. I know the bloghers are not trying to sound intolerant.

I do believe parents should know about this aspect of the decision and I am going to call my doctor to find out what happened to my little dudes' skins.

Jill at Langer Loksh

The Bottom Line

audreyh68 — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:22:20 -0500

I think, for me, the bottom line comes down to whether parent's are being "encouraged" to circumsize by physicians/hospitals looking to profit from the bio-engineering companies who purchase the foreskins. If parent's are FULLY and COMPLETELY informed and consent, then there isn't an issue. If not, well then that's another ball of wax altogether.

I have no qualms about foreskin being used to genetically engineer new skin, especially for burn victims and other other's who have need of grafts. But again, I think there needs to be full consent involved.

Auds at Barking Mad

I think about this

mysailorsmistress — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:17:25 -0500

I think about this actually... I guess it really gets me going.

My son is intact... That was my decision.

This makes me think though. Doctors charge between $200 and $300 for this to be done. If they infact turn around and sell this I am sure they make the same price.

If it was my decision to get my son "snipped" as I call it and I was told that it would be used to grow skin for burn victims I believe I would be all for it. For creams to prevent wrinkles I am not sure.

They are both for vanity purposes but one is to the extreme.

Also, if you opt out how can you be sure that the doctor is not going to sell the skin any way? What are you going to do ASK for it?! That is medical waste. You can't just toss it in the trash!!!!

Jennifer

www.mysailorsmistress.net

Not sure I agree with you Cat.

lousymom — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:09:17 -0500

Cat H, I'm not sure I agree with you that this should not be a part of the consent. I feel like if there is a financial reason for the doctor to do the circumcision, that should be revealed. You may not be getting all the information from the doctor on risks if there is a reward for the doctor. Also, I kinda feel like if there is money made in foreskins, it should go to the parents.

Honestly, the whole idea makes me a little ill. The circumcision is not a procedure that is medically necessary and when we trade in foreskins, we create the demand for people to have their babies circumcised, even if it is just because the doctor has the incentive. People should be able to make well-informed choices. I think this takes away from that.

www.lousymom.com

I had never heard of this

Cat H — Fri, 29 May 2009 08:13:22 -0500

I guess I have less of an issue with it being used for medical purposes like growing skin for burn victims, etc. But that's a personal belief. Certainly not a justification for circumcision by itself, no matter what the benefit. I do think it creates an incentive for the medical establishment to support circumcision.

I don't think it needs to be part of the consent process for the parents because it will not affect the baby boy (whether the foreskin is used afterward or whether it is discarded as medical waste). The consent process is for disclosing risks to the patient.

However, this issue should be publicized so parents can decide for themselves whether they believe that their may be other reasons why circumcision is encouraged.

WOW!!! i have actually

mysailorsmistress — Fri, 29 May 2009 00:02:07 -0500

WOW!!!

i have actually heard of these creams but would never purchase them due to the price and it freaks me out a bit.

I think I made the right decidion!

Jennifer