So I’m not really asking for advice, but more wanting to start a conversation. I have a big 1st date coming up, as in he’s away so we can’t meet yet, but we’ve already gotten to know and like each other. (BTW, I would also not be wrong in calling this a hot date.)

The 1st choice is quite specific, as it’s the outfit I chose. Lately, I’ve been wearing a skirt for a first date, but I’ve picked a low cut top. Not too bad, but I usually would have worn a lacy tank underneath - not now. *evil smile* I even picked this out a while ago (before hinted familiarity). Don’t worry, I be keepin’ it classy. Anyway, with a sexy top, I want to wear pants (capris) as bottoms.

So here’s the poll, feel free to add your own unique choice, and/or to leave comments.

n

Oh and wish me luck! Of course, I’m still not sure when the guy’s available for said date. Sighh.

“All those old skanks in these tabloids all wear bikinis. Don’t you want to be different? Don’t you want to look more fabulous and glamorous? Aren’t you sick of the bikini?” - Simon Doonan

I couldn’t agree more, and yet I couldn’t pinpoint it before this bold, genius gay said it in this perfect way.

I still wonder what will be in next year, which will likely mark my return to bikini-ready-dom. (My decision on what to wear vs. trends or personal style combined with how often I go to the beach merely to show off, when I hate the beach, should say a lot about me, no? Who cares - fun fun it will be.)

So what about you, if you’ve got it to flaunt, is the one-piece good enough still?

The trend for males from Miami Swim this past weekend, showcasing designer swimwear for Summer ‘09, is definitely a fright of sorts. Every designer that included men’s swim trunks (or lack of trunks) included short shorts.

Short shorts.

On guys. Male short shorts.

Every guy I know only wears shorts down to his knees, and swimwear is no exception. I don’t think any straight men, at least American ones, will adopt this look. First of all, straight men don’t follow trends in fashion, and boy do I love them for that! Consdering that, this isn’t such an actual fright with any danger to impact our view at the beach, right?

Yes, but it’s still a fright in and of looking at the photos, itself. If you look closely at the pictures, you should notice not only do these men wear short shorts, but they actually “nair” for short shorts.

Another thing one could never get any straight man I’ve ever known to do is to consider shaving at all, at least when it comes to their own legs. (I happen to wish men would shave their armpits, and have vocalized this to men in my life. 100% of them firmly rejected the idea, period [even trimming, silly boys].)

So either the designer fashion world’s male aspect is pure fantasy, product-less eye candy for girls’ dreams (I think most secretly do hate overly hairy bodies - no fair!), or actually all for gay men. I’m sure designer/expensive men’s apparel is actually all aimed to gay men, because straight men wouldn’t pay for it. I wouldn’t even ever subject a boyfriend to it with gifts, I see no need. Except there’s one sad flaw in this - in that the women looking at fashion shows and ads hope to be looking at straight men when it is men they see, right?, and they’re clearly not, at least not the character these models portray in these getups. So do women actually enjoy looking at the male models? (I don’t, but I personally am not attracted to the muscular type and even the rugged or pretty-boy types anyway.) I hope this doesn’t mess with women’s avoiding-gay-dar. Ouch.

If you’ve had enough cerebral discussion on silly fashion, or are just still interested or want a different view, especially one from a male himself, stay tuned for a snarky straight male’s POV on this “trend” a bit later!

According to this article on AOL, sparklier diamonds are often actually fakes (especially with a rainbow sparkle). And then I think, “then give me the fake!” What I want especially out of my engagement ring (or any diamond) someday is such a brilliant cut, etc., that it’s as sparkley as can be. So why is genuine always better?

Can an inspired BAG be better than the higher priced originals? I once though I liked my Birkin-style bag from Wilson’s Leather because it had shoulder straps (like the JPG Shoulder Birkin) but now I think, “eww, long straps!” (To be fair, they weren’t, like, down at my hip long or anything!) So maybe the experts always know what’s best for us, even if we do not? I mean, higher quality (if it exists in higher price - but that’s another entry) usually means longer life. Diamonds may NOT be “forever” but they can cut up a mean amount of things, while remaining in tact. While I want my true love to be gentler than that, I want our feelings toward each other to be just as tough to trials and time. Genuine diamonds DO kind of give that statement.

Of course, they also give the statement, “I don’t care who’s blood shed for your diamond, honey, I love you so much, I just care about you having your selfish bling!”

What says love like the uncaring of all others, huh?

I snark, I snark. Seriously, what do you think?

Stay tuned, for in a few days I’ll feature some obviously fake, but totally fun, bling. (I promise, for I made such a ring myself, and how can I resist the publicity?)

Do you give your lady high-priced items or more fairly priced yet quality gems?

Well, here are some ruby jewelry options for three budgets:

Budget Blower:

Cushion-Cut Ruby Ring
highest price, but synthetic stone,
plus cubic zirconia accents
by Fantasia by DeSerio
$630

Quality Keeper:

Poinsettia Flower Pendant/Necklace
with 5 ct. center ruby, fine silver
by Lucinda Fox Wood

$299

Passionate Cheap Thrill:

Jewels of My Heart
shaded rubies & sterling silver
by Sky Dreams

$89

Notice the materials get more quality, truer gems or silver, when the price decreases? Take a lesson. Although the fake ruby and the “fine” silver (aka silver plated, etc.) look more expensive, and are more expensive, they’re less of the “true” fineries. Hmmmm?

That being said, there’s nothing wrong with fine silver, or any of these items. But $630 for faux stones is wrong, imho. Thanks, Needless Markup.

Not tacky, too bright, or with a spot of logo on them, these slippers are just 100% cashmere luxury. In assorted sophisticated colors, this yummy indoor footwear is cable knit. They’re lightweight, surely to suit any climate this winter.

One thing, the cashmere goat shorn material is given a more expensive pricetag ($110) by the Dooney & Bourke name, which means they cost more than say sheepskin thong slippers by Ugg. Hmm. Personally, I’d recommend either, and at least these are fairly on par with other 100% cashmere items out there. 100% of this fiber doesn’t just mean price, it means infinitely more softness and virtually no itch.

One can then look at price differently, when comparing to other accessories. A Burberry scarf is usually around $200, and these mean total comfort for the feets. (And don’t require other accessories to match.)

And anyone can buy these whether you’re into names or not, bigger or smaller names, or prefer no names, even. With no distinguishing marks, what does it matter? These are simply quality, and there’s barely any competition for these lovelies.

Just bringing you some different views for your two feet.

I amusedly came across this “v” string from Victoria’s Secret last night, which depicts the phrase “wish you were here” (obviously on the front). That’s cute and saucy, huh? I love a good naughty symbolic panty!

If you get a kick out of the pair, you can purchase from victoriassecret.com for $5 for $25.