Shibori

Never underestimate the spending power of hipsters for pointless trends. Have you seen what they're paying for "bone broth" (aka stock) lately? I actually thought the vinegar drinks had the most potential of the bunch, even if I personally think it's stupid. But I guess you can't tell Kevin that the "hipsters paying ridiculous prices for anything free-range old time-y artisanal steampunk fermented paleo buzzword crap" is a viable market without pissing off your core constituency.

As far as Whitney's dancing, for someone who dances because it makes her happy, she is fine. For someone her size, she's fine. But for someone who holds herself out as a "dancer" and whose only means of support (besides this reality show) is teaching dance, I don't think so. As others have said, even in her "skinny" dance videos, there's not much evidence of technique or much talent. What she's doing now is what passes for watered down hip hop in white suburban dance studios and a little bit of Zumba, but not even done well.

Bringing up the Holocaust in a diet thread is an excellent example of Godwin's law, but not particularly good science. Only healthy men deemed fit for work made it past the gas chambers. Someone who was overweight with the modern equivalent of a metabolic disorder wouldn't have made the cut. Every human being will eventually starve to death if denied food long enough. My original point was that the 3,500 calorie in a lb of fat concept will not accurately predict weight loss for all. Your application of the 3,500 calorie formula is based on the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Which would be great- if the human body was a closed system, and if the human body produced energy by setting flame to fuels rather than through a complex metabolic process. All fuels are not created equal, which you can easily demonstrate by putting diesel fuel in a car designed to run on unleaded gasoline, and measuring the energy produced by the engine. Or feeding sugar to someone with type I diabetes. I would also point out that from an epidemiological standpoint, your comparison group of "everyone you know who has succeeded in weight loss" is not valid, as it is a self-selecting group. Anyone who followed the same method but did not succeed in weight loss would be, by definition, excluded. How long would someone need to prove the rule wrong before the rule isn't a rule anymore? Or should they just keep trying until they prove it right, even if it never happens? Because we all know they're either lying or just not trying hard enough, right? You acknowledge there are some exceptions- those medical conditions deemed a "legitimate" medical excuse. As determined by whom, though? The people in the "success" group? And the beauty is that it becomes a self-reinforcing concept for the success stories: weight loss is really, really hard, so if I succeeded and you didn't, it's because I have more commitment and willpower than you. Acknowledging that it may not be the case for everyone, or even most people, would then diminish the "success," so that's not likely to happen. The entire diet industry is built on the idea that you just aren't trying hard enough, so acknowledging there are other factors would really cut into business. It's not about trying to be "polite," it's about getting the science right: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/28/why-the-most-popular-rule-of-weight-loss-is-completely-wrong/

The "dancing" is just painful to watch. The choreography is crap. It looks like someone doing an impression of a gay male stereotype in the back of a Zumba class. Who's paying for that house?

As a PCOS sufferer who struggles with my own weight, this show could do a lot of good if it showed someone doing the "right" things and still struggling, because that happens. And if you're one of those people, TLC could have cameras everywhere to film you 24/7, even if for just a week to show that weight loss rarely follows what the calorie formulas predict- sometimes it's more, sometimes it's less. There's still a good story there- I'd argue it's an even a better one. But as ClareWalks said, Whitney is not that girl, and this is not that show. She's a spoiled brat who takes no responsibility for any aspect of her life, not just her weight. Not exactly anyone's role model. I'd argue she's actually making things worse for people with PCOS, because she's fitting the stereotype of the lazy fat girl that eats junk. Another season or two and this will be an episode of my 600 lb. life. I'm DVR'ing this first ep, but I stopped watching after a few last time, and if this is more of the same, it'll be my last again.

Was the guest choreographer actually selected for the performance episodes of SYTYCD or was she just in the audition/Vegas episodes? Because if it's the latter, claiming that as part of your pedigree in professional work is pretty pathetic. Either way, she had way too much ego without the goods to back it up.

Make sure you put one in the china cabinet. For the bull.

So now the weigh in is in bra and panties? Is that really necessary? I'd have loved Hannah forever if, when Heidi challenged her to go makeup free, she'd said "I will if you will."

I chuckled at the "bull in the china cabinet" comment too. Someone can certainly make it their own, or repeat it from hearing it wrong, but it's not the original idiom and doesn't make sense. In French and Spanish though, it's an elephant in the China shop!

Colby doesn't have the DCC look, but she could pass as Charlotte Jones Anderson' just-slightly-younger sister. It's that too thin, too rich, too much work look. It ages you. Madeline does seem very young/immature. I think many dance girls who have their moms as teachers will either get a swelled head from years of being treated like a special snowflake or an inferiority complex from thinking you only got where you are from your mom's status, and she seems to be the latter. Unless your last name is Trammel so you know you're in no matter what, leaving mom's studio for your first real professional gig on your own has to be a bit of a mind fuck.

Now I remember why she was known as Katie-bot during S1 Top Chef. Giada saying "spaghetti" ranks up there with dentists who kill lions on my personal hate scale.

If she's drop the eyeliner-by-Sharpie, she'd probably be down another pound or two. I think it ages her and looks cheap. But thumbs up to a reduced Heidi episode. I fast forwarded a lot less.

I would watch the SHIT out of that!

Maybe it's just because I'm in a bad mood and slightly hung over this morning, but this week's episode with the 21 year old anime hairdresser had me frothing at the mouth with rage. First, that this girl had a job at all. If you want me to believe that there's anything realistic about this show (which I don't), don't suggest that a decent looking salon in suburban Pennsylvania would let someone come to work looking like that on a daily basis and would actually keep their clientele. Second, that Stacey didn't address the girl's constant little-girl posing, with the head tilts, awkward body positions, and pointed in feet- that she was *still* doing in the after part. I found that so off-putting, almost more than the ridiculous makeup. Everything about her body language was just giggle, don't take me seriously, I'm just a little doll. I cut her some slack, because clearly, at 21, she's never had someone that acted like an adult in her life to suggest that by acting like that, she's just demeaning herself. At the risk of sounding ancient, I just feel like this is the by-product of our "special snowflake" culture where parents don't want to be parents, and adults don't want to be adults and set some boundaries for their kids and employees.

She had one of the worst cases of Resting Bitch Face I've ever seen. Made me wonder if that's the main reason I found her so unpleasant, or if she was just straight up unpleasant. Though there are some benefits to woman owned businesses (51% or more), they tend to be in terms of preference in government contracting (not likely to be relevant for these kinds of cosmetics) or small business loans, which wouldn't matter with Marcus's bankroll. That said, I thought it would play some part in the story when they brought it up, but was never mentioned again.

Dom made obnoxious comments about women in general in response to Michelle last week, and not only did he stay, he was described as "sweet" and "vulnerable" at judging. Emilia apparently didn't know the preferred way to insult Food Network personalities is on YouTube while molesting a brisket. I've never seen a more synergistic pairing than this show and Cici's Pizza. This show is to food what Cici's is to pizza! I would watch the crap out of a show where Danushka, Emilia, and Suzy Wong hold a viewing party to snark on this show (and FN in general) over cocktails.

Promotional language taken from company press releases cited on a Wikipedia page that is itself flagged for being written like an advertisement doesn't change my personal opinion that I think less of Marcus for affiliating with Direct Buy. Information on the location with "close to a decade of no customer complaints with the Better Business Bureau" you referenced refers to a single Direct Buy franchise location and came from a PR release in 2007- (prior to the mortgage crisis that tanked the renovation market) and since then that location and the other Boston location have both closed. The AG's amicus brief in the class action case was filed in 2011 and the NY settlement was announced in 2013 and address both historical and more recent business practices. That said, when a new CEO took over last summer, he acknowledged the many problems the company faced, including downgraded credit, more than 100 federal lawsuits on the books, and questionable sales tactics (he was subject to the same "lifetime ban" hard sell on his first visit to his local club in 2014), and is apparently trying to turn the company around. If that's the case and the company is in fact moving in that direction, it would be interesting to address on this episode, as many people who watch this show may have the same negative opinion of the company that I do. I watch this show because I find the process and the business side of it interesting, and I would find a discussion about choosing to work with a beleaguered company attempting to turn its reputation around interesting as well. In that case (and this is giving the recent Direct Buy turnaround talk the benefit of the doubt), two companies both trying to overcome obstacles and re-position themselves in the marketplace would be cogent to the episode and to the point of the show.

The fact that there might be someone, somewhere, who finds value in a Direct Buy membership doesn't negate the fact that the company has a shitty reputation and it has been legally established that they use deceptive sales practices. Examples of their tactics include telling potential members that they'll be banned from the stores forever if they don't buy a membership before they leave the building, or selling memberships at a location they know is about to close (just two examples from the NY settlement). They don't have to use those methods with every single potential member to establish a pattern of deceptive practices. Their reputation is the part that's relevant to Marcus's decision to consider doing business with them in the context of this show. From the NY state Attorney General's office from their settlement with Direct Buy over deceptive sales practices: "DirectBuy lured consumers into expensive memberships by promising exclusive member-only deals with substantial savings over retail prices. This company failed to deliver on its promises by taking advantage of consumers who were looking to save hard-earned money," said Attorney General Schneiderman. "Consumers should be wary of offers that seem too good to be true, especially when companies demand consumers make an immediate decision to become a club member or be barred forever. DirectBuy has been held accountable for its actions." http://www.ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-reaches-500000-settlement-directbuy-reimburse-new-york-consumers Note that this concerns a settlement (to which both parties agreed), not just litigation claims. Direct Buy had to agree to the settlement, and they are barred from using the specific, questionable sales tactics for which they're known. The original point was that it's surprising Marcus would even want to do business with them, much less lend them any air of legitimacy by mentioning them on the show. Not to mention that Direct Buy makes money from kickbacks and incentives from manufacturers, which is part of how they turn a profit (hence the claims of fraud- they don't actually sell at "cost" when it's inflated to fund the kickbacks). That doesn't seem like a great initial option for the expansion of a company that is struggling financially. Not to mention that by associating their quick order products with Direct Buy, legitimate design houses may no longer want to carry their custom and semi-custom pieces. Is the order significant and sustainable enough to risk cannibalizing your other lines of business? For a company with a crap reputation? Doesn't make sense.

Magnet magnate and coon tie tycoon! (If we get a robber baron themed pun every episode, I'll be happy!)

Ooh, backformore I actually know the reason! (not trying to be snippy, I'm just excited because I like random stuff like this!). There is a difference between a 22 and a 22W. Every brand uses their own sizing, based on their fit model. For designer brands, that might be an actual person's measurements, but for mass market clothes, it's more likely a specific set of measurements rather than a specific person. But there's no standard sizing in the U.S., so it can be very different from brand to brand, or even season to season in the same brand. Designs are developed for one size, usually in the middle of the range (typically an 8, 10, or 12 for Misses, or 7 or 11 for Juniors) that represent that brand's fit. Once they're satisfied with the fit of the garment in that size, they grade the patterns up or down to get the other sizes-they don't actually re-fit it on someone in each size. Misses sizes have even numbers and Juniors sizes use odd numbers. (Juniors sizes are cut for younger bodies/fit.) Plus sizes (with the "W") are actually patterned on a plus size fit model (typically a size 20W) and graded up and down for the other sizes. For any line, if the grading isn't done well, the sizes furthest away from the original fit size are more likely to have odd proportions. So a size 20, like at Gap or Old Navy, is a scaled up from a 10 (or whatever size they use). A 20W, wouldn't be the same thing, because it was patterned on a plus sized body and maybe scaled down from a 22W, not just scaled up from a misses' size. You really see the difference where sizes overlap. A 14 and a 14W fit very differently. (Try a Merona XXL (20) in the Misses at Target and a 2X (20W) in Plus- not the same.) Bridal sizes run really small to begin with, so it's even more tricky there. The last time I was a bridesmaid, the shop wanted to order me an 18W based on my measurements. But I'm really small chested, and plus size tops that "fit" my measurements tend to be too big in the bust for me. I ordered a 20 (no "W", and it was cheaper!) and had some alterations done, but it was closer to the right fit than the "smaller" women's size. If you go to someplace like David's Bridal (whose site isn't working at the moment or I'd link to an example), there are some differences in fit and styling between the misses and plus sizes, even for the same dress style- they don't just keep scaling up for the larger sizes. To bring it back to the episode- bridal shops don't stock every size to try on, so you may not get to see the dress you want in your actual size before ordering. But if you're in that abyss where misses and plus sizes overlap, it's important to try on a sample that's from the same size group. Don't just try on a misses sample and order a plus size- you may find yourself with a very different fit from what you expected! But no matter what, it doesn't mean wide! :)

The majority of the Attorneys General in the U.S. (Including the AGs of DC and Puerto Rico) have taken serious issue with Direct Buy's business practices. I think it's an insult to Sam's Club and Costco to compare them. I agree with the other posters who think less of Marcus for making it sound like they're legit. http://www.ct.gov/ag/lib/ag/press_releases/2011/directbuyamicusbrief.pdf

As someone who came of age in the 90s, I can't agree that the Cranberries are "C- level". It may have been before Kaitlyn's time, but they were certainly influential then. Now, were they slumming it by appearing on this show? That's another question entirely. (Full disclosure: I have an acoustic version of "Zombie" that I got from Napster that gets me a little misty eyed every time I play it. Yeah, I'm old.)

Also, the "W" in plus sizes stands for womens, not wide, dumbass. God, I wanted to smack her when she said that.

I thought this episode was horribly depressing. I've struggled with weight my whole life, lost more than 100 lbs 15 years ago, gained it back, and struggled to lose it again since then. When I think about how many holidays, events, and accomplishments I spent distracted by my diet du jour, it's brutal. So I personally couldn't imagine having the focus of my *wedding* being my weight. Literally, with giant banners of fat me all around. In fact, I'm kind of having a panic attack just thinking about it. Even if I had just lost that much weight, I'm just horrified about making it so much of such an important day. I also kind of feel like it makes an unhealthy connection between weight and marriage. If they gain some weight back, does that mean the marriage is a failure?

When Ben Z cleared the room and started telling Kaitlyn why he didn't want to be funny in that situation, you could see the wheels spinning in her head and her expression went from smirk, to giggle, to complete confusion. She had no idea how to handle the situation without cracking a joke. She's really not that bright. I can't speak for Ireland, but here in the states a lot of Catholic churches have been sold. We have a restaurant/bar in Pittsburgh with vats and brewing equipment on the altar. I bought a small church myself and converted it into a house. The buildings are deconsecrated before they're sold. I was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school, but I'd rather see the buildings used for something (though perhaps not the filming of the Bachelorette) than to have them fall into disrepair. After awhile you get over the creepiness of knowing weddings and funerals happened in your kitchen.