TwirlyGirly

In defense of Ashley (and no, I don't think she should have won)....designing flattering clothing for plus-size women as a group is next to impossible. There are five main female body shapes; apple, pear, rectangle, inverted triangle, and hourglass. If you're tall and thin, how much your body shape influences whether the silhouettes you choose are flattering is minimal. After all, there are accessories (such as belts to cinch in a waist, or heels of different heights to slightly change one's posture - which affects fit), and alterations that can be made to "tweak" a particular design to better flatter a particular individual's body shape. The shorter and heavier you are, the more pronounced and obvious effect your body shape has on your clothing decisions. If a plus-size designer knew at the outset exactly who their models would be (their body shape; apple, pear, etc.), and could design specifically for each model, their looks would be much more flattering - on those individuals. But would they be flattering on most women who fall into the category of "plus-size"? No. They would be flattering on plus-size women with the same body shape. Put an outfit designed to flatter a large-size "rectangle" on a woman with a large-size "pear" body-shape and she is not going to look her best. So, the question is, can a plus-size designer be profitable creating outfits that are only flattering to 1/5th of the plus-size market? That doesn't even take into account personal tastes of those who fall into that 1/5th category a particular "plus-size" outfit has been carefully designed to flatter. It doesn't matter how good that little black dress (LBD) you designed to perfectly flatter an apple-shaped customer if that customer hates black and/or has no occasion to ever wear a LBD. To be profitable and successful, a designer has to create clothing that is both attractive and flattering to the greatest number of customers. That is quite a challenge for those designing for the plus-size market, and I think it's why we don't see designers creating collections especially for plus-size women that are as flattering and fashion-forward as those which are available to taller, thinner women.

I think Candace is drop-dead gorgeous and I love her designs. If I was of the right age, had the right body and the money, nothing would make me happier than opening my closet door and seeing Candice's collection (yes - including the hat). Where would I wear her clothes? Trust me - I'd figure it out. But I would wear them. As often as possible. As for her personality - to be honest, I'd somewhat soured on PR because it seemed like the last few seasons there's been at least one designer who was a mean-spirited, obnoxious, back-stabbing [w]itch I couldn't wait to be eliminated so I could enjoy watching the show. Nothing Candace has said or done this season has come close to what those previous designers did. If one of this season's designers ended up hiding out in the restroom sobbing uncontrollably as a result of something Candace did, I missed it. In the presentation Candace gave to a group of fashion design students (linked to by another poster in a previous post), Candace admitted she had been a bully as a teenager. Considering the enormous stress and lack of sleep experienced by the PR designers during the competition, if what we've seen of Candace is the worst of her behavior, then she's come a long way in the years since high school. I applaud her. There. I said it.

But they way AMERICANS do things in AMERICA is the "best" way to do them, don'tcha' know? The rest of the world clearly does these things WRONG and needs US to tell THEM how to do them "right."</s>

Here's a video made by Hank Green (brother of John Green, author of "The Fault in Our Stars" and other books), explaining the difference between sex, gender, and orientation/attraction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXAoG8vAyzI Hope this helps! TwirlyGirly

Thank you for this! If I have to hear any more about "privacy" on HHI, I'll scream. Do people really think their lives are so interesting the neighbors will be spending their free time spying on them? Honestly? Or does HHI just attract people who 1) walk around naked all the time, and/or 2) are having sex in front of an open window 24/7? I have enough excitement/drama/challenges in my own life as it is - I really couldn't care less about what my neighbors are up to and I certainly have zero interest in whatever excitement/drama/challenges they're involved in. If you're the type of person who believes your neighbors are so fascinated with your day to day life they have nothing better to do than sit in their windows and WATCH you, then YOU have way too much free time. Methinks you need a hobby.

Oh Terra....you have the WORST timing. Your fiancé has been sex-deprived for six weeks. You two finally gets the "go ahead" (and you KNOW that's all the guy could think about!)...he sees you lying in bed in a sexy negligee, all ready to go...and YOU think that's the perfect time to bring up...your WEDDING???? No, girl. Bad idea. Wait 'til afterwards, when he's feeling all warm and fuzzy and....satisfied.... I loved the nanny they hired for Penny. She is hilarious! I understand Terra having "new mom" nervousness and not wanting to let Penny out of her sight, but that's not good for Penny, Terra, Joe, OR the relationship between Terra and Joe. Hopefully the nanny can get through to Terra and make her understand the importance of relaxing and letting go just a little bit. (Joe might be a bit more enthusiastic about their upcoming nuptials if Terra shows she is just as devoted to nurturing their relationship as a couple as she is to nurturing Penny).

Perhaps I misheard this, but when Jenelle called Barb to tell her about the trip, I got the impression Jace was supposed to be with Jenelle for part of the time they were going to be in St. Thomas. I thought I heard Barb say something about having to cancel or change some plans she had made so that Jace could stay with her the whole week - and that was why she was annoyed. Of course, Janelle never ASKED Barb if she would be available or whether she would mind taking Jace so that she could go on vacay - she just ASSUMED Barb would drop everything. And then Jenelle starts yelling at Barb to "shut up" and hangs up on her? Really? I have no words.

Right on both counts, and this is why: Texas Approves Textbooks with Moses as Founding Father http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2014/11/texas-approves-textbooks-with-moses-as-founding-father/ I *knew* this episode was going to go the way it did. For all their blather about believing in the Bible, when it came right down to it they didn't trust God to provide, so they took the sure thing. Also, apparently they skipped over those portions of the Bible which talk about giving away everything you have to follow Jesus, and the story of the poor woman who only had a few coins to give to Jesus, but Jesus said she had given the most, because she gave everything she had..... I guess they were too busy memorizing the parts about same-sex relationships....

So many things bothered me about this episode, but since others have already brought them up, I don't see the point in rehashing. I do want to mention on thing I caught that I haven't seen anyone else talk about. In regards to Josh and Meghan, at one point, Josh said (paraphrasing) Meghan had told him about how his mother had been treating her, and he said he just doesn't see it. Then, he was privy to the comments made during the dinner, and in his TH said he was beginning to see what Meghan meant, but there was nothing he could do about it. That pissed me off. I'm not particularly religious, but Josh, Meghan, and their families are Christians. The Bible does say when you marry, you leave you families and cleave onto your spouse. IOW, your SPOUSE - not your mother, father, etc., are to become your priority. Furthermore, in marriage it is up to each partner to manage their respective family members. Josh obviously LOVES to be babied by his mother, and also quite obviously is unwilling to do anything that could jeopardize that relationship, even at the expense of Meghan's happiness (hey - it's kinda like he has TWO women fighting over him!). But it is HIS responsibility to take his mother aside and tell her some of the comments she's made to his wife are totally unacceptable and must stop. Meghan is in for years of misery unless and until Josh decides to man up and put her first AND make it clear to his mother his wife is now #1 and must be treated with respect.

"Rentable boy toys"? In Morocco? Really? Now where did I put that passport?? LOL!

Her voice and some of her facial expressions reminded me of Victoria Jackson. And not in a good way. At all.

Did they ever say what type of job Konrad has? I looked online and couldn't find anything. As a matter of fact, I, too thought they might be Fundiebots, but couldn't find anything linking them to that, either..... Very odd family.

It's a bit different, IMO, finding accommodations for a family that has a child who uses a wheelchair as opposed to looking for a home for an adult that uses one, only because a child (depending upon their age, of course) usually isn't going to need to cook, do laundry, and a whole slew of other "tasks of daily living" adults must be able to accomplish on their own. OTOH, it's extremely rare for other countries to allow people with disabilities to immigrate from the US, especially those countries with socialized medicine. Immigration laws make it practically impossible. For example, Australia recently loosened their policy to allow some people with disabilities to immigrate, IF the migrant can demonstrate " a 'net benefit' approach where the potential costs of any medical required can be offset against what the potential migrants contribute to the Australian economy." http://www.visabureau.com/australia/news/02-11-2012/australian-immigration-law-loosens-criteria-for-disabled-migrants.aspx

The family purchasing a vacation home and opening a "franchise" of their coffee shop in Grand Caymen last night was prone to exaggeration about their home city, International Falls, MN. The wife said the temp in International Falls dipped below freezing half the year; according to Wikipedia, it's slightly less than 1/3 of the year (109 days). She also said International Falls is the "coldest city in the US." Not exactly - "there are still many towns that are smaller and annually overall colder than International Falls, many of these being mountain communities in the Rockies, as well as several in northern Minnesota" : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Falls,_Minnesota Interesting little town, though - population only about 6500. The town's "claim to fame," if you will, is winning a federal trademark challenge against the town of Fraser, CO in a battle for the rights to use the slogan "Icebox of the Nation." LOL! I liked house #2, but the first thing I would have done if I bought it would be to buy several dozen cans of paint; finished in all white like it was when they toured it made it look far to stark and sterile.

I agree, and am waiting for them to feature someone searching for housing overseas who uses a wheelchair for mobility ....not holding my breath, though...

I, too, believe Gabby is a spoiled, entitled brat - and wondered why her mother panders to her in the extreme. I started to think about it, and realized what probably is happening is this: Mother has three kids, all of whom have reached or are about to reach the age at which they will be living on their own and have their own lives. IF she was still married, Mom would be teetering at the brink of "empty nest syndrome," and working on rekindling her relationship with her husband and planning their future. Most likely, like the rest of us, she thought she and her husband would grow old together. But now that they're divorced, her future is a big unknown and everything she thought about what that future would be like has to be abandoned. Also, one of the toughest things for moms in general is accepting and moving past that feeling of "no one needs me anymore." So, I can see why Mom is giving Gabby so much power. Somewhere in her subconscious, avoiding having to face a future alone (with no idea how to restructure that future in light of her present circumstances) by doing whatever she needs to keep Gabby at home where she can still "mother" her is the lesser of two evils. Not saying she's right. What she is doing is selfish, although she probably doesn't realize it. Gabby needs to be booted out of the nest post haste and Mom needs to figure out what she wants the rest of her life to look like and work towards achieving those goals. Therapy would definitely help. I actually liked the kitchen reno. But I'm with others who said the first cabinet choice the designer presented was identical to the cabinets already IN the kitchen. What was that about? My only objection to the whole thing - including the choice of house - was that the decision should have been entirely the Mom's. I would have nipped Gabby's attitude in the bud in about two seconds flat. "Oh, you don't like the blue shingles? Well, if I decide this is the house I want, if the blue bothers you THAT much, you are welcome to buy the supplies and equipment needed to repaint them with your OWN money and put YOUR sweat and tears into the work. And that goes for anything else that doesn't meet your standards in whichever house I choose. Got it?"

And then they ended up in the house that (IMO) had a tiny kitchen (one in which she couldn't keep an eye on the kids when she was cooking, which is something most HHI'ers with kids have claimed as an issue), and NO bathtub! If the majority of these complaints are producer-driven, they need to find some new producers for this show; i.e., producers that can keep their story-lines consistent from the beginning of each episode (the "wish list") to the end. It just doesn't make any sense most of the time! Whenever the House Hunters complain about kitchens being "dated," or "too small," I want to drag them into my house by the hair to see MY kitchen.and force them to watch me prepare a meal. I suspect most, if not all, would claim they simply could NOT prepare meals in my kitchen and would certainly starve to death. Yet despite the challenges presented by my old, very dated kitchen with appliances I like to call "temperamental," I manage to produce pretty wonderful meals every day. The fact that I have laminate countertops and mis-matched appliances has never affected the quality of my cooking, and neither my daughter nor I aren't even close to starving. Funny, that! OTOH, I've been disabled since birth and use a manual wheelchair for mobility. In order to survive independently, I've had to develop my creative problem solving skills and learn to "make do." I've never had the money to adapt any space to accommodate my disability. If I allowed such silly things as not having granite countertops stop me (especially since I'm also short-statured, and standard counter height is level with my shoulders - which is a much bigger challenge than any aesthetic issues), I'd be dead by now.

I noticed that when Tim's bookcase was being judged, the editing was bad. When the turntable first displayed the bookcase, the fan blades were behind the piece. Then in the next shot the bookcase was turned around with the fan blades in the front. The back to front shots/scenes flipped several times, proving the editing showed the exchange between the judges and Tim and the carpenter were cobbled together out of sequence. Those types of continuity issues really annoy me. Almost as much as Katie's voice. Oh, and I also noticed that much of Katie's affectation goes away when she forgets she's being filmed - like in a few long shots in which she's talking to her carpenter and her back is to the camera .....

Yes, this was the rule in the house I grew up in. I was not allowed to enter my parent's bedroom without permission - ever. I remember always standing in the doorway of my parents room to talk to them, and if I began to inch past the doorway and into their room my father would quickly point it out to me and demand I scoot back. Come to think of it, I don't recall EVER even sitting on my parent's bed, let alone sleep in it. They were of the mind there was never a good reason for me to enter their room - anything that needed to be accomplished could be via talking to them from the doorway. I'm sure if I discovered the house was on fire in the middle of the night, and they were asleep, the appropriate way to handle the situation would be to shout "Fire! Fire!" from the doorway ... So, I don't have an issue with Kate banning her children from her room. I think it's important for parents to have their own private space and some assurance they won't have their kids snooping around their personal things, even if they don't have anything to hide.

Honestly, I have to admit to feeling more than a bit sympathetic towards Jamie. While it is absolutely true many of us had to endure less than stellar childhoods for various reasons, and managed to move beyond whatever trauma we suffered as a result without any outside intervention, some people cannot. If I were friends with Jamie, I would gently point out to her that her demands to have a baby NOW stem from her need for the safety and security of the idealized view of "family" she has created in her mind. BUT.... If she wants to have that safety and security for both herself and her future children, the most important thing right NOW is to work on strengthening her relationship with Doug. Jamie needs therapy to deal with her past, forgive her mother, and learn to move on. Jamie and Doug have to be emotionally healthy before they even think about having children - not to mention, they both have to be fully onboard with the idea. Sure, plenty of people have children even when they do not have the financial and emotional resources to raise them properly, and even parents who are fully prepared with to meet the demands of parenthood make mistakes. But if Jamie wants better for her future children than what she herself had to deal with, she cannot afford to enter into parenthood without both of them taking the time to prepare themselves in every way they can. Unfortunately, there is still a stigma among some people regarding therapy. If Jamie is one of those who hears "therapy" and thinks "I'm not crazy!" then the likelihood of her getting the help she needs to deal with her past is slim. If that's the case, my heart goes out to her. But, by delaying her desire to begin a family and using that time to work on her issues, her relationship with Doug, AND ensuring both of them make the necessary emotional and financial preparations, I think Jamie could be an excellent mother and eventually have the safety and security a stable and loving family can provide.

When I was in my late teens, I subscribed for a year to "Bride" and "Modern Bride" magazines. If I recall, in each issue there was a page devoted to educating young women about bridal gowns. It described silhouettes, fabric types, trims, embellishments, and types of lace. (Not to mention what is appropriate for the time of year, time of day the wedding is being held, and the formality of the wedding) Do those magazines still include that information? If they do, is the issue young women aren't reading it? Or have weddings become such a free-for-all brides have an "anything goes" mentality, which allows them to abdicate themselves from any resposibility to have to learn anything that would help them and their consultants find the dress of their dreams? I have to admit I am shocked at what I see and hear when these young women are shopping for gowns. It seems every episode at least one bride says "I don't like this material" and it's obvious she not only doesn't know what the "material" is, but also whether it's worth the price of the gown. Not to mention, if a bride can't even accurately describe the silhouette she wants, how in the world can she tell the consultant what types of fabric, lace, embellishments and trims she prefers? I'd be willing to bet most of them have no clue as to whether they've just plunked down a few thousand dollars for a polyester gown embellished with cheap plastic rhinestones (glued, not sewn) and crappy machine-made polyester lace - or a silk gown embellished with hand-sewn Swarovski crystals and hand made Alençon or Chantilly. (Although I suspect most often it's the former, and they are overpaying for what is essentially shoddy materials and workmanship).* These women don't even know the difference between a "strap" and a "sleeve"!!! Maybe it's just me, but I can't imagine spending that kind of money and having no idea what I'm getting. It's going to come as quite a shock when these women have their gowns cleaned and preserved after the wedding, in the hope they can pass it along to a daughter or grandaughter to wear. When they finally open the box decades from now they may discover their expensive dress has fallen apart because it was made of cheap goods to begin with. <Edited to add yet another thought> I believe I also remember those bridal magazines advising brides to take the undergarments and shoes with the same heel height they plan to wear at their wedding with them to their appointments when trying on dresses. So many of these brides discard dresses that might otherwise be flattering if they were wearing the right undergarments. Spanx or long-line bustier-type bras can do wonders, and heels (or lack thereof) completely change your posture (and fit of the dress). *Just to be clear, I understand many women cannot afford to spend thousands on their wedding gowns. There are certainly many beautiful, quality gowns offered at much lower prices. I'm objecting to women paying thousands of dollars for a gown they think is quality just because it's expensive.

Horrible. As others have mentioned, I was hoping for more of a Master Chef: Junior than what was thrown at us last night. Why, why WHY couldn't they just give the kids more time, as opposed to forcing them to have an "assistant" (all of whom were worthless, as far as I could tell). Or, if they did want the kids to have help, how about some professionals from the garment industry (what was that show where three adult contestents had to create a mini-collection, but had pro seamstresses at their disposal, who they had to manage)? As soon as I saw the program was being sponsored by Jo-Ann, I groaned. Their fabric is CRAP. When I was living in Texas, the fabric stores in my area were limited to Jo-Ann and another chain, and I ask you - how do you even FIND interfacing that's off-grain to sell? (Not kidding. After buying and returning multiple yards of fabric and interfacing only to discover they were ALL either off-grain or defective in other ways I finally gave up). Honestly, Project Runway must have boosted sales at Mood exponentially, so couldn't Mood have thrown in a few bolts of decent fabric for this show? Polyester and a bunch of quilting cottons and cheap embellishments does not a Red Carpet look make. I felt bad for all those kids. I think all of them could have done much better if they'd had access to better quality materials, and more time OR assistants who actually knew how to sew. The clothes themselves? Just awful. The judges comments made me wonder if all of them were drunk or just visually impaired. Maybe both.

I wasn't at all surprised by Vaughn and Monet's decision to divorce. From the beginning I saw there was a big disconnect in Monet saying she wanted a traditional man and a marriage with traditional gender roles, versus what that actually means to the average person. Disclaimer: Personally, I would never engage in a relationship with someone who wants/expects me to be a "traditional" mate. The issue is that Monet didn't really think through what contributions to the relationship she would be expected to make as a "traditional" wife. I think she only saw as far as "he'll take care of me, and I won't have to worry about making any big decisions - but otherwise, my life will go on as it always has." No. A "traditional" man, who expects traditional gender roles in marriage, expects his wife to cook. And not just once in a blue moon - he wants a meal put before him at least once a day (preferably, two or three times, depending upon whether he has a home business and thus takes lunch at home, or works at a location outside of the home. But even with that, he may expect his wife to prepare a bag lunch for him to take with him to work). He is also going to expect his wife to bear the burden for most of the upkeep of their home AND he'll want a certain amount of "coddling" from her. Monet was not prepared for that in the least. She didn't have any of the skills a "traditional" man involved in a marriage with traditional gender roles with a "traditional" wife would normally expect. I think Vaughn was totally taken off guard by this, and that is what was at the root of all of their issues. Do I think Vaughn is a bit of a jerk? Yes - but that's only because I would never want a "traditional" man or to be involved in a relationship defined by traditional gender roles (although I do have the skills a traditional man would look for). There are women out there who truly do want a traditional man and who want and expect their marriages to be defined by traditional gender roles. The problem with Vaughn and Monet is that Monet is not one of those women, so I suspect a lot of the ways in which Vaughn reacted to Monet was caused by him being just confused. Monet claimed she was a traditional woman who wanted a relationship based on traditional gender roles, but she wasn't and she didn't. Monet summed it up herself thusly: "I really feel like all the things I might have asked for before... I don't think I understood what I was asking for before, and I think now I have a better understanding maybe of what I really want, or maybe what I really need." I do blame the "team" that selected her for not digging a little deeper into Monet and forcing her to define what "traditional" men and "traditional" women meant to her, and also what her expections were of what both her role and the role of her husband would be in a marriage based on "traditional gender roles." They really dropped the ball with Vaughn and Monet.

Yes! I am going to be giggling about this for the rest of the day. "Pair of breasts with a woman attached"!!! LOL!!! (Oh, I should BE so lucky!)

Since this relates to my earlier comment, although references an epi of SYTTD-A, I'm putting this here. Yesterday, I had the TV on in the background tuned to the SYTTD-A marathon, while I was doing other things. I heard what I thought was a bride saying something to the effect of wanting an "A-frame" dress...... and quickly ran to the LR, grabbed the remote, and rewound a minute or two. YES...there she was...in the segment of the program which features a bride picking up her dress. She was doing her TH, and was explaining when she initially came to the salon to select her gown, she had thought she wanted "An A-frame style dress" but then had selected something quite different. I even turned on the CC to be SURE she had said "A-frame" - and she had. Okay, the bride-to-be WAS a bit chunky but did she really think covering herself with a HOUSE would be flattering? Really? So, let's add another entry to my initial post (although it should be an addendum to my reference to the non-existence of "Princess dresses"): #5 Know your silhouettes: A-line, Ball gown, Sheath, Mermaid, Trumpet, Empire, Fit and flare. Unless you truly want to drag along a house on your back, DO NOT ask for an "A-frame."