RuPaul's Drag Race season 8 recaps

The shadiest Drag Race recaps on the web. Get ready to death drop, queens!

The Bachelorette Australia recaps

One woman, 14 desperate men, mucho LOLs. Oh, and Osher Gunsberg.

The Bachelor Australia recaps

Sequins, spray tans and sex - it's season 3 of the world's stupidest dating show.

RuPaul's Drag Race Season 7 recaps

YASS, HUNTIES! Every episode of season seven recapped for your reading pleasure. Let's get sickening!

Sunday, January 30, 2005

Marat Safin


Marry me. Marry me now.

Sunday, January 23, 2005

Whingeing queens

misc_rantsbitch_eryI'm sure I'm not the only one to have noticed a bit of a "whinge" trend in pop music of recent times. It seems lately all I've heard is teen queens whingeing about their over exposure. (The fact that WE'VE all been whingeing about it for years seems not to affect them.)

Britters has re worked Bobby Brown's classic celebrity whinge anthem My Prerogative and introduced a whole new generation to crap early 90s beat loops. Sorry, did I say re worked? I think the word I'm looking for is 'copied'. It's pretty much the same, although she did remove the lyrics about how it's her prerogative to snort a kilo of cocaine while beating her wife.

Now Lindsay Lohan has gotten in on the act. Who? You know, that chick from that movie with the thing, who used to be in Parent Trap. She's a shy, retiring lass, our Lindsay, and she's downright FED UP with all this press she and her implants have been getting. So she's decided to fight the power, with song, releasing her first single Rumours. Rumour is that it's crap.

Obviously Lindsay was sick of all the attention she was getting from her films so, cleverly, she made herself into a pop princess, recorded a song, shot a sexy video and threw herself all over the media to promote it. Brilliant plan.


"That bitch better keep her tits in while the cameras are on us. It's LINDSAY'S time to shine."


I just LOVE the lyrics of this song, they're 100% pure teen-queen whinge gold:

Here we are back up in the club
People taking pictures
Don't you think they get enough
I just wanna be all over the floor
And throw my hands up in the air to a beat like "What?"

I've gotta say respectfully
I would like it if you take the cameras off of me
'Cause I just want a little room to breathe
Can you please respect my privacy.


Oh, my heart goes out to her, it really does. She can't even throw her hands up in the air to a beat like "What?" because of all those BASTARD photographers. To be honest, Lindsay, I don't think photos of you dancing in a club are going to make the front page any time soon. It's what you're doing in the BACK ROOM of the club they're trying to get.

But in any case, she's right: she's altogether too talentless to be THIS over promoted. Memo to paparazzi: remember when Jennifer Love Hewitt released a pop song? Mmm, thought not.

I'm all for Lindsay having her privacy. It will mean we don't have to put up with her stupid freckly face anymore, or hear the stories of how she was a child model/actress/cocaine dealer* when she was 5.

Speaking of spinning (we were, weren't we?) it's Paris Hilton, in her underwear, spinning to Dead or Alive. That's what the web is all about.

*may not be true.

Friday, January 21, 2005

Weight Watchers: you are their bitch.

misc_rantschick_stuffOk. Firstly, let me just say that I have been a member of Weight Watchers in the past. Not that I was GROSSLY overweight or anything (hey, if you can still fit through your front door, you're fine). And yes, I have to admit, it worked quite well.

But a friend of mine who has just started on it drew my attention to a strange anomaly in the world famous Weight Watchers Points Guide. This is the fascist little book of dietary mathematics that converts food into numbers and tells you how fat you'll get if you eat a slice of chocolate mudcake. (And for the record - it's more than a Big Mac, so just keep that in mind next time you're having a good time and not thinking about weight at all. Let the Points Guide ruin your next birthday celebrations).


Even Jesus wants you to join us. Weight Watchers: you are our bitch.


My friend discovered in this book that a FRIED prawn dumpling is worth 1 point, while a STEAMED dumpling is worth 1.5 points. Which makes me think - is this whole points system actually a complete crock of crap? Are the Weight Watchers scientists (assuming they hire any, and don't just sit around after weigh-ins making this shit up) just randomly pulling point values from their svelte arses?


"Hmm, it's Tuesday today, and this year's a leap year, so this potato chip must be...3 points."


Who decides these point values? They can't be based on fat content or calories alone - how to explain the dumpling conundrum? Could this be the new chaos theory? A woman takes a bite out of a dimsim in China, and a Norwegian suddenly puts on 5 kilos?

Anyway, allowing foods like chocolate mudcake onto the points list seems completely ridiculous, given that a slice will cost you 26 points and you're allowed a maximum of 20 a day. "No breakfast for me thanks, I'm going to have an inch of this slice of cake....I'll skip lunch today guys, I'm having a bit of my cake slice....Sorry, can't make it to dinner, I've got to finish off my cake...." And then you have to skip breakfast the next day too, to keep balance in the mathematical food-iverse.

Still, I suppose if I had stuck to the plan I wouldn't be worried about my lovehandles so much.

Monday, January 10, 2005

Got expensive taste? Maths can help.

We've all been there: dirt poor, credit cards being rejected, not enough pennies to scrape together for a loaf of bread (forgive me for getting all Dickensian but you know what I mean)...

And yet...there they are in the shop window (and later, wrapped around your arse in the changing room)...the PERFECT JEANS. And they're only $200. GAH! What's a girl to do?

Well, good news: there is help. And it comes in the form of maths.

Pardon me?


You heard me. Maths. I recently had to enlighten a poor, struggling friend on the PetStarr "cost per wear" rule (patent pending) and now, in the spirit of goodwill, I offer it to you, the internet. (And you, the reader.)

The purchase of expensive clothes can be justified using the "cost per wear" mathematic equation, thusly: Calculate the number of times you are likely to wear the item, then divide the cost of the item by this number.

For example - if the jeans are $200, and you calculate you'll probably wear them 200 days of the year, it works out to $1 per wear. Pretty reasonable.


These jeans rightly have a cost per wear of 2.5c


But it works both ways: a pair of leather pants for $300 you might only wear 10 times, with a cost pear wear of $30. Not great.

Therefore: jeans = justified.



The second rule to remember when considering the purchase of expensive clothing is that there are certain items of clothing that cannot be skimped on in price, because they are the HOLY GRAILS of shopping and CANNOT BE IGNORED. These are:

1) jeans
2) bathers (obviously this one is aimed mainly at chicks)
3) white collared shirts
4) fitted jackets


The rule is that when and if you find any of these items that fit you and make you look great, you MUST PURCHASE THEM - NO MATTER THE PRICE.

And there you have it. I hope I helped some of the penniless.

Let them eat jeans!

I mean wear cake!