BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND TWITTER BACKGROUNDS

Monday, January 14, 2008

Its all in how you accessorize, I guess. . .

I read this article the other day, while I was waiting for my physical therapist, mini-mimi to do her usual nothing with my hand. . .
It involved couples. It was about relationships, and while I don't usually read that sort of thing (because, frankly, every relationship is unique to its own self, and any self proclaimed 'relationship guru' is usually a dumbass, anyhow) the premise of this one was so ridiculous that I perused it.
What they were saying, in a nutshell, is that Fashion Wise, couples should match each other.
Excuse me?
Yes. We should all be oh so matched. Of course, they had to give celebrity examples, like Will and Jada (Pinkett)Smith, and Brangelina ect. ect. Where they lost me was showing Ben Affleck with J-Lo AND Jennifer Garner Hello? He and J-Lo were the ultimate matchy matchy people, and they broke up! They said J-Lo tried to make him too pretty and fashion forward. So they were doomed. Jennifer lets him be his sloppy, jeans wearing self, I guess.
They also showed Ashton and Demi. Whatever.
Anyhow. My brain has been flashing back to this stupid article intermittently, between my diabolic plans to make oompa loompa's out of the frenemies. Since I accomplished that, I figured if I blogged this it would climb out of my head.
I guess my thinking that attraction, and common interests and values, and, well, Love, was what kept couples happy and together. Along with lots of xanax, therapy and/or booze, possibly. I thought hard work, communication, compromise, and respect for one another were more ingredients to what kept a relationship alive.
And to think, all along, it's the clothing.
Good thing MM is comfortable in jeans, that's all I'm saying.
But speaking of MM, and looking at the date, it reminds me that we are halfway through our Chocolate free month. (almost). I have a chocolate conundrum, though.
We started this, because chocolate was freely and greatly consumed in the month of December. Yes it was. So, January rolls around, we are chocolate free. We are all, truthfully, in our heads, gleefully awaiting Feb. 1st. where most of us will probably celebrate with a piece of chocolate. MM has been so very supportive of my chocolate free month. Yesterday, knowing my love of Dark Chocolate, he told me that when I made it through the month, he was going to give me a "basket of gourmet dark chocolate". My immediate thought was, yum! I love dark chocolate! So I agreed with him that he could do so. But. I don't want to eat so much chocolate in February that it totally defeats what I did in January. . .
I am afraid we are going to enter a chocolate backlash, ladies. Any thoughts?

10 comments:

CamiKaos said...

Mr. Kaos and I are going to celebrate our freedom to eat chocolate by enjoying the chocolate bar Jo sent me in december. It is waiting patiently.

I think though, that after that we need to consider that while we are free TO eat the chocolate we are also free to not eat it... and maybe this month of chocolatelessness (yes I know that isn't a word, suck it) should be a platform for all of us towards something else healthy?

Maybe as a group we should discuss it.

holly said...

SHUT UP (said in the funny way. not the rude way)! chocolatelessness is a GREAT word!

i am exactly with you mie, fearing the chocolate backlash that i was backlashing in the first place. (wait, that doesn't make sense...)

i got so i couldn't stop eating chocolate. now i'm afraid that if i have a piece i'll have 20 again. and no, i don't think it is a deep pscyhological problem. oh, there probably *is* one, but it's not linked to chocolate. probably.

i'm open to suggestion though. i'm interested in what everybody thinks. and i'm all in favor of something else healthy.

Lori- Fairytales & Margaritas said...

Um, I'm eating chocolate in the form of protein bars, but I don't think they count.

And my husband and I couldn't be further from each other when it comes to fashion. For God's sake he has Pink Floyd lounge pants that he wears all the time!

Marcus said...

And here I was gonna leave a comment about matching couples...
*note to self: the presence of the word "chocolate" in a multi paragraph post not generally about said word automatically changes the subject of the entire post to chocolate.
Man log 13254625785.9*

mielikki said...

Yes, it is quite funny how this whole posting came to be about chocolate.
But, matching couples is a pretty horrific topic.

Dapoppins said...

Mwhahahaha! I laugh in the face of your ban on chocolate. Here, have a
deep, dark, truffle, why don't you?

Marcus said...

I was gonna say, when I think of matching couples I think of this one...

Linky?


That couple has style ;)

mielikki said...

Holy Hell batman! Where did she come from! (Shaking fist at Dapoppins). You may keep your truffles for now, and don't be surprised if I come throw a honey nut cheerio at you and turn you into an oompa loompa!

mielikki said...

Marcus-
those two do have style, but I have to tell you I prefer my leather bodyce. Now if only I can talk MM into *at least* a kilt next year for the Faire. . .

sybil law said...

Problem solved, choconerds:
http://www.viactiv.com/products/index.jhtml?id=viactiv/calsium/softchews.inc&WT.srch=1&gclid=CJujkNWg95ACFSI-Igod4xFdxQ
(In case you don't want to click on that, it's for that Viactiv stuff.)
Anyway, I truly wondered about that, too. That's why I HATE diets of any sort. Eventually, you gotta live in the real world.
Anyway, matching couples is incredibly creepy and just wrong.