<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Unstirred &#187; general</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.unstirred.com/category/general/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.unstirred.com</link>
	<description>We're not impressed.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2011 15:20:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Monika Jagaciak Unfairly Excluded</title>
		<link>http://www.unstirred.com/monika-jagaciak-unfairly-excluded/</link>
		<comments>http://www.unstirred.com/monika-jagaciak-unfairly-excluded/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 05:46:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Starving Socialite</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[fashion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[general]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unstirred.com/?p=30</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think this is total shit.  The press is making a big huge deal out of this, so I guess Simon Lock got just what he wanted.  This is is a publicity stunt to generate buzz for his dying show.  Twenty or more designers have dropped out of this show over the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a title="Monika Jagaciak headshot" href="http://www.unstirred.com/pix/monika-jagaciak.jpg" target="_blank"><img class="alignright" style="float: right; border: 2px solid black; margin: 1px;" src="http://www.unstirred.com/pix/monika-jagaciak-mini.jpg" alt="Monika Jagaciak" /></a>I think <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080411/lf_afp/lifestylefashionaustralia_080411161807" target="_blank">this</a> is total shit.  The press is making a big huge deal out of this, so I guess Simon Lock got just what he wanted.  This is is a publicity stunt to generate buzz for his dying show.  Twenty or more designers have dropped out of this show over the past year, and it&#8217;s mostly because of the obnoxious organizers.  Lock has decided that getting some media attention for his little show was worth the embarrassment and difficulty to Monika and the risk of starting another dumb industry trend (following on the BMI stupidity in London and Madrid, which has thankfully blown over.)</p>
<p>I would also like to point out that he&#8217;s flip-flopped on this.  For years he said he would leave it up to the designers and agencies, but I guess he couldn&#8217;t resist.</p>
<p>This is no different from telling a young actress she cannot be in a show or movie. Luckily, FW Australia doesn&#8217;t matter very much in the grand scheme of the industry &#8211; and with this, it&#8217;s becoming more of a joke.</p>
<p>I know this isn&#8217;t a very useful post, but I&#8217;m irritated and haven&#8217;t posted since we came back to life!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.unstirred.com/monika-jagaciak-unfairly-excluded/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top Five Myths About Hollywood</title>
		<link>http://www.unstirred.com/top-five-myths-about-hollywood/</link>
		<comments>http://www.unstirred.com/top-five-myths-about-hollywood/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:45:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous Realist</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[celebrities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[general]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weight]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myths]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unstirred.com/?p=29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First, sorry we&#8217;ve had our heads down.  We had some weird issues stemming from our allegation that Tom Cruise is a pro-ana nutjob, and also had some other stuff come up.   But to the many of you who wrote in worried about us &#8211; thanks, we&#8217;re fine.  We&#8217;d also like to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First, sorry we&#8217;ve had our heads down.  We had some weird issues stemming from our allegation that <a href="http://www.unstirred.com/tom-cruise-likes-em-starved/">Tom Cruise is a pro-ana nutjob</a>, and also had some other stuff come up.   But to the many of you who wrote in worried about us &#8211; thanks, we&#8217;re fine.  We&#8217;d also like to congratulate loyal reader SueBerry on being our iPhone winner.  (She was kind enough to send us a photo too, and thanks Sue, you&#8217;re <em>hawwt</em>!)</p>
<p>With all the courtesies out of the way, now for some follow-up on our controversial article.   <a href="http://lifeandstylemag.hollywood.com/2008/04/in_life_style_now_refusing_to.php"><em>Life &amp; Style</em> tells us</a> Katie and Posh are hanging out again, and the magazine reports they&#8217;re skipping the pasta and splitting a kid&#8217;s salad as if this is some kind of news.  I find it odd that <em>Life &amp; Style</em> and the other gossip mags don&#8217;t seem interested in exploring how this might tie into her predicament with Scientology, but they&#8217;re likely afraid to cross that line.</p>
<p><span id="more-29"></span></p>
<p>While some might be stunned at a story about Posh training Katie Holmes how to starve, it comes as no surprise to anyone who read our original article last summer.  Frankly, any of that craziness should come as no shock to anyone who spends any time <a title="Scientology Forums" href="http://forums.enturbulation.org/">learning about</a> the cult founded on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_opera_in_Scientology_scripture">space opera</a>.  But we&#8217;re not <em>complaining</em> about being first, or being right &#8211; we&#8217;re just reminding you that we were.</p>
<p>Moving on &#8211; we&#8217;ve decided our next course of duty is to shatter some myths we see rearing their ugly heads on our favorite blogs these days.  We love all of you, but most of you don&#8217;t live and work in this business, so many of you are a little confused about how things work around here.</p>
<p>Since we want you to be best equipped to practice your celeb-worship in every corner of the globe and throughout your pathetic little lives, and &#8211; for better or worse &#8211; we live, breathe, and earn our paychecks from it, we&#8217;re going to straighten out your pretty little heads.  Here goes.</p>
<p><strong>Myth One</strong><br />
Skinny celebrities and fashion models don&#8217;t starve themselves, they just have fast metabolisms/work out/have good genes/employ tricky optical illusions.</p>
<p><strong>The Truth</strong><br />
Bullshit.  They <em>do</em> starve themselves, they take Adderall or other forms of speed, some do cocaine, and they&#8217;re constantly encouraged to lie about it.  Now, I work with a lot of them and love them and am not criticizing them <em>at all</em> &#8211; I&#8217;m just telling you how it is.</p>
<p>Fashion models are the most notorious.  One super-agent told me that they actively discourage their models from exercising because it &#8220;makes them eat.&#8221;   Another I work with makes her models bring their food receipts back &#8211; along with their leftovers &#8211;  so she can be sure they&#8217;re toeing the line.  A model I was shooting a couple weeks ago, who I have a decent friendship with, told me before makeup that she&#8217;d had a &#8220;huge breakfast&#8221; and &#8220;felt disgusting.&#8221;  A big stack of chocolate-chip pancakes, perhaps?  Nope &#8211; <em>two eggs</em>.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s little question what top designers want to see on the runway &#8211; tall, impossibly thin girls with young, beautiful faces.   The idea is to taunt the masses with the fantastical and unattainable.  This year&#8217;s Fashion Week stars were elfin dolls like Vlada Roslyakova, Snejana Onopka, and Olga Sherer &#8211; and each of them were rewarded for their extreme thinness by booking more than <em>seventy shows</em> each.  Some models seem to relish the challenge; model Lily Donaldson has been competing with two other models to see who can eat the least.  Her reward?  Big fat contracts with D&amp;G, Dior, Gucci and Burberry.</p>
<p>With celebrities &#8211; especially this new breed of famous-for-being-famous tarts, it&#8217;s done for fun, competition and attention more than economic necessity.   Sure, you need to be thin in Hollywood, but it&#8217;s best &#8211; and just plain funnest &#8211; to be thinner than your competitors.  Nicole Richie is fairly open about her ways and is known for taunting anyone an ounce bigger than she is.  Victoria Beckham is unapologetically obsessive about her intake.    Nicky Hilton is thinner than she&#8217;s ever been &#8211; and, as a result, is more popular than she&#8217;s ever been.  <em>Life &amp; Style</em> reported last week that airhead Heidi Montag is having a skinny contest with Lauren Conrad (and it looks like Montag is winning.)</p>
<p>Many models and celebrities are aware they&#8217;re often used as &#8220;thinspiration&#8221;, and while a few are disturbed by it, my experience is that many see it as a badge of honor.  Almost all of them read blogs and forums and are regular &#8220;ego-surfers&#8221;, and I know some of them post under pseudonyms.</p>
<p><strong>Myth Two</strong><br />
The newswire picture of so-and-so on the red carpet / coming out of the club is &#8220;Photoshopped.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>The Truth</strong><br />
If by &#8220;Photoshopped&#8221;, you mean altered, it&#8217;s extremely unlikely.  Sure, there&#8217;s cropping, color balancing and that sort of thing, but that&#8217;s it.  News agencies have no time to manipulate images &#8211; they&#8217;re much more interested in being first than making sure someone&#8217;s ass doesn&#8217;t look big.</p>
<p>Also, it&#8217;s against any standard of good journalism.  Any reputable agency will fire a photographer who submits a manipulated image.  Reuters <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13165165/">fired a staff photographer last year</a> for editing an image from Iraq &#8211; and no, it wasn&#8217;t because the edit job looked like it was done by a 5 year old.</p>
<p>Just to make sure we weren&#8217;t high on something, today we checked in with Brandy Navarre of <a title="X17 Celebrity Photos" href="http://www.x17online.com/">X17</a> &#8211; one of Hollywood&#8217;s top photowires &#8211; and she told us the same thing, adding, &#8220;we&#8217;re not in the business of selling false stories.&#8221;</p>
<p>So, if the image is sourced directly from a good photo agency, news wire or photographer, the chance of it being Photoshopped are basically zero.  Celebrity blogger tip: save yourself the dozens of moron comments like &#8220;this image must be Photoshopped, she&#8217;s not that fat&#8221; by simply sourcing your images directly from a reputable agency (and properly crediting them).</p>
<p><strong>Myth Three</strong><br />
The camera adds ten pounds.</p>
<p><strong>The Truth<br />
</strong>No, it doesn&#8217;t. Yes, lighting and different camera lenses and various angles can play tricks on the eye, but a camera is no more likely to make you look fat than it is to make you look thin.  Generally speaking, with the lenses most paparazzi photographers are walking around with, there&#8217;s not going to be a weight penalty or a benefit.</p>
<p><strong>Myth Four</strong><br />
Paparazzi ruthlessly stalk celebrities.  These poor people can&#8217;t go anywhere without a camera in their face.</p>
<p><strong>The Truth</strong><br />
It&#8217;s a lot more complicated than that; it&#8217;s a very symbiotic relationship.  First of all, excepting superstars or human train wrecks, the &#8220;average celebrity&#8221; carries on a fairly normal life and is rarely recognized, let alone photographed.  This is partially because most humans are numb and oblivious and wouldn&#8217;t recognize Brad Pitt if he ordered a sandwich from them while barking lines from Fight Club.</p>
<p>But it&#8217;s also because the world is a large and busy place.  On the rare instances someone <em>is</em> paying attention, the exchange I&#8217;ve seen most commonly is: &#8220;has anyone ever told you you look like Tara Starlet?&#8221; to which the well-heeled celebrity coyly replies, &#8220;oh, I get that all the time.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m reminded of the old saying, &#8220;you know you&#8217;re in Hollywood when the guy at Starbucks who looks just like George Clooney&#8230; <em>is</em> George Clooney.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m no celebrity but I know a few from my work, go out to eat with them, exercise with them, and even run into them at the grocery store.  Setting aside set-up events like red carpet and photocalls &#8211; these people aren&#8217;t dragging along an army of drooling photographers.</p>
<p>Those who <em>are</em> recognized are almost always intentionally trying to draw attention to themselves (such as walking around with an entourage or going to lunch at the Ivy.)</p>
<p><strong>Myth 4-A Dumbass Follow-up Question</strong><br />
Then why do I see all these pictures of so-and-so buying groceries, walking their dog, etc.?   I&#8217;m so confused!<em></em></p>
<p><strong>The Truth<br />
</strong>Because celebrity publicists, &#8220;spotters&#8221;, and even doormen call photo agencies and tip them off.  Photographers are not psychics with magic powers of intuition about who is going to go where and when.  Los Angeles County is nearly 5,000 square miles and is crawling with ten million or so thin, good-looking people wearing sunglasses.  It&#8217;s not as if celebrities stand out unless they try.</p>
<p>Having said that, some <span style="text-decoration: underline;">do</span> try.  It&#8217;s a marketing decision and, for the most part, everyone wins when they do.</p>
<p>Photo agencies get hundreds of calls a day from publicists who are dying to get their clients photographed, because they know celeb-sluts like you are going to clickie-click-click and eat the pictures up.  The call is something like this: &#8220;Hey, Rick, it&#8217;s CokeFace from AgencyB &#8211; wanted you to know PopTart is headed over to Koi at 7 or so, <em>and she&#8217;s not wearing any underwear</em>..&#8221;  (OK, maybe not the last part, but&#8230;)</p>
<p>When this happens, the agency sends a photographer over and the rest is history.  Bloggers and magazines pay the agencies for rights to the photos (well, the good ones do) &#8211; the agency makes dough, bloggers get traffic, magazines sell copies, the celebrity gets visibility, photog gets paid, and the slutty publicist earns her next eight-ball.</p>
<p>Finally, there&#8217;s an entire caste of losers here in LA called &#8220;spotters.&#8221;   These sad little warts-on-the-ass-of-life buzz around all day on scooters hunting for celebrities and then they tip off agencies and photographers.  This is the source of most of the truly unwelcome attention celebrities deal with.</p>
<p><strong>So There<br />
</strong>Now that we&#8217;ve armed you with some new myth-slaying powers, go forth and use them.  Oh, and thank us, you little ingrates!</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">December 2, 2008 UPDATE</span></strong>: Hold up!  Before you go, check out some of our more recent Hollywood Smacktalk:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.unstirred.com/kristen-stewarts-falling-star/">Kristen Stewart&#8217;s Falling Star</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.unstirred.com/three-gorgeous-fashion-models-youve-never-heard-of/">Three Gorgeous Fashion Models You&#8217;ve Never Heard Of</a></li>
</ul>
<p>or how about a classic from the archives &#8211; the one that got us in <em>all that trouble</em> with the Scientology goons:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.unstirred.com/tom-cruise-likes-em-starved/">Tom Cruise Likes &#8216;em Starved</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.unstirred.com/top-five-myths-about-hollywood/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lucky iPhone Number</title>
		<link>http://www.unstirred.com/lucky-iphone-number/</link>
		<comments>http://www.unstirred.com/lucky-iphone-number/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous Realist</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[general]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unstirred.com/lucky-iphone-number/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, we promised y&#8217;all a few months ago that we&#8217;d give one of you an iPhone.  And the time is right.  So, the lucky iPhone number is 039.  If that&#8217;s your number, you win, and we&#8217;re sending you a fancy iPhone.  Get in touch.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, we <a href="http://www.unstirred.com/were-giving-away-something-sexy/">promised y&#8217;all a few months ago</a> that we&#8217;d give one of you an iPhone.  And the time is right.  So, the lucky iPhone number is 039.  If that&#8217;s your number, you win, and we&#8217;re sending you a fancy iPhone.  Get in touch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.unstirred.com/lucky-iphone-number/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>We&#8217;re Giving Away Something Sexy</title>
		<link>http://www.unstirred.com/were-giving-away-something-sexy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.unstirred.com/were-giving-away-something-sexy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:38:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous Realist</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[general]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.unstirred.com/were-giving-away-something-sexy/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We started this blog a month or so ago and it&#8217;s afire &#8211; 5,000 daily visits on a couple of our best days &#8211; way, way beyond what we expected.  We wish to fan those flames and we&#8217;re willing to dust the coke off a few greenbacks to make it happen, so&#8230;

We were thinking [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We started this blog a month or so ago and it&#8217;s afire &#8211; 5,000 daily visits on a couple of our best days &#8211; way, way beyond what we expected.  We wish to fan those flames and we&#8217;re willing to dust the coke off a few greenbacks to make it happen, so&#8230;</p>
<p><span id="more-18"></span></p>
<p>We were thinking &#8211; since you&#8217;re all insatiably horny for the kind of gossip and brutally honest opinion we&#8217;ve been serving up, and we&#8217;re horny for you, and everyone&#8217;s horny for the Apple iPhone &#8211; let&#8217;s bring all it all together.</p>
<p>But how, you ask?</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s how.  We&#8217;re giving one lucky Unstirred subscriber an <a title="Apple iPhone" href="http://www.apple.com/iphone">iPhone</a>.  It works like this:</p>
<ol>
<li>You subscribe to our feed.  It&#8217;s easy &#8211; just click <a title="Subscribe to Unstirred.com" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/unstirred">here</a> and do what the voices tell you.</li>
<li>Come on back here and leave a comment (say anything &#8211; you love us, you hate us, we&#8217;re fat, we&#8217;re sexy, etc. &#8211; it won&#8217;t count against you) with your name, screen name, nom-de-plume, or whatever &#8211; and a REAL e-mail address. (it won&#8217;t be published and we will <em>never, never, ever</em> share it with anyone)  Or if you&#8217;re really shy, e-mail it to us.</li>
<li>We e-mail you each your own special lucky number.</li>
<li>We publish the lucky number when it&#8217;s iPhone time.</li>
<li>One lucky subscriber gets an iPhone and is the envy of all their gadget-fetishising friends.</li>
<li>The world becomes a more honest, sexier place.</li>
</ol>
<p>There aren&#8217;t a bunch of rules, really &#8211; we&#8217;re informal around here &#8211; but you must remain a subscriber to be eligible (we have secret ways of checking these things) and you must claim it within 10 days after we publish the winning number.  If no one claims it, we&#8217;re giving it to the homeless guy with the shepherd&#8217;s crook who sings gospel songs out back.  That&#8217;s it.   Oh, and you must send us at least one picture of yourself.  Well, we&#8217;re kidding about the picture &#8211; unless you&#8217;re serious &#8211; then, we are too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.unstirred.com/were-giving-away-something-sexy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Welcome to Unstirred.</title>
		<link>http://www.unstirred.com/welcome-to-unstirred/</link>
		<comments>http://www.unstirred.com/welcome-to-unstirred/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:48:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous Realist</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[general]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unstirred.com/welcome-to-unstirred/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here we&#8217;ll be venting and slicing.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here we&#8217;ll be venting and slicing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.unstirred.com/welcome-to-unstirred/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

