To a true Targetista, a Targé-loving budgeted fashionista, Zac Posen's upcoming capsule for the mart may not be entirely affordable. For example, there's a peplum-esque dress that is absolutely lovely, but $75. (Noooo! Whyyy?)

But one other piece is also superb, well-designed and more unique than... OK well unique is a perfectly fitting word for superlativism, obviously.

It's this pink colorblock tie-neck top - don't you just want it?

Just a head's up to budget it now, because Targetistas need to do so.  ;-) If you want more from the collection, you may also need to save some extra pennies.

You're welcome.

[caption id="attachment_2859" align="alignnone" width="450" caption="FOUR BUTTS - TWO A$$ES*"][/caption]

They're no longer pants anymore, fellas! What are they? Ridiculousness. See those pockets? See how they look like butt cheeks? Well, that's because they're supposed to cover 'em.

These men have doubled the appearance of their butts. Something women know not to do, because at a certain point, it's far beyond bootyliciousness. It's frickin' 2 extra cheeks.

This is like underwear-as-outerwear of the least sexy kind.

Via The Cut/NYM - with the original image - and a quote of Russel Simmons (ex-husband of Kimmora Lee and founder of Phat Farm) defending those pants on the ground with his own ridiculousness.

*Like donkeys, in case I'm far less clear than I'd hope.

A fun Discovery program, Science of Sex Appeal, discussed the ideal female waist to hip ratio in terms of male attraction. By waist to hip, we're talking visually from the front so there's no worry about measuring your gut to see if you, well, measure up (or down). Not in this case.

[caption id="attachment_2833" align="alignright" width="210" caption="Marilyn Monroe seemed to have an excellent .67 score in Waist to Hip (see our shoenote)"] [/caption]

The ideal ratio, confirmed by studies like one from Harvard University, is a fairly curvy 7 to 10. That's about what I have, and I've no waify waist. In fact, just a defined one, big hips ... and let's not, no do, forget that gut.

Oddly the TV program sort of ignored the very wide hip demographic when discussing how an even smaller and yet even smaller waist compared to the hips were visually hotter to guys. A 6-and-lower to 10 ratio was said to be inhuman (or perhaps it wasn't until as low as 5, but that was the gist). Odd because even though cartoon-character waists are either unhealthy or literally unreal, there are a heck of a lotta big hips out there, which can turn into a 7 to 11 on up. Same extra sexiness, right?*

So worry not, if you've got 'em, rejoice. Conversely if you're worried that, even if your stomach is flat, your waist is not defined enough - you can always add some fat to your love handle or thigh areas. ;-)

Or at least that's the way I see it. Gosh if thigh counts and not just padded hip bones, then I'm hotter than Marilyn Monroe, pictured. ;-) I newly love my thighs, or at least most of them.

[caption id="attachment_2846" align="alignnone" width="380" caption="Esteem-spiration!"][/caption]

I've also recently discovered that even with some "flab" and cellulite, I really do have great legs, not just calves. And look at my relatively thin akles!

You, too, should look at your body with a positive attitude. Find something to feel good about today, and hopefully you'll feel great tomorrow and the next day and .......

ShoeNote:

*I asked a more math-inclined individual and he mentioned something about how .6 is better than .7 (getting those numbers is easy, deriving from a blank to 10 ratio). He said 7 to 11 is still lower than .7. It only makes sense, but I wanted to check.

[caption id="attachment_2806" align="alignnone" width="450" caption="Joan Crawford re-touched by hand"][/caption]

• No touching, or retouching, the beautiful people. Much ado about nothing, when they don't even need it. From BK, who posted this haunting photo of Joan Crawford.
• Jewelry brand, Dogeared, is making jewelry and other products for the films Eat, Pray, Love and Sex and the City 2. From WWD. More news when there are photos.
• Lindsay Lohan's expending her 6126 line from just leggings to slightly beyond. From The Cut/NYM.
• Interview with emerging denim designer, Michelle Siwy. From The Cut/NYM.
• More ado about nothing: Last night Twitter seemed zombie-like possessed over Zoe Kravitz with a "tweet" conference at an ad campaign debut. (Or as far as we can tell.) Check it out on Twitter.

[caption id="attachment_2797" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="Surrender my shoes? I'd rather surrender Dorothy to the witch. Sorry babe, you're gone."][/caption]

In attempts to promote good deeds, TOMS Shoes is sponsoring a ... (blegh) ... go barefoot day, tomorrow, April 8th is (booming voice:) a Day Without Shoes.

Dun dun dunnnnnn...

TOMS donates one pair to underprivileged children for every pair someone else purchases from them. Which is GREAT! Fantastic!

But imagine the chaos that could unfold in the US metropolitan-type areas. Imagine the disgustitude. Imagine, men, how you'll turn off women. (And how their not only heel-less feet but nude feet, not cool, will turn you off!) (OK, not for every man.)

Also - ow. We'll beg for our stilettos back after the pain of accidentally stepping on a tiny sharp pebble about 50 times.

I guess that's the point.

Like I said, I'm all for charity and shodding people, I'm just kind of glad I work at home and don't have to see.

By the way when I go barefoot at home, it'll be something. Lately I can't stand to look at my preety pumps but not put them on.

So perhaps I'll go a whoooooole work-at-home day without having one of my own private shoe shows.

That's sad enough.

I'm still the girl who can't stand feet! Ahhh.... So ... don't think I'm a .. chienne, n'est pas?

P.S. The Jonas Brothers are in on it. As is Rachel Zoe.

P.P.S. Rachel Zoe put her name on the link, so I put my nick in. No idea why, just thought I'd be cool. *shrug*