I suppose I should write something about Scott, and those drunk comments he made about being good at "the sex", but I'd be being a hypocrite then because Anna's said a lot worse. Of course, what she says isn't published because she is The Fashion Press. Still, I prefer to be a hypocrite on my own warped terms.
What else is there to say? What else, what else- I see some young Turk in the comments wrote something relating to the shirt being only good enough for cleaning their oven (or something like that- I don't actually read these things). My question is why do they have an oven in the first place?
I went to the supermarket the other day. Everybody starred at me. There's some strange people who go to the supermarket. There's these people who wear "hoodies" with words written on them, and some people who wear far too much make-up, and there's children, and so on. Luckily I found that Yves was there too, doing some shopping for a big dinner he want to hold. So Yves and I went around together, because there's some odd people who go the supermarket. There was this one woman who had children in her trolley. I wondered to myself: what is she doing purchasing children? There's actually a seat for the children and everything. I suppose with this so-called recession...well. Although, to be perfectly honest, I imagine that it's cheaper simply to do "the sex" as Scott would call it, rather than purchase a child. I recall a movie called "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" (did you know that a "chit" is a little note? Don't say I don't teach you anything on this "blog"!) , where there was a "child catcher" who caught children. I believe the PR-team at Balmain recently hired someone of the like. He has a shiny black cage disguised as a sweet-stall and everything.