Funny how the twin who played Jessica continued in showbusiness while the other one retired.

Just do your job. Be sensitive to those kids and understand that you can't FULLY know what they're going through, but that's okay. You're not expected to know exactly what it's like. You're trying to help them. That's what matters. Let them speak, don't assume you know things about them because you've worked with kids…

Some POC will tell you that white allyship is not needed, but it is. If we want society to progress, members of the majority and minority have to work together to get towards that point. The first and most important rule to being a good ally is to listen. Listen and pay attention to what POC are saying and understand…

National Domestic Violence Hotline

Ah, yeah. Mayweather sucks as a person but I don't know that pointing a finger at him without any real facts is a great idea. Though I am happy that ol' Tom Smykowski managed to sell at least one Jump to Conclusions mat.

It would be one thing if she'd met some actual Harajuku ladies who were dancers and actively collaborated with them, giving them a platform for their art and aesthetic and letting them have their own voice...which is pretty much the opposite of what she actually did. But I'm also open to correction.

If she hadn't treated them like human sex dolls and made them act like the subservient Asian woman stereotype come to life, that would have been Ok. Like Harajuku culture is all about dressing really wildly and individually, so why would you have a bunch of Harajuku girl backup dancers all dressed alike anyway?…

I completely agree with what janeka001 has posted. Besides that, Gwen could have co-written a song with a Japanese lyricist, sampled Japanese pop tracks, worn clothes by a Japanese designer, or otherwise collaborated with any actual people from the culture she claims to appreciate so much. But she didn't.

I just posted my take on this - it's probably still in the greys. I don't think there's a solid universal line. But when you think about the way that East Asian women are treated in the US - like they're shallow subservient little sex kittens for white male fantasies - and renaming a group of them and keeping them…

I want to love this, but it's all just so innacuracte. It like, the stage version of each look, rather than real historical accuracy. The overall feeling is right, but the details are all wrong.

Her eyes were also way underdone for the 1920s. They had these crazily made up doll eyes that the silent movies loved doing close ups of. She barely has anything on her eyes.

And the 40s seemed significantly lighter than I would have thought. Though to be fair, not everyone is good at knowing whether they're a spring or autumn tone, and I'm sure plenty of people in the 80s couldn't guess either from throwbacks I've seen.

Beauty Whiplash would be my roller derby name.

Quite a few of the decades were a bit off. The 1920s didn't seem to have the crazy eye makeup thing going. The 1960s didn't have the crazy white lip they rocked for a while in the mod period. Some of the lipstick shades seemed off somehow. The eyebrow style made a big difference and that would've been hard to…

I wish they would have used wigs, too. The hair would have been more authentic to each given era. The 20's should have been a Louise Brooks bob and the 70's needs the Fawcett feathered wings or a Dorthy Hamill.

Oh for God's sake. Don't hurt yourself reaching that far. I think this woman did a totally fucking immoral, horrible thing. I'm not saying he deserved it. But telling someone they are free to do whatever they like sounds like it could be reasonably seen, technically, as consent. Was it not consent for all the others…

This is the part I am struggling with. I'm all for backing victims - wherever, whenever, however - but am having a hard time reconciling the fact that he told people "do whatever you want to me". Oh, and here's a few weapons/tools.... That smacks of implied consent. I'm not saying that what the woman did was ok, but…

Lawyer here - not rape. At least under the legal definition of the term in California.

Yeah, isn't that the point of this "piece"? Give consent for people to do whatever they want then see how far they take it when there's no limits? I guess it's possible that he was so shocked by what was happening that he was unable to withdraw consent but I can't tell if that's what happened here.