Viva Elizabeth

She is the queen of bombshells.

She is the queen of bombshells.

Elizabeth Rosemond Taylor (1932-2011) is the queen of bombshells. She was always an optimist, a humanitarian, and had one hell of a commitment to glamour. I don’t think Elizabeth was ever seen not in full glamour mode, even when she was in a nightgown or a swimsuit. The woman has even had a diamond named after her.

Making a towel turban look glamorous.

Making a towel turban look glamorous.

Elizabeth (she never liked Liz) had a pretty good genetic head start. She had the hair as black as ebony and skin as white as snow of fairy tales, “violet” eyes, and an extra layer of eyelashes. Yes, my friends, she was born with “false” lashes. Life often threw her very unglamorous curveballs, however and she was more than a pretty face. She was a loyal friend and a talented hardworking actress.


Life lessons from Elizabeth:


Here are instructions for an Elizabeth-inspired look featuring a red lip adapted from Kevyn Aucoin’s book Face Forward. This look is great for anytime you want to wear a red lip. Naturally, it goes well with diamonds and cleavage. It makes blue eyes pop, and also looks good on pale brunettes.

Elizabeth Red Lip

  1. Use whatever moisturizers and primers you like to prep your face for makeup.
  2. Use a concealer to cover anything that bugs you, like zits or dark spots.
  3. Lightly dust the skin with powder. This will keep your concealer from fading. My absolute favorite is Bare Minerals Mineral Veil.
  4. A groomed brow is important for any look. Groom your brows as you normally would.
  5. A little bit of soft pink powder blush is dusted on the cheeks. Elizabeth would rock a tan after the seventies, but her style is also great for pale girls (ahem). Whether you are bronzed or pale, just a tiny bit of color will keep the focus on your eyes. I’m a fan of Benefit box blush in Dandelion.
  6. For a bit of fun, Aucoin also suggests using eyeliner to add a beauty mark or even finding some light blue or purple contacts. (For me, this goes a little too far–I’m just inspired by Elizabeth, not dressing up as her.)
  7. For your eyeshadow, choose a dark brown metallic, cream is better. This color is especially fabulous on blue eyes like Elizabeth’s. Sweep it in oval shape over your eyelid, and run some under your lower lash line. It’s not a cream, but Younique’s Daring has the sparkle and stays put well.
  8. Now you want to break out the black liquid liner. Feel free to lay it on thick-remember Elizabeth’s eyelashes were already double, so for her to get her dramatic look, she needed even more then usual. Aucoin says to use liquid on the lower lashes as well, if this scares you use pencil or powder. This line isn’t thick, it’s just to bulk up those lower lashes. Urban Decay Perversion is the best liquid I have tried.
  9. Put on 2 full coats of mascara.
  10. Of course, to get 2 layers of lashes yourself you will most likely need to use a full set of falsies. (If you aren’t into falsies, skip them. If you like the look but can’t handle the maintenance, I highly recommend Younique Moodstruck Mascara layered over your everyday favorite.)
  11. Line and fill in your lips with a basic lip pencil. This may seem old fashioned, but it makes your lip color last longer and it really does give your lips a little something extra. (Like Elizabeth I like to emphasize “face, breasts, waist”.) Urban Decay makes a bunch of great neutral lip liners, and Victoria’s Secret Makeup also has good pencils in pink and red.
  12. Slick on some basic red lipstick, using a lip brush if you want to be precise (which Aucoin recommends for the true stylized Elizabeth look). Blot and reapply, or for a more casual look, just blot. You can also do this as many times as you like to “stain” your lips a deeper or brighter red color. Estee Lauder makes really good lipsticks. I would choose Scarlet Siren.

Here I am in Elizabeth’s makeup:





What makes a Bombshell a Bombshell?

The things that come to mind when one hears the word bombshell might vary, from old-timey actresses to the Victoria’s Secret Angels. Some people might think of pin-ups, burlesque dancers a la Dita Von Teese, and other women with “loose morals”. I suppose that’s fair too. What I think defines the essence of a bombshell is a girl who is unafraid of her sexuality, her femininity. I admire this because I grew up in a fairly conservative (and many times hypocritical) culture where women were supposed to be pretty but never sexy, approachable but not flirtatious, and relaxed but never lustful. I never felt like my sexuality could bloom in this culture, indeed I finally gave up on trying to fit the mold. I decided instead to be a bombshell.

Bombshells are authentic in their sexuality. When Lady Gaga goes out without pants, we (I) feel uncomfortable because it’s a gimmick. When Miley Cyrus pops up everywhere naked we (I) feel disturbed because it seems like a bid for attention. But a bombshell, even in the artifice of burlesque, hair color, push up bras and false lashes feels authentic. She is comfortable enough with her femininity that she can play with it. It doesn’t disempower her to give her husband pleasure in bed, it doesn’t disempower her to display her cleavage, and it doesn’t disempower her to be thought of as sexual. Nor does it disempower her to receive or create her own pleasure, go without the push up bra today (or any bra at all), or to be an intellectual.

At times I am more bombshell than others. Sometimes you will see my curves in a dress, my hair in sexy tousles, my eyelashes “that extra half an inch” long. But as I’ve hurt my leg and become a “proper” grown up, I am not usually in heels. Sometimes a sleek chignon better communicates authority than a Bardot-bun. My husband prefers me with no makeup and definitely does not like me sleeping in curlers. I still like visiting my face in the morning with cosmetics but my hair is usually of the actual bedhead variety than the “Why yes, I am a rockstar’s girlfriend” type. However, lately I have had a lot of time to myself, and I have again been thinking about why sexuality, and all the things we do to celebrate it (cosmetically, aesthetically, etc.), are so important to me. Why do I actually get sad when I don’t have cute clothes to wear? It’s because dress and appearance is a way of expressing myself–and if I express myself inauthentically, I die a little.

Seeing as I am confined to a flat for the next few days with very little to do besides stare out the window at these impossibly green trees and write, I hope to bring a girl back that got scared a few years ago. She darts in and out of sight now and then, but I think I am finally coaxing her into full being. She might be a rockstar’s girlfriend. She might be a bombshell. She might be a romantic. She might even be me.


I’m thinking about how I just want to open up and give and give and give….

The title is a line from Ben Lee’s “Begin”. I wish I could express the way good music makes me feel. I don’t know if everyone gets to feel the same way I do. Maybe they are not deeply moved when they see beautiful things. I wish I could create. Let me rephrase that. I believe I can create, but what I create with the most passion is really just an appreciation of other beautiful things. I like making collages, outfits, reviews of amazing things, exploring why they are so amazing. I just want to share the wonder that I have learned. 


Right now, from nothing, who I am is the possibility of radiance.

Much joy everyone. 

Method Matters: The “How” of Religious Teaching is Just As Important As The “What”

Method Matters:

The “How” of Religious Teaching is Just As Important As The “What”

Khrystine Danielle Kelsey

University of Utah




            This paper explores the education, socialization, and goals thereof for Evagelical Christians as seen in the movie Jesus Camp and the social and moral implications of such methods for any religion.



In the movie Jesus Camp (Ewing, 2006), a documentary which follows children at a Pentecostal Summer Camp, we hear youth pastor Becky Fischer discuss suicide bombers. She laments that Muslims in the Middle East are taught such dedication to their religion. She says nothing of the suffering these bombers inflict—rather, she says she would love to help American Christian children to have faith strong enough that they would lay down their lives for Christ. She doesn’t explicitly say she wants these children to kill people, but she doesn’t seem very concerned about their lives—and, hopefully doesn’t realize the implications of the statement she just made. If she does realize the implications of her statement, one would imagine the FBI, CIA, or NSA would put her on some sort of list.

Later in the movie, we meet Levi, a young man who will soon be attending Fischer’s camp. He is being homeschooled by his mother. As we snippets of the school day we hear his lessons on creationism and the falsity of global warming. At one point he says he believes “Galileo made a good decision when he gave up science for Christ.” His mother homeschools him because she wants him to know that it is “good to be a Christian”. (It is interesting to note here that one characteristic of so called “fundamentalist” groups, or groups that advocate reliance on one “original” or “basic” interpretation of ideology tend to feel a sense of social pressure and persecution, even when they are in the majority of a population. (Page, 2013))

At the camp, Levi and others experience socialization that is similar to cult initiations—a degradation ritual in which they must publicly confess their sins followed by a purification ritual in which they are accepted generously back into the fold. While most religions and even some self-improvement programs have similar rituals, the confession rituals are generally private. George Lundskow (2008) explains that these become group rituals when an organization wishes to emphasize group loyalty. They do so by contrasting one’s individual feelings of guilt to the communal feelings of solidarity and acceptance when they are not rejected for whatever bad thing they did/confessed to doing. A cynic would also point out it gives the leaders “dirt” on the group members. Lundskow also says this serves to sublimate the individual—for better or worse their actions are not as powerful as the group. Some of these children are as young as six.

It may seem as if none of this is really any of our business. Why does it matter if some kids aren’t taught what evolution really is, or think Galileo recanted his theories based on a religious experience rather than being threatened? There are plenty of uneducated people. Is it really fair to single out one group for what they tell their kids it takes to be a good person when so many kids aren’t part of any sort of community?

Well, yes, it is fair. It does matter, and it should be our business. We have focused on evangelicals in the United States, but one doesn’t have to look very far to see that the same sort of problems exist within several religions. The West likes especially to look at the Muslims (as does Becky Fischer); Muslims will then point out Jews and Hindus who are just as vehement. If one has humanistic values, we best look at what these groups have in common and why we should care.

The first issue I wish to address is education. 73% of homeschooled children in this country are evangelicals (Ewing, 2006). This statistic does not necessarily, prima facie, mean anything. There are plenty of reasonable situations in which children are homeschooled. However, it is likely that Levi’s mother is not the only parent to homeschool her child because she actually wishes to prevent him from getting an adequate education. We see a video Levi is watching about “evolution”.  Rather than explaining Darwin’s theories of natural selection or genetic mutation, the presenter asks the child to speculate whether humans were made out of goo (“Yuck!” he exclaims) or came from monkeys. Obviously, this is ridiculous. This is not educational, followed by a “But we don’t really believe that honey, because we believe in the Bible.” At least then we would know that this child was properly educated. One might wonder what I’m driving at, if the child is still being taught to disregard evolution. But even if he does reject the scientific theory at least he would know what he is rejecting. The point of education is not to convince the student of the truth of everything you say, but to give him information and tools that enable him to continue progressing in the world. He can accept or reject what he sees fit. If someone goes to Auschwitz and rejects that the holocaust ever actually happened, there would be nothing more any of us can do to convince her she is wrong. She has seen the evidence and some people may call her delusional, but she has exercised her own will or reasoning or lack thereof. When we teach children, for whatever reason, that there is no evidence the holocaust actually happened, or misrepresent history by saying, “Well, a lot of people liked Hitler,” (which is after all true), we are hurting ourselves. Later when Levi finds out or comes to realize that Galileo was threatened by death before he recanted his statements, there will be limited options for how his brain will make sense of this. He may feel a sudden sadness at the corruption of religion and may be forced into an existential crisis. Or he may think, “Wow, death threats seem extreme, but at least he accepted Jesus.” That second option should scare us.

Now religious people are not the only people that attack things they don’t understand. For example we have Religulous (Charles, 2009), a documentary in which Bill Maher claims to explore religious belief but in reality condescendingly asks people why they are dumb/hypocritical/crazy. He does not seem any more open to discussing religious experience than Levi’s mom does to discussing Charles Darwin. At one point he states that LDS people believe God has a physical body. The implication of this is that when Jesus was conceived, he was conceived via sexual intercourse between God and Mary. Maher plays a sexually explicit video while reciting scripture from the New Testament to make his point, which is that this idea was made up by some really dysfunctional people who are possibly voyeuristic in their tastes. This is an interesting counterpoint to Levi’s video about goo. Perhaps in a country as religious as ours, we should be teaching children philosophy. If Maher understood that everyone, including scientists, have struggled with the idea of reconciling mind to body, he would be better able to understand various religious interpretations thereof. It wouldn’t mean he would have to believe any of them. Neither he nor Levi would have to accept what they hear but they would know why people think the way they do and be better prepared for any conversation/science class they will ever have.

Education is also important for what is tells us about socialization, our next focus. One other defining characteristic of a cult is that it creates an alternate reality that is meant to replace, well, real reality. We will explore in greater depth why this is not functional shortly, but for now we will simply point out we should care about this because we have to share reality, however it is perceived, with each other. These children may not be taught to believe in global warming. When a gigantic tidal wave wipes out half the country[1], they will blame it on the homosexuals, or as they are drowning perhaps they will see it as the rapture. George Bernard Shaw has famously compared the peace of a religious man to the joy of a drunken one. I for one think if one is about to die, one can afford a little drunkenness. But all evidence suggests we can help the situation—and to subject those of us who would prefer to do so to those of us who prefer to get drunk is not just unfair, but possibly murderous. This is a dangerous alternate reality to have.

I have kept comparing these groups to cults, particularly regarding socialization. Many people use this word to describe people they don’t agree with. However, I am using it in the sociological sense. Bill Maher is obnoxious and I do not agree with everything he says, but he is not cult-like. A cult, as defined by Lundscow and others, is a group in which individual identity is sublimated to a group identity. Alternate realities are established. Often this happens in a degradation ritual. The individual is torn down and then rebuilt as whatever the cult leader or cult group wishes the individual to be. In a sense, most religions have this cultish aspect in which one dies to an old reality or lifestyle and is reborn in the new one. Actual rituals and cults have the important differences of this being semi-public (rather than internal/mental), sometimes physical (rather than merely symbolic), and (perhaps) more degrading. One doesn’t just discard aspects of the old identity; one completely destroys it and demonizes it. (The military is also cult-like in this sense, though the old identity is not discarded.) Socialization begins when we are very young, and probably never truly ends. However sociologists, psychologists, and unfortunately Becky Fischer realize that these forces are especially powerful when you’re young. Fischer points to the pureness of children, but children will accept negative socialization because as a child your survival depends on other people. It is this openness that leads Fischer to designate children as “such useful tools”. Again, this should frighten those of us who have humanistic beliefs. Children should not be dehumanized. If children are merely tools, why not make them tools of sexual pleasure? Or of death? Muslim groups that believe in the martyrdom of jihadists dress infants as suicide bombers. These children are “such useful tools” as well.

Furthermore, such socialization is abusive, all the more so if the person being socialized is a child at the age where these beliefs will not be easily shaken. A child fearing hell may be well behaved, but how happy will she be? And how will she know how happy she is? When the mother of a suicide bomber rejoices at his martyrdom, is she truly happy? Perhaps she is, if the socialization has been strong enough or started young enough. I am not saying that people who are religious are not truly happy, or that people who say they are happy are not being honest with themselves. But it does seem that with strong socialization, someone can be led to think that dissatisfaction with their life or occasional doubts are signs of a wicked heart. This imprisons people in their own minds. Similarly, those socialized to be irreligious may feel weak if they experience dissatisfaction and doubt. Whatever ideology we are being socialized to, to demonize the other, in the outside world or your own thoughts is extremely dangerous. This leads me to my final point: the goals of such groups as these are, by any objective standard, abhorrent.

Throughout this paper I have made several value judgments. Some I would hazard most people would agree with; murder is wrong, child rape is wrong. Some, as evidenced by the groups in this paper are slightly more controversial: liberal education is good, global warming is real. Some implications are not necessarily accepted at all, even in my own academic community: humans should have humanistic goals, individualism is important. Many might argue with the first term as being too vague or anti-environmental. To this my response is what other kind of values are we meant to have? Maybe we can’t know there is a God, we can’t know if Mohammed is his prophet or Jesus his only begotten son. But we know we are here now. It may be an illusion or not in any permanent sense but like Buddha, we can touch the ground under our feet and say, “This is my testimony.” We have an evolutionary drive to survive and propagate. So I would argue we must have humanistic values, values that honor the individual for who s/he is, his/her own mental processes and choice of goals, pleasures and values. We must protect this from those who would take it away. The next logical question is “Aren’t you proposing we do that from these religious groups?” And frankly I must say yes—but only because they are a group that wishes to take it away from other individuals.

Despite what these groups say and even think, they do not wish for good things. These people are spreading a worldview where people must be punished not just for the things they do but who they are. These people are spreading a worldview where killing groups of people and oneself is a reasonable career path. These people are spreading a worldview where their rights to land are so absolute that it’s all right to kill children. All of them believe that they should be the group deciding for everyone else. Furthermore, to emphasize the truth of these worldviews, they are willing to abuse and degrade their own children. Becky Fischer can speak in tongues. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can deny the Holocaust. Tom Cruise can believe in malevolent aliens. Bill Maher can make fun of all of them. But to abuse people, even and especially their own children, is cruel. It doesn’t matter why, it doesn’t matter the doctrine behind it. They may be right and we may burn in hell, but if we don’t change it, it won’t much matter. We’ll already have hell on earth and in our minds.



Reference List

Charles, L. (Director). (2009). Religulous [Documentary]. United States: Lionsgate.


Ewing, H. E. (Director). (2006). Jesus Camp [Documentary]. USA: Magnolia Home Entertainment.


Lundskow, G. (2008). Cults. The Sociology of Religion: A Substantive and Transdisciplinary Approach (pp. 279-303). Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press


Page, F. (Professor) (2013, July 22). Fundamentalism. Sociology of Religion. Lecture conducted from University of Utah, Salt Lake City.


Finals & Weddings & Condos, Oh My!

Well, I have pretty much been insanely busy these last two and a half months. As it turns out, planning a wedding is pretty hard. Well, not hard but it takes A LOT of time and A LOT of money and A LOT of people. But I am actually starting to get excited. This is my dress, below. I am hoping to mail my invites this week (which is crazy late, but oh well). And then I can go about designing the playlist. 



On top of that, I have of course had work/school (the same thing really for me) which despite being only half a load felt like a normal one because classes are so short in the summer. I studied religion this summer and it has me thinking. I’m religious, but institutions do seem to corrupt themselves. I wrote a paper on religious indoctrination, maybe I will post it here for those who are interested. Anyway, I am ready for a summer vacation! Alas, it will be wedding plans right until school starts for me. Which is ok because I’m happy. 🙂 

Odysseus and I have also been looking for a place to live, as my apartment won’t cut it and he’s anxious to buy. This has been pretty stressful too. I want to stay close to the center of the city and my university, but what we can find around there in our budget is pretty…well…not fabulous. We’ve found a couple cool places but property goes so fast….wish us luck! Anyway, that is why there have been no posts.

On the plus side, lately I have been able to really define my sense of style. I feel like it’s coming into focus in a much more authentic, practical, but still glamourous way. So I am hoping to have a couple good style posts up in the next little while. 

Rock on Bombshells,


The Proposal Story

As of May 10th, 2013, I am engaged.

Friday, S. took me to see The Great Gatsby for my birthday. On the way there we stopped for a walk at City Creek Center. We stopped in front of the fountains and S. said he had another present for me. He gave me a gift bag from Swarovski which made me pretty excited because they have very sparkly jewelry.When I opened it and found a ring inside, however, I was speechless. The ring is perfect–if I had to design a ring myself, this would be it. Anyway, so I was stunned and also blushing quite a bit and smiling.

“Do you like it?” he asked.

“Yeah,” I replied.

“You can keep it. But you have to marry me.”


So we were actually engaged Friday, but we managed to keep it a secret until Sunday because we wanted to do the traditional thing where S. talked to my dad first. I’m not too sure what they talked about, but my dad was pretty excited because he came out and pushed us to tell my mom and sister. We were pretty awkward and shy about that for some reason. Just excited I guess.

The funny thing is, I thought I would feel super excited and emotional, but I actually just feel really calm and peaceful. On our first date, S. told me he could tell I worry about the future a lot. This is true. It’s really easy for me to be scared of making big decisions because I don’t feel like I know what the future holds for me. When I think about marrying S. I don’t feel like I can see what our future is going to be, but this time it doesn’t scare me. Instead, I feel like my life is moving in the right direction and I am being guided with it.

Capitalism, Socialism, Humanism

I started out my sociology class as a capitalist. It seemed to be the only economic solution that allowed for individual freedom. I still believe in individual freedom–but.

But my view of things has changed. I still think if you want to sell coffee, or laptops, or jewelry, or what have you, you should be able to do it. And if you have a great idea you should be able to turn it into your livelihood if that’s what you want. And if you can get someone to pay you $6 for that cup of coffee, more power to you! I will gladly pay that much for a frappucino when I can. So I still believe in entrepreneurship.

But I really think the government should not be about money, it should be about serving people. Yes serving. Some of my friends say the government is not there to solve all your problems and ok, I accept that. But what is it there for, exactly? As I have studied in depth the philosophy behind the country I live in–the first nation striving to be a utopia, striving to be based on ideological principles rather than whoever can manage to grab the most power–I really believe them. To my LDS friends this will sound like a joke, but I earnestly bear my testimony that humans have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I want you to know that before I say what I say next, because I know some of you won’t listen to me otherwise.

In historical circles, The Civil War is considered to be the true revolution in the United States. The reason for this is that while the Revolution changed our ideological framework, the world as a whole did not change for the average American until after The Civil War. What that war was about for Abraham Lincoln was whether the government would protect its people from tyranny, even tyranny from some of its other people. Yes, there were many other reasons we as a whole and as individuals fought and died. But that question is the reason we have The Civil War etched into our national identity.

I think one of the questions we are struggling with now is will the government protect us from those threats that we can’t control, that aren’t human? I don’t mean zombies, but I do mean disease, natural disasters, and the like.

One has to know that governments do not arise naturally. It may be “natural” for humans to form societies, but the range of political systems we have come up with proves that we can pretty much set up these societies however we want. We can distrust our fellow neighbors and decide we need someone appointed above us because one corrupt ruler is better than 1 million corrupt individuals. We can desire our own freedom enough to allow others theirs as well, knowing we risk one or all of us being offended from time to time. We can decide that the government has to provide certain things. Equality. Human rights. Education. Healthcare. Food. Water.

A lot of us, myself included, are scared that if we say the government has to provide these things, we are giving the government too much power. This is valid. I don’t want my education to be determined by a government agenda. I don’t want the government to decide I am not worth saving from cancer, or genetically modifying my food, or telling me what to eat for that matter. But. It all comes down to this.

Either the people have sovereignty in this nation or we don’t. Either we have a government “by the people, for the people” or we don’t. If we don’t have it, we are already lost. It won’t matter if the government takes away our arms, or our land, or our freedom of speech. If we do not have power now, we won’t have power then. If we do have power now, though, we can demand so much more.

I don’t think the government should have the power to tell us we have to have insurance. We should be able to be educated free from propaganda. We shouldn’t have to limit our food choices to whatever the government deems healthy enough (or cheap enough) for us to eat. But the government should serve us. It should protect us from the choice between death or slavery if we need heart surgery. It should protect us form the choice between death or slavery if we need food. I don’t think it should do this by limiting those who wish to provide us with goods, as it has in so many socialist experiments. I also think it doesn’t work so well to fund those services and we, the consumers, never know if it does any good. But we forget–we are those in power here. We can and should demand our people don’t starve, sicken, and go uneducated. If they begin to abuse their power, we can demand a change again. If they don’t listen, be louder. The laws of this country are on our side.

Perfect Parsley

Ellen Whitehurst: Parsley has long been associated with the month of March mainly because it grows in abundance at this same time of year. From the holistic perspective, many practitioners advocate chewing on parsley to cure bad breath. An old wives remedy says to soak parsley in water and swish it around your mouth if you have a loose tooth. Eating parsley is also believed to provoke a lusty libido and enhance fertility. Ancient lore tells that the Romans would garnish plates of food with parsley in order to safeguard from poisoning, a tradition that carries on to this day. So the next time you’re wondering what you should decorate your dish with, it’s parsley to the rescue. It will sweeten your breath, make your teeth tighter, your libido lusty and allow you to live, love and eat another day.

Thought this was cool and also a good beauty tip!

Defining My Style

Lately, I have been thinking a lot about defining my personal style. While I don’t believe in rules per se, I do have things I almost always do and things I almost never do. I thought I would share some of them, not because I think anyone else should follow them, but because I think it’s interesting and it helps me clarify my thoughts. I would be very interested if you guys want to share some as well.

  • Don’t believe in don’ts. Don’ts are just a rule that works for someone else. When they tell you to do it, they are just giving you their opinion, which is not fact and can be disregarded. In this same attitude….
  • Disregard “occasion”. Wear whatever the hell you want! Ok, so some places it’s important to know what’s appropriate, like work, church, or a courtroom. But day vs. night, casual v. formal, whatever. If you look good, you look good.
  • Always, if you can, wear perfume and jewelry.
  • All your pants should fit as comfortably and well as your favorite pair of jeans.
  • Sweatpants are for home and the gym.
  • Foolproof outfit math- 1 classic+1 sexy/girly/flirty+1 edgy=perfect glamour.