Sunday, 30 December 2012

Benefit- "Dazzle Me Dahling!" Beauty Box

Golly gosh! It's been a busy couple of weeks, hasn't it?  (well, 'tis the season, after all...). There's just been SO much going on that I've neglected my blog!

So, to make up for my slack behavior I thought post I'd dedicate this post to my Benefit "Dazzle Me Dahling" beauty box that I received for Christmas. I've always loved Benefit products and it's got to be one of my most favoured brands out there, so one can only imagine my face when I unwrapped this little thing on Crimbo!  

As you can see the box is pretty lavish number containing all sorts of treats, including a few of my Benefit favs alongside some other products I'm eager to try: Benefit BadGal Lash Mascara, The Porefessional Primer, Hoola Bronzer, Some Kinda Gorgeous Foundation, and Laugh with me LeeLee fragrance. 

I just LOVE that the box has an actual latch on it! It adds an extra touch of quality to the whole thing. 

Check out the confetti! 

BadGal Lash and The Porefessional are two really great products that I use regularly so I was pretty excited to see them in the box, especially as I'm almost out of both! I've yet to try the Hoola Bronzer and the foundation- I might review these two products at a later date.
Even though I love Benefit their perfumes have never really appealed to me, however I can say that the LeeLee spritz actually has a pretty nice scent AND it doesn't fade out into nothingness after a few hours. The description reads that it's a "woody floral" fragrance with top notes of cassis, melon and citrus as well as a few other middle and lower ones- It certainly did have a floral smell and one that wasn't so sickly so this one's definitely a keeper.

Yaaaay, so excited to use all these productssssssss :))

Tuesday, 11 December 2012

Lancome: Gel Eclat

Lancome are  a brand that are usually associated with bringing luxury and quality with their products. 

This little number is a cleanser for all skin types with a "pearly foam" that supposedly "acts deep down to free skin of toxins and impurities". It claims to be "rich in anti-oxidants, with white Lotus and Rose de France". The latter ingredient is probably why it smells so good. The gel is quite thick and you only really need a little bit to do the job. Overall, you do get a sense of luxury whilst using this product. Though I have to be honest, I usually prefer exfoliating face-washes as I feel like I really need to scrub away at my face, albeit with a gentle cleanser, to really get rid of the dirt in my pores. So it feels weird just lathering on this smooth gel that, quite frankly, acts a bit like body gel. The only semblance I get of 'clean' is that once rinsed off, my face is left feeling quite dry. So I guess if you're one who doesn't want a trace of moisture on your face- this is for you. 

Friday, 7 December 2012

Yet another American Apparel scandal.

A couple of months back US fashion retailer, American Apparel was part of a dispute over their rather provocative 2011 Autumn campaign which pictured scantily-clad women in somewhat provocative poses. Well, they’ve only gone and done it again.

American Apparel has yet again found itself in a predicament with the UK ad watchdogs who have ruled their ads as “sexually suggestive and gratuitous” following a complaint from a mother who came across a series of risqué images whilst trying to shop for tights with her 12 year old daughter.
She said that that there digital ads are “… sexually provocative… and likely to cause widespread offence, because they were displayed on a website which could be viewed by, and was likely to appeal to, children under 16 years of age.”
Further complaints were received over the nature of their ads showing young models posing in their range of coloured t-shirts.
Naturally the ASA were quick to issue a statement on the matter stating that:
“We told American Apparel they should not use images which were likely to sexualise models who appeared under 16 years of age, and they should not use images which were likely to cause offence.
“Because her breasts were visible through her shirt, we considered the images could be seen to sexualise a model who appeared to be a child.”
After all, their perpetual use of such images seems to suggest that they really don’t give a damn about how offensive these images can be.
The execs down at American Apparel tried to defend themselves over their t-shirt ad campaign issuing a statement that outlined that all the images were a “completely fair and decent representation of their product”… Nice way to really hit the nail on the head there. Objectification of the female form at its finest.
They went on to argue that it is “standard practice” to market their hosiery in the way they do.
Oh, that’s fine then, if it is a standard practice this MUST mean that it’s all entirely ethical and not sexist in the slightest.

Sources used:,,