The Stir By CafeMom: Blogger Linda Sharps

January Jones Finally Addresses Baby Daddy Mystery and Doesn't Pull Any Punches

Tue, 21 May 2013 16:34:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

If you've been inclined to think of actress January Jones as, let's say, not a particularly warm and friendly person, it's unlikely that her recent New York Times interview will do much to convince you otherwise. The interviewer somewhat predictably compared her to Betty Draper, the "sweet and sullen character" she plays on Mad Men, and says Jones' glamorous demeanor is "as wintry as her name." Jones was also put on the spot to share a particular detail about her personal life that may have endeared her to her detractors -- but she was having none of it. According to January Jones, the identity of the mystery man who fathered her 20-month-old son Xander is none of our business.

Was this the sort of response that will, once and for all, erase Jones' reputation as a stone-cold bitch? Not even a little bit. Is she right? Well, of course she is.

Plenty of rumors have swirled about who Jones' babydaddy might be, but she's been famously tight-lipped about this subject along with pretty much everything else about her personal life. The New York Times piece suggests that this sort of attitude might be contributing to the way people perceive her:

Fans might relate better to her if she did discuss her private life, but the prospect seems not to interest her.

It's true that Jones comes across as something of an anomaly in the Kardashian-drenched world of oversharing, but personally, I suspect her chilly persona has a little more to do with with how she actually comes across face to face, rather that what she chooses to discuss about herself. Orrrrr maybe it has to do with statements like this:

The bitches in high school were bitches because I was pretty.

Regardless of whether her prickly ice queen reputation is deserved, she's definitely not down with making herself seem more likable by spilling any details about her son's paternity. As she put it,

That's my son's business. It's not the public's business.

Well, good for her. She has every right to keep that information private, and while I really don't fault The New York Times for hoping to be the first publication to get the big babydaddy scoop, it was pretty obnoxious to ask.

Jones went on to explain a little about why she keeps her personal information close to the vest:

Jack Nicholson once told me: "You should never give your personal life away, otherwise people will pick you apart. They'll never believe in your character." (...) Women should have lots of secrets. It's our right to have secrets. Otherwise, what would we write in our memoirs?

Unfortunately, wanting privacy certainly doesn't guarantee she'll get it, but I totally respect her stance. Hopefully she'll be able to keep the media from revealing this information before she and her family are ready.

What do you think about January Jones' answer about who her son's father is?

Image via Splash News

Jennifer Lawrence as a Naked Blue Mutant Is Ridiculously Hot (PHOTO)

Tue, 21 May 2013 13:38:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Jennifer Lawrence: is there anything she can't do? She's universally beloved for tripping and falling during the Oscars, she gets away with smoking pot, she admits being star-struck by Honey Boo Boo, she jokes about her butt, and she just so happens to be one of the most gorgeous and intriguing actresses in Hollywood. Also, according to a recently released X-Men image, she looks stupendously hot as a naked blue mutant.

Yesterday X-Men: Days of Future Past director Bryan Singer tweeted a photo of Lawrence in her role as Mystique, and she looks predictably fantastic. What's really interesting about the photo, however, is the fact that Lawrence is wearing a completely different Mystique costume this time around -- and even with the fairly detailed picture Singer shared, you can't tell what's fabric and what's flesh.

Apparently when Lawrence did X-Men: First Class, she had a lot of problems with the body paint used to transform her into Mystique. Not only did she suffer an allergic reaction that was bad enough that a medical specialist was brought on the set to treat her skin, she had to sit in the makeup chair for up to eight hours every day as she underwent a process where her body was shaved, coated with layers of blue body paint, then topped with silicone scales. She said of the grueling schedule with her makeup assistants,

Nothing's sacred anymore. Those girls and I got so close. They were painting me naked every day for months. It was kind of like going to a really bizarre sleepover.

This time around Lawrence won't have to endure quite as much makeup application, because a skin-tight blue suit replaces the blue body paint used in previous movies. As she put it,

I'm so excited because I'm going to wear a body suit. It will be from [the] neck down so it will cut out time and the blisters.

Check out the full image of Jennifer Lawrence in all her Mystique glory -- can you tell where the bodysuit begins?

That's one hell of a costume, and she looks like she got in crazy good shape for the role. JLaw is famous for saying she'll never diet for a role ("I keep waiting for that one role to come along that scares me enough into dieting, and it just can’t happen") ... buuuuuuut it's also true she said that when she did X-Men: First Class she worked out twice a day for months while following a strict eating regimen:

It was awful, I was hungry for five months. I’m still pissed about it.

Well, whether she dieted or just naturally looks this amazing in a blue suit that leaves nothing to the imagination, I'm excited to see her take on the Mystique role again. Way to be relentlessly awesome, JLaw.

Are you looking forward to seeing Jennifer Lawrence in X-Men: Days of Future Past?

Image via BryanSinger/Twitter

10 Places to Never Change Your Baby's Diaper

Tue, 21 May 2013 13:25:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Did you hear about the Denver parents who made news for changing their baby in a Starbucks seating area after they found no changing table in the restroom? An employee reportedly offended them by asking them to clean up, the dad angrily poured his coffee on the floor in retaliation, and things somehow escalated to the point where police were called to calm everyone down.

The parents are still unhappy about the way they felt they were treated by the staff, but I'm mostly stuck on the fact that they thought it was their right to change a diaper in a public eating area. Sure, it would have been nice to find a changing table in the restroom, but ... well, come on. That's what diaper pads and a little parental ingenuity are for.

Dealing with an emergency diaper situation when you're away from home is no fun, and I'm pretty sure we've all been there. I'm sympathetic to the challenge, but I still have to draw the line at changing a poopy diaper in these 10 obnoxious locations.

1. A table in any restaurant or coffeehouse or bar. Dude, that's just wrong. I know, I know: the bathroom floor is so gross. Well, so is inhaling a noseful of someone else's feces while you're eating dinner. Just saying, you can always use a changing pad -- your fellow patrons can't escape the diaper smell.

2. Your seat in an airplane. I can only begin to imagine how hard it is to change a diaper in that tiny lavatory. Still, that's what must be done. The alternative is a hostile act.

3. On the ground in a parking lot. That just seems a little ... dangerous? The trunk of your car is a WAY better choice.

4. In the seat of a grocery cart. More power to you if you can actually pull that off, but still: no.

5. In a non-bathroom part of the library. Gahhhh! Not even if you hide between the stacks, people.

6. The bed in a Macy's furniture department. Believe it or not, I've heard of this happening.

7. The floor of a nail shop. I saw this once. A lady was getting her nails done with her baby propped nearby in a carseat, and she stopped the process so she could change the baby's diaper. On the floor. Next to a pedicure station. WHAT.

8. The seat in a movie theater. Mmmmm, love that poopy popcorn smell.

9. On someone's sofa, without asking first. Simple etiquette demands that when you're visiting someone else's house, you ask the host to designate an appropriate diaper-wrangling location for you and your precious snugglebunny. Extra negative points if you get body fluids on the cushions.

10. In church. I don't know what the Bible says about this, but maybe it should be amended to include something about how thou shalt not expose thy fellow worshippers to thine offspring's bowel movements. Amen.

Agree/disagree? Do you have any places you'd add to the list?

Image via trotzenberg/Flickr

Apologies to My Children, at Ages 7 and 5

Tue, 21 May 2013 08:00:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

(I wrote some apologies to my kids four years ago -- I thought it was time for a followup.)

Riley,

I'm sorry I don't always have the patience to endure the near-constant barrage of pshew pshew pshew sound effects that come out of your noise-hole. I don't know what mental movie is playing so frequently in your active little brain, but I suspect it's directed by Michael Bay and gets a one-and-a-half-star rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I'm sorry if I sometimes fail to assemble my facial features into a properly stunned expression when you show me your latest Lego creation, and I'm sorry for that one time I deadpanned, "Boy, I can't WAIT to step on that thing in the dead of night" instead of marveling over your building skills, which are in fact quite impressive.

I'm sorry I cannot share your unbridled enthusiasm for "Gangnam Style" and I'm sorry for whatever grievous schoolyard situation exposed you to the accompanying dance, which you have no qualms about performing in line at the grocery store.

I'm sorry that you're still such a pain about trying new foods, and I'm sorry you cry so easily over small hurts, and I'm sorry you can be annoyingly rigid about certain things. I'm sorry that I'm not always completely understanding of the ways in which you are sensitive, and I'm sorry that I don't always know where to draw the line between firmness and gentle coaching and I'm sorry that I'm basically making up this parenting shit as I go along. I'm sorry that it doesn't seem fair that you have to endure the clumsy flailings of amateurs, when you are the most important work of my life.

I'm sorry that I still grab your butt sometimes, and that I swoop you sideways into my arms and force you to endure loud gobbly mom-kisses. I'm sorry if I embarrass you by telling you every day how handsome and smart I think you are. I'm sorry I make you hold hands with me and your brother whenever we cross busy parking lots, and that I always shout "Ducklings!" while you two make loud quacking noises. I'm sorry I leap onto your bed every night and say, "WHAT NEVER HAPPENS IN THIS HOUSE?" and you roll your eyes and recite: "Mommy never forgets to tuck Riley in." I'm sorry I like to sneak back in, long after you've fallen asleep, to check just one last time.

I'm sorry, but you'll always secretly be my favorite.

Dylan,

I'm sorry you are so crippled with shyness when you're around other people, but when you're home with me, you never stop talking EVER. I'm sorry for the number of times I've replied to your chirpy question with a distracted "Mmm-hmmm" only to belatedly realize I've just agreed that sharks can be milked or that astronauts put corks in their butts to stop them from space-pooping. I'm sorry your easy good cheer can switch with mercurial speed and that your small fury has the intensity of a thousand burning suns stomping around in 5T pants.

I'm sorry your baby-soft edges and rolls have long been replaced by knobby knees and jabby elbows and a strong little boytorso, but whenever I look at you, I see the improbable perfection of you being your own glorious growing self, stationed in this lovely place past the land of toddlerhood, yet not quite in the school-aged world. I'm sorry I like to tickle you and nom your cheeks and pretend I am a mother whistlepig grooming her baby and I'm particularly sorry about that last one because let's be honest, son, that just sounds weird as hell.

I'm sorry that I can't always give 100 percent of my attention to you. I'm sorry I don't indulge you in as many games of Old Maid as you'd like. I'm sorry I'm kind of over this stage you're in where you want to jump over various things and you constantly demand that I watch all your big, HUMONGOUS jumps and I'm sorry I am seriously just so tired of the jumping, uh-huh, yup, that was a big one.

I'm sorry that there sometimes seems to be a sort of gulf between us, one that has to do with me feeling like you see me as the boring parent who does boring things like work at the computer or run errands, while Dad is the incredibly awesome one you wish you spent your days with. I'm sorry I'm not better about not taking such things personally. I'm sorry you'll never know how I visualize myself erasing this distance every single night when I smother you in kisses and tell you over and over how very much I love you, and remind myself that tomorrow is another day that I get to be your mom, and what an indescribable joy that is.

I'm sorry, but you'll always secretly be my favorite.

Image via Linda Sharps

Teens Accused of Sexually Assaulting 12-Year-Old and Posting Video of the Attack

Mon, 20 May 2013 14:34:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Last Friday, it was announced that three Chicago teens accused of gang-raping a 12-year-old girl at gunpoint will face charges as adults. Scandale Fritz, 16, Kenneth Brown, 15, and Justin Applewhite, 16, are each are being held on $900,000 bail. Each of the teens is facing one count of aggravated criminal sexual assault, based on the events that allegedly took place on December 15.

As it turns out, the boys' desire to document the attack -- and, horribly, share it on Facebook -- may be exactly the evidence that will be needed to put them behind bars.

According to Chicago police records, the alleged sexual assaults took place at around 3:30 p.m. December 15 in Fritz's home. Prosecutors say that the girl agreed to meet Fritz at his home, but when she arrived, she saw Brown with a gun in his pocket. Fritz then allegedly took the girl downstairs to the basement, and once she declined his demands for sex, he raped and sodomized her.

Fritz then allegedly demanded that the girl have sex with Brown and Applewhite, and forced her to do so at gunpoint. Fritz videotaped the sex acts, and prosecutors said all three boys appear on the footage, in which the girl begs them to stop. Brown reportedly held a gun during sex, and the boys could be heard shouting gang slogans.

The day after the assaults, the girl went to the hospital and notified police. Unbelievably, the very next day after that -- December 17 -- prosecutors say the video was posted on Brown's Facebook page ... and then on all three boys' Facebook pages.

I ... yeah, I don't even know what to say about this. I can't believe the evil of what these boys are accused of doing to a 12-year-old girl, and I can't imagine what they were thinking sharing that video on Facebook.

Unfortunately, I guess it's not such an unfamiliar story these days, is it? It sounds pretty similar to the shocking details of the Steubenville rape case, down to the bizarre decision to gloat about the details of the attack via social media.

The silver lining, if there's one to be had here, is that if the allegations against these teens are true, then they did the prosecution a giant favor by posting that video. Not that the poor girl wanted the details of her horrific assault to be seen by others, but at least it will remove the he said/she said element altogether.

In fact, court documents say that Fritz has provided a handwritten statement to investigators admitting that he made the tape. So whatever happens next with these boys, it's not looking good in terms of proving their innocence. If they're guilty as charged, I hope they get the full punishment possible -- because they'll deserve to lose what's left of their childhood, and more.

Are you surprised to hear about another rape case involving shared video of the attack?

Image via Matteo Paciotti/Flickr

Kristen Stewart and 4 Other Celebs Whose Faces Look the Same in Every Pic (PHOTOS)

Mon, 20 May 2013 14:16:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Have you noticed that Kristen Stewart has the same facial expression in every photo that's ever been taken of her? I mean, okay, technically I think I have seen her smiling (although I'm not gonna look it up, because ain't nobody got time for that), but mostly her posing-for-a-professional-photo face is ... stony? Sulky? Just sort of deadpan?

I don't blame her for not lighting up like a Christmas tree in front of the camera, since she's been pretty up front about her awkwardness and inability to convey emotions in a manner endearing to other humans. But when you really look at how she comes across in photos, it's downright freaky. She's not alone, either -- there are a handful of other celebrities who look exactly the same in every photo, despite hair, makeup, and styling.

Check the amusing GIF evidence of how Kristen Stewart, Paris Hilton, and Beyonce look IDENTICAL in all of their photos.

Let's start with good old KStew, whose dead-eyed no-smile stacks up alarmingly when you view a bunch of photos in succession:

Remember Paris Hilton? She definitely had a signature look, involving a tilted head complete with obnoxiously smug side-smirk:

I've always thought of Beyonce as a sort of style chameleon, but as you can see here, she actually never changes. Whoah.

This is a Jonas brother, right? Is it Nick? Or does he have an identical twin? Or, like, 10 identical twins?

Lastly, Summer Glau (of Firefly fame) clearly has a Posing With Fans Face. Except for that last guy. Man, what happened there?

Do you think celebrities develop a Camera Face to deal with being photographed all the time?

Images via SoBadSoGood

12 Funniest 'Walking Dead' Fan-Made Memes From Season 3 (PHOTOS)

Mon, 20 May 2013 12:34:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

There's something inherently meme-able about The Walking Dead, don't you think? I don't know what it is exactly, but there must be a reason the show has launched a million Tumblrs devoted to sharing AMC screenshots adorned with snarky text. Pretty much every episode in the series has been lovingly re-created in image macro form, and season 3 was no exception.

In fact, this season really seemed to bring out the best of the Internet pundits, because there are a TON of hilarious graphics floating around. I'm sure you've seen plenty, but memes are like Jello: there's always room for more.

Here's a roundup of the top 12 Walking Dead season 3 memes covering everything from Lame Andrea to the Evil Governor to Always-Awesome Daryl.

Maggie, you've come a long way, baby.

Now you're just some leg that I used to know ...

Ha ha ha! It's funny 'cause no one really cared about poor T-Dawg.

Well, yeah. Pretty much.

I don't even care that only Internet Meme Rick said this, I'm still doing the Arsenio Fist Pump for this line.

Oh TV Version Andrea, why couldn't you be more like Comic Series Andrea?

Right???

Watch your back, Tyreese.

Makes total sense. Because biceps.

No SHIT.

You got us on this one, Walking Dead writers.

Rick's character arc, perfectly summed up in jpeg form. Well done, meme-creators!

Which one is your favorite?

Images via Funny or Die

Brave Vigilante Mom Chases Down Man Who Allegedly Tried to Snatch Her Child

Fri, 17 May 2013 14:56:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Here's an unsettling story that makes me play the What Would I Have Done? game in my own head: on Wednesday evening, a 4-year-old girl was playing in front of her home in Albuquerque's North Valley neighborhood when a stranger picked her up and drove off. A group of teenagers witnessed the kidnapping and raced to tell the little girl's mother, Melissa Torrez, at which point the family called 911. Torrez didn't wait for the authorities to respond, however. She instantly ran for her car and began chasing the man who took her child.

I certainly hope I'm never called upon to find out what I'd do in that sort of awful situation, but I can't help but wonder. Would I have had enough adrenaline coursing through me to take vigilante action? Would the mama bear instinct have completely taken over? Or would I have been flatlined with terror, unable to decide what to do next?

As for what Melissa Torrez did, she followed the man's vehicle for seven miles, before losing control of her car and smashing into his silver Buick near an intersection. The suspect then fled on foot, triggering a massive manhunt that involved more than two dozen officers going door-to-door in the area to search for him.

What Torrez didn't realize is that the suspected abductor had pushed her daughter out of the car right before the chase began, and the little girl was found wandering uninjured near her home. In hindsight, Torrez's decision to follow the man at what must have been high speeds may have been a questionable one -- but who could say how this story might have ended if she hadn't done so? The man likely wouldn't have ditched the child, and who knows what could have happened after that.

In fact, it turns out that the cops are investigating whether there's a connection between this incident and the abduction and sexual assault of a 6-year-old from the same apartment complex the previous week. It certainly seems likely, since the suspect in that case was described as a male in a silver or gray vehicle.

A 31-year-old man named David Hernandez has now been arrested and charged with kidnapping -- and I'm thinking it's all thanks to Melissa Torrez. It took a lot of guts for her to chase this guy down, and it definitely sounds like she stopped a horrible crime from progressing.

What do you think about this lady's actions? Do you think you would have done the same?

Image courtesy of the Albuquerque Police Department

'The Baby Bachelor' Is Jimmy Kimmel's Most Adorable Kid Clip Yet (VIDEO)

Fri, 17 May 2013 12:29:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Some people give Jimmy Kimmel a hard time for routinely asking parents to pull mean pranks on their kids in the name of quality television entertainment. Personally, I can't get enough of those awesomely cruel videos of children weeping over their terrible Christmas presents or reacting to the upsetting news that their parents ate all their Halloween candy, but if you prefer your Kimmel Kid Programming to be a little more on the awwwww side, may I recommend The Baby Bachelor.

In the clip, Kimmel pokes fun at ABC's The Bachelor/The Bachelorette franchise with a little help from his adorable nephew Wesley. Wesley is single, lives with his parents, and he's looking for love ... while perched in a stroller and dressed in a pint-sized tux. This video is so freaking cute you just might forgive Kimmel for his kid-pranking ways (although in true Kimmel form, at least one child does a bang-up job of crying on cue for the camera).

Wesley must choose between a bevy of lovely young -- very young -- ladies, including 35-month-old Jesse, a "stay-at-home daughter" looking for "a sugar daddy." Ashley, the dental hygienist, looks like the winner when Wesley reveals that he'd "like to get the big girl." But surely it must be anybody's game at this point? I mean, Eva the fingerpainter has quite the alluring handshake, going for the surprise left hand approach and all.

Here's the video:

See this video on The Stir by CafeMom.

Poor Stella, the "handful" who appears at 0:45 and can't stop wailing. But how adorable is Wesley for trying to make her feel better?

Seriously, this whole thing is beyond awesome. Part two of The Baby Bachelor is apparently coming next week and I can't wait to see it. Will you please accept Wesley's rose dinosaur?

What did you think of The Baby Bachelor?

Image via YouTube

'The Office' Season Finale: 7 Moments No Fan Should Miss

Fri, 17 May 2013 11:44:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

I haven't watched The Office for the last couple years, but I had to tune in for the series finale last night. Even though it's been a while since I was truly invested in the Dunder Mifflin Paper Co., I was curious as to how they'd wrap things up after nine seasons. As NBC described it, "Months after the airing of the documentary, the workers of Dunder Mifflin, past and present, gather for a wedding and a final round of interviews. Mysteries are solved, hatchets are buried, pranks are prunked [sic]."

Like most Office episodes that happened after the superior (in my opinion) Jim and Pam Will-They-or-Won't-They Years, this one had moments that fell a little flat, or dragged on a little too long. Storylines were resolved right and left, but mostly it was a nostalgic reunion within a reunion ... and standing out among the occasional feeling of "meh" there were plenty of wonderful, pitch-perfect scenes.

A few of my favorites:

1) Toby's sad confession during the cast reunion Q&A, when a member of the audience asked, "Do you find your life pointless now, now that nobody is filming you?" Toby, instantly: "Yes."

2) The moment when everyone watched Andy Bernard's Cornell speech, when he redeemed himself for becoming a tragic viral sensation for his failed audition tape for America's Next A Cappella Sensation

3) Erin being reunited with her birth parents, played by Joan Cusack and Ed Begley Jr. (Should've been SO CHEESY, somehow wasn't.)

4) Andy's heartbreaking line: "I wish there was a way to know you were in the good old days before you've actually left them."

5) Ditto to this from Jim: "Even if I didn't love every minute of it, everything I have I owe to this job. This stupid, wonderful, boring, amazing job."

6) The final thoughts voiced to the camera by Pam: "There's a lot of beauty in ordinary things. Isn't that the point?"

And, of course, 7) the best moment of the entire episode -- when Steve Carell returned as Michael Scott. I was legitimately surprised and delighted, and the writers took an already fantastic moment and elevated it to platinum status with the following exchange:

I can't believe you came! -- Dwight

That's what she said. -- Michael

All in all, I feel like they did a really nice job with the finale. If it was imperfect and occasionally sprawled into dumb territory (Kellie and Ryan? So many ughs for that storyline), well, I think the good moments outweighed the bad. Michael summed it up with one of his trademark heartfelt/creepy lines, delivered while choking back tears:

I feel like all my kids grew up and then they married each other. It's every parent's dream.

What did you think of The Office finale?

Image via NBC

Owning Guns Doesn't Make Me a Bad Mom

Tue, 14 May 2013 07:13:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Today contributor Jennifer Galle is a stay-at-home wife and mom to two little girls. She's also an NRA Basic Pistol instructor and the National Membership Director for the A Girl and a Gun Woman's Shooting League. In a recent article titled "I Am a Mom With a Gun," she writes,

"... while I’m like many other moms across America, there is one little twist in my daily routine that may set me apart. When I go to the grocery store, I grab my car keys, my purse and I put on my holster. Yes, I am a mom with a gun. So was my mom. And someday, my daughters may be too."

I am too. A mom with a gun, that is. I definitely don't take it to the grocery store -- in fact, it rarely leaves our safe -- but I own one and I know how to use it. My husband is a hunter and a gun enthusiast. And our sons will grow up learning how to safely handle and shoot firearms.

The subject of kids and guns is a difficult one, not only because of horrific incidents like Newtown, but also for the seemingly endless number of stories about children and accidental shootings. Last week, a 13-year-old shot his 6-year-old sister with a handgun he'd found at home. A week for that, a 5-year-old killed his 2-year-old sister with a kid-specific Crickett rifle he'd been given the year before.

My 7-year-old has that same rifle.

That rifle, however, is secured in a heavy-duty safe. He doesn't touch it without direct adult supervision, and never in a million years would we leave it lying around the house where he or his brother could access it. Like his dad, he first learned how to shoot a BB gun (as shown in the photo accompanying this post) before graduating to safety lessons with the youth rifle.

Still, I realize the fact that we're a gun-owning family automatically puts me on a side of a political debate I often don't feel qualified to take part in. People don't tend to have mellow feelings about guns, much less the idea of children being exposed to guns. Look at some of the horrified, disgusted reactions to a recent NRA-hosted "Youth Day" convention:

This is indoctrination. These kids are too young to see that guns are wrong.

It agitates me that these people don’t think it could happen to their children. This is just beyond words.

They shouldn’t be teaching kids how to use guns. What happens when they get older? They might become like that Connecticut killer.

That last comment may as well be aimed at my family. We teach our children how to handle guns. So are we raising the next mass shooter?

Well, obviously I don't think so. I believe that my sons will grow up much like my husband and his brother did, as responsible shooters who were trained from day one how to safely handle a firearm. They may be entirely uninterested in guns when they're older, and that's fine -- but they'll have a healthy respect for what a gun is capable of.

My political beliefs differ from my husband when it comes to guns. He is a hugely passionate proponent of the Second Amendment, while I feel ... less strongly than he does. In the wake of Newtown, I felt -- and still do feel, in many ways -- terribly confused about what it is I DO believe about gun rights.

But aside from the thorny subjects of who should be allowed to own what kind of weapon, here's the reality of the world we live in today: according to the Children's Defense Fund, one-third of all households with children younger than 18 have a gun, and more than 40 percent of gun-owning households with children store their guns unlocked.

For that reason alone, I'm glad my children are being taught about gun safety. I fully support the ASK campaign, which encourages parents to ask questions about guns in homes before playdates (and although I'd likely feel awkward about it, I would totally understand if a parent didn't want their child to come to our home). And like Jennifer Galle, I want people to know that owning a gun doesn't make you an irresponsible parent -- it's the choices you make that have the potential to do so.

What do you think about kids growing up in a house with guns?

Image via Linda Sharps

'Gravity' Trailer: George Clooney and Sandra Bullock Endure Nightmare Space Scenario (VIDEO)

Fri, 10 May 2013 13:45:54 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

I somehow missed the buzz surrounding Gravity, the new space thriller starring George Clooney and Sandra Bullock, but now that the full-length trailer has hit the web, I'm officially on board with everyone else who's counting down the days until it hits theaters. For one thing, it's got George Clooney, and cinematically speaking this guy can do no wrong. (Excepting, perhaps, his 1987 performance in Return to Horror High.) Also, if the actual movie is anything like the trailer, it's going to be one holy hell of a nail-biter.

Based on what I just watched in the teaser clip, Gravity is going to light up nearly every single one of my personal phobias: confinement, running out of air, the unfathomable shrieking black horror of empty space. Not even a superhot astronaut like Clooney can make this movie's scenario less terrifying -- and that, of course, is why I can't WAIT to see it.

The trailer starts out with a peaceful vibe, as Bullock and Clooney are out on a space walk and soaking up the spectacular view of Earth. Things don't stay calm for long, though: their space shuttle gets dramatically torn apart by flying debris, and the astronauts are left utterly alone. Floating. In SPACE.

Check out the trailer:

See this video on The Stir by CafeMom.

That final shot of Sandra Bullock flailing to hold on to something before she tumbles head over foot in the darkness? GAH.

Gravity is directed and co-written by Alfonso Cuarón, the creative mind behind the amazing Children of Men and Y Tu Mamá También. Interestingly, Gravity is being officially pitched as a science fiction movie, and it reportedly cost $80 million to film -- so I wouldn't be surprised if there's something more lying in wait than "Two astronauts get stranded in space and float around freaking out for two hours." Could there be … ALIENS?

Whether there are in fact a slew of space creatures or just a lot of gorgeously terrifying slow-motion catastrophe shots, Gravity looks fantastic. Interested parties will get a chance to experience it on the big screen on Oct. 4, 2013.

What do you think of the trailer for Gravity?

Image via Warner Bros

Worst Sex Ed Teacher Of All Time Accused of Unspeakable Act

Fri, 10 May 2013 12:49:25 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

I think most of us can probably agree that the vast majority of teachers are amazing, generous, passionate people who have the power to inspire our children to greatness. Every now and then, however, there comes a story about someone who's such a disgrace to the profession, it's downright mind-boggling. I'm sorry to report that this is one of those stories, and it involves a Texas sex ed teacher who's accused of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old.

Marlena Mints, 31, has been charged with one count of aggravated sexual assault of a child and two counts of improper relationship with students -- after allegations surfaced that she'd performed oral sex on one of her students. During recess.

Mints is a health teacher and coach at Bessie Coleman Middle School in Cedar Hill, Texas. As the story goes, one of her 13-year-old eighth-grade students texted her that he had a problem with his penis, to which she said she could help but that she "needed to see it" and asked him to come into her class. According to what the boy told investigators, he exposed himself to her, thinking it was okay because she was a health specialist, and that's when Mints allegedly performed oral sex on him.

The student also said that he and other classmates were allowed to touch her breast and buttocks while spending time in her classroom.

Mints is accused of assaulting another student who's a high school senior. The arrest warrant said the second victim also exchanged text messages with Mint, during which she asked if he wanted to "hang out" and if he liked "white girls." She then reportedly picked the boy up, drove him to her home and engaged in oral sex with him. Evidence of the messages exchanged with Mints are on his phone, police say.

The teacher has been suspended from her job and is currently being held in Dallas County Jail.

Boy, it's hard to even know what to say about this, isn't it? If the allegations turn out to be true, this woman deserves every bit of justice the legal system can throw at her. Regardless of the circumstances under which these events may have happened, the fact remains that she's a 31-year-old teacher responsible for taking care of her young students -- not BLOWING THEM DURING RECESS, for god's sake.

How angry would you be if you were one of these boys' parents?

Image via Cedar Hill Police Department

David Bowie's Controversial 'The Next Day' Clip Was Too Extreme for YouTube (VIDEO)

Fri, 10 May 2013 11:49:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

So David Bowie has this new video, and -- what's that? Yes, I said David Bowie. Yeah, I'm a little surprised to hear he's still making music videos too, but wow, his voice has held up wonderfully over the years. Whatever throat-coating tea he's drinking, he needs to share some with Bob Dylan. Anyway, so Bowie has this new video for his song "The Next Day," and while you'd think his days of shocking the public would have peaked during his Ziggy Stardust days, it turns out the singer's still got some impressive tricks up his sleeve.

Not only is the clip so controversial it was yanked from YouTube, The Catholic League has referred to it as -- I swear I am not making this up -- the work of a "switch-hitting, bisexual senior citizen from London" that "is strewn with characteristic excess." Plus, a prominent Christian evangelist from Harvest Ministries called it "offensive and distasteful."

Oh, you KNOW you want to see it now, right?

The video stars stars Oscar-winning actress Marion Cotillard and Oscar-nominated actor Gary Oldman, and it's chock-full of all sorts of eyebrow-raising religious imagery. Oldman is in fine predatory form as a corrupt priest, Bowie sings onstage as a sort of Christlike figure in a monk's robe, Cotillard dances provocatively before blood gushes from her stigmata wounds. It's all very … well, here, take a look:

It's all very familiar, actually. I mean, this is a little more extreme than, say, Madonna's "Like a Prayer," but artists using religious iconography to stir up controversy is nothing new. Being condemned by spiritual leaders is one of the surest methods of drumming up free publicity, and let's be honest, David Bowie probably needed to push the envelope a bit to encourage album sales.

I'm not offended by anything in that video, but unsurprisingly, there are plenty of people who are. YouTube took the clip down within a few hours, saying it "violated its terms of service," before reinstating it with an adults-only rating. The Catholic League released a statement blasting the singer for his "mess" of a video, before expressing hope that he'll see the light:

… it’s a sure bet he can’t stop thinking about the Cadillac of all religions, namely Roman Catholicism. There is hope for him yet.

(The ... Cadillac of all religious? What does that even -- oh, never mind.)

Well, props to David Bowie for being 66 years old and still capable of getting some folks' panties in a wad. I doubt his comeback album would be making headlines without this video, so I'm thinking he achieved exactly what he set out to do.

What do you think about this David Bowie video? Do you find it offensive?

Image via Vevo

Obscene Anti-Woman Marine Facebook Page Finally Taken Down -- After 3 Years

Thu, 09 May 2013 17:20:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

You know that thing they keep saying on Game of Thrones: "For the night is dark and full of terrors"? Swap "night" with "Internet" and you've got about the only explanation I can come up with for the existence of the unbelievably offensive "F'N Wook" Facebook page that's devoted to degrading female members of the U.S. Marine Corps.

Thanks to U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier, who fired off a letter to the Secretary of Defense alone with top military brass, the page has been taken down -- but not before it racked up an astounding 10,000 likes for what Speier describes as a "culture of misogyny and sexual harassment." Worse, it appears the F'N Wook page has been on the Marines' radar for three years.

The page had received hundreds of comments and thousands of likes for its content aimed at degrading female Marines. It included a variety of offensive photos, including an image of a female Marine putting a colleague in a choke hold with the words, "This is my rape face." Another photo shows a woman with a black eye, with the accompanying text: "She burned the bacon. Once." Other images suggest military women perform sexual acts in exchange for promotions.

Speier's letter (PDF) calling out the Facebook page coincides with a disturbing report released by the Department of Defense which says sexual assaults rose by six percent from October 2011 to September 2012. Approximately 26,000 service members were sexually assaulted last year.

The Marines are now saying they'll take disciplinary action against anyone involved, and that "both active duty and reserve Marines have been involved." While there is "no tolerance for discriminatory comments" in the Marines, Speier says Marine Corps General James Amos has been aware of the F'N Wook page for three years.

The existence of this page certainly raises some questions about why Facebook tolerated it for so long (were they too busy taking down breastfeeding images?) when their own community standards expressly prohibit “harassment,” “hate speech,” and “graphic content.” Additionally, their policy states that “sharing any graphic content for sadistic pleasure is prohibited.”

Facebook hasn't exactly had a great history with responding to controversial pages, though. It took weeks of outrage and a Change.org petition that garnered more than 180,000 signatures to take down a page titled "What's 10 inches and gets girls to have sex with me? My knife," along with more than half a dozen more pro-rape pages back in 2011, a process that prompted Facebook to give this statement to the BBC:

It is very important to point out that what one person finds offensive another can find entertaining, just as telling a rude joke won't get you thrown out of your local pub, it won't get you thrown off Facebook. Groups or pages that express an opinion on a state, institution, or set of beliefs - even if that opinion is outrageous or offensive to some - do not by themselves violate our policies. These online discussions are a reflection of those happening offline, where conversations happen freely in people's homes, in cafes and on the telephone.

And there's the worst part of it all, I suppose -- the Facebook pages prove that these disturbing opinions exist, and that, unbelievably, some people agree with them. Like the “Support Innocence of Nanny Yoselyn Ortega” page that supports the New York nanny accused of butchering 6-year-old Lucia Krim and her little brother, Leo. Or the "Adam Lanza Is a Hero" page with the description, "Adam Lanzer [sic] should be awarded the highest honors for his work in population control. Forever in our hearts.”

People can be disgusting in real life and they can act even worse behind the anonymity of the Internet. I'm sure it's impossible for Facebook to track and take action on every potentially offensive page, but it sure seems to me that the F'N Wook page should have been flagged a LONG time ago for violating community standards.

Do you think the 'F'N Wook' page should be considered free speech and stay on Facebook?

Image via Facebook

Bizarre Nancy Grace Split-Screen Parking Lot Report Will Make You Look Twice (VIDEO)

Thu, 09 May 2013 14:41:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

If you were watching CNN on Wednesday during the network's coverage of the Cleveland kidnapping story, you may have noticed something a little odd. Nancy Grace and Ashleigh Banfield were doing a split-screen broadcast when a bizarre spatial anomaly seemed to take place: the cars passing behind the news actors were exactly the same. How could this be, when the two reporters were communicating via satellite and thus had to be hundreds if not thousands of miles apart, as evidenced by Grace's death-clutch on her earpiece as if she were struggling to hear Banfield's time-delayed comments? Had they somehow tunneled a wormhole through space?

As it turns out, they were both in Phoenix to cover the Jodi Arias murder trial verdict -- and not only were they in the same zip code, but the same damn parking lot. Despite their split-screen interview, the two reporters must have been standing all of 30 feet from each other, which is hilariously clear when you see the background of both shots.

The Atlantic did a great job of making some amusing GIF evidence that Grace and Banfield were in the same lot, facing the same direction, and standing fairly close together during the "remote" interview broadcast:

It's true the two reports are from separate networks, but it's still pretty strange that they staged the broadcast to appear as though they were in entirely separate locations. And come on, CNN, this is the Internet -- you didn't think someone would make an animated-image mockery of your Sooper-Serious Split-Screen Broadcast?

As the two intrepid journalists stood in front of the same building, while the same vehicles trundled through one shot and then out the other, one wonders if the women felt the cold distance of putting on their respective faces for the cameras -- so close, yet so far apart. As The Atlantic put it,

... despite being on sister stations and the fact Grace would literally only need to walk a few brisk steps to join Banfield on the same camera, the two broadcast teams remain hopelessly torn apart.

Do you think it's weird that this interview was done via split-screen?

Image via CNN

Farrah Abraham’s Adult Film: This Is Why We're Criticizing Her

Thu, 09 May 2013 12:46:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

I'm sick of hearing about Teen Mom Farrah Abraham's sex tape. You're sick of hearing about Farrah Abraham's sex tape. We're all sick of hearing about Farrah Abraham's sex tape and we can't escape Farrah Abraham's sex tape because everywhere you go on the Internet, there it is, all pressed up against your FACE: Farrah Abraham's goddamned sex tape.

There's an exceedingly short path between overexposure and irritation, and I suspect that's one of the reasons many of us hope that Farrah Abraham follows her adult video launch by a literal launch of some kind, ideally to outer space where we can't hear her dying horse screams. Her porn partner James Deen, however, has stepped up to defend Abraham's choice to make the tape -- and I have to say, he sounds pretty reasonable.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised that Deen is saying anything nice about Abraham, considering she hasn't exactly treated him with the utmost respect since he, uh, "co-starred in her film." (This is me making exaggerated air quotes before switching to a lewd-finger-thrusting-into-a-closed-fist-gesture.) In fact, she's publicly ridiculed his penis size, called him a "prop in the background," and ripped him for being "unprofessional."

Still, he recently spoke out on Abraham's behalf, and here's what he had to say:

I get kind of bummed about society and the fact that just because a chick decides she wants to do a porno, that she needs to be called mean names and stuff and I kind of feel like people should be nicer to her. If she wants to express her sexuality, whatever her motivations for making the adult film may be, I kind of feel like she shouldn’t be ostracized for such decisions.

Check out the video clip:

See this video on The Stir by CafeMom.

You know, I hear what he's saying. It's not like James Deen is getting a bunch of flak for doing this video, right? We're all focused on Abraham and what in the HELL she was thinking.

But, see, I think that's exactly why she's receiving so much criticism: she's not being on honest about her motivations. I swear if she came right out and was like, "Yeah, I totally made a porno and I sold it for a ton of money, so what?" we'd be like, whoah that's kind of extreme but hey best of luck in your new career. Instead, she keeps spouting all this total gibberish about why she made the tape and who the intended audience was.

First she said in a message to her fans,

You have just realized you are an awesome person and you deserve someone. Now that you’re 21, you’ve pretty much been crying every night because you are single and you’re alone. So, you make your own video, celebrate your awesome body (and) get your own sexy shots.

Then she told Dr. Phil,

I’m celebrating my body and I’m showing my feminine side. This is something that never should have been talked about publicly, because it was something that I personally wanted when I’m older because I want those sexy photos of me on my best year. This is my year to celebrate that to me. This was for me and just like how I represent things for myself. (…) I am not shopping the tape. If I’m going to release something because somebody’s already seen it, I really need to take into consideration my future, and yes, there is a money amount to that.

And now she's telling Entertainment Tonight,

A lot of my girlfriends who are back home … have done personal sexy shots, sexual videos … feminine things showing their sexuality and being happy for themselves. Here I am the same age or younger as most of my friends, and I’m like ‘why am I not [as] happy with myself as they are? Why am I not doing this for me? (…) What ended up happening was James Deen, who is in my video…thought it was ok …[to say to] the public ‘I did something with Farrah’ but he did it in his own way of saying ‘I made a porn with her’ … [and] made it his own thing and that’s why I was like, ‘Let me be one step ahead and let me gain control of my own video again.'

Dude. Come on. Is there anyone who actually buys the idea that she made a full-length professionally-shot porn film with a porn star -- one that features anal sex and, ahem, squirting -- which was all for her own private enjoyment, and that the only reason she sold it to Vivid is because that jerk James Deen leaked it to the press?

This is why everyone thinks she's a freakshow and the media isn't being "nicer to her." Not because she made an adult movie -- but because she's either delusional, a complete fool, or both.

What do you think about this whole Farrah Abraham sex tape craziness? Do you believe for a second that it's actually a leaked personal video?

Image via Vivid

Nick Lachey's Jaw-Dropping Confession About Ex-Father-in-Law Joe Simpson Is Going to Stir MAJOR Rumors (VIDEO)

Wed, 08 May 2013 13:19:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Hey, remember when Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey had that reality show called Newlyweds: Nick and Jessica and we got to see how totally in looooove they were while Jessica continually burped and farted and expressed her deep confusion over whether Chicken of the Sea was chicken or tuna?

Yeah, I barely do either, and apparently neither does Nick Lachey. It's probably not exactly a shocker to hear he's totally moved on, but according to what he said on Bravo's Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen last night, he hasn't even spoken to Jessica in years.

That wasn't the jaw-dropper of the evening, though. The big OMG moment came when Lachey dropped a huge piece of gossip about Jessica's dad Joe Simpson -- while cameras were rolling, no less.

Lachey appeared on Watch What Happens Live with his brother Drew, and he was unusually candid about his prior relationship with the Simpson family while playing "Plead the Fifth," a question-and-answer game Cohen plays with celebrity guests. When Lachey was asked about when he'd last spoken with Jessica, he said,

It's been years. Honestly, probably six years. (...) It was like another lifetime ago.

Interesting, right? But that little revelation was nothing compared to what he said when Andy Cohen asked him, "What is the best thing about no longer having Joe Simpson as a father-in-law?" Check out Nick Lachey's eyebrow-raising answer:

Okay, first of all, Drew's answer cracked me up. What's great about not having Joe Simpson as an in-law anymore? EVERYTHING, that's what.

But holy crap, the confession that Nick's happy he doesn't "have to play grab-ass under the table on Easter Sunday"? I mean, is he saying what I think he's saying? What, in fact, the entire world seems to be saying about Joe Simpson and his fondness for young men? WOW.

I'm sure he'll take some heat for this particularly on-camera moment, but after years of polite silence about his experience being part of the Simpson family, I think Nick Lachey has the right to dish a little. Even if, as his brother put it,

Our publicist is freaking out right now!

And cue the clarifying statement/apology, in 3 ... 2 ...

Are you surprised Nick Lachey said this about Joe Simpson?

Image via Bravo

'Walking Dead' Petition to Resurrect Dead Character Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things

Wed, 08 May 2013 12:38:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

How seriously do Walking Dead fans take their favorite zombie show? Well, just imagine for a brief horrifying moment what would happen if Norman Reedus's character Daryl Dixon were to be killed. I'm picturing a furious crossbow-armed crowd -- mostly female -- storming AMC's corporate headquarters, aren't you?

Well, it turns out there are a number of fans who feel pretty strongly about a certain other character who did die at the end of season 3. I won't mention any names until I've issued the standard WARNING I'M ABOUT TO DISCUSS SEASON 3 SPOILERS, but let's just say I strongly disagree with their desire to see this character come back in season 4. Unbelievably, they've actually banded together to create an official petition for AMC to correct their "colossal mistake" in killing this person off.

Once more with feeling: spoilers ahead!

Okay, so I'm obviously talking about Andrea, who after many episodes of being a inexplicably-manicured pile of suck, FINALLY died after being bitten by Milton the zombie during the season 3 finale. I guess I wouldn't go so far as to say I leaped out of my chair and cheered during her death scene, but I sure wasn't sad to see her go. Unlike the incredibly awesome Andrea of the comics, Andrea of the TV series was kind of a giant drag.

However, despite the fact that there are over 246,000 Google results for "Andrea Walking Dead annoying," someone was so upset about her death they actually started a petition to bring her back to the show. Here's what it says:

The Walking Dead fanbase would like to petition the producers of the show to re-write history and bring back the character "Andrea" in the fourth season. Through interviews we are led to believe former showrunner, Glen Mazzara, was the sole producer in favour of killing off the character in question. Under new management we encourage Scott M Gimple to rectify his predecessor's mistakes starting with Andrea's unnecessary death. Failing that, The Walking Dead fanbase would like the producers to know that Andrea's death was a colossal mistake and detrimental to the storytelling in the show.

Not that an online petition would likely sway the producers one way or the other, but thankfully it doesn't exactly seem to be rocketing towards its goal of 1,000 signatures:

Oddly enough, there IS a rumor floating around that Andrea will be back in some form in season 4. Maybe as a flashback, or a hallucination like Lori -- or maybe we'll learn that despite the gunshot we heard, she was never killed? (Although she WAS bitten, so ... maybe as a zombie?)

As for what actress Laurie Holden thinks about the possibility that she'll return, she said,

It’s not up to me, you know? I’m the actor. I do what I’m told. The writers are the ones in charge of the storylines. And they write the scenes. Woulda, shoulda, coulda. Do I wish we could’ve seen and explored more of the comic bookAndrea? Yes. Absolutely. Do I wish that I had more scenes with Michonne showing that friendship? Yes. Absolutely. But at the end of the day, I don’t think I could ask for a better death. I feel like her life mattered, and she died trying, and her heart was in the right place. I feel grateful for that. You can’t have it all.

Yeah, I think Andrea is done. It's too bad she wasn't a better character, but bringing her back would be pretty lame. Time to move on and upset more fans by killing more people ... just not Daryl. Please god, NOT DARYL.

What do you think about the idea of Andrea coming back to The Walking Dead?

Image via AMC

'Honey Boo Boo' Wedding Was a Bad-Luck Reality Show Move

Tue, 07 May 2013 14:52:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Have you heard the big Honey Boo Boo-related news? Mama June Shannon finally got married to Sugar Bear, nine years after they made each other's acquaintance. (They met in an online chat room, of all places. I somehow can't picture either one of them tapping away at a computer.) June and Sugar Bear -- aka Mike Thompson -- got hitched in a camo-themed wedding in their Georgian backyard, and it's assumed that the big day will eventually be broadcast on their TLC reality show Here Comes Honey Boo Boo.

Naturally, the Boo Boo clan is already getting some flak for the rumors that they earned a bonus for televising their nuptials, but if you ask me, the REAL reason they should be concerned about this decision has to do with ... *dramatic organ music* THE DIRE CURSE OF THE REALITY SHOW MARRIAGE.

Here's what I'm saying: if you choose to put your relationship on a reality show, you shouldn't be surprised when your marriage goes to hell.

I mean, just look at the collateral damage created by past reality television entertainment: Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries! Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey! Jon and Kate Gosselin! Britney Spears and Kevin Federline, Shanna Moakler and Travis Barker, Leah Messer and Corey Simms, Carmen Electra and Dave Navarro, Hulk and Linda Hogan, Bobby Brown and Whitney Houston, Danny and Gretchen Bonaduce, Missy and Bam Margera, Susie and Corey Feldman, Camille and Kelsey Grammar, a shit-ton of Real Housewives, and ugh HAND-CRAMP FROM TYPING.

Now, the Honey Boo Boo family aren't really your typical glamour-seeking wannabe celebrities, but still. What was it that prompted Shannon and Thompson to finally tie the knot, I wonder? Was it Sugar Bear's recent health scares? Mama June's newly slimmed-down figure and beautimous makeover? Or was it the promise of a bigger paycheck from TLC if they provided fodder for a Honey Boo Boo wedding special? It definitely sounds like they gave the network some exclusive footage, since the invitations reportedly warned guests that “no cellphones, cameras, or outside video taping will be allowed.”

Personally, my guess is that the wedding was more about the love than the benjamins ... but accepting a payout for your wedding day is just one more step in the Doomsday Reality Show Fame path that typically leads to "irreconcilable differences."

I truly like the Honey Boo Boo folks, and I hope their relationship bucks the reality trend. Still, I don't think I'll be too surprised if we eventually see a spinoff show on TLC: Here Come the Newly-Single Honey Boo Boos.

Do you think reality show marriages are bad luck?

Image via TLC

Brooke Mueller Losing Her Kids Could Be the Best Thing That Ever Happened to Her

Tue, 07 May 2013 14:12:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

You have to hand it to Charlie Sheen: despite the utter craziness of his 2011 Winning/Tiger Blood/F-18, Bro/Vatican Assassin Warlocks phase, he's pretty much stayed out of trouble since those days. If he's still living a messed-up, drug-fueled lifestyle, he's at least keeping it out of the tabloids. Unfortunately, the same can't be said of his ex, Brooke Mueller, who's currently serving her nineteenth stint in rehab.

Actually, it may be her twentieth rehab visit, because reports vary as to what her six-day-long December treatment for Adderall abuse brought the tally to. But despite Mueller's lack of success with beating drug addiction, it's possible this time might be the rock bottom she needed -- because unlike previous rehab stays, this one was preceded by her children being taken away.

Last Wednesday, Mueller was placed under a psychiatric 5150 hold under the Californian Welfare Institutions Code. That's the same evaluation that Britney Spears went under in 2008, which "allows a qualified officer or clinician to involuntarily confine a person deemed to have a mental disorder that makes them a danger to him- or herself, and/or others."

The next day, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services took Mueller and Sheen’s 4-year-old twins, Bob and Max, out of Mueller's custody. According to TMZ, officials decided her house was an unsafe environment for children due to fears that Mueller's drug use could endanger them.

The twins were placed with Charlie Sheen's second wife, Denise Richards. Afterwards, Sheen's publicist issued a statement on his client's behalf:

Charlie supports the actions of the Department of Children and Family Services. He knows Max and Bob are safe and in a stable, loving environment with Denise and the boys’s sisters. Charlie will fully cooperate and fully participate in all proceedings.

Mueller's rep says she voluntarily checked into the UCLA Medical Center on Friday, May 3:

Brooke will be there for several more days, and will likely transition directly into a residential treatment facility to get help for prescription drug abuse. Brooke misses her children, and wants to get healthy so she can resume her life and get back to being a mom.

It's hard to know what's really going on with Brooke Mueller, but if there's any truth to the statement that she's voluntarily getting help, maybe that's a hopeful sign she's ready to do some serious battle with the substance addictions that have impacted her life for so long. I can't imagine a bigger wakeup call than having DCFS take your kids away, and even though Richards has stepped in before to take care of the boys while Mueller's been in treatment, I think it's the first time she's been officially involved in the custodianship. (In fact, Charlie Sheen and Denise Richards are in court right now trying to get temporary custody for Richards.)

Brooke Mueller has an enormously hard road in front of her, but I sure hope for their boys' sake she uses this opportunity to get her act together. Eventually, her luck at even being ALIVE at this point is going to run out.

Do you think Brooke Mueller has a shot at making this rehab stay a success?

5 Things Moms Should Never Say Out Loud (Or the Karma Gods Will Get You)

Tue, 07 May 2013 11:53:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

I've never been a superstitious person. I don't throw salt, knock wood, or obsessively stroke the soft severed appendages of woodland animals. (Seriously, that last one. Are rabbit's feet still a thing? Thinking back, that was a pretty gross trend. Why were they on keychains?) But ever since I became a mom, I do believe in the cosmic principle according to which each parent is rewarded or punished in one instance according to that parent's statements in the previous instance.

In other words, I believe there are certain things you should never, ever, EVER say ... unless you want the Parenting Karma Gods to strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger. For instance, these 5 payback-triggering statements:

"I think he's finally sleeping through the night!" Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh girl. That's great that you had seven consecutive hours of blissful restorative sleep last night, but you just doomed yourself to a months-long every-two-hour wakeup routine that will CRUSH YOUR WILL TO LIVE.

"She always takes a two-hour nap at 11 a.m., so let's do the conference call then." Ring ring, hello? Hello, this is your Crying Non-Napping Baby Who's Teaching You the Shitty Lesson of Never Assuming Any Routine Is a Sure Thing, are we reaching?

"She's such a great eater! She loves everything, she's totally going to be my little foodie." Uh huh. And with that playdate-withering announcement, Little Miss Adventurous Eater will suddenly and inexplicably refuse every single food on earth with the exception of Saltines. Not the whole-wheat/low-sodium kind, either.

"I started giving my kids fish oil and no one's been sick in weeks." You didn't. You DIDN'T. You violated the Golden Rule: you verbally acknowledged your family's health streak. Well, there's nothing that can be done now. Go stock up on children's Motrin, Kleenex, and Pedialyte -- and get out the barf bucket.

"He's so smart for his age, I think he's going to be a breeze to potty train." Sniff-sniff. Do you smell that? It's hubris. Well, that and the giant load your son just dropped in his Spider-Man underwear.

Are there any parenting karma statements you'd add to the "never say it out loud" list?

Image via Scott Ableman/Flickr

9 Ways My Pack Rat Kids Have Turned My House Into a Garbage Dump

Tue, 07 May 2013 07:20:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

There are times when I feel an overwhelming sense of despair over the amount of housekeeping it takes just to achieve a "baaaarely acceptable, as long as no one unexpectedly drops by for a visit" level of cleanliness. The problem isn't just that I hate cleaning and vacuuming and picking up and doing dishes and putting away laundry (although sweet jesus, I truly do), it's that there is absolutely ZERO job satisfaction with these tasks because they're never ever ever ever ever ever finished. As Taylor Swift would say: like, ever.

As if it's not bad enough to be mired in a Sisyphean loop of interminable homekeeping activities, my kids make it a thousand times worse by, well, by EXISTING, frankly, but also by glomming onto certain cluttery garbage-y items and refusing to part ways with them. So not only is my house forever littered with the basic detritus of crumbs, pieces of paper, articles of clothing, and miscellaneous dropped objects, there are all these ... THINGS, too.

For instance! Here are 9 random items that really should have made their way to a garbage can by now, but instead, they're each taking up space in my house. And in some cases, waiting to puncture the bottom of my foot in the dead of night.

ITEM 1: MONTHS-OLD SIGN ON 7YO'S DOOR WITH DIRE, GRAMMATICALLY INCORRECT WARNINGS.

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "But if I don't have this sign Dylan will go in my room and, and, and ... and then he'll play with my toys!"

ITEM 2: WEIRD COLLECTION OF GOOGLE IMAGES PRINTED, CUT OUT, AND HAPHAZARDLY TAPED TO THE INSIDE OF A CABINET DOOR.

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "Those are my AMINALS."

ITEM 3: CRAPPY MCDONALD'S HAPPY MEAL TOY WHICH IS MISSING ITS PROJECTILE (1 of approximately 28954).

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "It's Eagle Shooty ... uh, Soldier Guy! I love Eagle Shooty Soldier Guy."

ITEM 4: FORTY BILLION MILLION JILLION KAZILLION LEGOS, USUALLY STREWN ALL OVER THE FLOOR.

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "What do you mean, give some of them away?" *clutches chest dramatically* "I need all the Legos, Mom! ALL OF THEM."

ITEM 5: TWO RANDOM PIECES OF PLASTIC TAPED TOGETHER WITH LINES DRAWN ON THEM.

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "That is my COMPUTER."

ITEM 6: CRUMBLING BLOB OF HARDENED PLAY-DOH.

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "But Mom, that's Perry the Platypus!"

ITEM 7: CHUNKS OF WOOD NAILED TOGETHER WITH PEELING STRIPS OF DUCT TAPE.

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "I made that G.I. Joe aircraft carrier all by myself, so I want to keep it. Unless ... *scheming expression* you want to buy me a real one, that is."

ITEM 8: TWO STALE MARSHMALLOWS IMPALED ON A TOOTHPICK? SERIOUSLY, WHAT THE HELL?

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "That's in case my Lego guys want to lift some weights!"

ITEM 9: CREEPY SEVERED HEAD FROM A BOBBING-HEAD DOG TOY.

CHILD'S EXCUSE: "Spotty Head Puppy ... uh, Guy! Ohhhhhhhhh, we can't get rid of Spotty Head Puppy Guy."

Do you have this problem in your house too? Which items do you most want to secretly dump in the trash when your kid's not looking?

Images via Linda Sharps

Pathetic Woman Arrested After Allegedly Creating Fake Facebook Account to Stalk Herself

Mon, 06 May 2013 14:33:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

Just when you thought you'd heard it all when it comes to people using Facebook for ill-advised activities, here's a story of a Michigan woman who's accused of setting up a Facebook account in order to stalk herself. Yes, you read that right: Cheryl Nelson, 52, allegedly created a fake Facebook profile with her ex-boyfriend's personal information, and proceeded to use it in order to make it appear as though her ex's new girlfriend was harassing her.

The truly strange part about this story is that according to the details of the case, Nelson didn't even bother to cover her trail, and cops easily discovered evidence of her Facebook-finagling when they searched her home computer. When will people learn? If you commit the crime, ERASE YOUR TIMELINE.

Okay, that didn't actually make a lot of sense, I was just trying to get a catchy Johnnie Cochran catchphrase going there. My point is, if you're going to go so far as to set up a fake Facebook account for the purpose of illegally framing your ex's new lover, mayyyyyyyybe take the extra step to make sure your login history isn't saved on your computer?

This lady was busted red-handed after her ex filed a police report against her for threatening behavior, and detectives checked her home computer equipment. Mind you, this was after a YEAR of Nelson making criminal complaints saying she had been the victim of stalking, harassment, assault, and home invasion.

Nelson has now been charged with false report of a felony and unlawful posting of a message, and police say she admitted she'd been falsely reporting claims because "she was not able to let go of her relationship" with her ex.

She definitely sounds like a troubled woman, and I hope she gets some help with her obsessive behavior. In fact, I almost wonder if she didn't want to get caught, and that's why she didn't delete the evidence of her criminal activity.

It's more likely, though, that it just didn't occur to her that it would be fairly easy for police to prove she was the culprit behind the fake Facebook account. Even if she had been diligent about erasing her history or used a different computer, someone would have eventually figured this out. People have the tendency to believe there can be such a thing as true Internet anonymity ... but it should be pretty obvious that unless you're some sort of genius hacker, you're going to leave a digital footprint. A Do Not Pass Go, Go Directly to Jail footprint, even.

Do you think this woman should get jail time for faking her own harassment on Facebook?

Image via J_Benson/Flickr

Slayer Guitarist's Cause of Death Is Stirring Up a Pointless Mystery

Mon, 06 May 2013 14:17:00 EDT

Post by Linda Sharps

On May 2, Slayer fans were devastated to learn that guitarist Jeff Hanneman had died at the age of 49. He passed away in a Los Angeles hospital at around 11 a.m., with his wife Kathy by his side.

Hanneman's official cause of death was liver failure, but in a strange twist, news of his untimely demise has turned to focus on a spider bite he'd suffered two years ago. According to Slayer's spokeswoman, Hanneman had been recovering from a rare flesh-eating infection caused by the bite, and that the infection may have caused the chronic liver disease responsible for his death. Others are theorizing that his liver was damaged from a far more common cause, and that blaming a spider is masking the true culprit.

Slayer's spokeswoman Heidi Robinson-Fitzgerald says that Hanneman had been slowly recovering from necrotizing fasciitis, a brutal flesh-eating infection that nearly cost him his right arm. In 2011, Hanneman himself described the bite (which he saw happen while relaxing in a friend's hot tub) that led to his condition:

Didn't even feel it. But an hour later, I knew that I was ill. The arm was real hot. I got to the emergency room, and thank god the nurse knew straight away what it was. By chance, although it's pretty rare, she had seen a case a little while before. At that point, I was an hour away from death.

Hanneman had emergency surgery and two months of skin grafts and treatment before beginning physical therapy:

I had to learn to walk again. I hadn't stood up for a month, apart from anything else. The skin grafts were very painful and all the muscles and tendons in the arm where very weak. That was ok though. I count myself lucky that the nurse and doctor knew right away what had happened to me, because things could have been a whole lot worse.

Robinson-Fitzgerald believes the bite-triggered flesh eating bacteria caused Hanneman to develop a form of strep bacteria associated with streptococcal toxic shock syndrome, which in turn led to his liver failure. According to this doctor writing for The Daily Beast, however, it's far more likely that Hanneman suffered from "the ongoing silent epidemic of chronic liver disease in the United States": viral hepatitis. Still others wonder if alcohol played a role in Hanneman's death.

So far, neither doctors nor any of Hanneman's family have discussed any details behind the exact cause of his death, and who could blame them? It's really none of our business, and I'm sure the family is far too busy grieving to focus on releasing a bunch of private medical information.

The bottom line is that it doesn't really matter, because it's an enormous loss for Slayer fans no matter how it happened. RIP Jeff Hanneman, co-founder of one of the most pioneering thrash metal bands in musical history.

See this video on The Stir by CafeMom.

Were you sad to hear about Jeff Hanneman's passing?

Image via Ozz13x/Flickr