from the Sydney Morning Herald:
"Diane Lane recently made a drastic change with one of her most valuable assets: her hair.
On Today, Lane - smiling but wincing - got a haircut, losing 20 cm of her long, sandy-hued locks.
Why? To donate the shorn hair to a charity that gives wigs to women battling cancer."
Does this strike anyone else as a little ridiculous?
I mean, good on her for the donation and everything, but isn't this essentially an article about someone famous getting a haircut? Now i'd understand it a little more if maybe she shaved it all off or something, but 20cms? that's not much! and why would you WINCE at getting 20 cms taken off?? her hair was already long! it really won't make that much of a difference! and hey if it really bugs you, call your personal stylist in LA and i'm sure they can organise some extensions! problem solved!
famous people...urgh...
why do we love them?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
i live in new york. i sing. i dance. i frolic in the park.
About Me
- Katie
- i like shiny things... they're pretty... i may burst into song and dance with no warning...
1 comment:
So true! haha
The things people write about famous people is insane sometimes!
I love that her hair was her most valuable assest...
Post a Comment