Presenting the Veiled Threat!

September 11, 2008


Blog Guy, I was supposed to be married, but my fian stood me up at the altar and took off with my best friend. What can I do to express my anger?

Fortunately, you no longer need to suffer in silence when you’re “jilt to the hilt,” thanks to a fashion creation called the Veil of Tears.

For $99.99 you can get a effigy of your fian or the chick who lured him away, and a handy clip to attach it to your actual unused wedding veil.  For instance, the woman in this fashion photo apparently lost her boyfriend to Lucille Ball.

Now, everywhere you go, folks will get the message about your fian and the trash queen that stole him away. Or, for only $499.99, get the deluxe model, which comes with colorful pins and a genuine voodoo curse! Batteries not included.

Facebook Odd Blog Network


A model presents a creation of Geova Rodriguez designer Spring 2009 collection during New York Fashion Week, September 6, 2008. REUTERS/Kena Betancur

More stuff from Oddly Enough


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

I have often believed that fashion designers try to imagine the most absurd clothing possible and then pass it off as “fashion.” The Blog Guy’s posts regarding fashion and models have cemented that belief.

What’s next? A ventriloquist’s dummy to stand in for the AWOL spouse-to-be? Hmmmm. That might just be absurd enough to sell big in the fashion world, especially for those with two personalities. I have half a mind to try it!

Posted by RLM | Report as abusive

I thought after the models in their underwear earlier this week there was nothing weirder to see. As always, you have found somethnig even MORE weird! Wow!

Posted by Dee T | Report as abusive

Poor girl. This is what happens when you don’t tell people to stay out of your hair in the planning stages of the wedding…

Posted by Bandage | Report as abusive

Blog Guy, I must say I am surprised you haven’t written about “Natalie Dylan,” who is attempting to auction off her “virginity.”

I am writing because I have been renting mine out for a number of years now, and I think the time has come to auction mine, too. Can you identify the auctioneer for me?

I’m willing to take a lie-detector test, like Natalie, or should that be a lay-detector test?

Posted by RLM | Report as abusive

That’s insane! Who in their right mind would actually WEAR that thing? Ick!! Have you seen the Sex and the City movie?? Poor Jessica Parker has a dead bird on he veil!!

RLM: Only problem is that you’re not technically selling your virginity… it’s been rented… just cause it comes back doesn’t mean that you are actually one! (or does it?! …. I guess it depends on how long it is inbetween renters)

Posted by Maggie | Report as abusive

around here virginity usually goes for the price of dinner, maybe a movie (if the virginity is high quality) and a bottle of cheap wine. figure 50 bucks tops…

Posted by gspears3 | Report as abusive

Maggie, I’m sure I’m just as much of a “virgin” as “Natalie.” Just ask my kids;)~

Posted by RLM | Report as abusive

How should I say this? Never, never, never! Well, hardly ever!

Posted by RLM | Report as abusive

That’s true, RLM… my parents are virgins too… my brother and I are both imaculate conceptions! ;o)

Wow… only $50 for a virgin.. gspears, you’re cheap!!

Posted by Maggie | Report as abusive

Here’s the deal – suppose you are a woman looking at such an outfit. If your thought process is such that you would actually consider wearing such a thing in public, you are exactly the woman who would certainly get jilted – a nut case.

Posted by scott | Report as abusive

What is the designer trying to say? “Raggedy Anne died for your fashion sins”?

Posted by Charlene | Report as abusive

I think that some of us may have overlooked a couple things about this model’s outfit. Did you notice how it seems to be a contrast (or perhaps negative image) of the model herself — skin and hair colour and so on?

Perhaps this is suitable attire, as Scott suggests, for a virgin in training. Can you imagine how the introductions would go?

“Hi! I’m Amore Live, and this is ‘friend’ Evil Roma.”
“Okey. Hey! Why is it that, everywhere I go, your ‘friend’ is watching me? … (Sound of shuffling feet)… Love to talk, but I got stuff to do. Byyyyyyye.” (Sound of footfalls retreating rapidly.)

Or perhaps, this is the uniform for a state highway worker in training: “Okey. Here’s the deal. That’ll be 30 dollars an hour for me, and 25 dollars an hour for my ‘leaner.\'”

Posted by RLM | Report as abusive

All, that should be “Amor,” not “Amore.” Sometimes, I think my brain is remote controlled by a fly! While I’m writiing again, though, did you notice the black figure on the doll? Creepy, very creepy.

Posted by RLM | Report as abusive

Yes, and it should be “Okay”, not “Okey” as well…

Posted by MLR | Report as abusive

MLR, your statement is not true where I come from, Sweetie. Ever hear of regional spellings? You must have, since you purport to be such a language purist.

I refer you, for example, to the novels of Raymond Chandler, in which “okey” is used as a perfectly legitimate variant of “okay.” So, your criticism regarding usage simply explodes itself, doesn’t it?

But read on, Sweetie, and I want you to pay very close attention because I doing this to prove a point.

Sentences, MLR, require end punctuation. An ellipsis is not an end-punctuation mark. I point this out because I know punctuation must be very important to such language purists as you purport to be.

In addition, unless you reside in Britain, commas go inside quotation marks, not outside. But you must not reside in Britain because, if you did, you would have punctuated your sentence thus:

Yes, and it should be ‘okay’, not ‘okey’ as well…

Furthermore, pronouns (such as “it”) should have clear antecedents. Your “it” does not. This would be a definite no-no for such language purists as you.

Posted by rlm | Report as abusive