Blog Posts by Erin Flaherty, Shine staff

Getty Images
Today certain junior high-minded individuals in the blogosphere are snickering about Positive Singles, a new online dating site tailored for folks who have STDs. And sure, while the concept is ripe for parody, I have to say that in principle, it's genius. After all, STD rates are skyrocketing, and presumably, a lot of that has to do with the fact that our partners are either completely in the dark about the fact that they are infected, or worse, lying when they say they're "clean," so to speak.

Conversely, the members of Positive Singles are responsible enough to be up-to-date on their medical status, and courageous and honest enough to be totally up front about it, all traits that everyone is looking for in a romantic partner. The majority of them have herpes and HPV, and considering the statistics on both, more than half of the daters on Myspace and Facebook should probably be advertising their wares on Positive Singles instead. But I also like that it gives people with more

Brad Barket/Getty Images
It was inevitable that Tina Fey would return to "Saturday Night Live" to play Sarah Palin. Not only are they spot on look-alikes (right down to the "sexy librarian" glasses), but Fey nailed that far north accent and carefully coached timing with her signature comedic precision. (To be fair, Gina Gershon does a pretty mean impression, too.) Placing her on a platform with Amy Poehler's Hillary Clinton was genius, especially since, much to Clinton supporters' chagrin (and surely much to Hil's own), Palin keeps aligning herself with Clinton, even if their politics couldn't be more different. In fact, Palin's beliefs are pretty much the antithesis of Clinton's, and yet, when Palin talks about her (at her last speech, the crowd booed, so she is pulling back on that presentation), surely the speech writers in her camp have encouraged her to do so because part of her role in the campaign is to stealthily attract those millions that staunchly supported Hillary. And that makes me wonder if

Freaky Martin
"Pictures of brides in their underwear" just about sums up the artistic direction behind the prolific collection of photography Freaky Martin has assembled on his blog. And while the images aren't exactly pornographic--heya guys, hurry, I think I saw one or two naked breasts over there!--there is something oddly compelling about the whole under roo smorgasbord. Also, while many look like some overzealous mom snapped the pic, a lot of them feature the bride standing there, proudly posing in her undies, while the bridesmaids are all huddled around fawning over her. Is this part of the wedding documentation a tradition I've somehow missed all these years? Too weird. While some of the undergarments are your pretty standard, support staff fare, a few are fussy and complicated enough to get me wondering if perhaps some ladies spend as much time picking out their lacy lingerie as they do the wedding dress. Was what you wore underneath memorable? And if it's true that most couples don't

If you think the sexism in "Mad Men" is offensive, consider this: The E.U. is seeking to ban gender stereotypes in ads. Maybe it was what some considered a depiction of gang rape in the Dolce & Gabbana ad above that broke the proverbial camel's back, but according to the New York Times, the legislature will be actively assessing and slapping companies on the wrist for even minor transgressions.

And lest you think the move is laughable--after all, who cares if Mr. Clean represents the idea that it takes a "strong man" to clean a floor?--consider the idea that these moves could eventually become legally binding. The thought of the government regulating advertising sounds scary: I would rather they outlaw companies making outrageously false claims about wrinkle creams than focusing on the creative side. And what next? Editorial output? Journalism?

"The concern, according to the committee report, is that stereotypes in advertising can 'straitjacket women, men, girls and boys by

Getty Images
Maybe I'm the last person to know about the bizarre, kind of genius blog that is Last Night's Clothes, but the deal is that readers can write in their tales of seduction, and while most sexcapades involve more nudity than articles of clothing, these folks share all the dirty details, right down to the garments that helped get the job done. Oh and there's a service element: They also provide shopping information for the items that will hopefully make you just as lucky!

Now, I don't think I've ever slept with a dude because of what he was wearing (although I have encountered say, a ----- blocking do-rag here and there). If you're attracted to someone, they could be wearing a paper bag and you'd call it avant garde and go for it. But I do realize that people have articles of clothing that a) they got laid in and this raiment forevermore becomes the "lucky" skirt and/or b) most people have an article of clothing or shoes in their closet that can be used as a sexual weapon, as in, "I wear

Getty Images
Let me get straight to the point: The idea of an open marriage scares the beejeez out of me. It's not that I'm judging couples who choose to go that route--do what you need to do people--but the thought of "sharing" my partner so intimately does not appeal to me personally. Then again, one only has to observe the numerous community posts regarding infidelity and marriages gone sour to acknowledge the obvious: the traditional marriage rubric ain't exactly perfect either. Sometimes desperate times call for desperate measures, so they say.

There's been a lot of talk about open marriage this year, and yet, for all the various representations in the media, the idea is still somewhat mysterious and even threatening. I think it's so hard to define because like all relationships, it's complicated. What works for one does not work for some, no question there. So while we're admittedly curious about this exotic open marriage beast--after all, it's hard for some couples not to fantasize about a

Even though Lindsay Lohan had no trouble talking her top off for New York Magazine, turns out, the gal has standards. Says Page Six:

"It's once nude, twice shy for Lindsay Lohan. The Sapphic-leaning star has turned down a $700,000 offer to do an eight-page topless spread in Playboy's 55th-anniversary issue this January. 'If there's nudity, then the answer's no . . . She's not going down the [New York] magazine road again,' Lohan's rep told Playboy's creative consultant, Hal Lifson, referring to Lindsay's naked Marilyn Monroe tribute last winter. Lifson said he hoped to have Lohan do a tribute to '60s sex kitten Ann-Margret and her film Kitten With a Whip, which is one of Lohan's faves."

We get that she wants to clean up her image and all, but given the recent speculation about her lack of funds, it must've been a tempting offer. Celebrity or not, how much cash would it take you to er, take it off?

Image from Grease courtesy Paramount Pictures
John and Jennifer couldn't do it. Grease characters Sandy and Danny did. Problem is, the latter was the stuff of fiction. Now Labor Day's gone by, everyone's waking up with the collective hangover of summer's end, and the harsh reality that slacking at work due to the glorious weather will no longer be tolerated. Recently, radio personality Mary Tylaska asked me back to her morning show to talk to listeners about how to extend a summer romance into the fall. My initial reaction was, "Does anyone really want to?"

Sure, that distinct brand of red hot lovin' a summer fling inspires is the stuff of legends: Everyone wants to experience love accompanied by thrilling fireworks. But is this the true nature of love? A friend's father always gave her the following advice when it comes to matters of the heart: "True love is quiet."

And that's part of the reason summer romances tend to falter under more realistic circumstances. It's easy enough to enjoy an infatuation with someone when there's