text:
Results 1 to 10 of 15
Thread: Guy too attractive?
Guy too attractive?
I'm just curious if a guy is too attractive is it harder for a girl to talk to him or look at him as they pass each other? Do some girls feel like they are not good enough for a guy? I know if I see a really beautiful girl (Not just beautiful but looks TOOO Glamorous) I feel like she is way to high maintenance and although she is really attractive I don't have the desire to approach her.
Guy too attractive?
The point is... Do you feel that way? Do you get approach anxiety? If you see a girl of high value, isn't it more difficult for you to approach her? Of course it is. The same goes for women. Coincedentally, women don't often approach men, anyways. It's not their role to.
The difference is that a pickup artist should be able to approach his OWN sets, no matter what his hindrances are. Personality and inner game are truly what matter to women after about 5 seconds.
Guy too attractive?
Yea I understand that, I guess what I'm getting at is this. It seems that I have an easier time gaming a HB8+ than I do gaming a HB7-. It's hard for me to understand. Also, it seems that when I hit on someone that is not so attractive, I get less IOIs. I thought that gaming someone less attractive would be easier for me but it seems harder, like they show less interest.
I would say that I'm pretty attractive. I workout and eat right so I have a bodybuilder look and I get rated about 9.5+ on hotornot.com(4 diff photos).
Guy too attractive?
Confidence certainly plays a part. Women that have higher self respect aren't going to feel as threatened by a guy as good looking as yourself.
Things to keep in mind: SINCE you are good looking, ease up on the cocky... We good looking guys have to play more funny/playful because simple cocky statements can be perceived as arrogance, which is undesirable. It usually doesn't matter much with a HB8+, which answers your question. Another thing is that you need to stay away from comments about looks/appearance. My roommate/wingman is an excellent looking guy, (bodybuilder) and we've had to hone his game accordingly. If he even says the word "fatass" or something similar, he loses the set. EVERY TIME. Beauty can be a hindrance... We do not have the ability to fly in under the radar.
In the meantime, I'd stick with the "plow" motto... EVERYTHING is an IOI. You see less IOI's from uglier chicks... That's because they already see you as having higher value. Additionally, WITH THE UGLIER CHICKS, stay away from the negs. You won't need to neg as much, since you have looks going for you.
Guy too attractive?
Gambit, thanks I think I see things a lot better. Your explanation really helped and I think your right that I need to adjust my game. I've had a girlfriend for nearly 2 years and now that I'm single I don't have as much field experience so I have a lot to learn.
Guy too attractive?
I'm truly glad I could help. Additionally, don't allow looks to rule out a set. A girl may dress like she is "glamorously", in your words, as a means to show her best assets. Open everything, just to see what happens!
As far as getting out of a LTR, you're in the right spot. Best of luck with it.
On a side note... I dated this "glamorous" girl for a while that used to say "high maintenance is another way to say 'high quality'." Funny story.
Guy too attractive?
If your good looking its like any good looking person it only takes you so far. Personality is important so being kinda laid back and playfull in a proactive way will aid you allot. Girls can be very self concious so you gotta make them feel comfortable, and like they can open up to you. So just don't come across like a clicky guy, or judgemental person then you should be good.
Guy too attractive?
bump...good replies so far
i've been having the same problem. i'm kind of good looking, and the past few months i've been negging too hard and the sets always end up falling apart
and i also dont think question openers work terribly well...
should a more direct approach be used?
daresay compliment? i really am not sure about the compliment parts if your good looking..i heard somewhere you should use em sparingly...
Guy too attractive?
First and foremost, if your negs are not working, then it's quite possible that you're not negging correctly... Which is a very common mistake. Here's a GREAT thread about that...
Direct approaches should near never be used... They display too much interest. Direct approaches should be reserved for when you've displayed social status already... And even then, NEVER combined with a compliment. Think about it... That displays you are a man of lower value, because you're trying to get the female of choice interested in YOU, and you're being obvious about it.
Question openers are Direct... Ex) "What is that you're drinking?" and you're displaying interest. On the other hand, being non-threatening and saying, "Let me get your opinion on something... I have to get back to my friends in just a second (FTC), but we're in a conundrum. ." MUCH more non-threatening. If you do it correctly, the set will open. Every time, provided you're interesting. People in public gatherings WANT to be entertained/talk to someone that will brighten their occasion. It would be weird if they DIDN'T want to. If someone wouldn't give you their opinion on something, is that really someone you would want to surround yourself with?! Not me.
As for compliments... Compliments should be reserved for the comfort stage, and they should ALWAYS be unique/creative, and seldom. Saying, "Wow, you're so beautiful!" is clingy, wussy, needy, and un-original. It also displays that you believe that THEY are of higher value than you. Think about it. If you're a beautiful woman and COUNTLESS guys approach you complimenting you on your looks, that's flattering... but those guys don't get to be your boyfriend. Treat them like HUMAN BEINGS. However, saying, "Oh my God... Your blue eyes are fabulous... They remind me of ." THAT is the correct way to compliment. It also helps create an emotional connection, telling them of your past.
If you're having trouble with getting blown out of your sets, it's very likely that you're just NOT being interesting enough, or perhaps your inner game isn't on key. Additionally (and no offense), you claim that you're "kind of good looking," which is not a very confident proclamation. Are you good looking or not? Don't be embarrassed about it, nor feel like you're gloating. We don't care what you look like. :-)
Guy too attractive?
Well, if a guy is good-looking, the attraction phase is already there...so he can start at a deeper tier into the seduction
& I feel you have to be more direct when you're GL, because if the attraction is already established i dunno if you need to beat around the bush...probably wouldn't use a compliment tho yeh
isn't that what most girls fairy tale fantasies are made of, directly approached by a good looking guy? if you're body language, eye contact and tonality are all on point, i'm sure it could just assault her emotions into deep attraction without even doing much
& i'd say ehh 8/10, get alot of body lang on a regular basis at my university


text:
Chillar will receive more than $3 million in the first year of the two-year deal, according to the Green Bay Press-Gazette. The contract is worth $5.4 million, and Chillar can make another $1 million in incentives, his agents told the Press-Gazette.
Poppinga has started at strong-side linebacker the past two seasons. Poppinga has been strong against the run, but has struggled in pass coverage. The Packers also have lacked depth at the strong-side linebacker position.
Chillar, 25, visited Green Bay on March 5. The Arizona Cardinals also showed interest in the 6-foot-3, 242-pounder who had 4 1/2 sacks over the past two seasons for the St. Louis Rams. Chillar has played in 63 games (41 starts) in four NFL seasons. The Arizona Republic reported the Cardinals were the front-runners to sign Chillar but couldn't complete a deal because of salary-cap issues related to the renegotiation of receiver Larry Fitzgerald's contract.
The Packers had five linebackers on their roster last season: Poppinga, Nick Barnett and A.J. Hawk, plus rookie Desmond Bishop and special-teams ace Tracy White, who re-signed with the team this week. Middle linebacker Abdul Hodge, a third-round draft pick in 2006, spent the season on injured reserve because of knee problems that required surgery.
Korth's quick take
The Packers made a great move by adding Chillar. He has experience and the ability to improve the strong-side position. Between Chillar and Poppinga, the Packers are suddenly much stronger at that position.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Jun 26 2009
From Lake Tahoe
This land is truly inspiring, snow capped peaks surround placid Lake Tahoe, clear streams, sunny skies and pleasant breezes. The sparsely wooded hillsides are different from our eastern mountains. Everything is big and open, no lush, green, secure hollows like home.
Everyone is excited particularily after the race cancellation last year. I've bumped in to several friends from back east.
Predicted temp for the 5:00am start is 50, but by afternoon they are talking about highs of 98 in the canyons to the west…….but it's a dry 98! Right
My excellent crew of Jody, Willie and Lara are ready as am I. We are preparing for supper, 3:00am will roll around soon. Thanks so much for all your well wishes.


text:
Thursday, February 09, 2012
The Vampire Thing
Sooooooo romantic.
A REMINDER. Just taking a quick break from a job of work (why I've been somewhat absent of late). I have a niece with a head injury and a broken pelvis because a cop slammed into her car going the wrong way on a one-way street. Was he in pursuit? Who knows. She has two children, a husband, and an extended family who are all injured and traumatized by a single act of no doubt unintended violence.
Why does this make me think of vampires? They're only a fantasy, after all. Their violence occurs in the realm of the imagination, not reality. Except...
Vampires have become a media obsession. Movies and TV series devoted to romanticizing their undead plight and explaining away their unfortunate habit of killing others to keep on keeping on. The defense against their blatant moral turpitudes? Coolness. Pretty faces, fashionable costumery, superhuman invulnerability and violence, and perverse sexual innuendo, as if murder were akin to orgasm and eternal life.
Hard not to perceive the metaphor of American youth and its various isolating pathologies, including drug addiction, homosexuality, perceptions of racial, gender, and ethnic discrimination, and [sigh] existential alienation.
I'm calling foul. This is a realm where so-called entertainment has become politics in a big way.
Most vampire movies and TV shows are the exact opposite of a coming of age story. They're a truncating of age story. A malevolent version of Peter Pan. You don't ever have to grow up. What does it mean when you're invulnerable to injury, immortal, and never have to experience the sunshine of public scrutiny? You're free to kill the uncool because they are mortal, lesser, inconsequential. Who, then, are you?
What are vampires? Parasites. They have to kill others to survive. Do the math. How many people does a vampire have to kill to perpetuate his adolescent sense of immortality? Right. It doesn't matter. Because he and she are so cool their victims are mere cameos in the drama of me. There are no consequences because time no longer matters. There is only the eternal NOW of the beautiful ones. And never any sign of accumulated wisdom. Just repeated expressions of monotonous appetite. A perfect picture of teenage consciousness.
In the old days, vampires were villains. They were the evil that continually stalks the good. Now they're the beautiful that consumes the dull and the fatally frail who can't afford designer boots.
But there are consequences. To everything we do. Every life casually tossed away, or even put into danger, affects dozens and dozens of people. Our narcissistic children may be in a state of denial about that. They may dream of a world in which they get to do whatever the hell they want because they're young and invincible, but it isn't true. Being a selfish, self-obsessed pig isn't romantic. It's just sub-human.
Which we're doing a pretty good job of convincing our kids is the right way to be. They may fancy themselves undead. But in reality they're just, well, dead.
Screw the whole vampire craze. Time for everyone in its thrall to wake up and smell the coffee. Two movies that show vampirism as the curse it would inevitably be: We Are the Night and Midnight Son.
Now I have to get back to work. (GW: I spent one hour on this. Now I'm back on task.) And my prayers for Sandy and her family.
Home Page


text:
Longtime California Horseman Bill Currin Dies
Bill Currin, who bred, owned, and trained 2006 Hollywood Futurity (gr. I) winner Stormello, died Feb. 11 in Solana Beach, Calif., after a long illness. He was 77.
Bill Currin, who bred, owned, and trained 2006 Hollywood Futurity (gr. I) winner Stormello, died Feb. 11 in Solana Beach, Calif., after a long illness. He was 77.
Irish agent Demi O'Byrne outlasted all other bidders to acquire a Bernardini colt for $1,550,000 at the Sept. 12 third session of the Keeneland September yearling sale in Lexington.
My Best Brother proved he was the best 3-year-old on turf at the Del Mar meet with a smart, front-running victory in the $300,000 Del Mar Derby (gr. IIT) at 1 1/8 miles Sept. 2.
A year after Tom Proctor shipped Banned west to win the Del Mar Derby (gr. IIT) for Glen Hill Farms, the trainer is back for the turf event Sept. 3 with La Jolla Stakes (gr. IIT) winner Old Time Hockey.
In a wild three-horse photo finish, Old Time Hockey outfought favored My Best Brother and Chips All In to win the La Jolla Handicap (gr. IIT) Aug. 11 at Del Mar.
Bettors won't have to look hard to find something in common with all five of the contestants in the La Jolla Handicap (gr. IIT) at Del Mar Aug. 11 for 3-year-olds.
Images from the 75th opening day at Del Mar. View Slideshow
My Best Brother and Midnight Crooner tallied victories in divisions of the Oceanside Stakes for 3-year-olds before a record opening-day crowd of 47,339 at Del Mar July 18.
|Julio C. Canani
|Martin Garcia
|Currin, William L. and Eisman, Alvin
|Al Eisman & William Currin
|My Best Brother View Five-Cross Pedigree
|Stormy Atlantic
|Storm Cat
|Hail Atlantis
|Carson City
|So Cozy
|Sale / Hip
Hip 348
|Valkyre Stud, agent for Mr. & Mrs. William L. Currin
Prices in parentheses indicate a horse did not sell because it did not meet its reserve price.
|Spooky Woods
|Mill Road
|Classic Empire
|Unspoiled Moments
|Always Dreaming
|Gun Runner
|Lady Aurelia


text:
North Carolina freshman Ty Lawson knew there was a 7-foot-6 foe between him and the basket Saturday, but figured the giant was too far away to block his shot. Really. "I threw it up high and everything," the 5-11 point guard later insisted. No wonder coach Roy Williams is worried about his team's attack -- even though the third-ranked Tar Heels blew out UNC-Asheville 93-62 at the Smith Center. (Raleigh News & Observer)
Share: Facebook | Twitter | Email
Related: Basketball | Roy Williams | Ty Lawson
Recent Basketball News:
Inside the Playbook: Hold the door, UNC basketball is on the elevator upSaturday June 24, 2017


text:
FOX To Debut 'Skating With Celebrities'
In what is sure to be riveting television, and a rip-off of Dancing With the Stars, FOX is debuting Skating With Celebrities. It has now been confirmed that anything can be given the greenlight in Hollywood.
Trying to take a page from ABC's white-hot "Dancing with the Stars," FOX is going for the gold with a new celebrity ice-skating show.
The new program, aptly titled, "Skating with Celebrities" will pair famous faces with well-known pros in a weekly elimination competition, reports Variety. "If it's interesting to see celebrities ballroom dancing, it's going to be incredibly interesting to see if they can master a double axel and a spin," said FOX reality programming boss Mike Darnell.
"Watching a celebrity try to master something this intricate is going to be compelling to watch. We expect a lot of falls and a lot of nerves."
I personally don't understand the viewing public tastes. I mean while shows like Entourage and Arrested Development are struggling to find viewers, America is watching crap like Dancing With the Stars. Here are some ideas I'm thinking of pitching to the networks.
- Shopping With Socialites
– Rollerblading With the D-List
– Watching Stars Watching Dancing With the Stars
– Driving Around L.A. With Lindsay Lohan
– Picking Your Nose With Jennifer Lopez
God help us.
FOX Prepares 'Skating With Celebrities' [FOXNews]


text:
By Chris Harris
The timing of Aaron Ramsey's injury will not hamper his development into a top-class footballer, according to Arsène Wenger.
The Wales midfielder is back in the Frenchman's squad for Saturday's Premier League clash with Sunderland. After warming the bench against Leeds and Ipswich in January, Ramsey could make his first appearance since breaking his leg at Stoke City last February.
Thirteen months ago, as the teenager left the Britannia Stadium in an ambulance, Wenger feared for Ramsey's future. Now the manager thinks that the midfielder's youth helped his recovery process.
"[He will be] better now because he is a young boy, 19 years old and you expect him to be stronger," said Wenger.
"When he will be really back on the competitive side of the game he will be stronger. When you have a big injury before the age of 20 normally you come back and you develop normally.
"That is why the big question mark about him was whether he would be back fully fit physically. That is now sorted out in a positive way, the rest is just a question of playing games."
Every long-term injury victim has to overcome mental as well as physical hurdles during their rehabilitation process. Wenger has been impressed by Ramsey's attitude.
"He has dealt with it very well but he could talk much better about it than I can," said Wenger. "Certainly he has been very down for a long period but on the outside signs he has shown he is always highly motivated and determined to work hard.
"It feels good to have him back because it happened one year ago basically, his injury. He had to be very patient and he must feel himself very good to be back."Copyright 2017 The Arsenal Football Club plc. Permission to use quotations from this article is granted subject to appropriate credit being given to www.arsenal.com as the source


text:
Sunday's Belgian Grand Prix served as another reminder about the dangers of motorsport after four drivers luckily escaped uninjured in a spectacular shunt on the first corner of the opening lap.
Unfortunate it may be for the championship leader to walk away without adding to his points tally at Spa-Francorchamps, but Fernando Alonso was very fortunate to just walk away from his heavily damaged Ferrari.
A bit of pain was the only companion for the Spaniard, but the proximity of Romain Grosjean's Lotus to Alonso's helmet after the Frenchman's car lauched over the Ferrari could have given him more than a headache.
"It looked scary, didn't it?" McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh told Reuters. "It just reminds us...we become slightly nonchalant. We see so many big enormous shunts and we are just used to the driver hopping out. Fortunately on this occasion he did.
"You realise that they come inches away from not hopping out of the car on those incidents so...fortunate for him and the sport that we got away with a big accident," he pointed out.
The crash has re-opened the addressal of the driver's safety in the cockpit - which peaked during Felipe Massa's accident in Humgary in 2009 and Henry Surtees' death in Formula 2 the same year.
"We are working with the (International Automobile) Federation to try to work on the right system of protection. With what we have tested or are working on there are also some problems that you may have," Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali. "We need to be very careful on all these devices."
But a closed cockpit is not necessarily the safest solution, according to Whitmarsh
"I think people underestimate what a cockpit would have to be and how cockpits can make a situation worse," he said. "You can put this glass bubble over the drivers but you can't assume that they are thereafter safe."
Reuters reckoned a closed cockpit could raise issues such as "impeding sightlines, cars overturning or suffering electrical fires with cockpits filling up with smoke."


text:
The poets, in successive ages, have delighted in bearing witness to this witchery of The faerie queene.
Every canto of the faerie queene bears the impress of its influence.
The personages in The faerie queene, noble and miraculous as they are, are not of the fairy persuasion at all.
How beautiful is the description of it given by Spenser in his "faerie queene."
The framework of the plot of the faerie queene is vast and loosely put together.
He was a great admirer of Spenser, his faerie queene was a great favourite with him.
Like the allegory of "The faerie queene," it won't bite them.
Or that it is vicious, and that the stanzas are blots in the faerie queene?
I always get some one to read the faerie queene to me when I have neuralgia, and it usually sends me to sleep.
It is not often that the poet of the "faerie queene" is mentioned as an educator.


text:
painting over cracks in paint?
1 Attachment(s)
The paint in our guest bathroom has stange cracks throughout (see photo). It looks like the same paint that was used throughout the house, but I haven't seen anything like this anywhere else in the house. The home was new construction, but a foreclosure on the builder so I don't have anyone to call to ask questions. Would primer and a fresh coat suffice, or do i need to do something else? I'm confident in my painting skills, but i don't know anything about what needs to be done to make sure the cracking is taken care of, or why it cracked in the first place.
Thanks in advance for your help! :)
Could be a flat over a harder glossy surface+ humidity making to expand and dry at different rates.
It needs something ( a good primer) that will stabilize it.
here again ( for those playing at home) I think Zinsser Gardz is a good choice because it will penetrate and seal.
Finish with an eggshell that can put up with the changes, not a flat that will absorb.
Good call on this one BJ.........the only time I've seen this type of "cracking" was in a bathroom without an exhaust fan. Once fan was installed and walls were properly primed & painted, the problem disappeared.
Could that have been from an over application, a heavy one and done? Either way, follow brushjockey's advice. Sounds good.
thanks so much! :)
Could also be the dreaded paint over wall paper paste scenario.Still need to follow said advise.
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:08 AM.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


text:
Refine Search
Top Locations
Location Type
Employer Type
Job Type
Sorry! The position you're looking for is no longer available. Check out other Agriculture internships in Wisconsin below.
Results 1 — 1
Sort By:
DRONES, GIS, Geospatial, Engineering, Videography, UAV solution company
Theta UAV — Appleton, WI
March 12 2016
We're one of the leading UAV solution companies in the country, serving industries in Engineering, Television, Agriculture, Law Enforcement, and more. You will be asked to experience the innovations t…
Application Deadline: Available Year-round
Full time Paid


text:
Your name
Your email
Your friends' email addresses (up to 5, separated by commas)
Message (optional)
*Collectors Weekly will send a short email to your friend with a link to The How Miriam Haskell Costume Jewelry Bucked Trends and Won Over Hollywood page. We won't use your email (or your friend's) for any other purpose.
Home |
About |
Jobs |
Categories |
Collections |
Help |
Copyright © 2007–2017 Market Street Media LLC.
Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy


text:
Free Delivery
on orders over £49
5-in-1 mascara for perfect eyelashes
I really like this mascara, it lengthens and separates beautifully, But... I really wish it was waterproof, as I have really sensitive eyes that tend to water a lot and my mascara often gets smudged, which isn't a good look so... Please make a waterproof version of mascara so that I have one that I love instead of a couple that I really like :)
This mascara is a dream, lengthens and separates my lashes perfectly. Doesn't clump at all. The best mascara I've ever had. Thank you Charlotte!
really nice natural look achieved with this, doesn't clump and is good if your looking for a lot more volume for an everyday look!
This is, by far, my favorite mascara and, believe me, I have tried many!! I started using the Full Fat Lashes mascara just a couple of months ago and am so happy I decided to try it. I will probably never buy another mascara from anywhere else! I am 65 and have very light, fine, almost non-existent lashes, and normally, I would have to apply at least 5 or 6 layers to have the lashes I wanted, but with the Full Fat Lashes mascara, I can get away with one layer and my lashes look amazing! I still like 2 or 3 layers -- just because -- but I'm no longer putting on 5 or 6 layers to make it look like I have long, thick eyelashes! Love, love, love this product!!! Thank you, Charlotte.
This mascara is the best mascara I've ever used so far and believe me I've tried so many great mascaras, but this one really stood out it is the mascara in the market!! The thing that I love the most about this mascara is that it's not clumpy at all and the finish is a little bit glossy so it looks like you don't have any mascara on!! It's an absolute must-have for me I can't live without it....
I have very long, thick eyelashes naturally, but as I don't use an eyelash curler, I have never been able to find a mascara which curls and lifts my lashes...until now. One coat of this mascara is perfect for a daytime look, but I find this mascara works best as a second coat after using a different mascara with a harder wand to separate the lashes for a night-time look. Doesn't dry out, either!
This is the first mascara I've ever owned that doesn't clump. I challenge anyone to try- it's impossible! Great separated and natural looking lashes
Does absolute wonders for my eyelashes and I love it. I'll buy this mascara for the rest of my life, it's the best mascara on the market
I adore this mascara! I received it as a gift from a friend who works at CT as I'd been moaning about not being able to find a decent mascara. It really is wonderful; perfect for lush, fluttery lashes in the day and buildable for night! Would definitely buy again!
This is the first mascara, in the 30+ years I've been wearing makeup, that I didn't have to use a "shield" to apply it to prevent getting product on my eyelids. The formula is wonderful, but the brush may be almost as important. I also like that it only comes in one color - what other color could you want for maximum lashes other than black?
This mascara is AMAZING! no smudging through the entire day, I get great length and super cute baby-doll eyes with 1-2 coats. Full Fat doesn't flake or clump, its my new favorite and I'll be going back for seconds!
Doesn't leave eyes clumpy and even though it's not waterproof it doesn't smudge- even on a night out.
I've tried so many mascara's from MAC, Benefit, Clinique, you name it, but this is by far the shining star of the lot. Officially found my holy grail mascara, never letting this one leave my makeup arsenal - thats for sure!!
Best mascara ever. Beautiful lashes without the clumping effect. I have one in my car, one at home and one on my makeup bag!!
This is an awesome mascara! It is a good dark black color. I definitely get good separation from this mascara. I get length after only one coat, but I have to put on at least 2 coats to get more curl and some volume. My favorite part is that it DOES NOT CLUMP, no matter how many coats you put on! I've never really had any big issues with flaking or smudging beyond normal wear. Definitely a good mascara!
To give this a 10/10 is an understatement, it needs 110/10. My eyelashes are mid-lenth and black, all mascaras I have tried in past (that claim big, better unclumpy lash) don't do what they say they will, so I've never wanted to use them day to day...using this mascara has changed my view and has given my lashes much more, with only one coat as well. Great mascara and a MUST have!
I've tried them all...but at 46...I've found the ONE...it's AMAZING...Charlotte you are a genius...I'm phasing all my other named brands out and I intend to have a Charlotte tilbury full make up bag...❤
I have to say that this mascara is Brilliant! So many Mascaras promise wonderful things but I really do believe this is the best I have ever used. It gives my "small" lashes that fullness they have never had, and it also gives them length. It never clumps and it separates them evenly and makes my eyes look so much better when I am wearing this! Charlotte Tilbury you've done it again!! :-)
After reading great things about this mascara I decided to give it a shot. I must say what a disappointment! I have used many premium branded mascara over the years and this is amongst the poorest. Curling and lengthening of the lashes is ok, could be much better. I found that over the course of the day there was tiny little black bits of mascara falling onto my cheeks and blackening under my eyes to the point I looked like I had been awake for days!! Unfortunately it's back to Dior and Clinique for me!
There is only one word to describe this mascara and it really is AMAZING!
It beautifully separates the lashes! I don't think I'll be buying another mascara for a very long time!
I have read about Charlotte talking about "the one" when it comes to mascaras and finally I've found mine! It has made my lashes look fuller, bigger, longer without clumping or transfer.
The volume this mascara gives is incredible, I have very short, stubby natural lashes but this gives me a great length and also doesn't make them feel brittle like a lot of other brands do. I never use eyelash curlers as I often don't have the time to but I dont feel like I have to with this, it gives a great curl that lasts all day.
When teamed with the Rock N Kohl pencils I can create that feline eye that Charlotte is known for, and trust me, I'm no expert!
Truly is a 5 star mascara! Does exactly what is says on the package. My lashes looked fuller and longer with only a few flicks! My new make up bag must-have.
I had high hopes after reading the reviews, I so wanted this to be amazing. I have tried several products from the range and found it a very mixed bag - e.g. the Wonderglow is great but the Matte Revolution lipstick is so-so. This was a huge disappointment. It is true that it is very buildable, curls the lashes and gives a good effect - albeit one that you have to apply several coats to get. But it has NO STAYING POWER AT ALL. (Much like the rock n kohl eye liner which also comes off very quickly.) I am so surprised that a pro make-up artist would have created a product like this. I've tried it in several different weathers, environments etc just to check that it is the product's fault - but regardless of situation it comes off and leaves that infuriating black "snow" under your eyes within a couple of hours. (This is only applying it to top lashes by the way.) If I apply it at 9am, by 12pm - just 3 hours later - it has left a shower of black flakes under my eyes. Really, really poor performance, going in the bin.
This is the third product I have bought from Charlotte's range, and the most disappointing. The mascara goes on well initially, but flakes and smudges after 3-4 hours. I have tried using eye make up primer and finishing powder in the eye are to prevent smudging, but to no avail.
I should have liked to return this product for a refund, but terms and conditions state that only unopened products may be returned....how can one know that a product is unsatisfactory until it has been opened?
You need to improve customer service Charlotte!
This mascara cannot be beaten! Tried every top ten, award winning mascara on the market and nothing comes close to this. Stays on all day, seperates the lashes so you don't get that horrid clumpy spidery effect, but naturally curls them up to look full and long as well... what else could you want!
This is by far the most incredible mascara I have ever used! Without having to use eyelash curlers, my eyelashes take on wonderful volume and depth. It also separates the lashes seamlessly and your face looks instantly awake and bright-eyed! I would recommend this mascara many times over!
Charlotte Thank you - this does exactly what it says on the tin . Brilliant, faultless FULL FAT lashes acheived with one swipe of your magic wand.
If you want that flutter effect promised by so many and delivered by so few , this is your go to mascara .
Application - as with all Tilbury products hassel free no need to even wipe that magical wand.
Fabulous pigment , NO CLOGGING absolutely none at all.
Stays ! just like the eye liner pencil - this baby stays where you put it .
Stop searching - the ultimate mascara has arrived.
Someone who finally understands makeup as opposed to marketing delivers the best products ever. Nuff said :-)
I really had high hopes for this mascara having read several reviews. I've been using it now for a couple of months and I'm sad to say that I'm rather disappointed for a couple of reasons; I have long lashes and the mascara transfers to the skin easily despite not having hooded lids and using an eye primer. I also have noticed smudges under my eyes though I never wear mascara on my lower lashes. The brush I find a bit on the big side as it deposits product on my lids even if I wipe it clean. Sorry I won't be making a repeat purchase.
I am a little obsessed with Charlotte's range. How did I even miss the launch and remain in ignorance of its existence for so many months?! Anyway, I treated myself for my birthday and one of the items I order was the mascara. I have short lashes and heavyish lids, so need a good volumiser but not too fat a brush. This is THE BEST MASCARA I HAVE EVER USED! No clumping, not spider lashes, no placing, it is fabulous :)
Already a lot of positive comments on Charlotte's mascara. However I have to add my own. I am not good at applying make-up and probably underuse the options. However mascara I have used many years and tried many different brands, and I have to conclude that Charlotte's mascara is the best!! Amazing product, I am addicted. It stays on well, and the application is fantastic, I can actually apply several layers without clumping up my lashes. It is simply fantastic. Only thing I would very much like to have is a dark green or dark purple one in addition to the black one. I have hazel-to-green eyes and a dark purple mascara would help emphasize the green in my eyes. Thank you Charlotte. In fact you are so dedicated to make-up that I trust all your products.
Amazing, onto my second and can't see myself ever using anything else. Still look like my lashes, but a million times thicker.
best mascara ever!!! it reminds of the old style mascaras that make the lashes soft and the wand is the good old fashion wand that really makes the eyelashes like the hollywood starlets!
Really lovely mascara though disappointingly it smudges under my lower lashes.
This is just the best mascara I have ever used, I'm a mascara junkie and my search is over. Thank you Charlotte!
I have tried a lot of mascaras, and I can honestly say this is the best one I have tried! I am on my second tube and I have never repurchased a mascara before! Absolutely love the stuff and would recommend to anyone! Definitely try this mascara!
I have use lots of high end mascara but this one is the best must try
I have always used the "They're Real" mascara by Benefit before reading about Full Fat Lashes and thought that I would give it a try. I wasn't disappointed. The mascara arrived within a couple of days of ordering in beautiful packaging. The product itself is fab and really emphasises my eyelashes whilst feeling really gentle. I would highly recommend!
Having tried endless different mascara brands, I have finally found the best, the holy grail of mascaras! This lengthens, curls, separates and after a single coat. It feels so light on your lashes yet gives the most dramatic effect. Love!
Most of the other reviews have said exactly what i have found. Brilliant. The only thing I would add is that it manages to thicken and lengthen lashes while at the same time managing to make it look like i have more lashes than any other mascara has ever done. So somehow I end up with long thick lashes that look extra real and not like i have thick coats of mascara on. Best mascara by far - and I've tried many. Just one request - in summer i prefer a brown mascara to a black one. This product in brown would be really appreciated :)
Short, sparse ageing lashes! Were never that brill even as a bright young thing so mascara has always been a priority in my make up hamper (bags are far too small for make up junkies) and, as with previous reviewers, I have spent a small fortune trying them all. I have to say I was under impressed at first, as did not seem as good as my Dior Extase. However, given some time this is definately the better of the two and has become my 'go to' mascara and I will be repurchasing, that's for sure. I really like the 'buildability' and the fact that it does not clump. Have not had to resort to false lashes at all this festive season with this product. A good thing indeed, as I was beginning to get that 'ageing tranny' look whilst wearing them. Not a good look! Cheers Lottie.
This mascara must be the best on the market, easy to build up, doesn't cake and no need to wipe the brush before applying.
Like another reviewer has said I have tried pretty much every brand of mascara going and have never been satisfied for long, falling in and out of love with one or the other trying to find 'the one'.
Full Fat Lashes is 'the one'. It is truly buildable and does not cake or dry. The wand applies the perfect amount of product and maintains separation of the lashes. I have quite long lashes and have found that sometimes my mascara smudges on the lid and underneath the eye throughout the day. With Full Fat Lashes this is a thing of the past.
This is my Desert Island beauty product!
This is simply amazing! One of my new staple products that I simply couldn't live without!
I like to play my eyes up and have tried EVERY mascara out there, Diorshow, Dior Blackout, YSL, Lancome Hypnose, Lancome Hynose Drama, Lancome Extreme, Maybelline False Lashes, Maybelline Colossal, Bobbi Brown Everything, Bobbi Brown Extreme Lengthening, Bourjois Volume etc etc. Settled for Lancome Hypnose Drama over the last 5 years, its a good mascara but this one is BETTER. Lancome gave the 90% of the effect I wanted but dries out more quickly and when applied on the lashes can look dry and clumpy if you don't get the wand just right and if the mascara is more than a fortnight old, it failed to give the separation I wanted that you truly get with false lashes, However I was delighted that this mascara does do exactly what I want, volume, length and separation and a polished but extreme look, it does not clump or look dry even after 3 coats (deliberately pushed its limits to see). The only slight criticism I have is when removing it I need to apply eye make up remover twice, apply remove and then apply again as it has a great pigment and this needs to be removed properly from the base of my lashes as I found traces under my eyes in the morning but this is THE BEST MASCARA I have ever usedxx
The search for a good mascara is a bit like the holy grail and I know that Charlotte Tilbury has shared that search. Thankfully I need look no longer because this mascara is fab. It's so good my sister and mother have started using it as well. Thank you Charlotte, my quest is over!
Lovely long lush lashes just with one coat...
No clumping, just lovely fully defined lashes. Great packaging too. Felt like I was getting a present from someone.
Great mascara. I have been using Lancome Hypnose for sometime but thought I would give this a try after reading about it. Love it.
I've never been that in to make up but I heard about this one and it really is much, much better than any I've had before. It makes my lashes look much thicker. I am a convert!
Best mascara I've used. Perfect.
Fantastic mascara that does exactly what it says on the tin!
Okay usually mascara does not work with me my eyes water or something but this product is amazing seriously amazing so ladies if you have The same problem just as mine you should use this serious five star
Fantastically Fabulous...and does all that Charlotte has said more....LOVE it!....X
Definitely the best mascara I have ever used. It makes my lashes look amazing and provides superb definition to my eyes. Fabulous!
There are so many great reviews that its difficult to come up with something new. All I can say is that I agree, this is a great mascara!
This is probably the only mascara I've ever tried (and I've tried hundreds) that has actually done what it said it would do. First of all it doesn't clump and you don't have to spend 10 years wiping the mascara wand off before you can use it, I put several layers of it on just to see how much I could get away with and it didn't clump even once. My lashes look super long but also far thicker because none of the lashes have stuck together. So happy with this mascara, I don't think I'm going to bother trying any different ones. If she ever discontinues this I think I might cry!
This is the very best mascara that I have ever used. I cannot fault it, it is amazing and worth every penny. I shall never buy anything else. Thank you.
This is an amazing mascara. I am very fussy about about what I put on my eyes and this excels in every way. Thickens and lengthens but does not clog my lashes, and stays put all day. A real winner!
Oh my goodness!!! This is the best mascara ever. I have tried lots of different mascaras in my time but never have I found a mascara like this one. It does everything it says and more. Love it!!!
Simply the best mascara ever
I have never been more impressed with a mascara. It never, ever clumps and lashes are sleek and shiny. I simply will never wear any other mascara from now on, it's that good!
I love a new mascara but rarely do they live up to the hype that comes with them.
I try them all from those costing a few pounds to the high end priced ones on the market.
Charlotte says that "your search for the one is over" well at last I can agree, it does everything that it says it will. After only one application I had volume, length, separation and at last NO clumping. It has a good texture, goes on smooth and did not smudge throughout the day. Definitely 'the one for me'.
I admit to being a Mascar addict, always searching for the Holy Grail. Well move aside Indiana Jones.. Kerry Jones has made a discovery that will change lives (OK maybe a bit much) but Eye lashes definatly!
Love this product..
This is fantastic. It does exactly what it says on the tin. It's so soft on the lashes, but that doesn't mean you suffer in the look/application. You could layer this up as much as you want, and because it remains soft, it almost feels like you don't have any on and you can come back to it several hours after the first application and re-layer.There is a guide on the reverse of the box explaining how to use, and if you follow this you'll get some beautiful long, dramatic, full lashes, with no clumping in sight. It doesn't drop onto your skin at all.
Really like this mascara, tried many and in my 60th year have found one that does what it says it will.
This is the best mascara I've ever used, without exception. It makes the lashes full, long & separated without clumping or flaking or smudging. Amazing, this is a must have for everyone's makeup collection & HG material for me! :D
Thank you so much, love it! X
This product is pretty amazing and it does not clump. However it does smudge under the eye. Also I prefer a waterproof mascara and I hope one might be in the process of being developed.
The application is very good, and goes on very smoothly with little clumping. It layers easily without clogging up.
I'm really enjoying using this and the brush applies very well. Beautiful packaging - especially the box which at first I thought was squashed, but turned out to be diamond shaped. Quite original and a lovely colour.
The only thing negative is that I noticed a bit of a smudge under my eyes today, although this is the first time it has happened since starting to use it a few days ago. Otherwise, it seems quite durable with no flaking.
I've used this mascara on two occasions and I like it a lot! It goes on easily, covers well and doesn't clog, nor does it smudge. I 'll be buying again!
I always have a problem finding the perfect mascara - one that doesn't clog, or is too wet or too thick - but here it is! Fantastic - goes on like a dream no matter how many coats you apply.Thank you Charlotte.xx
A REALLY good mascara which does what it says but without the spiky effect of other mascaras - good deep colour - well worth trying.
The first mascara that I can put on in the morning and is not under my eyes by lunch...
For a non clogging natural look, this is a lovely product.
This mascara certainly lives up to the hype - I think I have tried hundreds of mascaras over the years, only to be disillusioned. However, I have one huge disappointment .... while this mascara is wonderful for upper lashes, I was left with "Panda eyes" when I used it on my lower lashes! I will continue to use it on my upper lashes, but have to resort back to my Japanese mascara for my lower lashes, the only one I have ever found that doesn't smudge below eyes.
This mascara is my new favourite - by miles! The formula is amazing. It builds length like no other mascara I have used, without creating spidery lashes and without clumping. It gives ultimate length, volume and is seriously black. I am a contact lense wearer and was concerned it might crumble or smudge, but no! No flaking, no smudging. Stays put all day and when I curl my lashes it keeps the curl in place. And no irritation to the eyes. Amazing!
I tried it this morning... BEST MASCARA ever tried... thank you CT x
I have tried several mascaras over the years and have never had a definite favourite. Once I tried Full Fat Lashes, do not really want to use any other. This mascara is just better than any other! :) Its brush covers and separates very well. The liquid is not too thick so you can either apply it lightly or build it for more dramatic look. Thanks for creating such a wonderful mascara!
This product is a bit of an addiction. It gets better with every coat I put on. My usuals are max factor, Chanel inimitable, Lancôme hypnose and benefits real but this raises the bar ( and my lashes ) a lot higher. Seriously good stuff and for the first time I can coat my bottom lashes thanks to the special tip on the brush. Extremely long lasting and stayed true without any perceivable fading from 7 am to 7 pm.
I am absolutely chuffed by the quality of this mascara , my lashes are literally touching my eyebrows . I know I found my lifetime product and will definitely keep on re- buying it ! It's a WOW
Darlings, your search for The One is over! My Full Fat Lashes mascara features ingredients for the ultimate false lash effect lashes. This best-selling, award-winning mascara will give you curl, separation, volume, length and drama!
• The 5-grooved brush deposits the optimal line of mascara along the lash line, pushing your lashes up and out
• Fine-tipped bristles catch every lash, no matter how short or fine, coating them from root to tip in the glossy black formula
• The buildable formula creates voluptuous lashes that don't dry up and fall onto your cheeks
• Creates a three-dimensional flutter
• Ideal for finely separated, naturally-defined eyelashes
Find out how to create a natural makeup look with this best-selling mascara
1. To use, start by curling your lashes with the LIFE CHANGING LASHES eyelash curler
2. Brush on the FULL FAT LASHES mascara, starting from the inner corner. Zig-zag the brush upwards from the very root of the lashes to curl and separate.
3. At the outer corner, pull the brush up and out to lengthen the lashes and elongate your eye. Turn the mascara wand vertically to use the tapered end to coat every bottom lash.
4. To finish, nestle the tip of the mascara wand into the roots and brush upwards to add volume to the lash line, as if you were applying individual false lashes.
Charlotte's Tip: Use this mascara with THE CLASSIC eyeliner in AUDREY to create a soft, subtle daytime makeup look.
Water (Aqua), Synthetic Beeswax, Paraffin, Iron Oxide (CI 77499), Acacia Senegal Gum, Oryza Sativa (Rice) Bran Wax (Oryza Sativa Cera), Butylene Glycol, Glyceryl Stearate, Stearic Acid, Polybutene, Triethanolamine, Palmitic Acid, VP/Eicosene Copolymer, Copernicia Cerifera (Carnauba) Wax (Copernicia Cerifera Cera), Glycerin, Phenoxyethanol, Black 2 (CI 77266), Propylparaben, Hydroxyethylcellulose, Cellulose, PVP
(Orders over £49 will receive FREE standard delivery)
Order before 3.30pm GMT for same day order processing.
(Orders over £150 will receive FREE Fast 'N' Fabulous delivery)
For more shipping information please, click here.
We hope you love your purchases, but if for any reason you do need to return something to us, we've made it as simple as possible. Just return the item in its original packaging within 14 days of receiving your order, and enclose the completed returns form in your parcel.
Please note that unfortunately we are unable to refund individual items from sets or bundles, and e-gift cards.
For more returns information please, click here.
Please call our Customer Care Team on +44 (0) 203 696 0496, Monday to Friday, between 9.30am and 6pm (GMT). Outside of these hours, please leave a message and we will return your call the next working day. Alternatively, you can email us at [email protected] Please note emails will also be answered within the working hours stated above.


text:
Rebecca SERNOVITZ and Lawrence Sernovitz, Individually and as Parents and Natural Guardians of Samuel Sernovitz, Appellants v. Stuart Z. DERSHAW, M.D., John Stack, M.D., Laura Borthwickscelzi, M.D. Margaret M. Fillinger, CRNP, Women's Care of Montgomery County, Holy Redeemer Hospital and Medical Center and Holy Redeemer Health System, Inc., Appellees.
Rebecca Sernovitz ("Rebecca") and Lawrence Sernovitz ("Lawrence"), individually and in their capacities as the parents and natural guardians of Samuel Sernovitz ("Samuel") (collectively, "Appellants"), appeal from the order of the Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County, granting the preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer filed by Stuart Z. Dershaw, M.D., John Stack, M.D., Laura Borthwick–Scelzi, M.D., Margaret M. Fillinger, CRNP, Women's Care of Montgomery County, Holy Redeemer Hospital and Medical Center, and Holy Redeemer Health System, Inc. (collectively, "Appellees").1 Because we conclude that 42 Pa.C .S.A. § 8305, which prohibits actions for wrongful birth and wrongful life, is unconstitutional as the manner in which it was enacted violated Article III, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, we reverse the trial court's grant of preliminary objections, reinstate the amended complaint, and remand for further proceedings.
According to Appellants' amended complaint, Rebecca sought care from Appellees after becoming pregnant in December 2007 or January 2008. Because both she and her husband, Lawrence, are of Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, their child was at increased risk of being afflicted with certain genetic disorders.2 Thus, in February 2008, she underwent blood tests to determine, inter alia, if she was a carrier of certain gene mutations, at the recommendation of Dr. Stack.
Appellants allege that the testing revealed that Rebecca is a carrier of the gene mutation that causes familial dysautonomia ("F.D.") but Appellees did not inform Rebecca of the results. Rather, at a March 3, 2008 office visit, Dr. Dershaw told Rebecca all tests were negative, i.e., Rebecca was not a carrier of any of the gene mutations for which she was tested. At a subsequent appointment on May 8, 2008, Dr. Borthwick–Scelzi likewise did not indicate that Rebecca was a carrier of the gene mutation that causes F.D.
Samuel was born in September 2008. In December 2008, Appellants were told that he might be suffering from F.D. According to Appellants, this would only be possible if both parents were carriers of the gene mutation that causes F.D. Rebecca called Appellees, and learned for the first time that she is a carrier, and that she was misinformed about the February 2008 blood test results.
On August 19, 2010, Rebecca and Lawrence filed a complaint against Appellees alleging causes of action for wrongful birth on their own behalf and wrongful life on behalf of Samuel. Therein, they asserted that Appellees were professionally negligent in failing to inform Appellants that Rebecca was a carrier of the gene mutation that causes F.D. Had they known, Appellants state that Lawrence would have also been tested, revealing that he too was a carrier. This, in turn, would have prompted further testing to determine if Samuel would be born with F.D. Because they were not so informed, they were not given the opportunity to determine whether they should terminate the pregnancy. Appellants sought damages for expenses related to the birth and care of Samuel, emotional distress, pain and suffering, humiliation, mental anguish, anxiety, fear, and loss of enjoyment of life. They included claims of respondeat superior against Holy Redeemer Hospital and Holy Redeemer Health Care System, Inc., and corporate negligence against Women's Care of Montgomery County, Holy Redeemer Hospital, and Holy Redeemer Health Care System, Inc. Appellants further asserted in their complaint that the statute prohibiting causes of action for wrongful birth and wrongful life (42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8305)3 was unconstitutional, as the manner by which it was enacted violated Article III, Sections 1, 3, 4, and 6 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Appellants appended to their complaint Certificates of Merit as to each of the named defendants. Because Appellants alleged that Section 8305 is unconstitutional, they further included proof that they served a copy of the complaint upon the Office of the Attorney General of Pennsylvania as required by Pa.R.A.P. 521(a) .4 Appellants filed an amended complaint on October 6, 2010, including a paragraph asserting that if Appellants had been appropriately informed, Rebecca would have undergone an abortion "rather than bringing a child into this world who would be destined to suffer from [F.D.] and to endure a lifetime of extreme and debilitating suffering and, ultimately, a premature death." Amended Complaint, 10/6/10, at ¶ 41.5
Appellees filed preliminary objections to the complaint on September 20, 2010 and to the amended complaint on October 22, 2010, seeking dismissal of the amended complaint with prejudice for legal insufficiency, as Appellants' claims for wrongful birth and wrongful life are barred by Section 8305. Appellees asserted that Appellants failed to carry their burden of persuasion that the statute is unconstitutional. Thereafter, the parties filed a series of briefs in support of their respective positions. On December 20, 2011, the trial court granted Appellees preliminary objections, rejecting Appellants' constitutional challenge and dismissing their amended complaint. This timely appeal followed.
In the court below and on appeal, Appellants acknowledge that Pennsylvania law, specifically, the wrongful birth and wrongful life statute, currently precludes them from bringing the causes of action contained in their amended complaint. See Appellants' Brief at 14. They assert, however, that Senate Bill 646 of 1987 session of the Pennsylvania Legislature ("SB 646"), signed into law as Act 47 of 1988, by which Section 8305 was enacted, violates the Pennsylvania Constitution in several respects, and thus Section 8305 must be stricken. See id. at 4, 15. Appellants' specific constitutional challenges are as follows:
1. Was Act 47, which as enacted has as its primary purpose addressing post-conviction relief and other issues of criminal law, but which was amended to include the 'wrongful birth statute' (42 Pa .C.S. § 8305), passed in violation of the 'single subject' requirement of Article III, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution?
2. Should Act 47, the primary purposes of which as enacted was to address post-conviction relief and other issues of criminal law[,] be severed so that provisions that do not fall within the primary legislative purpose, particularly § 8305, be declared unconstitutional?
3. Was Act 47, which originated as a bill concerning substitute bail commissioners, amended so as to change its original purpose in violation of the dictates of Article III, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution?
4. Was Act 47, which was only considered in its final form on one day in each House, properly considered on three different days in each House of the General Assembly as required by Article III, Section 4 of the Pennsylvania Constitution?
Id. at 4.6
As this appeal results from the grant of Appellees' preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer, our standard of review requires that we determine whether the trial court committed an error of law. Feingold v. Hendrzak, 15 A.3d 937, 941 (Pa.Super.2011).
Preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer test the legal sufficiency of the complaint. When considering preliminary objections, all material facts set forth in the challenged pleadings are admitted as true, as well as all inferences reasonably deducible therefrom. Preliminary objections which seek the dismissal of a cause of action should be sustained only in cases in which it is clear and free from doubt that the pleader will be unable to prove facts legally sufficient to establish the right to relief. If any doubt exists as to whether a demurrer should be sustained, it should be resolved in favor of overruling the preliminary objections.
Moreover, in reviewing constitutional challenges to a statute, we are mindful that "[a] statute duly enacted by the General Assembly is presumed valid and will not be declared unconstitutional unless it clearly, palpably and plainly violates the Constitution." W. Mifflin Area Sch. Dist. v. Zahorchak, 607 Pa. 153, 163, 4 A.3d 1042, 1048 (2010) (citation and quotation omitted). "This includes the manner by which legislation is enacted." Pennsylvanians Against Gambling Expansion Fund, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 583 Pa. 275, 292, 877 A.2d 383, 393 (2005) ("PAGE "). All doubts regarding a statute's constitutionality are to be resolved in favor of constitutionality, and thus a party challenging the constitutionality of a statute bears a very heavy burden of persuasion. Id. This is a pure question of law, and thus our scope of review is plenary. W. Mifflin Area Sch. Dist., 607 Pa. at 163, 4 A.2d at 1048.
The constitutional focal point of Appellants' first issue is what is commonly referred to as the "single-subject rule" contained in Article III, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which states: "No bill shall be passed containing more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title, except a general appropriation bill or a bill codifying or compiling the law or a part thereof." PA. CONST. art. III, § 3.7 The purpose of the creation of Article III was "to place restraints on the legislative process and encourage an open, deliberative and accountable government." City of Philadelphia v. Commonwealth, 575 Pa. 542, 573, 838 A.2d 566, 585 (2003) (citation omitted).
This Article was included in the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1874, which was drafted in an atmosphere of extreme distrust of the legislative body and of fear of the growing power of corporations, especially the great railroad corporations. It was the product of a convention whose prevailing mood was one of reform[.] [ ․ ][A]s these mandates survived the more recent constitutional revisions, they continue to reflect important policies relating to the nature of the deliberative process.
Id. at 573–74, 838 A.2d 566, 838 A.2d at 585–86 (internal citations and quotations omitted).
The single-subject requirement of Article III, Section 3 serves a variety of purposes, including: (1) preventing the attachment of unpopular riders that would not become laws on their own to popular bills that are sure to pass;8 (2) providing for a more considered review of bills brought before the General Assembly, as a bill addressing a variety of subjects is less likely to get such attention; and (3) protecting the integrity of the Governor's veto power.9 Id. at 574, 575 n. 18, 838 A.2d at 586, 586 n. 18.
The requirement that all bills relate to a single subject does not mean that any addition to a bill as it passes through the General Assembly renders that bill unconstitutional. Over 100 years ago, our Supreme Court set forth the definition of a "subject" in this context as "[t]hose things which have a 'proper relation to each other,' which fairly constitute parts of a scheme to accomplish a single general purpose, 'relate to the same subject' or 'object.' " Payne v. School Dist. Of Borough of Coudersport, 168 Pa. 386, ––––, 31 A. 1072, –––– (1895). "[P]rovisions which have no proper legislative relation to each other, and are not part of the same legislative scheme, may not be joined in the same act." Id. In other words, the single-subject rule simply requires that the added provisions "assist in carrying out a bill's main objective or are otherwise 'germane' to the bill's subject as reflected in its title." City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 575, 838 A.2d at 587 (citations omitted). As our Supreme Court explained, there must be a balance between judicial oversight and legislative freedom:
'[N]o two subjects are so wide apart that they may not be brought into a common focus, if the point of view be carried back far enough.' Thus, defining the constitutionally-valid topic too broadly would render the safeguards of Section 3 inert. Conversely, the requirements of Section 3 must not become a license for the judiciary to 'exercise a pedantic tyranny' over the efforts of the Legislature. Indeed, '[f]ew bills are so elementary in character that they may not be subdivided under several heads․'
PAGE, 583 Pa. at 296, 877 A.2d at 395–96 (internal citations omitted); see also City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 578 n. 20, 838 A.2d at 588 n. 20 (reciting the "reductio ad absurdum argument" advanced by petitioners "that all legislation pertains to the single subject of 'law' ").
With this background in mind, we turn to Appellants' first argument on appeal. Appellants contend that SB 646 violates Article III, Section 3, as the bill contains several different statutes that address a variety of subjects not germane to one another, and that the stated purpose of SB 646—amending Title 42 of the Judicial Code—is overbroad and insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Section 3. Appellants' Brief at 16, 20–21. The trial court responded to this argument by upholding the constitutionality of Section 8305 exclusively based upon a Commonwealth Court decision, North–Central Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Ass'n v. Weaver, 827 A.2d 550 (Pa.Cmmwth.2003) ( "NCPaTLA "). Trial Court Opinion, 12/20/11, at 5.
We begin by addressing the basis for trial court's decision in this case. In NCPaTLA, the Commonwealth Court, sitting as a court of original jurisdiction, held, in relevant part, that Act 127, relating in part to venue in medical professional liability actions, did not violate Article III, Section 3, based upon its conclusion that the statutes contained in the Act relate to a single subject, to wit, amending Title 42 of the Judicial Code. NCPaTLA, 827 A.2d at 556–57, 560. The trial court's reliance on this case for the purposes of this appeal is troubling for two reasons. First, opinions of the Commonwealth Court are not binding on this Court. Ira G. Steffy & Son, Inc. v. Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania, 7 A.3d 278, 285 n. 9 (Pa.Super.2010), appeal denied, 611 Pa. 675, 27 A.3d 1015 (2011). Second (and more importantly), jurisprudence of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and this Court mandate the opposite result. See, e.g., City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 579–81, 838 A.2d 589–90; Commonwealth v. Neiman, 5 A.3d 353 (Pa.Super.2010) (en banc ), appeal granted in part, 611 Pa. 419, 27 A.3d 984 (2011).10
City of Philadelphia involved the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1100 of 2002 ("SB 1100"), which contained several provisions amending Title 53 (relating to Municipal Corporations). When first drafted, SB 1100 contained a single substantive provision providing for the inclusion of a citizenship requirement for board members of business improvement district authorities pursuant to the Municipality Authorities Act. City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 550, 838 A.2d at 571. Following Senate approval, the bill was sent to the House of Representatives where it underwent three relatively minor changes over the next seven months, ultimately passing in the House.
SB 1100 returned to the Senate for concurrence in the amendments introduced by the House, bearing the name: "AN ACT Amending Title 53 (Municipalities Generally) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, providing for acceptance of gifts or donations; and further providing for governing body of municipal authorities and for certain fiscal reporting." Id. at 551, 838 A.2d 566, 838 A.2d at 572. The Senate sent SB 1100 to the Senate Committee on Rules and Executive Nominations for review prior to concurrence. The committee made extensive revisions to SB 1100. The bill, originally five pages in length, came out of committee as a 127–page document. The revisions included, but were not limited to:
[T]he repeal of Section 209(k) of the PICA Act, which, inter alia, had required arbitrators involved in resolving certain collective bargaining disputes to accord substantial weight to Philadelphia's financial plan and its ability to fund any relevant salary increases, and had, additionally, provided for judicial review of such awards; changes to the size and composition of the Pennsylvania Convention Center Authority's governing board, as well as the manner in which the Convention Center is governed; a transfer of authority over taxis and limousines in Philadelphia from the Public Utility Commission to the Philadelphia Parking Authority; a grant of new powers to the Parking Authority to develop mixed-use projects combining public parking facilities with commercial, residential, industrial, and retail components; an expansion of the bonding requirements for small contractors engaged in redevelopment activities within Philadelphia; the curtailment of oversight authority by Philadelphia's Finance Director over spending by the Parking Authority; and a prohibition on police officers participating in election campaigns.
Id. at 552–53, 838 A.2d at 572–73 (footnote omitted).
The Senate approved the new bill the same day it was reported out of committee, and it passed in the House the following day, which was the last day of session before the Thanksgiving Holiday. On January 23, 2003, the City of Philadelphia and its Mayor filed a petition for review before the Commonwealth Court, seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief, alleging, inter alia, a violation of Article III, Section 3, in the passage of SB 1100, specifically, the statute changing the composition of the Pennsylvania Convention Center Authority's governing board. Id. at 553–55, 838 A.2d at 573–74. The Commonwealth et al. filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer and a motion to dismiss. The Commonwealth Court found, in relevant part, that the petitioners established a clear right to relief under Article III, Section 3, and the respondents appealed.
Examining cases involving issues of constitutionality under Article III, Section 3, our Supreme Court noted that in early cases, the Court applied a strict "germaneness" test. Id. at 587, 838 A.2d at 575–76 (citing Commonwealth ex rel. Woodruff v. Humphrey, 288 Pa. 280, 291, 136 A. 213, 217 (1927) (finding a bill regulating land surveyors and engineers contained two subjects, as they did not regulate the same profession); Yardley Mills Co. v. Bogardus, 321 Pa. 581, 185 A. 218 (1936) (holding that a bill containing three provisions, each of which pertained to water canals, violated the single-subject test, as they were not sufficiently germane to one another)). In more recent years, however, the Court observed extreme deference to the Legislature, validating bills under the single-subject test that included a range of topics, as long as they could "reasonably be viewed as falling under one broad subject." City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 576, 838 A.2d at 587; see, e.g., Common Cause/Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth, 562 Pa. 632, 757 A.2d 367 (2000) (per curiam ) (affirming the decision of the Commonwealth Court upholding a bill amending Title 75 (the Vehicle Code) and Title 74 (relating to transportation) as relating to a single subject, vehicular transportation). The Court found that "germaneness has, in effect, been diluted to the point where it has been assessed according to whether the court can fashion a single, over-arching topic to loosely relate the various subjects included in the statute under review." City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 576–77, 838 A.2d at 587.
Although the Supreme Court agreed that "deference by hypothesizing reasonably broad topics in this manner is appropriate to some degree, [ ․ ] [t]here must be limits [ ․ ], as otherwise virtually all legislation, no matter how diverse in substance, would meet the single-subject requirement." Id. at 578, 838 A.2d 566, 838 A.2d at 588. In the case before it, the Supreme Court determined that SB 1100 violated the single-subject requirement of Article III, Section 3. It concluded there was "no single unifying subject to which all of the provisions of the act are germane." Id. at 579, 838 A.2d at 589. Even accepting "municipalities" as the overarching subject, the statute at issue changing the composition of the Pennsylvania Convention Center Authority's governing board, was not germane to that topic, "as the Convention Center is not a municipal authority, but rather, an instrument of the Commonwealth." Id. at 580, 838 A.2d at 589–90. The Court found the fact that all of the provisions contained in the bill were codified under Title 53 was "of little constitutional importance" and that this similarity did not save SB 1100 from being held unconstitutional pursuant to Article III, Section 3. Id. at 581, 838 A.2d at 590.
In 2010, this Court, sitting en banc, decided the Neiman case,11 which involved a constitutional challenge on Article III, Section 3 grounds to Senate Bill 92 of 2003 ("SB 92"), and specifically the statute contained therein pertaining to Megan's Law .12 SB 92 began as an amendment to the Deficiency Judgment Act, was modified to add a "major amendment" to the Landlord Tenant Act of 1951, was further modified making minor additions and changes, including an amendment to the Municipal Police Education and Training Law, and finally, in its fifth revision, added the provisions pertaining to Megan's Law and deleting the amendments to the Landlord Tenant Act. Neiman, 5 A.3d at 358. The trial court found no violation of the single-subject rule, as all statutes included in the bill affected Title 42 of the Judicial Code. Id. This Court, relying on our Supreme Court's pronouncement in City of Philadelphia, found that the fact that all statutes included in SB 92 were contained in a single title (here, Title 42), was constitutionally insignificant. Id. at 358–59. Rather, this Court found no unifying relationship between the several subjects included in SB 92.
The Court examined SB 92 in its final version, and based upon the layout of the bill and the volume of the bill dedicated to the subject, the Court determined that the primary purpose of SB 92 was to amend Megan's Law. Id. at 358. The Court concluded, however, that although SB 92 violated the single-subject rule, the provisions pertaining to Megan's Law were severable. Id. at 359 ("[W]here a bill violates the single subject rule, the extraneous, unconstitutional provisions may be severed so as to preserve the main subject of the bill as constitutional.").13 Thus, the Court sustained Megan's Law in its entirety, and struck the remaining provisions of SB 92 as unconstitutional.14 Id. at 360.
In light of this precedent, we turn to the case sub judice. The legislative history of SB 646 reveals that it was first introduced by Senators Rocks and Fumo on March 19, 1987, containing a single provision regarding the appointment of substitute bail commissioners in Philadelphia. See Pa.S.Res. 646 of 1987 (Printer's Number 728). It was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee the same day. Id. On October 6, 1987, a minor amendment to the existing provision was made, and on January 27, 1988, the bill underwent minor changes by the Judiciary Committee. Pa.S.Res. 646 of 1987 (Printer's Number 1424). The Senate finally considered and passed SB 646 on November 18, 1987.
SB 646 was sent to the House for consideration, which referred the bill to the House Judiciary Committee on November 23, 1987. On January 27, 1988, the bill came out of committee with the addition of a provision for sentences for offenses committed while impersonating a law enforcement officer. Pa.S.Res. 646 of 1987 (Printer's Number 1739). On February 24, 1988, the third day the House was to vote on SB 646, a number of significant amendments were made, including but not limited to, the addition Section 722 regarding direct appeals to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from the Court of Common Pleas in specified circumstances, Section 8305 prohibiting actions for wrongful birth and wrongful life, Section 8306 limiting the defenses available for a claim of an injury that occurred in utero, Section 8933 calling for the dismissal of criminal cases in prescribed circumstances, and Sections 9541–9546—the Post Conviction Relief Act—which replaced the Post Conviction Hearing Act. Pa.S.Res. 646 of 1987 (Printer's Number 1829).
All of the above-listed amendments were presented to the House on February 24, 1988. The majority of the House, without much, if any, debate or discussion, agreed to most of the amendments. Sections 8305 and 8306 were the exceptions, however, as a lengthy debate over the propriety of these amendments ensued.15 The House separately agreed to all amendments, including Sections 8305 and 8306, and SB 646 passed the same day. SB 646 ultimately passed in the Senate on March 22, 1988, and was signed in the Senate that day. It was signed in the House on April 5, 1988, and on April 13, 1988, Governor Casey signed the bill into law as Act 47 of 1988.
Looking at all of the amendments included in the final version of SB 646, we can discern no single overarching subject to which they all relate. That all of the amendments are encompassed by a single Title (Title 42) is insufficient to overcome an Article III, Section 3 challenge. See City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 581, 838 A.2d at 590; Neiman, 5 A.3d at 358–59.16 Moreover, Title 42 contains a veritable potpourri of legislation, ranging from magisterial district judges to financial management, from DNA testing to jurisdictional considerations, and addresses matters of juvenile, civil, and criminal law and procedure. There can be no argument that these diverse areas of the law are part of the same "legislative scheme" or that they are all "germane" to one another."17 See Payne, 168 Pa. at 386, 31 A. at 1072; City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 575, 838 A.2d at 587.
Having found a violation of the single subject rule, we must determine, "[k]eeping in mind the trepidation with which the judiciary interferes with the process by which the General Assembly enacts the laws," whether as a matter of law, there exists "a single unifying subject to which most provisions of the act are germane." See PAGE, 583 Pa. at 309, 877 A.2d at 404. Upon examination of each of the amendments and the subjects to which they pertain, we conclude that the main objective of the bill to which the majority of the provisions relate is post-trial matters in criminal cases. Only four of the 12 provisions included in SB 646 are not germane to that subject, i.e., Section 8305 (precluding actions for wrongful birth and wrongful life), Section 8306 (limiting defenses available for injuries sustained in utero), Section 8933 (providing for the dismissal of certain criminal cases at the preliminary hearing stage), and Section 1125 (providing for the appointment of substitute bail commissioners in Philadelphia). The remaining provisions—Section 722 (regarding direct appeal to the Supreme Court of death sentences from the Court of Common Pleas), Section 9719 (regarding sentences for offenses committed while impersonating a law enforcement officer) and Sections 9541–9546 (the Post Conviction Relief Act)—all bear a "proper legislative relation to each other" and "assist in carrying out [the] bill's main objective," to wit, they all relate to post-trial matters in criminal cases. See Payne, 168 Pa. at 386, 31 A. at 1072; City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 575, 838 A.2d at 587. Furthermore, SB 646 was 14 pages in length at the time it was signed into law, less than two pages of which addressed the offending provisions. See Neiman, 5 A.3d at 358 (suggesting the number of pages devoted to the amendments contained in a bill is a relevant consideration under the single-subject rule).
We therefore conclude that "post-trial matters in criminal cases" is a reasonably broad topic that exhibits due deference to the General Assembly within the limits of the single-subject rule of Article III, Section 3. See City of Philadelphia, 575 Pa. at 578, 838 A.2d at 588. Having also concluded that four of the amendments contained in SB 646—Sections 1125, 8305, 8306, and 8933—are not germane to the primary purposes of the bill, we must now ascertain whether they are severable from the bill such that the remaining provisions that are germane to the stated single subject may still stand.
The law is clear that provisions within every statute are severable. 1 Pa.C.S.A. § 1925. If a portion of a statute is invalidated for any reason, the remaining, valid provisions shall be unaffected unless the court determines: (1) the remaining provisions of the statute depend upon and are inseparable from the void portion of the statute; (2) it does not appear the General Assembly would have enacted the valid provisions without the invalidated one; or (3) the remaining provisions are incomplete and cannot be executed in accordance with the intent of the General Assembly without the void portion of the statute. Id.; see also PAGE, 583 Pa. at 308–09, 877 A.2d at 403.
Our Supreme Court and this Court have long applied this mandate to bills found to contain unconstitutional provisions under Article III, Section 3. See, e.g., Payne, 168 Pa. at 386, 31 A. at 1072; PAGE, 583 Pa. at 308–09, 877 A.2d at 403;18 Neiman, 5 A.3d at 359–60. In PAGE, for example, our Supreme Court was faced with several constitutional challenges, including a challenge on single-subject grounds, to Act 71 of 2004 ("Act 71"), the Pennsylvania Race Horse Development and Gaming Act. The Court found that the single unifying subject of Act 71 was the regulation of gaming. It further found that although most of the provisions contained in the Act were germane to the subject of gaming, two provisions—calling for the disbursement of funds from the State Gaming Fund to the Volunteer Fire Company Grant Program and to recipients of benefits under the Forest Reserves Municipal Financial Relief Law—were not. PAGE, 583 Pa. at 307–08, 877 A.2d at 402–03. It found, however, that these outlier provisions were severable from Act 71. In addition to relying on the express intention of the General Assembly that all provisions of the Gaming Act are severable, the Court found the remaining factors set forth in Section 1925 required severance of the unconstitutional provisions:
First, as they are not germane to the single subject of the regulation of gaming, they are clearly not essentially and inseparably connected with the rest of the Act. Second, the remaining valid provisions are certainly capable of being executed in accordance with legislative intent in the absence of this limited number of disbursement provisions.
Id. at 308–09, 877 A.2d 383, 877 A.2d at 403.
In the case before us, we do not hesitate to conclude that Sections 1125, 8305, 8306, and 8933 are severable from SB 646. Like the unconstitutional provisions in PAGE, these amendments are not germane to the single subject of SB 646—post-trial matters in criminal cases—and thus the remaining provisions are not dependent upon or inseparable from the unconstitutional amendments. Second, there is no indication that the remaining provisions would not have been passed without the offending amendments. To the contrary, each of the amendments contained in SB 646 received a separate vote in the House prior to being included in the bill (see Pa.H.R. Legis. Journal,, 172D Sess. 14, at 303–25), and the Senate likewise voted on the amendments, and then separately debated the propriety of including Section 8305 (see Pa.S. Legis. Journal,, 172D Sess. 19, at 1959–66). This leads to the conclusion that the Legislature would have enacted the valid provisions of SB 646 regardless of the inclusion or exclusion of the invalid provisions. Finally, the non-germane amendments are entirely separate from the remaining provisions, which can be executed in accordance with the General Assembly's intent on their own.
In summary, we conclude that the primary purposes SB 646, signed into law as Act 47, was to address post-trial matters in criminal cases. Most of the amendments contained in SB 646 are germane to that primary purpose. Four amendments—Section 1125 (regarding the appointment of substitute bail commissioners in Philadelphia), Section 8305 (prohibiting a cause of action for wrongful birth and wrongful life), Section 8306 (limiting the defenses available for injuries sustained in utero), and Section 8933 (regarding the dismissal of felony criminal actions at the preliminary hearing level)—are not germane to that primary purpose, and thus are unconstitutional under the single-subject rule of Article III, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.19 Those four provisions, however, are severable from the remainder of Act 47, and thus are the only provisions stricken.
Appellants filed their complaint, alleging that because of Appellees' professional negligence, they did not know that Samuel was doomed to be born suffering from F.D., and thus they did not seek to abort Rebecca's pregnancy rather than bring a child into the world that would suffer from the effects of this disease. The trial court dismissed the complaint, granting Appellees' preliminary objections on the basis that the causes of action are precluded by 42 Pa.C.S.A § 8305. As the statute has been declared unconstitutional, we reverse the trial court's grant of the preliminary objections, reinstate the amended complaint and remand the case for further proceedings. See Glen–Gery Corp. v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Dover Twp., 589 Pa. 135, 152, 907 A.2d 1033, 1043 (2006) (stating that "an unconstitutional statute is ineffective for any purpose; it is as if it were never enacted") (citations omitted).
Order reversed. Case remanded for further proceedings. Jurisdiction relinquished.
As the author of this court's en banc decision in Commonwealth v. Neiman, I join the Majority in holding that 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8305 was unconstitutionally enacted. I write separately to note that regardless of this statute, a cause of action for "wrongful life" has never been recognized as a legally cognizable action at law in this Commonwealth. Ellis v. Sherman, 330 Pa.Super. 42, 478 A.2d 1339 (Pa.Super.1984), affirmed, 512 Pa. 14, 515 A.2d 1327 (1986); Speck v. Finegold, 268 Pa.Super. 342, 408 A.2d 496 (Pa.Super.1979) (en banc ), affirmed in part, reversed in part, 497 Pa. 77, 439 A.2d 110 (1981).
McEWEN, P.J.E. joins the majority Opinion. FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E. files a Concurring Statement in which McEWEN, P.J.E. joins.


text:
"Polly and Peter have been absolutely amazing with a lab Monty, we couldn't have asked for better..."
"Awesome! Michelle really put our mind at rest that our animals were all ok. The photos Michelle..."
"Lulu loves her walks!!"
"Always friendly and helpful! Thanks Paige!"
"Jayde is a fantastic pet sitter - and she kept Milo and Bella well entertained and well loved for..."
"Once again, great service. Thanks Nicole!"
"Thanks again"
"Alex was wondering would happily recommend him to look after your pet. Thanks so much. "
"Julie was great! Really easy to deal with and fast getting back to me. Defiantly recommended! "
"I can't thank or praise Tracey enough as soon as we had our meet and greet I knew that Miss Millie..."
"Kylie was great. My booking was last minute and I would definitely contact her again. Thanks heaps..."
"Once again Bron was awesome and flexible. We added an extra walk and that was no problem at all! ..."
"Spike had a good time with Charley and Cam and their two fur babies Macey and Effy and enjoyed..."
"Melissa took great care of our animals for 3 days and it was great to return to a lovely tidy home! ..."
"Very happy puppies when I got home."
"Thank you once again Kristen. You guys were awesome"
"Amazing as always!! Thanks again Caitlin!! "


text:
Friday, November 2nd
Impressive performances by the home teams Friday night set up a one versus two matchup in the Division One football state championship game.
Top seed Hartford blanked number five Middlebury 34-0, while number two BFA-St. Albans ran past third seed Essex 35-6 in the D-1 state semifinals Friday.
It sets up the second meeting in the last three years between the Hurricanes and Bobwhites in the state final. In 2010, Hartford beat BFA-St. Albans 33-0. The two teams were anticipated to meet again in the championship last year, but Middlebury upset the Bobwhites in the semifinals.
Hartford has won the last two D-1 championships and four of the last five. The teams will meet for the title Saturday, Novebmer 10th at South Burlington High School. Game time has yet to be determined.
Quick Links
PO Box 4508
All content © Copyright 2000 - 2017 WCAX. All Rights Reserved. For more information on this site, please read our Privacy Policy, and Terms of Service, and Ad Choices.