McDonald’s and Crocs are joining forces to make spicy shoes inspired by the fast-food chain’s animated characters. In partnership with the notable footwear company, the popular creator of the mouthwatering McFlurry is releasing four limited-edition sandals available on 14 November. The special collection will feature three traditional Crocs alongside slip-ons in the brand’s colour scheme (red and yellow) as well as options made to look like Grimace, Hamburglar, and Birdie. “McDonald’s and Crocs are introducing their first-ever collab. Inspired by both Crocs Stars and Mickey D’s loyalists, the collab will drop with a full line of shoes, socks and Jibbitz charms beginning tomorrow in countries around the world,” Crocs announced in its press release, adding that the collection will go live midday. “From a Classic Clog with a McDonald’s spin to a throwback, limited-edition collection inspired by iconic McDonald’s characters – Grimace, Birdie and Hamburglar – the new shoes are designed to give consumers a way to live out their bold fandom every day,” it continued. A layer of potent purple fur will line the inside of the Grimace sandals, while the outer rubber straps will feature the footwear brand’s iconic punctured holes to place themed Jibbitz in. Meanwhile, the Birdie design will be adorned with plastic pink bows, her white goggles, and matching insoles. Then, in true Hamburglar fashion, the Crocs will be detailed with black and white strips, popout masked eyes, and yellow soles. In addition to the McDonald’s emblem – the golden arch – a pack of french fries, a soda cup, a carton of McNuggests, and a Big Mac will be available as Jibbitz add-ons. Each unique pair will retail between $70 and $75, with optional coordinating socks for $20. The entire collection will be sold at Crocs stores as well as select wholesale locations. While the McDonald’s and Crocs collaboration is certainly a tasty treat, the humourous line follows the shoe company’s edgy drop a little over a month ago. On 5 October, Crocs fused a Western aesthetic with dark grunge to come up with its very own cowboy boot. The “foul” shoe was lengthy yet bendable, with two spurs lining the faux leather shaft. Careful stitching and a textured vamp mirrored a classic cowboy boot but was still reminiscent of the brand’s love for funky design. These $120 boots, made in accordance with “Croctober,” the time of year when the brand releases a new style, riled up fans online, eager customers debating harsh critics over the inventiveness and look of the spongy boots. “Why...why do I not hate these?” one person questioned, while another said: “Crocs released cowboy boots. That’s enough internet for today.” Read More The Wrong Coat? You’re bang on trend my friend Chrissy Teigen has hilarious reaction to wardrobe malfunction at Baby2Baby Gala

After years of rumors, Apple might finally be announcing its long-awaited VR headset at next

In March, unable to legally obtain abortion care in Texas, Samantha Casiano was forced to carry a nonviable pregnancy to term, and gave birth to a three-pound baby who died hours later. Ms Casiano is among 13 women denied emergency abortion care under state law who are suing the state in a landmark case that is now in front of a Texas judge. In harrowing, historic courtroom testimony in Austin on 19 July, Ms Casiano and two other plaintiffs described their agony, isolation and heartbreak as they detailed their traumatic, life-threatening pregnancies and the state’s failure to care for them. As she described her experience to the court through tears, Ms Casiano vomited from the witness stand. “I watched my baby suffer for four hours,” she said in her testimony. “I am so sorry I couldn’t release you to heaven sooner. There was no mercy for her.” Abortion rights legal advocacy group Center for Reproductive Rights Texas filed the lawsuit on behalf of the women in March to force Texas authorities to clarify emergency medical exceptions to the state’s overlapping anti-abortion laws, marking the first-ever case brought by pregnant patients against such laws. Their testimony has underscored the depth of impacts from Texas laws and similar anti-abortion laws across the country, with abortion access stripped away for millions of Americans who are now exposed to dangerous legal and medical minefields during their pregnancies. The conflicting exemptions for medical emergencies in Texas have resulted in widespread confusion among providers and hospitals fearing legal blowback or severe criminal penalties, according to abortion rights advocates. Healthcare providers in the state found in violation of those laws could lose their medical license, face tens of thousands of dollars in fines, or receive a sentence of life in prison. The plaintiffs “suffered unimaginable tragedy” directly because of the state’s anti-abortion laws, Center for Reproductive Rights attorney Molly Duane said in her opening arguments. Texas officials and the state’s medical board have “done nothing” to clarify the law, she said. “I feel like my hands are tied,” said Houston obstetrician-gynecologist Dr Damla Karsa. “I have the skill, training and experience to provide care but I’m unable to do so. It’s gut-wrenching. I am looking for clarity, for a promise that I’m not going to be prosecuted for providing care.” Attorneys for the state have sought to dismiss the case altogether, arguing in court filings that the women lack standing to challenge the law because it is ultimately uncertain they will face similar complications again, that their “alleged prospective injuries are purely hypothetical”, and that some of the plaintiffs admitted they have since “struggled to become pregnant” again after their traumatic experiences. Amanda Zurawski, the lead plaintiff in the case, is still hoping to become pregnant after her life-threatening pregnancy. She called the state’s argument “infuriating and disgusting and ironic.” “Do they not realise the reason why I might not be able to get pregnant again is because of what happened to me as a result of the laws that they support?” she told the court. “Anybody who’s been through infertility will tell you it is the most isolating, grueling, lonely, difficult thing a person can go through.” ‘I wished I was dreaming. I knew I wasn’t’ Ms Casiano, a mother of four, was hoping for a girl. When she visited her physician for a checkup last September, “all of a sudden the room went cold” and quiet, she testified. Her daughter was diagnosed with anencephaly, a fatal birth defect in which a baby is born without parts of a brain or skull. “My first thought was … ‘maybe it’s a surgery, maybe she can be fixed,’ and then she said, ‘I’m sorry, but your daughter is incompatible with life, and she will pass away before or after birth,’” Ms Casiano said. “I felt cold,” she said. “I was hurt. I wished I was dreaming. I knew I wasn’t. I just felt lost.” A case worker at her obstetrician’s office gave her a pamphlet with funeral homes. She was prescribed antidepressants. She could not be referred for abortion care anywhere in the state. Texas was the first to implement a near-total ban on abortion, months before the US Supreme Court struck down the constitutional right to abortion last June, a decision that triggered a wave of state laws and legislation from anti-abortion lawmakers and governors to restrict care and threaten providers with criminal penalties. Amanda Zurawski endured several rounds of fertility treatments, tests, surgeries and misdiagnoses before learning she was pregnant in May of last year. “We were at first in shock … we were over-the-moon excited,” Ms Zurawski said. But her obstetrician discovered that she dilated prematurely, and soon after her membranes ruptured, draining amniotic fluid and endangering the life of her expected child. Doctors informed her there was nothing they could do under what was recently enacted state law, despite knowing with “complete certainty we were going to lose our daughter,” she said. The condition led to life-threatening sepsis. Doctors ultimately induced labor. Her daughter, which she named Willow, was not alive when she delivered. Ms Zurawski and her husband are still trying for pregnancy, but the trauma has closed one of her fallopian tubes, and a doctor had to surgically reconstruct her uterus. They also are considering in vitro fertilization, surrogacy and adoption. She previously testified to members of Congress about her experience, a story she will continue to tell, even if it is “excruciating” to do so, she told the Texas courtroom. “I know that what happened to me is happening to people all over the country. … So many people are being hurt by similarly restrictive bans,” she said. She has spoken out “because I can, and I know a lot of people who are experiencing or will experience something similar who can’t speak out, and it’s for those people I will,” she said. Healthcare providers caring for pregnant patients in the months after the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade have faced severe obstacles for providing standard medical care in states where abortion is effectively outlawed, leading to delays and worsening and dangerous health outcomes for patients, according to a first-of-its-kind report released earlier this year. Individual reports from patients and providers like those named in the Texas lawsuit have shed some light on the wide range of harm facing pregnant women in states where access to abortion care is restricted or outright banned. But reporting from the University of California San Francisco captures examples from across the country, painting a “stark picture of how the fall of Roe is impacting healthcare in states that restrict abortion,” according to the report’s author Dr Daniel Grossman. More than a dozen states, mostly in the South, have effectively outlawed or severely restricted access to abortion care after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization last June. The decision has also opened new legal challenges, ones that could once again reshape the future of abortion access in America, while anti-abortion lawmakers and Republican candidates face a public that is overwhelmingly against such bans. ‘I don’t feel safe to have children in Texas anymore’ Ashley Brandt sent a picture of an ultrasound to her husband when she found out she was pregnant with twins. But after her 12-week ultrasound last May, doctors discovered one of the twins had acrania, in which the skull of the fetus is not formed, and brain tissue is exposed to amniotic fluid. The condition is fatal. Despite no chance of the twin’s survival, Ms Brandt was not eligible under Texas law for a procedure called a selective fetal reduction; Twin A still had some signs of life, like muscle spasms and cardiac activity. They traveled to neighbouring Colorado for care, and she returned home the day after the procedure. She gave birth to her daughter in November. “If I had not gone out of state and just done what was legal in Texas, my daughter … would likely have been in the [neonatal intensive care unit],” she said. “All of my ultrasounds leading up to labor I would have had to watch twin A … deteriorate more and more, every ultrasound. … I would have to give birth to an identical version of my daughter without a skull, without a brain, and I would have to hold her until she died, and I would have to sign a death certificate, and hold a funeral.” She said the state has failed to account for medical emergencies like hers. “I don’t feel safe to have children in Texas anymore,” she said. “It was very clear that my health didn’t really matter, that my daughter’s health didn’t really matter.” Read More ‘I felt I couldn’t tell anyone’: The stigma of abortion keeps women silent. It’s time for us to shout Ohio voters are likely to decide the future of abortion rights One year after Roe v Wade fell, anti-abortion laws threaten millions. The battle for access is far from over

The president plans to provide protection to farmers targeted by notorious kidnapping gangs.

In significant life events, joy is supposed to be easy to find. Things like marriages and children and graduations and job promotions are the times when we expect to feel happiness and contentment with our lives — and we often do. But what about the inbetweens, the smaller moments? And we’re not just talking about concerts, sunsets, parties, trips — we’re talking about even smaller moments, the ones that might just pass you by if you’re not looking close enough. Those moments? They’re called glimmers.

‘Use sunscreen every day’ is the ultimate skincare commandment. Dermatologists and beauty buffs alike agree that protecting your face from harmful UV rays – while simultaneously preventing wrinkles – should be a priority for everyone. “Skin is the body’s first line of defence from everyday external aggressors which damage your skin such as UV rays,” says Prof Christian Aldridge, consultant dermatologist for LifeJacket Skin Protection. “The damage from these can have cosmetic, physical and long-term health consequences. At best, it can age your skin and cause you discomfort but at worst, can give you a skin disease you really don’t want.” That’s why daily protection of your skin is critical, particularly on those areas that are exposed to the sun regularly, such as your face. But in spite of all the warnings we receive, the message isn’t getting through to everyone. A new survey from LifeJacket and Melanoma UK found that 10% of respondents rarely use SPF, while one in 20 says they never use it. To make it more likely you’ll stick to a daily habit, finding a product you love can be a huge help – attempting to rub a thick, chalky cream into your skin is not the answer. The good news is, facial sunblocks have come a long way, and there’s a whole new batch of lightweight but effective lotions, serums and gels that are a delight to use – and many of them are under the £20 mark. “To adequately protect your face, I recommend 5ml (about a teaspoon) of SPF of at least 30 every day,” says Aldridge. “Especially during the months of April to September, to ensure long-term skin protection. Application should be repeated if outside for long periods or undertaking exercising in the light.” Here’s our pick of the best face sunscreens for everyday use… 1. Garnier Ambre Solaire SPF 50+ Super UV Invisible Face Serum, £14, Boots A more fluid texture than any existing Garnier sunblock, Super UV Invisible Face Serum is designed for even the most sensitive skin types. The vegan factor 50 serum sinks in quickly, meaning it’s suited to men with facial hair or for wearing under make-up. 2. Sun Bum Glow 30 Moisturising Sunscreen Face Lotion, £19.99, Cult Beauty The latest addition to the Sun Bum family, this SPF30 lotion comes with a generous dose of glow-boosting kakadu plum extract, which reportedly contains on average 100 times more vitamin C than an orange. 3. The Inkey List Polyglutamic Acid Dewy Sunscreen, £14.99, LookFantastic Fast becoming a must-have among ‘skintellectuals’, this light fluid is formulated with a trio of ultra-hydrating ingredients: polyglutamic acid, squalane and glycerin. Designed to prevent any white cast (no matter how dark your skin tone), this dewy-finish fluid is what you need if you’re after the trendy ‘glazed donut’ skin look. 4. Coco & Eve Daily Water Gel SPF50+ Sunscreen, £23 The first suncare range from self-tan specialist Coco & Eve does not disappoint. With hyaluronic acid to moisturise, the factor 50+ Daily Water Gel is as lightweight as it sounds, and the fragrance-free formula is suited to sensitive and oily skin types alike. 5. Skin Proud Serious Shade Lightweight Hydrating SPF 50+ Skin Serum, £16.95 Intended to provide a smooth base for make-up with no white cast, Skin Proud’s first sunscreen comes with extra benefits: ceramides to protect the skin barrier and cherry extract for a vitamin C boost. 6. Eucerin Sun Face Hydro Protect Ultra-Light Fluid SPF 50+, £20, Boots The newest face sunblock in Eucerin’s high-tech line-up not only protects against UVA and UVB rays, it boosts skin repair with glycyrrhetinic acid, and the non-greasy fluid is fast-absorbing. 7. Ole Henriksen Banana Bright Vitamin C Mineral SPF30, £28 If you prefer a mineral suncreen that provides a physical barrier on the skin (as opposed to chemical, where it works below the surface), Ole Henriksen’s Banana Bright is an excellent option. The zinc oxide-based formula also contains vitamin C to increase skin luminosity over time and banana powder-inspired pigments to add instant brightness. 8. Suqqu Protecting Day Cream SPF50+, £48, Cult Beauty This innovative daily moisturiser from Japanese skinbrand Suqqu offers factor 50 protection, botanical extracts and a glowy, light-reflecting finish that’s perfect on its own or under make-up. 9. Chanel UV Essentiel, £48 The newly reformulated UV Essentiel provides SPF50 protection alongside a duo of skin-strengthening extracts – blue ginger and Tahitian gardenia – to guard against pollution and premature ageing. 10. LifeJacket Daily Protection Moisturiser, £19.99 A great all-rounder, LifeJacket’s fragrance-free face cream provides factor 30 protection and hydrates with glycerin. 11. Hello Sunday The Illuminating One Glow Primer SPF50, £22 Defending skin against UVA, UVB, blue light and pollution, this highly protective primer is formulated with light-illuminating particles to enhance your complexion.

It takes a lot to turn my head when it comes to dual-stim suction vibrators. My go-to choice, the Tracy’s Dog OG (and Pro) gets the job done pretty damn well, and is widely known among R29 readers for making me black out from pleasure. So, when I heard reviewers going wild about a new iteration of a dual-stimulating suction vibrator from luxury sex tech brand, Lelo, I was intrigued. Though I highly doubted the mobs were wrong, I was determined that nothing could outperform my OG. Boy, was I an idiot.

This content originally appeared on Mashable for a US audience and has been adapted for

DoorDash set new records for total orders and revenue in the second quarter as its grocery and convenience deliveries accelerated and it improved driver efficiency

Super Sale Alert: Get 25% off the Kin Euphorics Emotional Illuminations Collection at Boy Smells with our promo code R29BS, now through July 12.

Lewis Hamilton insists his team are “almost there” as they look to agree a new contract with Mercedes – and has denied reports that Ferrari have approached him. The 38-year-old’s current contract with the Silver Arrows, where he has been since 2013, expires at the end of this season as he is set to take to the track on Friday in a revamped Mercedes car. COMMENT: Lewis Hamilton has shut the door on Ferrari – will he come to regret it? A report this week suggested Ferrari have offered the seven-time F1 world champion – who has won six of his titles with Mercedes – a £40m-a-year contract to join the Scuderia from 2024. Yet Hamilton, who covets a record-breaking eighth crown after missing out controversially in Abu Dhabi in 2021, revealed that his representatives are close to concluding negotiations with Mercedes over an extension. First practice at the Monaco Grand Prix starts at 12:30pm (BST) on Friday, with FP2 at 4pm (BST). Follow practice at the Monaco Grand Prix with The Independent. Read More Lewis Hamilton has shut the door on Ferrari – will he come to regret it? F1 Monaco Grand Prix: Why is practice no longer on a Thursday? Ferrari boss gives Lewis Hamilton update after reports of shock move

Following the devastating earthquake in Morocco, should travelers cancel or go ahead with their trips? Here's what to know if you're planning a trip or are due to travel imminently.