Riley Keough wore Chanel to the Gotham TV Awards. [RCFA]
Why the hell is 50 Cent cozying up to Lauren Bobert?? [Seriously OMG]
Adam Levine is returning to The Voice. [Socialite Life]
I’m glad Cailee Spaeny is having such a breakthrough, she’s talented. [LaineyGossip]
Kerry Washington posted a “Black Wife Effect” meme about herself and her work husband Tony Goldwyn. They play too much for people who are married to other people. [Buzzfeed]
Republicans don’t want people to have contraception. [Jezebel]
David Lynch teases a mystery project. [OMG Blog]
The 20th anniversary of Kill Bill Vol. 2. [Pajiba]
The Bikeriders might make Austin Butler a full-fledged movie star. [JustJared]
I love that Mariska Hargitay met her husband Peter Hermann at work! They’ve been married for a long time too, they’re so great together. [Hollywood Life]
I saw her in “The Lodge”. She was actually quite good. Some Nepo babies are terrible and some have talent.
I wish Celebitchy would do a full story about the Republican’s fun new anti-contraception stance.
It’s not new. This was always the plan. And after contraceptives they’ll come for no-fault divorce, and then for women’s rights to have a bank account or a credit card on their own without permission from a father or husband.
What’s truly terrifying is how many women in policy making roles will support this kind of legislation. The “not like other girls” sickness is rampant in the GOP.
Love your user name, Snideysense.
I was just thinking that too because it’s always just links but also, it’s depressing and I read about it everywhere else 😭
Someone explain to me how unwanted pregnancies benefit men? From the beginning of humanity, men have had to work hard in back breaking jobs to support children they didn’t intend to have (My disgusting redneck of a father in law included, and raising all those kids made him a bitter angry man who still consistently votes against his own economic interests). Men have died young from working hard labor since time began. And even in our increasingly misogynist society, the courts will still require child support from the sperm donor, whose wages will be garnished for 18 years (keeping in mind that also means that your HR office knows you’re a deadbeat dad). Irrespective of the delight some men feel in oppressing women, none of these policies are good for men. Why TF is the future men want?
“Irrespective of the delight some men feel in oppressing women, none of these policies are good for men.”
The cruelty is a feature, not a bug. The delight in oppressing others is the point. And oppression of woman, if these dopes push it to their end game, limits women’s rights, options, ability to live independently, and leave abusive relationships.
So it puts some men in more of a controlling power position. These people have a zero-sum outlook, advances for women, equal rights for minorities … these AH’s view that as taking something from *them* and the flip side of that is taking rights away, oppressing and harming others makes their gross brains squee with mean nasty delight, because they equate screwing other people as them winning. Even if they are the biggest losers on the planet and don’t actually benefit, their bigotry, tribalism, cruelty leads them to view harming others as them “winning”
These are not “a rising tide raises all boats” people. They don’t want to be true partners or have to be a decent human being to others. Or have to have any expectations put on them to be decent human beings.
Meanwhile the Xtian extremist fascists have been fed a barrel of nonsense about increasing the birthrate, by forcing woman to get pregnant and birth babies in order to fix what they perceive as society’s ills while also returning to the repressive dark ages. And those who stand to gain from a concentration of power and wealth feed into those attitudes because they’re aiming to make a killing.
Yeah this is semi off-topic but your entire post reminds me of the conservatives in my town’s FB neighborhood forum. After following and reading their asinine comments for years now I’ve found the common thread. They don’t necessarily agree about every issue that affects the community but the thing they share in common is a general disgust with the idea of doing something for the greater, collective good regardless of whether it affects their quality of life or not.
It’s shocking how selfish and entitled they are and how little they care about solving any myriad of very real issues, especially if it means they’ll pay more taxes. The “rugged individualism” shit that the GOP has been spouting for decades has really done an excellent job of rotting their brains to the point where they think that the SS and Medicare they enjoy is free. Yet they are outraged over the cost of having to paint bicycles on the bike lanes smdh…make it make sense.
But yeah your comment is spot-fucking-on…
@North of Boston – You’re preaching the true facts here, and I appreciate your answer to my question. Yet, I still feel the need to rant, so excuse me a moment . . . what really gets me is that it will backfire on *most* men. There are very few labor jobs left that can support a family. White collar jobs are also going to struggle in the era of Ai. What is the value of having the power of a patriarchal status if your family is going hungry from your inability to feed them on a single salary? ** That world does not exist any more. ** It’s gone forever. Right now, a dual income family with a manageable amount of children is doing okay, but not living large. And yes some single income families get by because they’ve strategized carefully to do so. But you remove the ability to plan pregnancies and limit a woman’s ability to earn a salary, it all comes crashing down hard.
This is what happens when the religious extreme get a hold of power – they target anyone who is not like them. They want more white babies for themselves and everyone else’s babies for wars etc..
In Russia (and other countries) it’s legal for men to beat their wives.
Women are being punished because we have the gall to want equality.
@DigitalUnicorn “They want more white babies for themselves and everyone else’s babies for wars”
THIS! Warmongering, racism, and imperialism go hand in hand with these misogynistic policies. White supremacy feels threatened. Look at Elon Musk reproducing like a rabbit and the reason he gives is that the world needs more white babies.
What about nonwhite babies, you ask? Soldiers and cheap labor. The working ants. This is what the white patriarchal capitalism wants for our children. They want our boys to die in their factories and their wars and for our girls to be broodmares. It is HORRIFYING.
Women are also punished because we can control birth – we ultimately hold power and it terrifies them.
I think it is linked to immigration policies. Low birth rate is bad for any country and higher education in women correlates to less children. So I guess the thought process is if forcing women to have less choices then that means more American born babies, which will have a positive effect on future workforce demographics, meaning American born people are more desirable than having to allow migrants or immigrants as a matter of policy and economics. Also related to changes in school curriculum where the right wing has a better chance of indoctrinating these children to their side rather than immigrants educated elsewhere.
“Low birth rate is bad for any country”
@raster I mean, is it really? There is a lot of fearmongering about this and I beg people not to fall for what’s most often a white supremacist concern. A slowing birth rate is natural. There cannot be growth forever. Look at what a couple billion human beings have done to the planet. It’s not a bad thing if human population numbers stabilize. You said it yourself: “higher education in women correlates to less children.”
This reminds me of an article I read a while ago about how technological advancement would be amazing in an egalitarian society free from capitalism. But in a capitalist society it means even more inequality, pressure on women to birth more workers, pressure on poor older people to die, etc.
Low birth rate is not the problem. It is the cissexist, heterosexist, ableist, white patriarchal capitalism.
You’re right about this. Further, low birth rate tends to be linked to the erosion of women’s rights and autonomy. The response historically (not just US here, but in many cultures throughout the world, throughout history) has tended to be clamping down on women and treating them as property when there are fewer babies being born. It’s frightening.
Bleak ASF – So many important points here:
1. Concerns about birth rate are generally about white supremacy (obviously if the need was just more cheap labor, there’d be less hostility to immigration).
2. The planet’s population is already unsustainable, and we’re less than a century from lacking enough fresh water to sustain the existing population numbers. Wars over access to water are imminent. A declining birth rate is actually a great thing, but the birth rate is only declining in wealthy nations, so it’s false by every measure that there’s a population reduction or dearth of potential workers, which brings us back to point 1: White supremacy.
As I pointed out above, though, the fantasy of the white blue collar patriarch – read, republican – is just that, a fantasy. Where are these jobs?
It is simple math. Don’t confuse yourself around the issue. A low birth rate is a definite demographic problem and an economic problem for individual countries in the developed world regarding the replacement rate. Referencing worldwide over-population, cissexist heterosexist ableist whatever is totally irrelevant to the actual numbers involving the workforce of an individual country and the continuing need for that country to support the elderly and others not working, financially. One way to solve the problem is bringing people from other countries here through immigration which the right wing doesn’t want or higher taxation. Again, back to my original point – it has to do with immigration policies.
@Raster – Can you clarify how a low birth rate is problematic for the U.S.? I understand how Social Security works, but can you clarify which specific U.S. based industry is having trouble or predicted to at some point have trouble filling jobs due to a low birth rate?
@bettyrose – It is simply revenue vs expenditures. Ideally we would want a ratio approaching 1.0 or above (with the trend of unchanged or increasing) and that is comparing the sum of all tax-paying working people with everyone else who will receive government transfers, of which social security is a key one of them. The US is below 1 with a long term trend of decreasing, similar to all other developed countries.
It gets women out of the work force. It gets women out of positions of power. It makes women reliant on men so that they can do whatever they want to them. That’s all it is.
If you read the republicans’ reasons for opposing the bill, their examples are all FEMALE birth control. There won’t be any laws making condoms illegal, so Republicans don’t need to care about those. The laws they want to pass will only affect women. Men will still get to choose whether to use a condom or not, and therefore have 100% control over the issue of ha ing kids.
BettyRose, In history, certain factors favor women’s rights and certain aspects suppress those rights and therefore favor men. For example, after major diseases like the plague, wars with huge (male) causalities, pioneers in the American West…in all those cases, women were necessary to help society and their participation was valued. When jobs, housing, educational opportunities become scarcer or the economy takes a downturn, that is worse for women. Right now, men see themselves as competing against women for jobs. There’s this creepy hankering for the Roman Empire. The far right is gaining momentum. Certain people see this as an opportunity to create space for men above women. That you need two earners or that women can be more intelligent than men isn’t part of this way of thinking. You control access to certain (power) positions in society at the cost of women to the benefit of men. If there are too many negatives to hiring someone who might get pregnant, then given a choice between someone with and someone without a uterus, more people will pick the latter.
The dress would be a lot better if I didn’t have to look at her boobs or underwear. I guess Chanel is too cheap to line a dress now.
I agree with you M. I’m so sick of the naked dresses.
Both of you are spot on. It’s tiresome and boring. The dresses at the Met Gala, etc are awful. Just don’t get it!
This print and design of this dress is beautiful and would look so much better with a lining or non-sheer material.
Agree! That dress needs lining or a slip. Tacky in my view to see the underwear…
I have so much empathy for Riley. Her mother died, her brother committed suicide, she had a battle with her grandmother over the estate. She is as strong as steel and simply a tower of strength. I admire her and feel so sorry for her.
ITA. Plus, some nefarious company tried to sell her estate and all of what’s happened to her is reported in the media. That would break most people.
Mariska Hargitay is so gorgeous