 | |  |  | Gwyneth Paltrow News & Gossip
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow is moving in with her husband, a year after their wedding | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by instylemagazine (@instylemagazine) on Aug 6, 2019 at 5:30am PDT
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow: 'You think I would pretend to write cookbooks if I didn't cook?' | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Years ago, I remember reading and covering an article about an event Gwyneth Paltrow hosted in support of either her first or second cookbook. It was probably her first, because she went all-out and managed to get all of her famous friends (are there any other kind?) to come out for a special dinner in support of the cookbook. The dinner was for about 70 people, and there were several headlines: one, Chris Martin was being a sucky baby and he didn?t want to be there to support his wife. Two, Jessica Seinfeld was always THE WORST. Three, they really tried to convince people that Gwyneth ?cooked? for 70 people. That irritates me. It?s one thing for Gwyneth to claim that she alone ?invents? all of these recipes (she does not) all by herself, but it?s another to try to promote this image of Gwyneth as so capable, she can just pull together a dinner for 70 all by herself, just cooking away in her humble kitchen.
All of which to say, I believe Gwyneth cooks. I believe that she goes to her kitchen and makes meals for herself and her children. I believe she experiments and tries out recipes and she enjoys all of that. But I also believe she has a team of people helping her write her cookbooks and, obviously, doing the bulk of the cooking and baking for which Gwyneth takes credit. So with that in mind, Gwyneth did an Instagram Live Q&A session and someone asked her ?Do you actually cook?? Gwyneth?s response: ?Do I actually cook? Yes, I f?king cook! Goddamnit. You think I would write ? you think I would pretend to write cookbooks if I didn?t cook? F?k that person!? The NSFW-for-language
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow: What happens to your identity if you?re not 'f?kable & beautiful?' | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Gwyneth Paltrow is 46 years old. Though I hate to give her credit for it, I halfway respect the way she?s owned her real age and the sometimes messy ageing process. I mean, she?s not really talking about down-and-dirty sh-t with ageing which is fine, women aren?t required to do that but she talks about ageing with a lot of positivity. She backs it up by not looking like a Real Housewife with a frozen AF face too, which I appreciate. I feel certain that Gwyneth has had little tweaks here and there, but she keeps her face and body mostly natural and I like seeing that. Anyway, as part of Goop?s The Beauty Closet podcast, Gwyneth spoke about what it?s like to be one of those women held up as ?fkable and beautiful? in her 20s, only to see that go away as she got older:
Gwyneth Paltrow has given a frank appraisal of the ageing process. Speaking on her Goop The Beauty Closet podcast on Wednesday, the actress confessed she felt typecast in her younger years, leading to feelings of losing her identity because she was no longer considered f**kable and beautiful as time went on.
The 46-year-old Oscar-winner said: I?ve been considered, not by everyone It?s a weird thing to be, I don?t mean in a pejorative way objectified, but sort of cast as something and put in a box?.And then I think when you come to age, if you have this broad identity as that, like, what does it mean? To get wrinkles and, like, get closer to menopause, and all these things?what happens to your identity as a woman if you?re not f?kable and beautiful??
Gwyneth went on to say that she believes that internal beauty begins to shine more as the years go on.
?Luckily, what?s happening at the same time in parallel ? is you just start to like yourself,? Gwyneth added. ?I think you get to a point where it?s almost like your sort of pulchritude is waning in a way and your inner beauty is, like, really coming out, and so it?s this funny shift that?s happening.?
[From People & Just Jared]
Several years ago, I covered a Kristin Scott Thomas interview where she talked about what getting older meant to her in her daily life, and how she ?feels invisible? at work and in life, and she said, ?When you?re walking down the street, you get bumped into, people slam doors in your face ? they just don?t notice you. Somehow, you just vanish. It?s a clich, but men grow in gravitas as they get older, while women just disappear.? I always think about that, and how for beautiful women like KST or Gwyneth Paltrow women who are always praised for their beauty, and put on ?most beautiful? lists, etc they all really have a moment where they?re no longer the hot young thing in town. I wonder if an ageing beautiful woman?s ?invisible? is a normal woman?s daily life though? But Gwyneth?s question remains: ?what happens to your identity as a woman if you?re not f?kable and beautiful?? Hopefully you have some personality and talent and drive and ambition to, you know, keep on existing in the world.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow's intimacy coach is getting paid to tell her clients really basic stuff | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Several weeks ago, Gwyneth Paltrow revealed in an interview that she and her husband Brad Falchuk do not live together full-time. Gwyneth has her home and Brad has his home and they spend four nights a week together and that?s it. I honestly thought it sounded like a good arrangement, and one that would work for someone like me, who hates cohabitation and likes to do her own thing. The problem I had with it is that it came from Gwyneth and she made it sound like only peasants live together all the time when they?re married. She said her ?intimacy coach? told her the four-nights-a-week arrangement was for ?polarity? and that ?all my married friends that the way we live sounds ideal and we shouldn?t change a thing.? One wonders if she would humble-brag about her arrangement if her friends thought it was a sh-tty idea, but whatever. Anyway, I did wonder about the whole ?intimacy coach? thing and luckily, Gwyneth?s intimacy coach is now giving interviews! Yay.
Gwyneth Paltrow shocked fans when she revealed that she has no plans to live with her husband Brad Fulchuk. Yet the Hollywood stars intimacy coach Michaela Boehm explained the reasoning behind the decision, as she appeared on Wednesdays episode of Loose Women. The counselor to the stars revealed why she advised the A-lister to keep some distance in her relationship in order to keep the spark alive.
Michaela reasoned: When couples start living together, they ruin the excitement. Thats true for anyone, Hollywood star or regular commoner. Offering advice to the audience, she preached: Spend time apart. That could be ten minutes at the end of the work day, it could be having separate rooms, or separate houses. separate houses do how much time you need.
Discussing the added pressure that celebrities deal with in their relationships, Michaela continued: Nothing you do is off limits, everything has to be dealt with in the public. A lack of the intimacy and lack of connection, not only celebs suffer from, when you look most people are always on their phones. Add to that, the distress of everything you do being watched.
[From The Daily Mail]
Nothing Michaela Boehm says is wrong, but that?s probably because it?s COMMON SENSE. Think of how much of a fart-sniffing narcissist you have to be to PAY an intimacy coach to come in and tell you that it might actually be bad for your marriage if you spend every minute together, or that most people some quiet alone time and that ?absence makes the heart grow fonder.? I really should go to Hollywood and make these aholes pay me for my wisdom. ?If you?re having problems in your marriage, you need to communicate.? Or: ?A sexual connection is not enough to base a marriage.? I?ll make millions.
It?s also notable to point out that for all the talk of polarity and intimacy coaches, Gwyneth and Brad?s arrangement is likely part of a custodial thing between Falchuk and his ex-wife for their children. I get the feeling Brad?s kids don?t like Gwyneth.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow was proud of her lack of fact-checking at Goop | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
I was about to write a story about how much I dislike Gwyneth Paltrow which would have been news to so many, right? but then I came across this interview with famous journalist/celebrity-profiler Taffy Brodesser-Akner, who is currently promoting her first novel, Fleishman Is In Trouble. Taffy is well-known around the gossip blogs for doing some of the best celebrity profiles and best pieces of entertainment journalism of the past five years or so. Her GQ profile of Tom Hiddleston still haunts me (and truly, Hiddles has never been the same since that profile). Her NYT profile of a dour Bradley Cooper last year was so unfavorable, it probably did more to ruin A Star Is Born than anything else. And of course, she did an epic profile of Gwyneth Paltrow and Goop for the NYT which spilled so much tea about Gwyneth?s true motivations for Goop and her lack of interest in fact-checking or, you know, actual science. Here?s what Taffy says about the Gwyneth profile now:
Brodesser-Akner had wanted to interview her for ever and had gone on a long campaign to secure the interview, assuring Paltrow she would take her seriously as a businesswoman, which she did. (And rightly so). She didn?t let her off the hook. I remember reading the piece and not liking Paltrow much more than I had going into it. I also wondered if, when the piece came out, she had felt betrayed. The story quoted from Dr Jen Gunter, Paltrow?s arch-nemesis who likes to point out the ludicrous and occasionally dangerous implications of, for example, suggesting underwire bras might cause cancer.
In fact, says Brodesser-Akner, Paltrow liked the piece, posting it on her Instagram and letting it be known that she found it broadly flattering. Didn?t she flinch at the paragraphs detailing Goop?s appalling lack of fact checking? ?Oh my God, no! She was like, you bet we don?t do fact checking! It?s part of her revolution. And don?t you always find that the thing you?re horrified to ask is the thing people really stand by??
What Brodesser-Akner hadn?t anticipated was what reporting on the story would do to her own psychology ? the terrible Stockholm syndrome that can descend when you spend too much time with a subject. ?There was a time in the middle when [Paltrow] became scared of me and my intentions. And after having gotten along so well, it made me so angry. But the anger was embarrassment that, oh, I thought we were getting along. Awful. I mean, I never hated her. I really liked her. And I thought she was so talented. And the thing that people hate ? ?Ugh, she?s just so privileged? ? how can you hold against her? It?s OK to be born wealthy. It?s very lucky. And also most of the people I know who were born privileged are incredible fk-ups. They can?t figure out a goal or a motive. She [Paltrow] works so hard.?
Did people get mad with you for not being more critical of her? ?No. I didn?t hear any of that. I hope that I made a compelling case. And the thing I determined was that it was not about how I felt about her; it was about how I felt about myself in her reflection that was the issue. And it was unbearable to me. I?ve never been happier to be done with a story, to go back to being an average person as opposed to the least graceful person in the room, the least successful person in the room. I?m a fine successful person, but next to her ?
By the end of the story, even Paltrow?s posture struck Brodesser-Akner as a rebuke. When she asked Paltrow how she managed to keep her back so straight, ?she was like, ?You think so?? She?d never considered it. And then I was even more upset! If you can have that posture without thinking about it? I don?t even know what species you are.? The bottom line is you can?t be friends with these people; above a certain altitude, not even their friends can be friends with them. ?These are people who no one makes requests of any more. They think they?re having a friendship, but they?re not.?
[From The Guardian]
?Oh my God, no! She was like, you bet we don?t do fact checking! It?s part of her revolution. And don?t you always find that the thing you?re horrified to ask is the thing people really stand by?? It?s part of her revolution! The revolution of? pseudoscience and not fact checking. Honestly though, I respect what Taffy did with that specific profile of Gwyneth it was half-respectful of the actual lucrative business of pseudoscience and half-shady because it was so matter-of-fact about how much bullsh-t Gwyneth actually shills.
Taffy also talked about the Hiddleston profile and how there were paparazzi photos of the two of them, and the Daily Mail called her Tom?s ?mystery brunette.? Tom called her afterwards and she says: ?He said, ?I?m so sorry. Tell your husband I?m horrified.? And I said you should not be horrified! It?s the best week of our lives!?
This Gwyneth Paltrow profile in @nytimes Magazine should be nominated for a Pulitzer. Or a comedy writing award. The kitchen scene should be required teaching material for kids in journalism school. What a great read. https://t.co/6kOgLiS4zV
Ed O'Keefe (@edokeefe) July 27, 2018
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow wonders if men also like crystals, jade eggs & pseudoscience | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Gwyneth Paltrow (@gwynethpaltrow) on Jun 2, 2019 at 5:15pm PDT
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow & Brad Falchuk don't live together, only do overnights 4 times a week | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Gwyneth Paltrow?s relationship with Brad Falchuk started as an affair when they were both married to other people. When she secured Brad as her jumpoff, only then did she and Chris Martin consciously uncouple. Post-conscious uncoupling, Brad and Gwyneth still took it relatively slowly after all, he needed to secure a divorce from his wife as well, and the divorce process for both of them took a while (in California-divorce time). Brad and Gwyneth would go out and most people knew they were together, but it wasn?t some ?they?re attached at the hip? deal. Then he proposed, and they got married last year in the Hamptons. And in all that time? they?ve never really moved in together, apparently. Brad still has his own place, and Gwyneth still has her own place (with her kids). She told the Sunday Times Style Magazine that they only spend four nights a week with each other:
Shes a wildly successful Hollywood actress and entrepreneur who is famous for her creative, and sometimes quirky, lifestyle choices. And Gwyneth Paltrow, 46, revealed that she still doesnt live with husband Brad Falchuk in Los Angeles in order to keep polarity in their newly married life. The founder of Goop, who was wed for the second time in September, admitted that Brad only stays with her for four nights a week, spending the rest of the time at his own house.
Speaking to the Sunday Times Style Magazine, the actress said the couples friends think their unorthodox set-up is ideal.
She said: Oh, all my married friends that the way we live sounds ideal and we shouldnt change a thing.
The actress previously revealed she and the TV writer dont live together yet because they are trying to navigate their blended family and be respectful of their children. But the Sliding Doors actress also admitted her intimacy teacher taught her polarity to keep the relationship fresh.
[From The Daily Mail]
I?m such a loner, this is probably the only kind of marriage which would work for me the kind of marriage where I could have my own private space and nights away from my partner. Everybody?s different and some married couples don?t need to or want to spend every waking moment together, or spend every night together by choice. I wonder if people would have a better reaction to this if it was someone other than Gwyneth, though. Because coming from her, it sounds less ?everybody?s different, do what works for you? and more like ?I?m so evolved and special and elitist that my intimacy teacher suggested that Polarity Is The Future, only peasants live together while married.?
Also: I find it curious that there are references to ?we?re being respectful of our children? sprinkled in a lot of stories about Gwyneth and Brad. Gwyneth?s children (Moses and Apple) seem fine with Brad and they both seem to have great relationships with Chris. I wonder if? Brad?s kids have an issue with how everything went down between Brad and their mom? It sort of feels that way, doesn?t it?
Here?s a cute thing which went viral a few days ago. Gwyneth did not remember that she was in Spider-Man: Homecoming.
Gwyneth Paltrow genuinely did not know she was in "Spider-Man: Homecoming" so this adorable interaction from "The Chef Show" is easily my favorite thing on the internet today pic.twitter.com/lc3VlSs1Hp
Jarett Wieselman (@JarettSays) June 7, 2019
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow 'has worked hard to integrate' Dakota Johnson into her family | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
View this post on Instagram
Consciously throupling
A post shared by Derek Blasberg (@derekblasberg) on Apr 23, 2019 at 11:55am PDT
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow wore a sad sack Chloe to the Met Gala: creepy doll nightgown? | | Added 4 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a bigger ahole than Gwyneth Paltrow? Chica never follows a theme. What?s weird about it is that it?s almost like she?s making an arrogant effort to go VERY far away from the theme every time she does attend the Met Gala the hot Pink nonsense at the ?punk? themed gala, the nothingburger pale Pink cocktail dress at the Rei Kawakubo/Comme des Garons-themed gala. That last one was in 2017, where she attended after throwing a hissy fit years prior about how much she hates the gala. Well, she?s back. And she wore a Chlo dress which looked like a creepy doll nightgown. If I was being generous, I would say that her camp interpretation was ?1970s Valley of the Dolls? MAYBE, but since I?m never generous to Goop, I?ll say that she just looks like a dumbass.
I friggin? LOVED the fact that Benedict Cumberbatch understood the camp theme. This was not Bendy?s first time at the Met Gala, and I feel like he actually tries to stay on-theme and he really thinks about it. His look was just so? great. Like a pimp Tom Wolfe. His ensemble is Labassa Woolfe. Bendy brought his wife Sophie Hunter who interpreted the theme as ?Renaissance Faire reject.?
For all of the bitching and moaning she?s done about how much she hates the Met Gala, it?s amazing that Lena Dunham manages to face her ahole demons, year after year. This year she and Jemima Kirke went together, and they both wore Christopher Kane. It?s camp and it?s tacky, so they got it right. But just prepare yourselves for more interviews about how Lena is SO OVER it and she?s never going again, only to show up in 2020.
Embed from Getty Images
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gwyneth Paltrow in G. Label at the 'Avengers: Endgame' premiere: cute or blah' | | Added 5 years ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Here are more photos from the LA premiere of Avengers: Endgame. They?ve been doing smaller premieres and screenings around the world for weeks now, but the LA premiere last night was the first and only event for the entire cast and every member of the Marvel franchises in total. Endgame really does spell the END for many beloved characters. I would assume Tony Stark and Pepper Potts are not coming back ever again? Gwyneth Paltrow came out for what is probably her last Marvel event. She wore a G. Label tuxedo minidress which showed off her legs and hid her neck. The neck bow is too large and puffy and it makes her look like she?s wearing a black neck brace. Otherwise, she looks good? Her hair is okay.
Benedict Cumberbatch looks AWFUL these days. He recently shaved his head and it looks like he lost weight and he just looks terrible. Sophie Hunter knows it too.
Brie Larson in Celine. I mean? it?s a shiny satin and taken with her cheap-looking dye job, she looks sort of like a game show hostess. It?s just very dated, and she could do so much better.
Danai Gurira in hot Pink great color for her and you can tell she was feeling it.
Robert Downey Jr. and Susan Downey. Tony Stark has made RDJ a rich man, but I suspect he?s happy to be done with this.
Zoe Saldana in Givenchy. The color is great but the dress sucks. She loves some weird sh-t though.
Bradley Cooper didn?t come with Irina Shayk OR Lady Gaga, lmao. He flew solo.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|  | | 5.307.166
Photos Online+ 5.682 past week
1.112
Users Online | |  |
| | | | | | | | We Salute
Kylie Jenner
Photos of Kylie Jenner will not count in your daily view limit, if you are a registered member
Tribute ends in
9 days | | |
| | | | | |
|
