 | |  |  | Celebrity News & Gossip
|
|
| | Kristen Bell's kids order non-alcoholic beers at restaurants: 'judge me if you want' | | Added 311 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
It is still so funny to me that Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard make this big deal about ?protecting their children from being photographed,? yet they are constantly telling their kids? business to everyone. While I have no idea what Delta and Lincoln Shepard look like, I already know way too much about them, including how infrequently they bathe, and how they don?t shower until they ?stink.? Well, for years, Kristen has been telling everyone that her kids drink non-alcoholic beers. She told the story again this week while appearing on The Kelly Clarkson Show, and Kristen added a new twist. Her daughters (aged 8 and 9 years old) actually order non-alcoholic beer in restaurants now.
Kristen Bells kids have very mature taste. While appearing on an episode of The Kelly Clarkson Show, the Good Place actress, 43, chatted with host Kelly Clarkson, 41, about letting her two daughters ? Delta, 8, and Lincoln, 9 ? drink non-alcoholic beers.
Although she admitted that it sounds insane, Bell said that context is important, since her 48-year-old husband Dax Shepard is a recovering addict.
Hes a recovering addict, Bell said of Shepard, but he likes non-alcoholic beer, so hed pop one open, hed have [our oldest daughter] on his chest, and wed walk and look at the sunset, she told Clarkson. As a baby, she was pawing at it, and sometimes shed suck the rim of it. So I think it feels to her like something special, something daddy, something family.
Bell went on to say that the drinks contain zero percent alcohol and that since establishing this routine, her kids have asked for non-alcoholic beer at restaurants.
Weve been at restaurants where shes said, Do you have any non-alcoholic beer? And Im like, maybe we just keep that for home time, said the actress.
But then Im sort of like, you can judge me if you want, Im not doing anything wrong, added Bell. Thats your problem.
[From People]
Kids that age just want to feel like grownups and they copy their parents? behavior too. I loved ordering Shirley Temples when I was a kid because it felt like I was ordering a cocktail, like I was a grownup. I?ve seen teenagers order virgin pina coladas too, because it feels like a thrill, like they?re doing something naughty. Technically, Kristen is right it?s not like she?s doing anything wrong. I mean, except for telling her daughters? business to everyone. She and Dax should introduce their kids to Shirley Temples.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Kristen Bell (@kristenanniebell)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Low: Princess Kate is a lot tougher than her 'slightly bland' public persona | | Added 313 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Valentine Low?s Courtiers is coming out in paperback, which is why the Times ran an exclusive several weeks ago with excerpts from some new chapters. Low?s sources insist that the now-Princess of Wales was particularly upset after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?s 2021 Oprah interview. Low claims that Kate insisted that QEII?s statement post-interview include the phrase ?recollections may vary.? Kate insisted on that because Kate had spent the better part of three years telling everyone in the family and everyone in the media that Meghan had made her cry, when really, Wedding Karen Kate had made Meghan cry. Well, Low is still shilling this book and he?s trying to promote it by saying that Kate is ?steely? and yet she might also be very bland and an instigator. Of course, Low can?t come right out and say that, so here you go:
Kate Middleton is one tough cookie. Royal expert Valentine Low exclusively told Page Six in a recent interview that the royal, 41, is ?tougher? than she lets on.
?Interestingly, behind the scenes, she?s a lot more steely, a lot tougher than we give her credit,? he said. ?She?s this nice-looking woman, dresses nicely, smiles nicely, adopts sort of fairly uncontroversial charities. You know, they think she?s slightly bland.?
Low said one example of the Princess of Wales? steeliness occurred after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle?s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired in March 2021.
The Palace waited until the interview aired in the UK to issue a response and Low says in a new chapter for the paperback edition of his book ?Courtiers,? that there the royal family split on how to respond.
?The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan. The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning,? the statement from Queen Elizabeth II read at the time. ?While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.?
Low said that Jean-Christophe Gray, Prince William?s newly appointed private secretary, came up with the memorable line, ?recollections may vary? in the statement, implying that the Palace disagreed about what had happened.
?There were some people in other [royal] households, who felt it would antagonize Harry and Meghan and would go down badly and just keep the whole unpleasantness going,? Low explained. ?But it was Kate who really strongly made the argument,? he noted, adding that the mom of three wanted that line to stay in the statement so that Markle and Harry?s version of events wouldn?t be accepted as truth.
Low told us that Middleton is acutely aware that ?she?s one day going to be Queen? and ?thinks very carefully about the long-term security and strength and stability of the royal family as an institution.? He added, ?She?s good. She has a good eye on the big picture, the long game.?
[From Page Six]
?They think she?s slightly bland.? I swear, Kate really is that bland. You can argue that she?s aiming for ?uncontroversial? and I think that?s true but mostly, she really is that bland, that uninspired, that intellectually lazy. Of course Kate didn?t want the Sussexes? version of events to be ?accepted? because even though Meghan took pains to go gently on Kate in particular, Kate came across like a huge ahole. Even moreso in Prince Harry?s memoir. Kate was probably thrilled at the idea that recollections may vary would antagonize the Sussexes, because that seems to be her thing too.
Honestly though, one of the most surprising aspects of Low?s new chapters and these talking points about who came up with what line in the statement is that we?re definitely left with the impression, over and over again, that these people were issuing all kinds of statements in Queen Elizabeth II?s name and QEII had very little say in any of it. But tell me again that QEII ?wanted? Camilla to be called ?queen.?
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Brad Pitt is getting drunk in pubs after he films scenes for his Formula 1 movie | | Added 313 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Last week, we talked about Brad Pitt?s Formula 1 film, loosely called Apex, which had been filming in the UK for several weeks before the SAG-AFTRA strike was called. It?s a complicated situation the film is produced by Apple (an American company) with an American actor and SAG member in the lead, but most of the crew members seem to be British, and Lewis Hamilton is a producer on the film too. Once the strike was called, sources insisted that the production shut down and that Pitt is ?definitely a very loyal member of the union? so he wouldn?t cross the metaphorical picket line in the UK. The thing is, he?s still in the UK. And Apex, or what it?s being called, still seems to be filming. It?s a bad news/bad news situation: either Pitt has crossed the picket lines and he?s still filming in the UK or Brad is just sitting around British pubs, getting sh-tfaced. Or both, because that?s what it sounds like.
The Mail on Sunday can reveal that the Fight Club actor has spent weeks here letting his hair down after filming his new movie about Formula 1 racing. He has been based at the exclusive Soho Farmhouse near the Oxfordshire village of Great Tew, staying in one of their A-list cabins previously used by his friend Tom Cruise and British actor Simon Pegg.
Sources close to Pitt, who turns 60 in December, also say that he fell in love with a traditional British pub in the market town of Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire, where they were filming scenes for his movie, rumoured to be called Apex, in which he plays a fictional F1 driver called Sonny Hayes.
He sipped pints at the idyllic Globe Inn, on the banks of the Grand Union canal, along with his co-stars and other staff working on the film. The traditional menu includes scampi and chips for 11.99 and sausage and mash for 11.89.
One source said: Brad loves traditionally English things, including a really nice pub. It was closed for a week for filming but Brad just loved it there so would stay after filming and enjoy a drink.
[From The Daily Mail]
So much for his ?sobriety.? To be fair, I never believed he was sober. I think he dried out for a year or two following his violent assault on his wife and children in 2016, but Pitt has looked actively drunk or drugged out for a while now. There have been many reports of Brad drinking while in the UK too reportedly, he and Guy Ritchie were drinking heavily during and after the Wimbledon men?s final. And now he?s filming in British pubs and then sticking around to drink after filming?
PS? British actors? union Equity cannot strike in support of SAG-AFTRA, but they can ?demonstrate? and express solidarity with SAG-AFTRA. Equity?s leader Paul Fleming spoke, this weekend, about how he will not allow the UK film industry to become the backdoor for studios to undermine the writers and actors? strikes. I am very curious to see if the British reports about Apex continuing to film through the strike will eventually be a bigger deal in the American trade papers.
My local pub, the Globe Inn by the Grand Union Canal at Leighton Buzzard, is closed all this week because they're shooting scenes for Brad Pitt's F1-themed film Apex. The Apple TV Plus crew have taken over the place. I'll have to go elsewhere for a pint. pic.twitter.com/ZzNAt8ZMqU
Geoff Cox (@Coxchat1) July 12, 2023
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Valerie Bertinelli: Botox changed the shape of my eyebrows, hated it | | Added 317 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Valerie Bertinelli has been open about her struggle with weight and body image for many years. Shes spoken about realizing that she cant find happiness just from losing weight, and shes had her fair share of body-shamers on the internet. Shes responded to trolls in the past and called them out for being petty and cruel. Recently someone commented on one of Valeries TikToks, the Botox looks great, which was definitely meant as a snarky comment. So Valerie made a TikTok where she talked about why that type of comment hurts, and detailed her own experience with Botox. She had it before, but she didnt like how it turned out. Valerie comes across so genuine and sweet, it just makes me more annoyed that people are coming at her for the apparent crime of aging as a 62-year-old woman.
The ?One Day at a Time? alum posted a TikTok Sunday in response to a user who commented ?The Botox looks great? on one of her prior videos.
The Food Network star interpreted the comment as sarcasm, but decided to switch gears by responding to the mockery with mindfulness.
?I know you didn?t mean that as a compliment, but let?s talk about it, shall we?? Bertinelli began. ?I have tried Botox ? I hated it.?
The ?Hot in Cleveland? star then pulled up a photo of herself from six years ago when she did get Botox, and explained that the procedure ?changed the shape of my eyebrows? resulting in her not recognizing her own face.
?What I thought it was going to do was help me with my genetically puffy eyes,? Bertinelli explained. ?They?ve always annoyed me. I?ve always wanted those deep-set eyes. Don?t have ?em. Never going to get ?em. So, just live with it.?
But then Bertinelli got to the real reason why she wanted to talk about the comment.
?Because you?re trying to shame me, and you?re a woman. Like, what made you go out of your way to try to shame me?? Bertinelli said. ?And I?m not the first person to try to be shamed on TikTok or Instagram or any place. So, we?re women. We have to stick together, OK? Don?t shame somebody if they want to do something, anything, to make themselves feel better as they go out into this insane, flippin? crazy world, OK??
She then shattered any kind of stigma surrounding cosmetic procedures by admitting that if Botox helped her feel better about her appearance, she?d use it.
?Some people can do Botox, and it looks amazing on them,? she said. ?I am not one of them, unfortunately, or I would?ve kept doing it. But thankfully, it faded. I couldn?t wait for it to fade.?
[From The Huffington Post]
I wonder who told Valerie that Botox would help with puffy eyes because that just seems like bad advice. Botox in the forehead will slightly lift the tail of the brow in many cases, but it wont meaningfully change how your eye socket looks. Anyway, good for her for calling this person out. The stigma against women getting treatments like Botox is so annoying, and it does feel like women cant win. If they age naturally, people shame them, and if they get professional help, people shame them.
As for the person shaming her being a woman, Im not surprised at that. In my experience, women can shame each other worse than men sometimes. And I think women often shame each other because of envy, or because they feel threatened. I was raised in a very conservative church and I carried parts of modesty culture around with me even after I left the church. Id never say anything to other women, but I would judge them in my mind for wearing revealing clothes, and it would bother me so much. I had to examine why I was getting so activated, and I realized it was because I envied them. I wanted to be seen, I wanted to be desired, I wanted to own my femininity like they were. And the culture I was raised in told me I was a deviant and a Jezebel if I wanted any of those things, so I suppressed a lot of stuff. Now Im not triggered at all by other women wearing whatever the heck they want. In most cases when other women annoy me, its because theyre reflecting back something I havent accepted about myself. I think a similar dynamic is often at play when women shame each other for how they manage aging or treatments like Botox. Valerie has always looked great to me and I hope she doesnt let mean comments get to her.
Valerie Bertinelli replying to @ lisaweiss711 [TikTok]
I couldn't hear it that well so I cranked up the volume and had to shorten it for twitter. [1/2] pic.twitter.com/yU7DdQqKZO
aka stardust (@a_k_a_stardust) July 17, 2023
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Joe Manganiello ended his marriage because he wanted to be a dad | | Added 317 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
When Joe Manganiello and Sofia Vergara?s split was first announced this week, my first instinct/guess was ?I wonder if this was about kids.? Sofia was a young mother her son Manolo is already 31 years old. She has repeatedly expressed her lack of desire to do any of that again. Considering all of the crap she went through with Nick Loeb, I always assumed she put her cards on the table with Joe and let him know that she had no interest in having another kid.
Well, as TMZ reported, Joe was the one to file for divorce. His lawyer is Laura Wasser, there?s a prenup in place and neither party seems interested in contesting it. I would imagine there will be a minor fight over real estate, but overall this will probably be a pretty cut-and-dry divorce. At the end of TMZ?s piece, they noted: ?Speaking of kids, were hearing a big reason Joe has filed is their conflict over having children he wants them, she does not.? Page Sixs source said the same thing:
Joe Manganiello chose to end his seven-year marriage to Sofa Vergara because they disagreed on the topic of children, Page Six has learned. A source close to the ?True Blood? star, 46, tells us he?s always wanted to be a dad and that those feelings have only intensified in recent years.
It?s unclear where Vergara, 51, stood on the subject when the two said ?I do? in November 2015, but we?re told she may have been open to it at the time. The ?Modern Family? star is already mom to 31-year-old son Manolo, whom she shares with her ex-husband, Joe Gonzalez.
She was also dragged into a lengthy court battle over custody of two frozen embryos from her 2013 IVF treatments with then-fianc Nick Loeb, who sought to bring them to term. Though a judge ultimately ruled in the actress? favor in March 2021, we?re told the experience may have affected her view on having more kids.
Our insider tells us this disparity in the estranged couple?s relationship is the real reason for the split, noting that the ?irreconcilable differences? Manganiello cited in his divorce petition ? which he filed Wednesday ? is accurate. Despite reports claiming the actor?s longtime sobriety negatively impacted the marriage, our source does not believe that to be the case.
[From Page Six]
In case you?ve blocked out the Nick Loeb saga, that ahole kept dragging Sofia into court for years after she broke off their engagement. Loeb wanted ?custody? of the embryos they created while they were together he wanted to implant the embryos into another woman and raise Sofia?s biological children as a single father. It was truly bonkers. Loeb?s other aim was to be a nuisance, a thorn in Sofia?s side, and attempt to do damage to her marriage to Joe. If Sofia was originally open to having a kid with Joe, and then the Loeb stuff affected her, I don?t really blame her. Although, as I said at the beginning of the post, I kind of think Sofia was always done with having kids. That?s her right. And Joe can change his mind too.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Shakira is facing a second 'tax fraud case' in Spain but they haven't notified her | | Added 317 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Back when Shakira was with Gerard Pique, she owned a home in Barcelona and that was her main residence and where she raised her children. She also owns homes in her home country of Colombia, the US, Uruguay and other countries. Now that Shakira and Pique are over, she?s moved to Miami full-time and she?s cut her ties with Spain. Except the Spanish tax authorities are still trying to drag her to court over her time spent in Barcelona. This has been going on for a few years now and, from the beginning, it sounded like the Spanish tax authorities are the scammers, not Shakira. Even by the most basic Spanish reporting on the issue, Shakira paid what she owed plus interest. Shakira has also spoken about the tax issue at length in interviews, getting very specific about how many days a year she spent in Spain and how thorough her tax specialists are she?s worked with PricewaterhouseCoopers for years. Well, funny story?
Shakira is facing a second tax fraud case in Spain. Almost 10 months after the singer, 46, was ordered to stand trial in her $13.9 million tax evasion case in the country, she has now been hit with another investigation.
According to Reuters, a Spanish court said Thursday that it has started a new investigation against the Colombian star linked to alleged fraud on personal income tax and wealth tax in 2018. The court, which is in the town of Esplugues de Llobregat near Barcelona, said it had no information on how much money was in question, according to the Associated Press.
Per a translation from Spanish media outlet El Pais, the court opened a second case as a result of a complaint by the Barcelona Economic Crimes Prosecutor regarding Shakira allegedly defrauding the Tax Agency. Another local outlet, El Periodico, reported that the prosecutor?s office has filed a complaint for two alleged tax crimes.
A representative for Shakira told PEOPLE in a statement Thursday that she ?defends having always acted in accordance with the law and under the advice of the best tax experts. She is now focused on her life as an artist in Miami and is confident that there will be a favorable resolution of her tax issues.?
Her representative also said she is yet to receive any formal notification of the second probe regarding the 2018 financial year. The statement continued. ?The singers legal team will not make any comments until the notification reaches them through the official and legally established channels.?
?As it is publicly known, and as the Spanish Treasury was officially notified, Shakira is now living in Miami, so she must be notified personally at her new address, in strict accordance with the provisions of the Law.?
[From People]
I feel sorry for Shakira and I?m glad she got the hell out of Spain. They?re trying to make an example out of her, they?re trying to tie her up in court for years, they?re trying to wear her down and jam her up. It also looks like they?re mad that she left the country. It?s very Meghan Markle-coded, right? The anger towards a ?foreigner,? the otherizing, the need to make an example out of her. Shakira has been handling all of this the right way, in my opinion she?s been open about what they?re doing and she?s provided details through her reps and in her own interviews. She also believes that the Spanish government has executed a smear campaign against her, and it?s easy to see why she believes that.
Photos courtesy of Cover Images.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Ariana Grande already has a new boyfriend & he's married with a baby at home | | Added 317 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
I knew Ariana Grande had someone waiting in the wings as soon as she turned up at Wimbledon without her wedding ring, and within 24 hours, we found out that she was divorcing her husband of two years, Dalton Gomez. The only thing I was wrong about was my theory that the jumpoff was Andrew Garfield. It?s NOT Garfy!! Please, Ariana doesn?t have that kind of taste in men. She likes um, dudes who dont have the raw sexual magnetism of Andrew Garfield. Her jumpoff is very much her type, with a new twist. The new guy, as confirmed by TMZ and People, is Ethan Slater. Y?all, he?s married with a baby at home.
Ariana Grande is moving on after her split from husband Dalton Gomez. The ?Thank U, Next? singer, 30, is dating Broadway alum Ethan Slater, her costar in the upcoming film adaptation of Wicked, sources confirm to PEOPLE.
?Ariana and Dalton separated in January, one source says. She and Ethan recently began dating, and he is separated from his wife.
Reps for both stars have not returned multiple requests for comment. TMZ was first to report the news. Grande is set to play Glinda in Universal?s film adaptation of the beloved Broadway musical, while Slater, 31, will play Boq, the love interest of Elphaba?s sister Nessarose.
The movie began shooting in the U.K. last year and was scheduled for release in November 2024, though it remains unclear if the SAG-AFTRA strike will affect its premiere.
[From People]
Ariana basically moved to London late last year to work on Wicked, which is when (we now know) her marriage was pretty much over. Dalton apparently tried to win her back, but she was done with him. So? I wonder when Ari and Ethan Slater started? They?re established/comfortable enough of as a couple where Ari?s people are openly telling People Magazine that he left his wife. The same wife he gushed over just two months ago. The wife?s name is Lilly Jay. Lilly and Ethan married in 2018 they were high school sweethearts. Lilly gave birth to their son last year. This is giving me strong Miranda Lambert vibes!! Oh, Ariana, what the hell did you do???
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Fran Drescher finally got the Covid vaccine 'because I kept losing work!' | | Added 317 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Those of us who are older than, what? 35 years old? We remember all of the highs and lows of Fran Drescher?s life. So it?s especially wild to see her as the president of SAG-AFTRA, summoning every nuance of her outer-borough accent to sound every bit like a tough union boss. Drescher has been giving tons of interviews since she broke off the ?negotiations? with the AMPTP and called for a strike last week. She spoke to Variety this week about what led to the strike, how she came to the position of union boss and what SAG-AFTRA is trying to do. She also talked about vaccines and it got a little bit nutty, but Fran fans know that about her too. Some highlights:
Whether she thinks she was initially too optimistic about AMPTP negotiations: ?This is my first negotiation. In hindsight, I could see how we were being manipulated. But at the time, I came into it with a certain level of trust, that we would actually be able to make a contract. But whenever we start getting to the meat of these situations, we start to see that we?re getting stonewalled. We?re coming back with open response counter proposals, and so, actually, in earnest we still gave them an unprecedented 12-day extension to come back with something really meaningful. And during that time, they canceled our negotiation meetings. And, again, I thought, maybe they?re duking it out behind closed doors, maybe they?re gonna come back with something that we can really start to roll up our sleeves. They just wanted to get more time to promote their summer movies and they had no intention of using that extension for anything else.
Whether she has regrets about being duped: ?I?m always going to try and give a person the truth. I hoped to avert a strike ? that is the ideal. Going on strike is not the original point. That?s when you feel like you can?t make a deal. But if you feel like you can make a deal? Hindsight is always 20/20. But even during that period when they woke up, they said, ?We?re still in our room,? talking about how to counter your proposal. So, it?s like, OK, well, maybe that?s good. We wanted to avert a strike, if at all possible.?
The journeyman actors were the ones pushing for a strike: ?Remember, Tom Cruise and top people make their own deals. That?s not who we are striking for. We?re striking for the journeyman?they?re the ones that were pushing us to strike, OK? They?re the ones that are living this level of oppression. They feel like they can?t take any more of it, because they are being economically squeezed out of their livelihoods. If they?re willing to take this huge step of sacrifice, then we?re in it to win it. If this was a different point in history, where the business model didn?t change so dramatically, and suddenly with streaming and digital and AI. It?s a whole new game! If you think that we don?t have to unpack the old contract and change it exponentially I don?t know what to say.
Whether she worries about being blacklisted as an actress: ?My speech at that press conference reverberated around the world. It spoke to workers everywhere; it is bigger than the sum of its parts. I?m not going to worry about my career. I?ve had a fantastic career. If anybody in this industry wishes to blacklist me or being on the side of right and good, then whatever. I follow Buddhist teaching or call myself a Jew Bu. I let life unfold. I don?t have a crystal ball. I?m not going to speculate. I don?t know where this will lead. All I know is in the now, which is what Buddhism teaches you, to remain present. This is my calling and I?m going to meet this moment.
Figuring out the longer vision: ?The greed of these entities and the shiny baubles that they put before the shareholders, obliterates a longer vision, a far sightedness of where this should go or how to manage it correctly. And they just jump in. They sell the shareholders, and all of this is bullsh-t. Then when they really get into the trenches with the costs, what do they do? They look right away to the performer to squeeze them, because God forbid they should take away from the CEOs. Do they do character driven smaller stories. No! They got all these flying dragons and bullsh-t and it?s expensive and all the big stars and it?s very expensive and all of that is what they wanted to do. The idea that if you spend 80% on production, maybe spend 79% and we can get our fair share. And the money that?s paid for all this, including the CEO salaries, is in subscriptions! It?s not in episodes or seasons anymore.
On Covid protocols & vaccine mandates: ?I felt like the COVID protocols, pre-vaccine, were successful. People went back to work. It was a manageable situation. Then, with the advent of the vaccine, it turns into something else. In California, private business can determine their own health policy. And they decided that rather than constantly be shut down, everybody had to be vaccinated if they wanted to work. Even though there was constant information coming out that you can still get it. And once you got it, are you as good as inoculated by the virus. There was a lot of ifs ands or buts. And the dangerous aspect of it all was that people were being fed different news. There wasn?t one narrative. And since 80% of all ad dollars on most broadcasts comes from big pharma.
Whether she got vaccinated: ?I did because I kept losing work! I did it, in spite of the fact that I was a little scared to do it. Because I have my own health issues, cancer survivor, all of this stuff, but I decided to just let the universe help me through this because I don?t know what to do. All I know is that I want to work. But a lot of people it was just that they didn?t have a choice. And they didn?t have a career during that time, either as a result, and I always felt like I?m not a dictator. I can only keep bringing the conversation to the board. I?m trying to get them to see that we should push back on this. I was not successful at that.
[From Variety]
The vaccine stuff was totally cringe and she should have just left it at something like ?I was trying to advocate for all actors, even the anti-vaxx dumbasses.? Unfortunately, it sounds like she was one of the anti-vaxx dumbasses who only got vaccinated because, oh right, those vaccine mandates actually did work. As for the rest of it while I?m not a SAG member, I think it?s fine that she did the 12-day extension, even if it turned out to just be a scam. It showed that she was operating in good faith and she was willing to do what she could to avoid a strike and make a deal. When the scam was laid bare, that?s when she showed her backbone and walked away. Anyway? I hope she continues to burn the sh-t down.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Joe Manganiello's 21-year sobriety 'played a role in his split from Sofia Vergara' | | Added 318 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
Is anyone else still bummed about Joe Manganiello and Sofia Vergara? I thought they were the real deal! I also thought Joe approached the marriage in a very grown-up, cards-on-the-table way. He was already sober (he?s been sober for over two decades) and working a program when they met, and he didn?t make his sobriety his entire personality either it was just part of who he was. Sofia, on the other hand, was still a social drinker and I?m sure she kept alcohol in the house. Well, reportedly, that was an issue:
Joe Manganiello?s sobriety journey reportedly played a role in his split from Sofa Vergara.
?Of course the fact that Sofa is not sober had an impact on their marriage,? a source told Daily Mail Tuesday. ?He was warned about this when he started dating her and again before marrying her.?
The insider added that the ?Magic Mike XXL? star ?did not think? he was going to ?change? Vergara in any way ? but also ?didn?t think about the implications? her drinking habits could have on their marriage. However, a second source told the outlet that Vergara ?could not have been more supportive? of her estranged husband?s sobriety over the years.
[From Page Six]
I don?t think anyone is saying that Sofia is an alcoholic she seems like a social drinker and someone who enjoys a glass of wine with dinner and she can keep it to one glass. But yeah, the sober spouse/not-sober spouse dynamic is always going to be tricky. Also tricky? The money. They spoke about signing a prenup before they married, as Sofia is the wealthier one. Page Six?s legal consultant explains what the prenup was all about:
Despite their relatively lengthy union and exorbitant wealth, high-profile divorce attorney Frederic J. Siegel ? who is not representing either party and has no affiliation with the case ? tells Page Six that the duo will likely have a clean break financially. Before she married the ?Magic Mike? star in November 2015, Vergara revealed that the two were signing a prenuptial agreement, which typically outlines how a couple?s finances and assets will be handled should they divorce later on.
?He said, ?Do whatever you want. I?ll sign whatever you want,? the actress, 51, told Howard Stern that May. Siegel theorizes that Vergara and Manganiello?s marital contract ?probably had what is called a walkaway.?
?She keeps what she has and what she earns, and he keeps what he has and what he?s earned,? Siegel, the founding member of family law firm Siegel, Colin & Kaufman, explains. ?So with a prenup ? and without kids [together] ? it becomes a much simpler case.?
As for marital property, Vergara and the ?True Blood? star moved into a shared home in May 2015, six months before they said ?I do.? According to TMZ, she?s the one who purchased the seven-bedroom, 11,000-square-foot Beverly Hills pad for $10.6 million.
Last July, the outlet reported that the pair put the fully renovated estate ? equipped with a chef?s kitchen, gym, movie theater and pool with a spa ? on the market for a staggering $19.6 million.
The then-couple was simultaneously building a bigger and better home in the same area, per TMZ.
?My belief is that they probably are at a more advanced stage [in their divorce] than people would think, because usually when people make the announcement like they made yesterday, they?ve already done some of the preliminary work,? Siegel tells us. ?It doesn?t look like it?s messy ? yet,? he adds. ?It?s a good sign when people issue the kind of statement that they did, saying that they wanted to do this amicably, but it doesn?t always work out that way.?
[From Page Six]
I would also imagine that the terms of the pre-nup are upheld and that they?ll both walk away with whatever they earned separately within the marriage, and Sofia will probably get the real estate (since she was the one paying for their homes). Joe is a working actor and he probably has a nice nest egg, but Sofia is very rich.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Gigi Hadid was arrested for marijuana possession in the Cayman Islands | | Added 319 days ago | Source: CeleBitchy |
|
|
|
|
|
The marijuana laws have loosened (if not completely disappeared) in so many states in the US, we barely hear about celebrities getting arrested on drug charges. I figure pretty much everyone in half of the country (if not more) has easy access to pot, whether it?s through medical dispensaries or simple open-to-anyone sales. Young people don?t know what it was like in the 1980s and 1990s, when marijuana was considered a ?gateway drug,? and being arrested for possession could mean some really terrible sh-t for your future. All of which to say, Gigi Hadid was arrested for possession in the Cayman Islands. She was carrying marijuana in her bag at the airport! Good lord.
Gigi Hadid had a bumpy start to her summer vacation. The supermodel was embarking on a girls trip to the Cayman Islands on July 10 when she was arrested at Owen Roberts International Airport, E! News has learned.
According to local outlet Cayman Marl Road, shortly after Hadid and her pal arrived via a private plane, custom officials allegedly found ganja and utensils used for the consumption of ganja in their luggage.
Hadid and her friend were then arrested on suspicion Importation of Ganja and Importation of Utensils used for the consumption of ganja, the outlet reports, adding that they were then taken to the Prisoner Detention Center, where they were released on bail.
Two days later, on July 12, Hadid and her pal were formally charged during a court appearance, where they pleaded guilty and were both fined $1,000, according to Cayman Marl Road. They are not facing any charges.
Gigi was traveling with marijuana purchased legally in NYC with a medical license, her rep tells E! News. It has also been legal for medical use in Grand Cayman since 2017. Her record remains clear and she enjoyed the rest of her time on the island.
E! News has reached out to authorities has not heard back.
[From E! News]
I mean? I would never carry on any flight, especially an international flight, regardless of medical license and regardless of the medical-use laws. That?s another thing ?90s kids will tell you: you never carry drugs on commercial flights! Don?t assume you know all of the drug laws of other countries! There are too many horror stories. That being said, my feeling is that Gigi got off lightly, probably because of her celebrity. I hope this will be a lesson learned don?t carry drugs internationally. Especially when you?re rich and famous, you?ll be able to find a dealer wherever you go.
Her vacation was barely interrupted the Cayman Islands probably got thousands of dollars in free tourism advertising from this incident. Gigi posted photos and videos from her vacation too, nary a mention of her arrest.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Gigi Hadid (@gigihadid)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|  | | 5.340.743
Photos Online+ 2.609 past week
1.418
Users Online | |  |
| | | | | | | | We Salute
Heather Graham
Photos of Heather Graham will not count in your daily view limit, if you are a registered member
Tribute ends in
4 days | | |
| | | | | |
|
