RCharter
-
Posts
4.2k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by RCharter
-
-
10 minutes ago, dixiecricket said:
No offense taken, seriously. Hell, I would rather Hollywood and the media focus on Alabama being full of corruption (because unfortunately it is). Anything other than presenting the state like we are still the same as we were 50 years ago.
And since I wasn't a citizen of the world in those times, then I think I should be able to expect that 50 years later, I can watch a TV show about my state without seeing a bunch of racist rhetoric bandied about.
I don't see why you would expect that, is everyone supposed to forget that Alabama has a racist history and still has racists because you came on the scene?
I don't expect that people are going to stop making shows about old Hollywood because I moved to LA
I don't understand people having to avoid reality because it makes others uncomfortable.
The reason that Alabama isn't the exact same as it was 50 years ago, wasn't because of Alabama, but was because of federal law and court decisions. Its not like everyone in Alabama just had a change of heart and decided to end segregation. And so, is there much evidence to suggest that the mindset has undergone a great change in regards to race relations? I don't particularly think so.
I don't think YOU'RE a racist, but I think trying to characterize Alabama as being "just like any other state" in terms of race is not accurate. But, the state of Alabama is no reflection on you as a person.
-
14
-
-
3 minutes ago, dixiecricket said:
When only Alabama is shown as a racially divided, segregation-wanting state, it is unfair. If Hollywood wants to cast judgement on the South as a whole, then there are many other states to choose from or lump us all together; but it is only Alabama [solely] that continues to be shown this way.
UnReal didn't show any of that. But Alabama has come by their reputation fairly.
It is not just Alabama that continues to harbor that reputation, there are other states in the south that have the same reputation.
The only difference is that those states may have also done something else of national note that makes the media discuss those things as well.
-
9
-
-
31 minutes ago, dixiecricket said:
These are all events that happened in more than one state. And, again, happened years ago. I can't fix what happened back then other than to make sure it doesn't happen again.
The bottom line is this, Alabama is not the ONLY state to have a marred history. I am exasperated that Hollywood continues to treat this state as being the only state where events happened.
No, segregated proms still happen in the south. And they happened on a wider scale as late as the 1990's, not 50 years ago. In Alabama there is evidence to suggest that segregated proms still occur even when people objected in 2010.
Alabama may not be the only state to have a history steeped in racism, but it is a state that has a history steeped in racism. I don't think Hollywood, or anyone else is unfair to Alabama.
27 minutes ago, dixiecricket said:This is my point, Alabama is never shown in any other light. This show proved no different with the exception of college football, which (as an Auburn fan) doesn't count) ;)
No tea, no shade but perhaps Alabama should work on doing something else that is worthy of national attention. But complaining about a reputation caused by the actions of its own citizens isn't at all fair or reasonable, IMO.
But, I will say that Alabama did gain some national attention when it allowed for posthumous pardon of the Scottsboro boys in 2013.....for a crime they were wrongly convicted of in the 1930.
Seems odd that it would take so long to pardon a group of black men wrongly convicted and imprisoned for raping a white woman.
-
11
-
-
4 minutes ago, dixiecricket said:
Every time, Germany is mentioned, we don't immediately play Holocaust tributes. Every time the Jewish people are mentioned, the media doesn't play a Holocaust montage. These images are only used in their historically accurate context.
This doesn't always happen with the southern states either.
Most of the times now when people are talking about Georgia (part of the south) they are talking about a trashy reality show, many times when people are talking about North Carolina -- its about their sports teams. Most of the times, grainy 50's video doesn't even get shown.
-
4
-
-
7 minutes ago, dixiecricket said:
I definitely agree it's not perfect; but it's no different than any other state. And for Hollywood, as a whole, to continue perpetuating this notion that Alabama is the proverbial black sheep of the nation regarding race relations is ridiculous. I, again, go back to where are all of the *alleged* race-based police brutality cases?---not here.
Please note that I am saying alleged because no one has yet been charged with a crime.
Actually, it is different than a lot of other states. Other states don't have segregated proms. Other states don't really have the same history of slavery and the economic dependence on slavery that made them treat human beings like filth and property. Other states don't have the same history of having to objectify an entire race of people in order to look yourself in the mirror and not want to shoot yourself in the face for enslaving another person.
The South traditionally was more reliant on slave labor because of the nature of the agricultural industry. Therefore, they had more slaves and had to justify slavery to themselves on a daily basis and putting profit before humanity. Which is much easier to do, when you tell yourself that the person you're enslaving either isn't human or isn't fully human....or is different than you.
This is the ideology which can and sometimes HAS been passed down through generations.
As for the alleged police brutality cases, I would suspect that in the Southern states, blacks know better than to even complain.
However, I will say that the number of black inmates vs. white inmates on death row in Southern States is startling and very real data.
-
15
-
-
6 minutes ago, dixiecricket said:
No. Where this belief comes from is the fact that anytime the South is mentioned it is inferred that we are anxiously awaiting for the next round of the Civil War. As an example, Civil Rights Era in Birmingham, Alabama, definitely not a proud moment for the state. To this day, anytime civil rights and Birmingham are mentioned in the same breath - the "media" start showing grainy black and white video of awful atrocities from 50 years ago. FIFTY. 5-0. Shows like this don't help show that this part of the world isn't like this any more.
Its not a proud moment for the state, but that doesn't mean that it didn't happen. And that doesn't mean that there aren't people alive today who believed in that ideology and raised their children to believe in it, and those children have raised their own children in the same belief system.
I also don't think 50 years is a such a long time as to think that there aren't still quite a few racist holdouts. I'm guessing 50 years is a long time for those who don't want to be associated with that era, but for the people still suffering from the effects of institutionalized racism 50 years isn't SO LONG AGO as to make that history irrelevant.
There are parts of the south that are still quite segregated. In fact.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segregated_prom which, pretty much only happens in the south.
A lot of Southerners may have changed their point of view, but there is no reason to believe that the south is all sunshine and rainbow coalitions now.
-
16
-
-
25 minutes ago, jhlipton said:
On TV, the rule is almost always Black Man, White (or Light) Woman; and very rarely Black Woman / White Man. And Sleepy Hollow lost 2(!!!) in one season!
I know.....the tide is just now starting to shift.
As much as I hate Kerry Washington as an actress, I can acknowledge that its nice to have a show on the air with a powerful black woman with powerful white men fighting over her.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Lady Calypso said:
Agreed. Bronte hinders Natalie's potential in making it far, I think. Without Bronte, Natalie could slip into an alliance with James and the other girls, and she could coast for a few weeks. Well, she could have, even with Paulie's hatred for her. I do think Natalie could be a much better player without Bronte and Bridgette. I think she would ditch Bridgette, but Bronte would have to leave in order for Natalie to move to a better alliance. So, I think getting Bronte out is a smarter idea.
Plus, again, I'm rooting for Natalie to win the whole game but she needs to play the game more. I think she'd be better if she didn't have Bronte to trust.
I actually sort of think this is what they both want to do, but they can't see themselves as being disloyal and getting rid of Bronte
But "at the end of the day," I think Bridgette really wants to hitch her wagon to Frank hardcore and not have to listen to anyone else but him. And I think Natalie probably doesn't want to have Frank tied around her neck via Bridgette.
But as long as all three are together, I think they are going to have to stay in their alliance, or at least thats the way they feel.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Madding crowd said:
Sketchers go walk shoes aren't backless, they actually are made for walking and contain some cushioning. They don't slip off and are nothing like flip flops. I have seen them in my gym and I think they are ok unless you are doing heavy duty workouts. I wear a lace up gym shoe myself but on days when my back is bad, I prefer shoes that aren't heavy.
Oh, then I'm thinking of a different Sketcher slip on shoe that I've seen.
The ones I've seen from Sketchers aren't flip flops, but they are backless shoes that you slip your feet into. I HAVE however seen people at the gym in flip flops and I'm scared for them.
-
2
-
-
21 hours ago, JudyObscure said:
I think we're talking at cross purposes here if we're calling immoral behavior and illegal behavior the same thing. Any man who makes inappropriate remarks or puts his hands on a woman in the work place is morally wrong. Any woman who hopes to prosecute that man for assault or harassment in the work place would be smart to verbalize her complaints. It's just the way the law works and most smart women know that. The woman isn't guilty of anything at all in either case but just like taking pictures of your bruises after being beat up is a good idea, saying "no," at some point is a good idea. You will be asked if you said it while you're on the witness stand. The fact that you are entirely innocent doesn't enter into it. You wont be the person facing jail.
No, legally a battery is a harmful or offensive touching. I didn't make that up, the court system did. So yeah, what Frank did, was a battery. legally.
And no, you do not need to verbalize your complaints in the case of a battery. The same way if you slap someone in the face they don't need to say "ow, can you stop slapping me in the face" for it to be called a battery. I'm not sure where you got that idea from, but you're mistaken.
If a reasonable person would find the touching offensive, it is a battery. Most reasonable women would find a person they don't really know slapping their ass as offensive.
You can be asked on the witness stand any number of things. The jury will only be asked to judge a battery by the standard of whether the touching was offensive by the standard of a reasonable person. In fact, legally, saying that you didn't actually hurt someone is not a defense to battery.
-
8
-
-
49 minutes ago, MV007 said:
Paulie's feelings toward Natalie are interesting. He has trashed her reputation around the house without actually saying anything. I believe it was yesterday that Michelle was telling James to beware of Natalie because Paulie told her he would share some "scary shit" about her after the show. Paulie didn't want to say it on the live feeds though.
Thats bullshit. If you want to say you have "scary shit" on someone on national TV, you need to say what the "scary shit" is.
Its not like you're so worried about her reputation, so either say it, or shut up about having "scary shit" on her. Unless you're worried about a defamation suit or being called out as a big fat liar....or you have nothing at all and just like to talk shit.
-
10
-
-
1 hour ago, njbarmaid said:
I feel like this "buzz" for keeping Tiff is starting a little too early, way too much time until Thursday night for people to change their minds multiple times.
I really wish Bronte or Natalie would reach out to Day or vice versa regarding getting Paul out this week.
Hope springs eternal.
I don't know, unless they are getting rid of teams I think Paul may be Day's best chance to be HOH.
I think they should get rid of Bronte, Natalie should be absorbed into another alliance (something with James) and Bridgette can continue to kiss Frank's ass
I think its much better for Natalie's game to be aligned with James than to be aligned with Bridgette
29 minutes ago, SiobhanJW said:I do want Tiffany to stay, but I want her to stay now more because it'll piss Frank off so much, he's going to go bananas and I'm totally #TeamFeeds. We need some fun Drama!!!
I wouldn't mind Tiffany staying in the game, but the Frank blindside will be so sweet! And I want that to happen more.
-
7
-
-
5 minutes ago, ClareWalks said:
And you know, if she's serious about No BS, it shouldn't matter why she's in a scooter. Her message is so all over the place. "Don't judge people for any reason! But especially me, because I have good excuses!"
That is exactly the message from Whitney. In fact, I would go as far as to so that her message is "I don't care who you judge, as long as you don't judge me, because I have an excuse!"
It is what I find most hypocritical about her "No BS" campaign
If you're never supposed to body shame someone, than we don't need constant reminders that PCOS is making you fat. Because WHY you're fat shouldn't matter, you just shouldn't be judged for being fat no matter why you're fat.
I don't understand why that doesn't annoy more of her fans.
-
7
-
-
41 minutes ago, Pdxblonde said:
There's nothing wrong with the slip on sketchers, but they aren't very sturdy- that was my point.
and I think thats an interesting, and super important point.
The bigger you get, the more important the workout shoe because you're already putting more weight on your joints
Wearing slip on shoes, backless during a workout is an accident waiting to happen, especially if you're doing cardio. I see it at the gym and I am scared for people who are trying to workout in flip flops and what not (I've seen it!) because I feel like the shoe is going to slip off and they are going to get tripped up.
Just as important.....you need to have support and cushioning, and you probably need to purchase workout shoes more often than others. If the shoes aren't sturdy its hard to get either of those things.
I have to believe that if we put a man on the moon, someone has surely created a workout shoe for people with really, really big feet.
-
5
-
-
5 hours ago, greekmom said:
I don't think so and maybe that was part of the reason she was so sour faced. The scooter just justifies the fact that her mobility is starting to limit itself (be it her back or what not). It's poking holes in the lies that Twit is telling herself that you can be obese and still be able to do all that people in a decent weight range can do.
While she may say one thing on the show...she was very clear to point out to the TV viewing audience that the scooter was NOT because she was fat, but because of her messed up back. I bet you somewhere in that TH was a line about how thin people tweak their back all the time, so ipso facto.....her being in a scooter was not due at all to her weight, but rather to just some freak occurrence that could happen to a skinny person and has nothing to do with her weight.
Which is partially true, people of all sizes have back pain and put out their back.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Save Yourself said:
I would really appreciate it if people would avoid using the word 'crazy' when talking about mental illness on the board. It's as disparaging as calling a gay person a f***** and it is not a clinical term. There is a lot of stigma for those of us with mental illness and it's quite hurtful to be called 'crazy' when through no fault of our own we have a serious condition that affects our daily lives and causes a lot of pain. The part of mental health stigma that UnREAL portrays very well is the fact that even if Rachel is in a stable state, as soon as someone wants to 'get' at her they start throwing her mental health back in her face. This is a very real thing in my life and others with poor mental health, no one ever lets you forgot that you are 'crazy'. The ongoing use of that word helps to contribute to that stigma.
I don't think I did this -- I try to avoid the word for actual mental illness. If I did, I apologize.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, xqueenfrostine said:
Again, no I don't think this is the show's way of telling us Rachel is bipolar. I don't think they would have gone to the trouble of showing her mother tell her that she has Borderline personality disorder and establishing that her mom had ruled out bipolar disorder as a diagnosis if they wanted to think that Rachel is in fact bipolar. Plus I doubt they'd have two characters share the same mental illness and we already know what bipolar disorder looks like in the minds of the writers. Mary's condition looked very different from Rachel's, and was a much more accurate (though still fairly flawed) depiction of what bipolar disorder looks like. The difference in the depictions of Rachel and Mary at the very least show that the writers understand the difference between a mood disorder and a personality disorder.
But was it all that different? Rachel does go through bouts of being "fine" and then, when faced with a stressful situation she freaks out. Mary was for real on medication so her symptoms may have been less obvious through most of the filming. But she had a stressful situation and she freaked out as well. And sort of in the same way as Rachel. There was a manic type high, followed by the crash that is to come. At least thats how I saw it.
But again, I don't even think the show is really wanting the viewer to know anything more than that Rachel has a mental condition that is causing her to have these manic highs and crashing lows. And that condition is triggered by stress.
I think its something more than that Rachel is fine and people just expect her to act out and therefore she does.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, HeyAdam said:
They're called "dimmers". True story.
that....is hilarious :)
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, phoenics said:
My point was more that it wasn't like Rachel HAD to still date Coleman to get there. Quinn either. I get what you mean - but Quinn didn't really get EverLasting on her own either - Chet was there and basically stole it from her. Her reticence about John Booth was about something else. And Rachel isn't being legally held to EverLasting anymore - she could leave too on her own. And probably make it somewhere else. I just don't get what ties them to EverLasting specifically - the show isn't really doing a good job of driving that home for me. I'm getting a serious case of that stereotype that black women get a lot of which is how black women's girl posse's actually hurting the black women's chance of having real love.
Rachel could break away and do her own thing - I don't think that's out of the realm of possibility - she doesn't NEED Everlasting.
Neither does Quinn.
They could BOTH leave and do better AND have the men. And it doesn't mean they have to take what the men are offering either.
My main point is that being a woman who made it on her own without a man, I don't see the appeal of Everlasting at all. It's garbage and soul destroying. And Rachel and Quinn seemed doomed to never find love and happiness while they are saddled with it. GET OUT ladies! It's not worth it!
My comment was this: "I would date the hell out of John Booth and have a bushel of biracial semi-ashy babies with him."
I'm a black woman. Hence the biracial babies. The ashy babies reference is from the movie Something New.
I don't know, I would imagine that Rachel has gotten somewhat of a reputation in her industry. She was "plucked" from nowhere, and has publicly acted out. I might not want to put her in charge of things because if stuff went sideways who knows what she would be doing.
And I'm a little over Rachel, for all her talk of feminism, she tends to constantly lean too heavily on men in the workplace. The very idea that she would even get involved with Coleman after the disaster of Adam/Jeremy is just.....not great to me. As much as she will pick on the contestants and talk down to them, I don't particularly think she is any better than any of them. And the fact that she seems to be under that impression, makes her even less likeable.
How long is it between filmings? A year or so? She had this giant blowup with Jeremy/Adam...both men she was dating in the workplace. The year before she drove off in a car due to stress of the show and that video of her talking about Jeremy (a man she was dating in the workplace) made the rounds.
How can she not get the message that its time to stop shitting where she eats. Or maybe she just needs to stop eating for a while, because she can't eat in a healthy manner right now.
I would also have babies with John Booth...
6 hours ago, TiffanyNichelle said:Other Random Black Lady has a name and lines and a career and everything. Wow! Of course she was only kept so they could have that drama of "will Darius cut Tiffany or Racist Beth Ann" but whatever. Finally Beth Anne is gone even though I'm still not sure how she lasted this long. That's one of the biggest problems with this season. The contestants are such an afterthought other than maybe two or three. Activist Ruby was an interesting character but to find out that Jameson was a cop? Could have been nice to explore some of that. Instead of trying to force fights between Ruby and Beth Anne (which went nowhere) I would have also liked to see how Ruby felt about Jameson being a black cop in Chicago.
Nice to see Jay do something other than bitch at Rachel.
Chet this episode felt like Chet from last season which makes me hate the MRA version we've had to suffer through for every episode until this one.
EXACTLY!!!! I also would have liked to know more about Jameson, why did a Philly cop choose to be on this show? How has she made it to the final 4 when I haven't seen Darius so much as hand her a cracker?
9 hours ago, BingeyKohan said:One all-time great moment I forgot to mention: When Beth Ann's babydaddy is storming off set (a gunshot breakup instead of a gunshot wedding) and Rachel hands him his bike helmet and says 'thankyousomuch' like he fixed a flat or checked a coat for her.
Yeah, but you know Rachel was hoping that the boyfriend was going to say the "n" word. I wonder if that was a discussion in the writers room. Rachel seem genuinely upset that there wasn't an obvious racist around and I thought that either the boyfriend was going to say something racist, or that the stress of the situation would somehow cause someone in the family to go off-script and say something racist (not something as obvious as the "n" word, but something that could be used)
-
4
-
-
7 hours ago, phoenics said:
It was sweet of Darius to give BethAnn money for getting pregnant and not knowing who the father was - wonder why he couldn't slip a huge donation to BLM on behalf of Ruby.
That made Darius look worse to me.
white woman that nearly accused you of being her baby daddy > BLM for Darius I guess?
ETA: We don't know if Darius actually donated some money secretly to BLM, and it was still really nice of him to put aside money for BethAnn. Goodness only knows she is going to be in a BAD situation when she gets home.
6 hours ago, BingeyKohan said:But don't you think if stereotypes were being perpetuated it was Everlasting doing it, and not UnReal? We have to remember production would have gotten there first, and made sure there was watermelon on the table and guns to be shot. I agree the sequence was rushed; last season, we would have seen Beth Ann place misguided trust in a producer to sneak her the pregnancy test, all the while scheming to exploit the outcome. But I think UnReal (fairly or not) trusts us to know the m.o. by now and take some things for granted.
I think that Rachel's assumption of there being a racist southern family was based on the fact that: a) there are likely still a lot of racist holdovers in the South. I'm not saying EVERYONE in the South is a racist, but given the long and storied history of racism in the South there may be more racists per square inch than in other places, and b) that Beth Anne saw fit to have/wear a confederate flag bikini and defend the confederate flag (which, frankly, I've had just about enough of, there are other symbols you can use to evidence your distaste for government that aren't steeped in slavery) and c) that Beth Anne doesn't even really seem to see Darius as a person at all but as "Quarterback" would all be clues that she might come from a family that is racist.
If your family may not accept a black man, but will accept you dating "quarterback," it may be because they have issues with black men.
And words cannot describe how shitty it was for her to give her father the impression that Darius might be the father as he was holding a shotgun. To me, that was a subtle callback to the days when a white woman would sleep with a black men and then claim to be raped and the man ended up getting lynched.
If I were Darius, I wouldn't have even wanted her to sit next to me on the plane, because who knows what other shit she would find to blame on him.
ETA: for some reason I didn't watch parts of the first episode, but I would have also assumed that they would have screened BethAnne for "racist southerner" if that was the narrative they wanted to go with when building their "cast"
-
13
-
-
4 hours ago, Pepper Mostly said:
I don't know, guys. To me this is dipping too far into soap opera. Everything is too rushed, I'm not getting character development or anything like subtlety. Madison is now as savvy and cynical as Jay? Chet is on top of things and decent? Quinn is a giggly teen with a new bf? How, why? How are Coleman and Rachel in love already? How did smart observant producer Rachel allow herself to be pushed to the edge in the first five minutes at Bethann's?? Of course her family would be polite! Why wasn't she snooping through the medicine cabinet, and assessing the rest of the family to find the secret Klan member (who she would then ply with booze to get the confrontation she wanted?) She's freaking out because no one burned a cross in the first five minutes? And really? The girl is pregnant? What's next? someone goes blind? Everything I loved about the show is going out the window.
That was hysterical.
Amnesia! Secret Twins! The suitor's long lost half sister is a contestant!
-
8
-
-
4 hours ago, xqueenfrostine said:
i disagree. Mood swings as a symptom aren't exclusive to bipolar disorder, and it's a misconception among people unfamiliar with bipolar disorder that people suffering from that condition careen from mood to mood over a short period of time. That's generally not how it happens. Manic and depressive episodes usually linger for several days, if not weeks or months at a time. People with bipolar also usually have long stretches of time where their moods are normal/stable, which is something that doesn't seem true for Rachel who has always been depicted as barely keeping things together. And while I'm loathe to give any credence at all to Rachel's mom, I do think it's telling that she herself had moved on from bipolar disorder as her chosen theory for what's wrong with Rachel. Borderline personality disorder, her mom's current diagnosis, is also characterized by mood swings and has other criteria that better fit Rachel far better than bipolar disorder. The fact that Rachel's mood swings are often triggered by events in her life alone is a pretty good sign that she's not bipolar. The defining characteristic of bipolar disorder is that the severe shift in mood seems to come out of nowhere. We don't see that at all with Rachel. Her extreme moods are almost always a reaction to something that's going on at work or with her personal relationships.
But, I think this is how writers will signal "bi-polar disorder" to a TV viewing audience that may be unfamiliar with the actual signs and symptoms. Or just some variety of mental illness that needs to be treated. And I just think that more people are familiar with the diagnosis of bi-polar.
However, in terms of what is actually wrong with Rachel -- it sounds like you have way more of a grasp of it than would the general viewing audience...and myself, of course.
-
2
-
-
27 minutes ago, poopchute said:
What are the nipple covers for? Does she wear them all the time? Or is it for special occasions? Why does anyone else know about them? Why is anyone even talking about them?
I thought they used to be called pasties. And I thought exotic dancers used them in towns where nude dancing is not allowed.
But they may also be something you use if you have a case of headlights (in high school, one of my nicknames was "One Headlight" after that song)
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, swankie said:
I had 2 morbidly obese great aunts who lived to be in their late 80's/early 90's. They were both larger than Whitney and the only limitation they had before death (besides dementia in the latter years) was that they had to walk with canes. Whitney on the other hand has already shown signs of deteriorating health with her pre-diabetes and sleep apnea. I don't have the answer as to why some people live long lives in spite of being morbidly obese and some die young because of being morbidly obese. I think it's just the luck of the draw. Unfortunately, I know many thin people with diabetes as well as bad hearts, kidneys, you name it. One thing I do believe is that being morbidly obese does add to a lot of those ailments even if it isn't the direct cause of it. The strain on your heart alone can be enough to kill you. I can't remember if Whitney's heart tests were good or bad. The fact that she got so winded just crossing the street should be a huge red flag for her that she is far from completely healthy.
For me, its the fact that....at her size Whitney must be in physical pain.
I'm in the middle of losing about 20 pounds I gained while studying for the bar. When I first started to run again, I noticed just how much more painful it was. It wasn't that I couldn't run, but so many things hurt. My calves were ON FIRE all the time, my hamstrings would hurt, my lower back would be sore, my gluts hurt more than normal (I have priformis on my left side, so there is always some pain). Everything just...hurt.
As I've started to lose the weight (knock on wood)....I've noticed that things are hurting a lot less when I run.
I know that when you run you put a certain amount of weight on your body due to the force of the impact. But at Whitney's size, just walking and moving around must put a lot of impact on her body. And she must be in pain a lot of the time. I remember watching My 600 Pound Life, and almost everyone would just say that they were in pain from walking or moving. And thats not fabulous. Thats not a great quality of life in your early 30's.
Yes, there are the heart issues, the pre-diabetes issues. But I guess if you're in denial, you can just sort of forget about those things....but you can't forget about being in pain all the time.
I think that the scooter is just so sad, yes, she wretched her back.....but I bet there was a part of her that was relieved to have the scooter in the parade because it probably would have hurt to have to walk and dance the entire thing. Of course Whitney was able to manage to "dance" with a messed up back because she has a pathological need for attention -- so it was probably worth the pain.
-
5
-
Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta - General Discussion
in Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta
LMAO! The rippin' and the tearin'!