RealReality
-
Posts
8.0k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by RealReality
-
-
On 11/16/2021 at 8:50 AM, bichonblitz said:
I hope it works this time.
Karen has the slickest mouth of all of them. She just doesn't scream as loud as Candyass, and she doesn't cry. I think for some reason Andy really likes Karen therefore she gets away with her ridiculous nonsensical comments without being called out on it.
And this is what people should see. Candiace is belittled for having a slick mouth, but most of the cast has a slick mouth, Candiace is not the worst, al all.
That uncle ben shirt, when you knew your friend of 20 years was going through it, is incredibly foul.
Ashley talking about Rays penis was mean spirited.
So you have two women that undertook to use personal insults about a man who had been nothing but kind to them, who they both knew and who was merely married to a cast member.
But Candiace is dragged all over the world for a 'yo momma joke about a woman she didn't know and hadn't laid eyes on.
-
3
-
-
19 hours ago, Yours Truly said:
The whole “then don’t start with Candiace” is so very weird to me. First of all they all say slick shit. That’s what the show revolves around. Second, what That says to me is that provocation is good enough to justify Candiace’s behavior and only Candiaces behavior.. No one else. ummmmmm ok.
Yes, because Candace doesn't resort to phyiscal violence and says the same slick shit they all say.
The only one who needs public justification is Candiace, because everyone else talking the same slick shit and doesn't get the same blowback.
There isn't anything that Candace has said or done that has been worse than what other castmembers have said and/or done, but she is the only one who is told that she deserves a beating for saying silck shit....when, as you said, they are all always talking slick shit.
-
4
-
-
On 11/16/2021 at 6:42 AM, islandgal140 said:
Everything is on point in this post but I have to disagree with the bolded. It was Robyn who basically said that if you took Candiace's words and put them in Karen's or Gizelle's mouth they would sound less harsh and not offensive and come off more playful. So basically easier to take coming out of the light skin chick's mouth - the very definition of colorism.
They have it in their mind now and it is the official narrative of the show that Candiace's mouth is hellfire. Now, anytime she tells someone they have a run in their stocking, they will hear it as her damning their soul to eternal hell! Seriously, 'yo mama' the 1970s go to insult hurled by Fred Sanford, Aunt Esther or George Jefferson is now the greatest insult in the world.
I've been loving Wendy keeping her foot on Gizelle's multi-neck. I don't care that her reads are coming off rehearsed to some. She still manages to be quick on her feet in the moment. Plus, I think her anger at Gizelle is justified. Why bring something you know to be lie on the show? To be a messy bitch!
Gizelle should've rehearsed some, maybe she would look less like a deer in some headlights if she did. It is like she learned nothing from last year.
Gizelle's style? Used to be funny but now that I have seen what she has done to that poor house, I don't even know if I can laugh at it anymore because I almost think her problem may be medical. Who does that to a house? I think she will not see maximum resale value in it because of the disjointed renovations. Jesus be an architect!
I get that people find the 'you ain't got no man' digs as misogynistic, which they are, however, it is hitting Gizelle where she lives. It is a sensitive point for her because one does get the sense that she wants a relationship and sees great value in being in one to the point of going back to a man who served her the greatest humiliation of her life. If I don't like a bitch, best believe, I am gonna hit her where she lives about an issue she is sensitive about. True facts!
I cosign this entire post.
Short of becoming a mute, everything Candace says will be interpreted as something that warrants a beating. The clutched pearls over a 'yo momma joke, when the person doesn't even know your momma has been a revelation. This show is centered on conflict and personalities, trying to shut up any castmember is BS.
Gizelle's is an absolute disaster and the people who should be cast out and banished are the architect and builder who told her that this nonsense was a good idea. I can't remember if it was Gizelle or someone else who had a tacky ass staircase in her backyard because she wanted it in the house. That should have been my first clue.
Gizelle has bad taste in everything including homes, clothes and men.
-
6
-
-
On 11/16/2021 at 9:34 AM, Yours Truly said:
Nope, running up on someone aggressively and threatening as well as body language that is intimidating is pretty universal. Same as invading someone’s personal space during heated disagreements. No ways around interpreting that as aggressive. It may not be “viewed” that way in the attempt to excuse the behavior but trying to put it in some ambiguous category doesn’t cut it.
I’m disgusted with CandyAss DELIBERATE acts of aggressiveness the same way Some are disgusted with Monquie’s stomping of that ass. Both were rooted in violence and aggression. Both won stupid prizes. To me there are no excuses to be made and none needed.
Cause at the end of the day They felt like acting out and they proceeded to act out and then proceeded to reap some very serious consequences. CandyAss seems to like the recipe tho so I wish her much luck with that cause she’s gonna need it. 💁🏻♀️😂Its so widely and well understood that you cannot define the concept. LOL. I see.
I don't see any ambiguity in my point because it has always been a bright line between physical violence and everything else.
Where I see ambiguity is with people who try to define what makes physical violence acceptable or understandable.
And that makes sense because those concepts are ambiguous and dependent on each person.
And because everyone who resorts to physical violence ALWAYS has a justification for it. They surely can explain to you how their physical violence is okay, acceptable and understandable.
Deliberate acts of aggression is another term that will vary from person to person unless its physical violence. Some people are going to see a deliberate act of aggression when someone else steps on the foot, bumps them in line, gets that Black Friday parking space they wanted, honks their horn, flips them the bird on the freeway, but them off while they are driving or nabbing the last Yankee Candle in the clearance section at Ross when you had your eyes on it.
As others have pointed out, a) people generally start up with Candiace and then cry foul when she hurts their feelings. If her castmembers are so sensitive about verbal combat than a Real Housewife show is not the right venue for them.
and b) multiple cast members have done as much or worse than what Candiace has said or done, but barely anyone advocated violence against them.
A collar flick is not the same or even equitable to smashing someones head onto a table, punching it wildly and then chasing the person outside. To me, to try to equate the two is a stretch worthy of a yoga instructor.
And if people are inclined to think that something as benign as a collar flip is the type of "aggressive act" that would make physical assault acceptable or understandable, then they should have that same energy for Mia, who put her hands all over Wendy after being repeatedly asked not to. And for Ashley, who went back into a home that she had been kicked out of.
-
7
-
-
I'm watching news footage of the Ahmad Aubrey trail on CBS evening news. And of the black pastors speaking at the presser on the front steps was none other than Jamal Bryant!
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Yours Truly said:
I personally can’t be all that nuanced when it comes to the aggression. I’ll condemned you the minute you’ve decided to introduce an intimidating element regardless if contact has been made. That is just as damaging. I think it ignores very important boundaries. It goes beyond the basic catty barbs and snide remarks. You don’t know what someone has gone through and can’t simply count on measured reactions to such an extreme infliction so to casually introduce behavior that crosses into violent just for the sake of flexing is dangerous and fucked up if I might add. Yes, people should monitor and be cautious about how willingly they throw around threats and violent elements. Just as much as they should walk away from a possible physical altercation.
It’s distasteful all the way around so I give no passes to anyone who decides to get into that arena. Once you decide on that approach then you’ve willingly entered into a specific situation and should take responsibility for your own actions as well. The problem doesn’t just start with the physical. It has to do with all parties involved deciding to inflict some sort of distress and pain on that level. Intimidation and aggression are just as jarring and damaging and shouldn’t be easily dismissed. That I can’t get behind. But that’s just me.
But what you've termed "aggressive" personal boundary violation, as you said, can differ with each person.
It seems just as intimidating to try to threaten someone's job if they aren't nice to you.
Can you define what a "violent element" or "extreme infliction" is that isn't open to wild subjective interpretation?
You don't know what a person has been through so if someone is offended by being bumped in line or having their shoe stepped on does this allow for them to administer a beating if you don't apologize or you blow them off?
You say you can't be nuanced but it seems like the entire point rests on things that are subjective, without much of a bright line rule which seems pretty nuanced to me.
Whereas a bight line rule that physical violence is not acceptable when you can walk away IS a bright line rule.
Violence is defined as "behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something"
So by its definition it appears that violence is only physical force and therefore likely would not include the things you've mentioned.
-
1
-
3
-
-
20 minutes ago, Rlb8031 said:
Well said. I'd add one more thing that I think is an interesting nuance to this. One of the ways to combat physical aggression is to engage in psychological aggression. Last year there was a lot of talk about Monique and her "army" of bloggers or people who would post on her behalf on blogs and message boards. She was roundly condemned for this behavior, even though all of the justifications I'm seeing here would indicate that such a non-violent war of words is the more socially acceptable route. But somehow bringing an "army" to a verbal fight is beyond the pale. I still don't understand all the rules to fighting in the twenties, it seems very complex.
At the same time, Candiace (and many other HWs) seem to get a pass for the horrible things they post on-line. The IRL behavior often drives many of the HWs conflicts on camera, but don't get nearly the pearl clutching that happens anytime someone's words become words of violence a la "someone is gonna beat your ass if you keep on like this" or when someone may have proxies posting on their behalf. (As an aside, I often wonder why no one raises the question as to whether some of the Candiace stans are also friends and acquaintances)
I think trying to lob out "well if you like her you must be a friend or acquaintance" is kinda weak reasoning to me.
I strongly disagree with people but I assume it's just two people disagreeing. Not that they have to have some ulterior motivation beyond simple ideological differences.
Physical aggression is both physical AND psychological.
Particularly in moniques case where she didn't feel any real threat from a collar flick so was only, AT BEST, using violence to try to shut someone up who said something she didn't like. And was trying to make sure that her victim couldn't escape. That's not just physically aggressive there is a high psychological component to that that the other person cannot walk away from.
Monique later admitted that what candace did and said wasn't the real reason she hit her.
But then MONIQUE continued the "psychological warfare" by making that pathetic song and music video and running to social media first to say that candace deserved the beating (and then later saying that candace didn't at all deserve it).
Verbal disagreements are what this show is about.
Moniques problem was that she followed up physical assault with psychological aggression.
It's not impossible to come back from a physical attack even on this franchise, look at Porsha Williams.
But when she dragged Kenya, she was off the show for a while and certainly wasn't out there making music videos and talking a load of shit. And then trying to say she blacked out, or was bullied as a child, or was from a poor neighborhood or whatever moniques excuse of the day was.
-
6
-
-
11 hours ago, Yours Truly said:
I just asked if I was wrong in thinking that behaving in a physical threatening way is just as distasteful as physical violence. I think reverting back to legalize to negate how abhorrent being physically intimidating during disagreements is just rings a bit hypocritical to me.
It’s wrong to do both but there’s this overwhelming amount of deflection and dismissiveness when it comes to equally ugly behavior. I’m talking on a personal level and not on a legal level. That’s all. It just sounds like there’s this very nonchalant attitude about people being aggressive all the while condemning violence so I find it quite odd.
I don't think it's deflection to talk about legal standards because those are generally a reflection of societal beliefs and ideals.
If society doesn't have a bright line between words and violence then you cannot really protect speech and even abborent actions that aren't savory but also aren't per se dangerous.
And that's why self defense generally requires an imminent threat of physical harm as judged by a reasonable person.
Because society likely doesn't want to encourage a society where only the physically strongest or the person with the best weapon to be allowed to speak or act.
And if you're gonna physically attack someone to punish someone or teach them a lesson about propriety, what's to stop anyone from doing the same to you?
It's not really my job to physically punish another adult. Because I'm sure whomever is doing the "physically intimidating" act ALSO feels like they are punishing/teaching a lesson/have a good reason.
You don't know if someone is going to be triggered by you looking them in the eye, bumping them in line at the store or inadvertently stepping on their shoe.
If the argument is "you don't know what I've gone through that might trigger me" then by that same token you don't know what someone else has gone through and may physically trigger them. Does this mean it's the same to step on someone's shoe as it is to hit them?
-
5
-
-
20 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:18 hours ago, Boofish said:
I am not denying from a fan or viewer perspective, colorism exists. But I don't think it exist on this show. The fundamental problem, deep down that none of them want to discuss - no one likes Candiace. For whatever reason, Candiace is TOLERATED. Every single "friendship" she thought she was forming has fallen apart and every single one of these ladies at some point prodded her into saying the things she did and they use that as an excuse instead of just admitting the truth. Candiace can compare her transgressions to the others all day everyday and it won't matter - not because her skin is dark. She needs to admit they just don't like her and move on.
I dont particularly think the show has borne that out.
Wendy came on the show as candaces friend and she spent a lot of last season sticking up for Candiace and looking out for her. They were friends this season too.
Karen started out this season by saying that she knew she had a lot of work to do to get back her relationship with Candiace, which suggests that she likes candiace enough to want that relationship back that they had.
Apparently grace was close enough to candace to see her as a "cool older sister " type figure and that's why she had been worried about scraping her car tires.
Sounds like gizelles own kids may like candace more than they like her. But having a relationship with grace suggests that gizelle likes her.. otherwise why even allow for any relationship to form with your kids?
So, it doesn't seem like the "no one likes candiace" narrative is borne out.
BUT, even more to the point, if they are TOLERATING Candiace it's because they realize she is necessary. They can keep crying about icing her out but they don't have a show without her, unless people want more boring scenes of gizelle refusing to talk about her personal life, Mia lying, Ashley breastfeeding and concern trolling and Karen trying to sell whatever La dame thing she has going.
They should be dared to put their money where their mouth is. But I'm guessing that they will all fold.
-
1
-
8
-
-
7 hours ago, WhatAmIWatching said:
I watched my BFF go through this with her ex. He went after her, she defended herself, and they BOTH got booked and BOTH got a court case. She also ended up with 30 days of an ankle bracelet and a fine, all for trying to get that man off of and away from her.
Justice doesn't always play fair, and now she's got a misdemeanor on her record. (Her ex has a different degree of misdemeanor, though was charged with a felony and had a history pre-my friend of DV) Self defense is harder than you'd think to get past a judge, no matter how much money or documentation you throw at it.
There is this case we read about in crim law that ALWAYS stuck in my mind and I believe it was the basis for many states to adopt a "battered woman's defense"
So this woman is with a guy who beats her terribly and on a regular basis.
Everytime she tried to run away he would find her an drag her back to his place and beat her senseless some more. She had no money so she could never get very far.
One day, she and her prince charming get into a fight and he beats her again. And he tells her "listen, I'm going to take a nap, but when I wake up, I'm going to kill you"
No fucks given because why should he.
So this terrified and battered woman shoots and kills him....as he sleeps.
Even though she has every reason to fear for her life, even though she couldn't get far enough to escape him the judged found that she couldn't use a self defense argument because she was in IMMINENT danger. Even though she couldn't escape him and when he was beating her she couldn't defend herself.
It was a sad case but like you said what may seem just can often get lost.
-
1
-
9
-
-
2 minutes ago, Yours Truly said:
So people should be allowed to be threatening and intimating and use aggressive body language just as long as they don’t actually touch you?
See I finding condoning such behavior concerning. Everything up until the actual act of violence is A OK? Hmmmmm.. 🤔 Too me that isn’t the sign of good people either but I mean… To each there own. 🤷🏻♀️
Should be? No. Because violence shouldn't be a punishment. If the idea is that someone is "getting away" with something unless you are physically aggressive then it's not a defense as much as it is a punishment.
There are plenty of shitty things people do that don't warrant a violent response. And some of them absolutely "deserve" it.
See, again, saying that not becoming violent is "condoning" the behavior is saying that its up to each person to decide to mete out physical punishment if and when they feel like it.
And I think history, even recent history shows us what a bad idea that can be.
Choosing not to react violently is not condoning any such behavior and its odd to me that people think that.
As a grown adult, you can simply leave and not have anything more to do with the person.
I'm not sure how that is "condoning" anything other than your own personal, emotional and mental well being without the stress of potential legal and financial consequences.
Going out there in the world to "punish" others is a fools errand, IMO.
-
7
-
-
7 hours ago, Yours Truly said:
Go ahead and walk away. 🤷🏻♀️ It’s anyone’s prerogative to do just that.
There’s also nothing wrong with standing your ground and defending yourself either. Doesn’t make someone a bad person cause the most immediate instinct they had was self defense.
“Fight or flight”
Some people fight and some people flee. It’s a natural instinct in both cases. That’s all I’m tryna say.
To me, if you cannot use words to defend yourself against words there is something wrong with that.
If "standing your ground" means responding to mean words with violence, for me that generally makes you a not good person.
Because an adult should have the restraint to either use their words or walk away in the vast majority of situations.
If you feel that you're in immediate danger okay sure. But outside of candace being attacked by monique and that time Robyn had an umbrella to moniques neck (which she apparently didn't feel very threatened by since she managed to keep her hands to herself) I haven't seen anyone in some immediate danger that they couldn't walk away.
As an adult, you should have enough restraint to overcome your natural instincts. The inability to exercise restraint is something I'd expect from a child.
-
6
-
-
11 minutes ago, eXiled said:
When it comes to aggressive touching/hitting, I've always believed I'd go with a compromise if I were attacked:
Beat that bitch's ass. Call the police to explain why. Hopefully there would be cameras nearby or someone trying to film a Worldstar video that would help exonerate me later.
I'd then do the reverse of what Monique did.
Instead of puffing out my chest and being loudly unapologetic, I would weep violently, allowing myself to be overtaken by full-body convulsions. I would explain my panic at being assaulted. I would be hysterical over the fact that I blacked out and hurt someone. I would be flummoxed that all I recall from the altercation after I was touched is waking up with my unconscious aggressor lying beneath me.
I would enlist a good attorney if criminal charges were filed against me. My attorney would dig up my assailant's past to show that this was not her first offense. If she does not have a criminal record, I'm positive we could find evidence from her neighborhood and previous employment to document her short fuse.
I, on the other hand, am a professional person who would never attack someone physically just because she'd verbally hurt my feelings.
I would enlist a good attorney to file civil charges against my assailant. My trauma, stress, and depression would be an issue. My medical and psychological records would prove my distress. Despite getting her ass beat, my assailant would have to pay for my pain.
I'd make it my business to take whatever my assailant owned, down to her shack. Had Candiace forced the issue with Mo, she might have netted something-something. Most hood chicks don't have much to begin with, hence the constant pop-offs.
LOL. Diminished capacity or inability to form the requisite intent sound creative.
But girl, imma need to see that worldstar video first!
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, Yours Truly said:
No one will be risking a career in the case of self defense. So the extreme nonsensical “oh my God I’m going to jail cause I pushed a bitch off me” just makes me roll my eyes. 🤷🏻♀️ Believe me I ain’t tryna catch a case for no one and believe you me I CAN and HAVE walk away from plenty but at the same time the idea that a bitch that runs up on you aggressively is still gonna be the victor in a case where you end up establishing personal boundaries and defending your person through a physical act completely tickles me.
As was established in the Monique situation. The courts dismissed the case after reviewing the situation. TWO people got into an altercation and TWO had contributed to the outcome. Even the courts weren’t trying to hear about such messiness. LOL! And no I don’t count on that logic in the case of any possible altercation I may come across but at the same time pretending that getting someone to get up off you and out of your personal space is some immoral act worthy of catching a case is Absolutely ridiculous. To think it’s wrong of a person to act instinctively and try to put up a defense when someone is coming at you aggressively. Miss me with the deliberate misunderstanding of how the law works on that. If there’s a perceived threat to person then that changes the whole dynamic and is factored in.
Granted the whole finger wagging and smacking it away would have been a petty decision. I would have had to think twice whether it was worth causing a ruckus in the middle of my restaurant but her charging Monique??? Most definitely a firm two hand push if not a punch in the mouth. And I’m most definitely claiming self defense cause she came up too fast, too close with threatening behavior so turning around and walking away would have left me vulnerable to whatever she had in mind and it was obvious she had some negative shit on her mind.Also, I know i have mentioned numerous times that I don’t care which housewife it is so my logic applies ACROSS the board. Not just with CandyAss and not every corny example mentioned fits the bill. 🙄 If Certain physical boundaries get crossed and it’s partnered with aggressive demeanor and intimidating body language then nah, imma put my high horse away and grab the popcorn hoping beyond hope that that shit gets shut down. #sorrynotsorry 😝🤣
I strongly disagree. People have caught a criminal case for what they felt was "self defense" and the reason monique needed a statement was because it wasn't clear cut from the video alone.
So rolling eyes and being tickled doesn't change that fact.
Further, beyond a criminal case a person can ALSO catch a civil case, which has a lower burden of proof and opens the door to losing money AND having to hire an attorney to defend you. Whereas a private attorney for a person suing can decide to take it on a contingency.
So, am I going to take that risk? No. Where I can walk away I'm going to walk away.
Every "corny example" involves the same set of facts. Someone entering the personal space of another in an unwanted manner, be it explicit or understood. And the outrage has never been this high when Robyn, Mia or Michael have done it (with gizelle).
I'm not on a high horse as I'm perfectly fine to watch Molly whopping on BGC. But this isn't BGC.
LOL, I'm fairly certain I understand how the law works.
Not sure where the winery was but here is some information on the Maryland statute.
Notably, the person claiming self defense must not have used more force than was necessary and must have been in immediate danger.
Alone, a hair flick doesn't support the severity of the response and calls into question of immediate danger.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_self-defense_in_Maryland
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, drivethroo said:
All of them tried to twist, turn, justify etc. It's ok to cry about Candiace's tweets from 2 years ago (that Ashley keeps bringing up) but whoa! Gizelle's tax t-shirt and Robyn running up in Oz to get aggressive with Ashley was "so long ago."
Another thing: Ashley tried to pull the race card on Candiace by crying about being called a slave but when Candiace brings up Michael calling Chris "white trash," well that's just 2 white guys insulting each other. So aren't Candiace & Ashley two black women insulting each other?
No wait ---Ashley let Candiace know she is biracial. So the black woman calling the biracial lady a slur is bad but Michael calling Chris a slur is alright because it's just two white guys, two equals so that's ok.
Looks like Ashley tried to go Karen on Candiace tonight and that is an example of the whitest privilege.
Speaking of Karen privilege, Karen sounded like a Karen threatening Candiace with being iced out ("We're not going to tolerate the verbal abuse." In light of the revelation of her trying to get Candiace fired last year coming out, I wouldn't be surprised if Karen pulled a Karen and tried that trick again.
Karen and Gizelle are going to "tolerate" anything that keeps them on the air. They should stop fronting.
Gizelles reasonably shady party and her look this entire season has me convinced she needs the money from this show more than anyone.
There is no way gizelle would have subjected herself to having her house ridiculed on national television by filming a party on her construction site if she didn't NEED whatever money may come from a location fee or if she didn't have the money to spend to have it anywhere else.
Gizelle could have had that party at a hotel, she could have had it at Robyn's place she probably could have had it at candaces house, she could have had it at a park.
And sorrynotsorry but Gizelle for all her beauty has been looking particularly poorly put together this season compared to past seasons.
Karen may not need the money (I think she does) but Karen absolutely NEEDS the attention, fame and recognition the show brings her.
The only reason I think gizelle was able to push it with monique is because monique had crossed a line into unrepentant physical violence.
-
12
-
-
41 minutes ago, Chatty Cake said:
I hope the others ice out Camdass. Yes she gets a reaction out of people but she’s not entertaining nor witty. She’s a petty jealous thing that cries victim after she hurls insults. The Grande Dame and Gizelle need to join forces. I enjoyed their banter last night and how they really do care for each other.
They should totally try to do that and see if the resulting snoozefest keeps them on the air.
Maybe Mias baldfaced lying, gizelles refusal to share anything about her life and Ashley's constant breast pumping will make for a riveting show!
-
4
-
3
-
-
58 minutes ago, drivethroo said:
It's fun to see Karen & Gizelle claim they don't go "low" like Candiace when the beginning of the season started with Karen claiming Gizelle was a broken whore from Hampton University.
Interesting to see Robyn & Gizelle now claim Ashley didn't mean anything by writing that statement for Monique. Interesting to see Ashley ask what she could've possibly done to Candiace to offend her so.
Good point Wendy brought up that maybe only a few people read that particular blog but millions watch the show so even mentioning it amplified the rumor. Now, I think Wendy continuing to go nuclear about it perpetuated the rumor but she is correct: bringing it to the show amplified it.
Several comments by the "OGs" (who referred to themselves tonight as "We are the OGs") confirm to me that they aren't happy the show is basically Real Housewives Of Potomac featuring Candiace and they want their show back and to get it back, they have to get rid of Candiace. The only problem for them is the charges they lob at her, they've done it. All the charges they lobbed at her tonight, she lobbed them right back at them. They tried to charge her with body shaming, she pointed out all the body shaming they've done, they claimed she goes "low" and they don't and she pointed out all the times they've gone low, when none of that worked they then turned to the mom shaming and she was basically like "I said what I said."
The cherry on top is the OGs (who are all light skinned), trying to claim there was absolutely no colorism on the show. Sure, Jan. Do I think Candiace and Wendy have used colorism to evade accountability for their actions? Yes. Do I believe there is colorism on the cast? Definitely, but the OGs aren't going to admit that because they benefit from it. We'll see if Karen stands by her "I don't gang up on people" stance because IMO Karen, Gizelle & Ashley are going to team up to get Candiace up off the show. Robyn will just go along.
And Karen? Candiace doesn't mess with you. You filmed with Candiace *once* the entirety of Season 6 at her new house. She hasn't to my recollection filmed another solo scene with you since. All the scenes you've done with Candiace in Season 6 were cast scenes. She don't mess with you, because you tried to get her fired in Season 5. She regards you as a coworker. Candiace needs to pay similar dust to Gizelle and Ashley. Make them earn their checks another way.
And good gracious! Size 12 feet? Mia, you ARE Big Foot!
Far be it from me to correct you. But Karen called gizelle a broke ho from Hampton College with a hot box.
And if broke ho with the clap isn't a low blow, I'm not sure what is....oh wait, it's when gizelle wore that uncle Ben shirt.
-
3
-
5
-
-
4 hours ago, eXiled said:
Wendy and Eddie have a great marriage.
When she looks at him, she sees Idris Elba.
When he looks at her, he sees Zen Wen.
They both need prescription eyewear (or new prescriptions for the aforementioned eyewear).
Giiiirl, I need me these shallow Hal glasses so I can see Idris Elba all day too!
3 hours ago, Arynm said:Wendy has a lot of nerve talking about Giselle bringing up Wendy's surgery as rooted in misogyny when every other word out of Wendy's mouth is "you can't keep a man" or your relationship isn't real, or "I have a mans last name"
This disappointed me because wendys intial read was right on the money. And her later statements muddied the water.
Her initial point was "you say you're a bad bitch but yet you let a certified toad back into your life. That's NOT a bad bitch move. And now you're letting your daughters see that it's okay to accept this disrespect from a man"
THAT I could get behind. But later when she came with some Phaedra parks "well I GOT a man!" reads I was disappointed.
I think even gizelles scene with Robyn where she tells her to ger it together so she can keep Juan interested exemplifies that toxic attitude. If a man isn't interested, it must be a woman's fault and her mental health isn't as important as putting on a facade to keep a man happy.
-
16
-
-
On 11/12/2021 at 6:04 PM, spunky said:
Good for her!
-
3
-
-
On 11/12/2021 at 11:00 AM, Yours Truly said:
Ashley Situation:
I would have smacked her finger/hand away from my face.
Monique Situation:
I would have two handedly shoved that heiffer up and out of my personal space and would have cheered Monique on had she did that in that moment too. (I had already applauded her use of the umbrella). Robyn stepped up to her pretty quickly and aggressively and in my book that's ground for a push back cause nobody has the right to come up on you in an aggressive, threatening manner and be that close in YOUR personal space. PERIODT! I don't care where you grew up. And I don't know where or who would think that's acceptable or think that the other person has no rights in that particular scenario to protect themselves.
In conclusion, BY MY LOGIC.... LOL I wouldn't have been surprised or mad if Robyn got hands put on her in either of those situations. So there you have it.
Where I grew up and where I continue to live I have too much to lose and too little to waste, so I'd walk away.
I have no interest in risking my career and my profession nor did I have any interest in ruining my chances at college and law school over a potential felony or even misdemeanor charge.
In all of these instances, except for when monqiue crossed a line into violence, each person has had the ability to walk away.
But I haven't seen any of this smoke for Robyn and there is and was nary a word about how she was begging to have her ass kicked.
Or how Mia was begging to have her ass kicked because she routinely has ignores requests from others to stop touching them.
Or how Michael Darby was asking for a physical beating when he physically towered over gizelle at the reunion in an intimidating manner.
The ONLY person who this logic ever applies to is candace.
12 hours ago, Chatty Cake said:She is a verbally abusive and miserable woman. Her husband has to drink just to stand being around her.
Too bad there isn't enough liquor in the world to endure gizelles company.
Maybe that should be gizelles next venture...a liquor so strong it will make her company palatable.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, JoSafe said:
Someone sees it finally. And all this is coming from Karen to be honest. She's pretending to be friend with all the new ladies just to turn them agains Gizelle in the end.
This is the game gizelle chooses to play with everyone else.
She is the queen of the gang up and pile on and maybe its good for her to get a sip of her own medicine every reunion.
I dont think she has a leg to stand on (well, maybe the one that isn't in a boot).
-
3
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Yours Truly said:
I find it interesting that there is this extreme defense of someone behaving badly. Just because it's wrong to lay hands doesn't mean that CandyAss should have free reign to behave badly. I think what gets lost in the conversation is that it's absolutely acceptable for the ladies to check CandyAss on the EXTREME behavior. It's okay to call her out on the bucking and the aggressiveness in her interactions. It's okay to tell CandyAss that there are some behaviors that are extremely detrimental to the progression of an incident. As much as I don't like Gizelle her trying to outline to CandyAss some stuff is just too much and that maybe just maybe there's some reflection necessary isn't "victim blaming". It would probably hit truer if Gizelle wasn't sounding a hypocrite about what is and isn't below the belt and more about the differences in CandyAss's demeanor VS. the others when blowups go down. That, to me, is really where the issue lies.
All this, "by that logic" it would have been okay for this one or that one to get THEIR ass beat then. No, those are not equal comparisons. These ladies get down in the dirt at times granted but very rarely is it accompanied by lettuce throwing, hair flicking, butter knife waving, talking about smoke, flexing, bucking, getting in the face of and attempts at squaring up, not to mention needing to be physically held back or restrained. In no way is that comparable to Gizelle's t-shirt, Ashley's messy messes, Mia's condescending delivery, etc. etc. I'm not gonna lie tho, when Gizelle pulled that shit with the t-shirt... boyyyyeeeee my slap hand started to itch on behalf of Karen. For Real! LOL.
I believe that everytime nearly identical behavior which is handwaved away as being "not as bad"
Robyn has gotten right into Ashley's face with her full hands and full invasion of personal space. Robyn also was right up in moniques face and dared her to fight. IIRC monique had an embrella to Robyn's throat. Robyn ran after monique talking shit about fighting. After being repeatedly asked to stop Mia kept touching Wendy. How is that any better or worse than a hair flick?
Even Monique admitted on the show that candaces behavior had very little to do with why she physically attacked her.
But there remains a persistent narrative that because candace was the victim of a physical attack she must have done something to bring it on herself.
Even after the person who attacked her admitted that her behavior wasn't really the reason for the physical attack.
As for other women "checking" candace, since they are ALL nasty to each other there is no need for them to verbally check candace.
As multiple people have said, it's easy enough not to talk to candace and it's 73000 x easier for them not to come for candace. They refuse to ignore her or not come for her but they keep doing it. So that's on them.
-
3
-
-
21 hours ago, Yours Truly said:
I find it interesting that there is this extreme defense of someone behaving badly. Just because it's wrong to lay hands doesn't mean that CandyAss should have free reign to behave badly. I think what gets lost in the conversation is that it's absolutely acceptable for the ladies to check CandyAss on the EXTREME behavior. It's okay to call her out on the bucking and the aggressiveness in her interactions. It's okay to tell CandyAss that there are some behaviors that are extremely detrimental to the progression of an incident. As much as I don't like Gizelle her trying to outline to CandyAss some stuff is just too much and that maybe just maybe there's some reflection necessary isn't "victim blaming". It would probably hit truer if Gizelle wasn't sounding a hypocrite about what is and isn't below the belt and more about the differences in CandyAss's demeanor VS. the others when blowups go down. That, to me, is really where the issue lies.
All this, "by that logic" it would have been okay for this one or that one to get THEIR ass beat then. No, those are not equal comparisons. These ladies get down in the dirt at times granted but very rarely is it accompanied by lettuce throwing, hair flicking, butter knife waving, talking about smoke, flexing, bucking, getting in the face of and attempts at squaring up, not to mention needing to be physically held back or restrained. In no way is that comparable to Gizelle's t-shirt, Ashley's messy messes, Mia's condescending delivery, etc. etc. I'm not gonna lie tho, when Gizelle pulled that shit with the t-shirt... boyyyyeeeee my slap hand started to itch on behalf of Karen. For Real! LOL.
In light of @TexasGal post I've responded to this comment about candace in her thread.
-
1
-
-
I believe that everytime nearly identical behavior which is handwaved away as being "not as bad"
Robyn has gotten right into Ashley's face with her full hands and full invasion of personal space. Robyn also was right up in moniques face and dared her to fight. IIRC monique had an embrella to Robyn's throat. Robyn ran after monique talking shit about fighting. After being repeatedly asked to stop Mia kept touching Wendy. How is that any better or worse than a hair flick?
Even Monique admitted on the show that candaces behavior had very little to do with why she physically attacked her.
But there remains a persistent narrative that because candace was the victim of a physical attack she must have done something to bring it on herself.
Even after the person who attacked her admitted that her behavior wasn't really the reason for the physical attack.
-
7
-
S06.E19: Reunion Part 2
in The Real Housewives Of Potomac
· Edited by RealReality
I think the narrative is that if someone is so bothered by whatever Candiace is saying or doing that they are at the point of physical violence and physical attack then that someone SHOULD walk away at that point.
As this is a show about verbal altercations, drama and verbal insults I don't think either party should be under an obligation to walk away if they can use their words. Verbal jabs, responses and conflict are the bread and butter of the HW franchise. Demanding that Candace can only fight back in THEIR perscribed set of rules is nonsense. Especially here, where so many other castmembers have done far worse.
However, if her castmembers are so offended by what she is saying they always have the option not to film with her or refuse to attend functions where she will be. If the words spoken are just too much for someone, then that person should walk away because they should realize that no one is under an obligation to walk away from a verbal confrontation on this show.
And the same applies to Candace. She refused to do Monique's podcast because she didn't want to be around Monique, which is walking away. She refused to take the bait twice and walked away from Monique (once at a dinner and once at her lakehouse). She purposefully did not invite Ashley to her photo shoot, and she actively did not invite Ashley to the trip she was hosting.