S05.E11: Taxing Times and Blurry Lines

[RealReality]

Did anyone confirm that Wendy is on tenure track?  She is an associate professor r/n I think.  Is it assumed that she is on tenure track at this level?

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 10/13/2020 at 10:53 AM, eleanorofaquitaine said:

No, she's really not to blame for the situation, unless you believe that Monique is not an adult who has no control over her emotions. She may share blame for the deterioration of their relationship. And she may share blame about contributing to a scene at the winery. But Monique's decision to physically assault her is ALL on Monique, and no amount of "but Candiace runs her mouth!" is going to change that. 

I'm not sure why people don't understand that.  Plenty of people are provoked by provoking people without becoming violent. I'm not sure why there is such a rush to absolve Monique of her behavior and I'm sorry, the number of times I've seen "well, sure, yeah, right Monique was wrong but..." followed by a paragraph of invective towards Candiace is really disappointing. 

Because people have differences of opinion. And just because one person sees it one way does not make it universal truth.

And, again, I never said Candiace was "to blame" for the situation. I said she is not entirely blameless. These are two very different statements.  Nor did I rush to absolve Monique of the situation. It's not either/or for a lot of us.

...I am not sure why people don't understand that.

Edited October 14, 2020 by PhilMarlowe2

[ladle]

2 hours ago, RealReality said:

Did anyone confirm that Wendy is on tenure track?  She is an associate professor r/n I think.  Is it assumed that she is on tenure track at this level?

If she’s an Associate, then she’s on tenure track. And Associate typically means one has tenure. 
 

ETA: According to the JHU directory she is an Assistant, not an Associate. Assistant means she’s on the tenure track but has not yet been tenured. 

Edited October 15, 2020 by ladle

[drivethroo]

Sunday's episode just aired again, I watched the last 5 minutes with Monique & the pastor.  This is the conversation.

• Pastor brings up Monique saying she "blacked out" and probes her for more information after she said her adrenaline finally calmed down.
• Monique says the last thing she remembers is Candiace in her face, provoking her.  The pastor asks her how she gets to the point of explosion.  She says that's not her and she's not a hostile person, but she started to notice how Candiace manipulates situations, she started noticing how Candiace was aggressive and how combative Candiace was.
• The pastor tells Monique the person she is dealing with is actually a reflection of who she is.  He tells Monique she needs to be honest with what is going on in her heart and that may be hard for her because she's used to orchestrating, controlling and dominating (Chris Samuels looks on, soberly).  The pastor says it comes from Monique trying to protect everything because she's had to protect everything from the time she was a kid to adulthood.
• The pastor then says when he first met her she was a fighter because of the bullying she went through as a child and she's felt she's had to prove herself over and over again when she got together with Chris. (I'm thinking Mama Samuels was not impressed from jump)
  Spoiler

  but she wouldn't be if what Gigi said was true, that Chris was with another girlfriend and Monique pushed the longtime girlfriend out of the picture.

    Pastor says Monique has been in survival mode since she was a child and perhaps all of this exploded in that moment with Candiace.
• Monique then says she does what she does to protect herself and her family and she says she's tired of being criticized. She says she was tired of being nit-picked and having to prove herself when she knows her self worth.
• Pastor then asks her why this is such a trigger because in her own mind she is ideal (nonpareil) but these people in Potomac are not impressed with Monique.  Because the people in Potomac are not impressed by Monique, she feels frustrated.  He then says it is not her (Candiace) fault and it's something Monique needs to resolve within herself.
• Monique starts to tear up and says all of this had nothing to do with her (Candiace) and she didn't deserve that.
• Chris then says he really wants to reach out to Broke Chris and let him know he values their friendship and doesn't want him to sit around wondering what's going on and tells Monique "We need to make it right."  She then says she needs to apologize to Candiace.

I wanted to re-watch this scene because some people felt the pastor was coddling her or giving Monique a pass and when I originally watched this scene, I felt he was giving her a read and after re-watching this scene, he definitely was giving her a gentle pastoral read. He basically said she was projecting her issues onto Candiace and trying to impress women who don't like her and she needs to look deep inside herself to discover why.

She also needs to ask her husband why the first words out of his mouth about this situation is calling up Broke Chris and reassuring him they are still friends.  I personally think Chris Samuels liking/being around Candiace is a big contributor to the breakdown between Candiace & Monique. Big Chris might be attracted to Candiace (without conciously knowing that he is), Monique is picking up on that and taking it out on Candiace.  Remember, Monique didn't start to really turn up at the lake house until after Chris arrived.

I loved Karen's tiny country church but I don't think I could ever go to one on a regular basis and I know I wouldn't want to go to mega-churches like Jamal's churches either.

 

 

Edited October 15, 2020 by drivethroo

[RealReality]

8 hours ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

Because people have differences of opinion. And just because one person sees it one way does not make it universal truth.

And, again, I never said Candiace was "to blame" for the situation. I said she is not entirely blameless. These are two very different statements.  Nor did I rush to absolve Monique of the situation. It's not either/or for a lot of us.

...I am not sure why people don't understand that.

For me, physically attacking someone for being verbally annoying, aggravating and antagonistic is not a reasonable response.  I would posit that most of society agrees with this, since we have laws to this end with only very, very narrow exceptions.

Since Monique's response was unreasonable, Candace is blameless for it.  

Candace played a role in making Monique annoyed and upset, sure, but she is completely blameless for Monique's reaction of physically attacking her.  

Its funny, I was just thinking of this as I binge watched the latest season of Love and Hip Hop New York.  I look at someone like Remy Ma, who should be a cautionary tale.  She shot someone in 2008 over $3,000.  That choice to resort to violence cost her six years of her life.  Her career went on hiatus, she couldn't be with her children as they grew up, and she couldn't enjoy her freedom, her friends or her husband.  She didn't get a lot of visitors and felt lonely.  In the six years she lost she could have made money hand over fist, and probably could have achieved some of the amazing success that her less talented counterparts have.  She could have made ten times the amount she claims was stolen, but she lost out on all of that, for what, $3000?

On this most recent season, she was AGAIN facing a charge for punching another cast member in the face (off screen).  The case was dismissed, but to watch her, worried and stressed out and fearing another prison stretch was illustrative.  And for what?  Because she couldn't control herself in the face of perceived disrespect?  Remy Ma is 40 years old and just had a child, out here in the streets punching people and AGAIN risking her freedom and the life she is just starting to rebuild.  

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Remy Ma ends up right back in prison on another assault.  But it should be a cautionary tale for Monique, maybe in the moment it feels good and maybe you'll get social media support, but as @drivethroo said, these twitter followers probably aren't out there dragging and punching people and they will cheer you on and live vicariously through you, but they won't be there to pay your legal bills, visit you in jail, put money on your books or give you back the time you lost.  

[ladle]

So, I perused Dr. Wendy's JHU profile, and a few things:  It looks like she got her PhD in 2016, so the earliest she would have started working at JHU would have been that year.  Assuming she's on a normal timeline, she wouldn't have been up for tenure yet by the time they were filming this season (It's usually about 6 years).  However, it's not uncommon for someone to get pre-tenure reviews and see the writing on the wall that they're not getting tenure.  Also according to the site, she has only 2 peer-reviewed publications.  I don't know the specific expectations for her field, but in my field and most others I know, you need far more than that to be granted tenure.  

So, I don't know.  Maybe she's underproducing, knows she's not going to be granted tenure, and this is a way out.  Or maybe she wants out for other reasons.  Clearly I'm far too invested in this!  

[Ms.Lulu]

12 hours ago, ladle said:

If she’s an Associate, then she’s on tenure track. And Associate typically means one has tenure. 
 

ETA: According to the JHU directory she is an Assistant, not an Associate. Assistant means she’s on the tenure track but has not yet been tenured. 

If she's been with Johns Hopkins for 3-4 years, she may be at a critical point in her tenure journey.

Once you are hired tenure track, the clock starts, and a lot happens before you come up for tenure in your sixth year. You typically start with a 2-4 year contract, and go through a review in your second or third year.  If you pass the review, you're offered a second contract that will take you through a probationary period and a final tenure review. If you don't get tenure you usually have one academic year on your contract to find a new position. 

It could be Wendy isn't feeling good about her prospects getting tenure, or she doesn't enjoy publishing or teaching.  If you look at her CV she doesn't appear to have published since 2017.   It happens.  

Edited October 15, 2020 by PDXlulu

[eleanorofaquitaine]

14 hours ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

Because people have differences of opinion. And just because one person sees it one way does not make it universal truth.

And, again, I never said Candiace was "to blame" for the situation. I said she is not entirely blameless. These are two very different statements.  Nor did I rush to absolve Monique of the situation. It's not either/or for a lot of us.

...I am not sure why people don't understand that.

Because, semantics aside, saying "she's not entirely blameless" is saying Candiace shares some of the blame. And, semantics aside, it's just another version of "yeah, sure, right, Monique was wrong to assault Candiace BUT [300 reasons why Candiace deserved to be assaulted]."

12 hours ago, ladle said:

ETA: According to the JHU directory she is an Assistant, not an Associate. Assistant means she’s on the tenure track but has not yet been tenured. 

I was surmising she was tenure track (partly because it's difficult for me to imagine why anyone would go on the show if they didn't already have tenure) but I surmised wrongly, apparently! 

[lasu]

1 hour ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

Because, semantics aside, saying "she's not entirely blameless" is saying Candiace shares some of the blame. And, semantics aside, it's just another version of "yeah, sure, right, Monique was wrong to assault Candiace BUT [300 reasons why Candiace deserved to be assaulted]."

I agree.  To me, the sentence is "Monique was wrong to assault Candiace."  That's the full sentence.  Candiace may have played a part in escalating the argument, but she bears zero culpability for being assaulted.  Even if the following week she had gotten even MORE verbally aggressive with Monique, and Monique assaulted her again, I would still say Candiace had zero culpability in being assaulted, even though Candiace now knows without question that being verbally aggressive could lead to an assault.  But it is NEVER the responsibility of the victim to prevent the abuser from being abusive.

Let me put it another way, when I was 17, I went to a frat party.  I dressed like a ho.  I was vastly outnumbered by men about 15 to 1.  I didn't have a friend with me.  I got drunk.  I passed out in one of the brothers' beds.  This is a true story, and it ended with me waking up with nothing worse than a hangover and drove myself home and moved on with my life.  But it could have turned out differently, and everyone reading this knows it.  It's pure luck I wasn't raped or assaulted that night.  I did NOTHING to take care of myself or keep myself as safe as possible.  So my behavior and choices unquestionably put my in a situation where my likelihood of assault or rape SKYROCKETED.  But it wouldn't have been my fault if I got raped.  It is NOT my fucking responsibility to keep men from raping me, and it's not my responsibility to keep women who don't like my sassy mouth from punching me in it.  If I had gotten raped that night there would have been many, many things I could have done to prevent it, and an unfortunately large number of people would have put it under "she got what she deserved" or "what was she thinking?"  And an even larger percentage would say, "well, no one deserves to get raped, but lasu shouldn't have put herself in that situation."

Could I have prevented my hypothetical rape in this situation?  Obviously.  I could have stayed home, brought a friend, not drank, lots of choices.  Could Candiace prevented her assault?  Probably.  She could have made different choices - to walk away, to ignore Monique, etc.  However, my bad choices do not make me culpable in ANY way for my hypothetical rape.  That is on the person who raped me, and only on that person.  Candiace's bad choices do not make her culpable in ANY way for her assault.  That's only on Monique.

[RealReality]

4 hours ago, ladle said:

So, I perused Dr. Wendy's JHU profile, and a few things:  It looks like she got her PhD in 2016, so the earliest she would have started working at JHU would have been that year.  Assuming she's on a normal timeline, she wouldn't have been up for tenure yet by the time they were filming this season (It's usually about 6 years).  However, it's not uncommon for someone to get pre-tenure reviews and see the writing on the wall that they're not getting tenure.  Also according to the site, she has only 2 peer-reviewed publications.  I don't know the specific expectations for her field, but in my field and most others I know, you need far more than that to be granted tenure.  

So, I don't know.  Maybe she's underproducing, knows she's not going to be granted tenure, and this is a way out.  Or maybe she wants out for other reasons.  Clearly I'm far too invested in this!  

That makes sense.  If the writing is on the wall and she won't get tenure being a TV commentator and reality show star may offer some level of prestige for her mom.  For whatever else Wendy is, she is well spoken and smart so she may be able to parlay this opportunity into something even more prestigious for her mom.  Funnily enough, she might be the person better suited for a podcast. 

[qtpye]

5 hours ago, RealReality said:

That makes sense.  If the writing is on the wall and she won't get tenure being a TV commentator and reality show star may offer some level of prestige for her mom.  For whatever else Wendy is, she is well spoken and smart so she may be able to parlay this opportunity into something even more prestigious for her mom.  Funnily enough, she might be the person better suited for a podcast. 

The sad thing is that I see too many children of immigrant families (this includes part of my family as well) that have no motivation in life beyond trying to live up to their parents' lofty and sometimes very unrealistic expectations.  

It is like keeping up with the Joneses on steroids.

The truth is that even though it is impressive to have a good education...it is no longer a guaranteed path to success. Heck, a good education sometimes can not even provide a solid middle class life. I know so many incredibly smart people who have been working as adjuncts for a while and it is not enough to provide a living wage. Luckily, they have other avenues of income but it is not easy to juggle multiple commitments. 

I hope Wendy is on this show for herself and not to please her mother.

Edited October 15, 2020 by qtpye

[Rlb8031]

1 hour ago, qtpye said:

I hope Wendy is on this show for herself and not to please her mother.

My guess is that Wendy is on here to have access to a large amount of money is a short amount of time that can be used to pay off debts and/or beef up college funds for her three little ones. Both of those things will please her mother greatly.

[PhilMarlowe2]

7 hours ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

Because, semantics aside, saying "she's not entirely blameless" is saying Candiace shares some of the blame. And, semantics aside, it's just another version of "yeah, sure, right, Monique was wrong to assault Candiace BUT [300 reasons why Candiace deserved to be assaulted]."

It's a big leap from "Candiace shares some of the blame for how the situation turned out" to "Candiace deserved to be assaulted." Absolutely not what I meant (nor do I believe it). What I and a lot of other people are saying is that, yes, Candiace absolutely played a part in escalating the situation and, no, Candiace did not deserve to be assaulted. Both things can be true at once. It is absolutely not semantics to differentiate between someone playing an active role in a situation and single-handedly blaming them for the entire situation/saying they deserved it. You can infer that all you want, but it's not what I meant and I never said it. 

Edited October 15, 2020 by PhilMarlowe2

[Ss55]

Ashley is from Sandy Spring, MD (somebody asked a few pages back). I never post on these boards but watch all the franchises, so I plan to start posting more!

I know many here aren’t Gizelle fans but she never fails to keep me entertained. She’s reality TV gold.

[ladle]

8 hours ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

I was surmising she was tenure track (partly because it's difficult for me to imagine why anyone would go on the show if they didn't already have tenure) but I surmised wrongly, apparently! 

And she is tenure track.  "Tenure track" just means on the track that leads to tenure, whether you're on the road to it or already there -- so you can be a tenure-track assistant, associate, or full professor.  Then there are other positions (adjunct, postdoc, lecturer, etc.) that are not "on the tenure track" in that they don't lead to tenure. 

Academia is arcane and weird.

[eleanorofaquitaine]

15 hours ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

It's a big leap from "Candiace shares some of the blame for how the situation turned out" to "Candiace deserved to be assaulted." Absolutely not what I meant (nor do I believe it). What I and a lot of other people are saying is that, yes, Candiace absolutely played a part in escalating the situation and, no, Candiace did not deserve to be assaulted. Both things can be true at once. It is absolutely not semantics to differentiate between someone playing an active role in a situation and single-handedly blaming them for the entire situation/saying they deserved it. You can infer that all you want, but it's not what I meant and I never said it. 

I'm just going to say one final thing on this and then you can have the last word. It's absolutely NOT a "big leap" from "Candiace shares some of the blame for how the situation turned out" to "Candiace deserved to be assaulted." The situation "turned out" with Candiace being assaulted. I'm... not sure how you don't see that. Saying that she shares some of the blame for how "the situation turned out" means saying she shares some of the blame for being assaulted.

Sure, we can talk about whether or not she was more responsible for the initial escalation - I think that is debatable - but given the fact that even AFTER the situation was de-escalated, Monique was intent on assaulting Candiace AGAIN, I'm not sure where that discussion really leads except excuse after excuse about how Candiace's smart mouth "led" Monique to become physically violent. And all of that is just a way to defer blame from Monique, who is the ONLY person responsible for her own behavior. 

Monique is getting a lot of support on social media and it's unfortunate because IMO if she sees she has the court of public opinion on her side, she's never going to do the introspective work she needs to about her behavior. So IMO her fans - or Candiace's haters - may think that they are doing her a favor but they really aren't because she really needs to figure out why she became violent and what she needs to do to prevent that from happening again. 

14 hours ago, ladle said:

And she is tenure track.  "Tenure track" just means on the track that leads to tenure, whether you're on the road to it or already there -- so you can be a tenure-track assistant, associate, or full professor.  Then there are other positions (adjunct, postdoc, lecturer, etc.) that are not "on the tenure track" in that they don't lead to tenure. 

Academia is arcane and weird.

Right, I knew that! 🙂 (I have a number of friends in academia). I meant I thought she was tenured, but you are right to correct me on the difference between tenure track and actual tenure. 

Edited October 16, 2020 by eleanorofaquitaine

[LaurelleJ]

Monique was 100% wrong. 

I'm wondering when Candiace filmed the scene where she talked to her therapist. For someone who admitted that she was tipsy during the argument and saw how much she was elevated when watching the footage, her account of the incident was pretty true to what happened, and it makes me think that maybe she filmed it after the court appearance where the footage was reviewed and she had a chance to see clearly what happened, and the flick of the vest is perhaps what convinced the judge to throw out both cases. Maybe that's why the therapist asked if she contributed to the physical and Candiace said no. Just a thought. 

[Vanderboom]

15 hours ago, Ss55 said:

Ashley is from Sandy Spring, MD (somebody asked a few pages back). I never post on these boards but watch all the franchises, so I plan to start posting more!

I know many here aren’t Gizelle fans but she never fails to keep me entertained. She’s reality TV gold.

I can't stand Gizelle, but I agree that she definitely brings the entertainment factor. Unlike OGs from the other cities, Gizelle makes RHOP and the show would fall apart without her and possibly Karen (her sometime antagonist).

[Neurochick]

On 10/15/2020 at 5:03 AM, RealReality said:

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Remy Ma ends up right back in prison on another assault.  But it should be a cautionary tale for Monique, maybe in the moment it feels good and maybe you'll get social media support, but as @drivethroo said, these twitter followers probably aren't out there dragging and punching people and they will cheer you on and live vicariously through you, but they won't be there to pay your legal bills, visit you in jail, put money on your books or give you back the time you lost.  

So many were gassing Monique's head on Twitter and Instagram, but you are correct, if she actually went to jail for assault, those people wouldn't be outside with "Free Monique" signs, they'd just follow someone else on Twitter/Instagram.  I'd forgotten all about Remy Ma when she went to prison.

 

23 hours ago, lasu said:

Could I have prevented my hypothetical rape in this situation?  Obviously.  I could have stayed home, brought a friend, not drank, lots of choices.  Could Candiace prevented her assault?  Probably.  She could have made different choices - to walk away, to ignore Monique, etc.  However, my bad choices do not make me culpable in ANY way for my hypothetical rape.  That is on the person who raped me, and only on that person.  Candiace's bad choices do not make her culpable in ANY way for her assault.  That's only on Monique.

Correct.  Candiace could have made better choices BUT Monique was the one who decided to take it to a physical level.  They could have just stood on opposite sides of the table and screamed at each other.  

But, not only did Monique take it to a physical level at the moment, she ran out of the room where production had put her, down the stairs, out the door and outside, to get at Candiace.  Monique had the nerve to say on WWHL, to Andy Cohen that she wanted to "finish Candiace off" because Candiace had screamed that Monique was going to be fired.  THAT is the one thing that bothered me about the fight and Monique can't say she was in the "heat of the moment" when the moment had passed.

Edited October 16, 2020 by Neurochick

[Sheenieb]

I'm tired of hearing about the fight.

Monique's sit down with her pastor would've been fine if we didn't know a year later that she wouldn't be remorseful. 

However, as someone wrote on the previous thread, there are some people who view verbal disrespect as a high-level offense and they would have no issues losing their freedom over it. It's insane to me, but those types exist. They have what I like to call the "Nicky Santoro view" about jail. "I'm fucking stupid. I don't give a fuck about jail."

Anyway, I liked seeing Karen's town and the farm. Ray still ain't shit, though. Unless he had some work commitment that he couldn't get out of, there's no excuse as to why he didn't accompany Karen back to her hometown. And then to leave her hanging when she tried to kiss him? He's a passive-aggressive ass and Karen needs to remember who the fuck she is and call him out on it. 

I know that Robyn is in a tax bind of her own making, so money might be tight, but I'm sure Party City would've had better wigs than the mess she had on her head.

How does one "forget" to report income? 🧐  

[Neurochick]

30 minutes ago, Sheenieb said:

How does one "forget" to report income? 🧐  

Apparently easy, especially when you do your own taxes.

[drivethroo]

2 hours ago, Sheenieb said:

However, as someone wrote on the previous thread, there are some people who view verbal disrespect as a high-level offense and they would have no issues losing their freedom over it.

People like that don't have anything to lose. People like that are dangerous.  Monique has 3 beautiful children and a loving husband who has money.  If she feels they are worth losing so she won't look like a sucka who got disrespected, she's got problems far worse than Candiace.

Apparently Monique has said she won't be in the next several episodes so I'm guessing the cast trip episodes are coming up.

[PhilMarlowe2]

17 hours ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

I'm just going to say one final thing on this and then you can have the last word. It's absolutely NOT a "big leap" from "Candiace shares some of the blame for how the situation turned out" to "Candiace deserved to be assaulted." The situation "turned out" with Candiace being assaulted. I'm... not sure how you don't see that. Saying that she shares some of the blame for how "the situation turned out" means saying she shares some of the blame for being assaulted.

Please stop saying, "I am not sure how you don't see that" - your view on things is not the unequivocal, unbreakable truth. People can view things differently. And yes, for me, it is absolutely a huge leap to say that because Candiace shares responsibility for the situation, that means she "deserves" what happened.

It's like the Kenya/Porsha altercation. Kenya did not "deserve" to be attacked by Porsha. That said, Kenya was not blameless in the situation. She chose to provoke Porsha, she chose to use props in a provocative way, she chose to use inflammatory language. So, if Kenya sits down with her therapist, and her therapist asks her, "What was your part in this?" and Kenya replies, "I didn't play a part in it," Kenya is disowning some of her responsibility. Does it mean she deserved to be attacked? Of course not. But can she reflect on her own actions and the way she co-created a situation that led to the unfortunate outcome? Absolutely. 

It's the same thing with Candiace - she played into the escalation, she put her hands on Monique, she repeatedly asked to be dragged - none of this means she "deserved" to be attacked - but when her therapist asks about her part in the situation, and she says she doesn't have any, that is not taking responsibility for herself...

Monique absolutely has no one to blame but herself for getting violent. And she needs to get clear with herself why she got violent. That does not absolve Candiace from also reflecting on her own action in the situation. And, IMO, any truly self-reflective person who has a commitment to personal empowerment (and not being a victim) always needs to be looking at the part they played in any given conflict between two adult peers of equal power. This includes me - there are situations in my life where I was treated unfairly. I did not "deserve" to be treated unfairly, but I also see where I made certain choices that put me in a position for the unfair treatment. And if a therapist were to ask me about my role, I would take ownership for those choices. It just seems like you are interpreting anyone saying, "Yeah, Candiace has some responsibility here" as "Candiace deserved it" or "Monique was justified in what she did," even when that's not what (some) people mean. It's not black-or-white. It's not either/or. It's not binary thinking. Multiple things can be true at once.

Edited October 17, 2020 by PhilMarlowe2

[nb360]

On 10/15/2020 at 6:33 AM, ladle said:

Maybe she's underproducing, knows she's not going to be granted tenure, and this is a way out.  Or maybe she wants out for other reasons.  Clearly I'm far too invested in this!  

Wouldn't it be great to have a "Real Housewives of Academia"?

We can have the struggling, insecure, tenure-track assistant professor; the "grand dame" -- a older, black feminist scholar; that scholar's nemesis; a graduate student dealing with the sexual advances of an important older, male professor; and an academic married couple whose marriage is on the rocks.

[ladle]

3 hours ago, nb360 said:

Wouldn't it be great to have a "Real Housewives of Academia"?

We can have the struggling, insecure, tenure-track assistant professor; the "grand dame" -- a older, black feminist scholar; that scholar's nemesis; a graduate student dealing with the sexual advances of an important older, male professor; and an academic married couple whose marriage is on the rocks.

I’ve long thought Real Housewives of Academia would make a great SNL skit, but it’s probably too niche. 

[albarino]

23 hours ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

Please stop saying, "I am not sure how you don't see that" - your view on things is not the unequivocal, unbreakable truth. People can view things differently. And yes, for me, it is absolutely a huge leap to say that because Candiace shares responsibility for the situation, that means she "deserves" what happened.

Thank you.  I completely agree with you.  This binary/black/white viewpoint is quite interesting.  Provoking somebody you have seen be unstable is on you.  That is why we have the verb in the English language.  Didn't C throw the wine glass?  Candace isn't blameless as I have said before.  All of this is ridiculous.  

In parting, I guess bulls are to blame when they charge after getting speared by a matador.   

[Talented Tenth]

On 10/11/2020 at 11:04 PM, nexxie said:

Somebody needs to tell Candiace - her husband, therapist, Karen maybe - that she should stop getting in people’s faces with her shrieking and hand action. Though Monique is rightfully being held to account for getting physical, Candiace needs to reconsider her behavior (as her therapist seemed to hint). 

Candiace wasn't doing anything Monique wasn't doing.  Every single housewife across every franchise has had arguments and conflict.  There was a huge table between Candiace and Monique.  If Monique felt hands were in her face she could have taken a step back.  There is absolutely no justification for Monique getting physical.  Candiace apologize to Monique three times this season to keep the peace for things that didn't necessarily warrant an apology and walked away multiple times when Monique was trying to start an argument.  Part of Housewives is conflict.  If any of them can't handle it they need to get off the show.  I'm lost as to why Candiace is being held to a different standard than everyone else.  

[nexxie]

21 minutes ago, Talented Tenth said:

Candiace wasn't doing anything Monique wasn't doing.  Every single housewife across every franchise has had arguments and conflict.  There was a huge table between Candiace and Monique.  If Monique felt hands were in her face she could have taken a step back.  There is absolutely no justification for Monique getting physical.  Candiace apologize to Monique three times this season to keep the peace for things that didn't necessarily warrant an apology and walked away multiple times when Monique was trying to start an argument.  Part of Housewives is conflict.  If any of them can't handle it they need to get off the show.  I'm lost as to why Candiace is being held to a different standard than everyone else.  

ANYONE who shrieks, mocks and waves their hands (and sometimes knives) in people’s faces should expect to get their obnoxious butt kicked eventually, even if - in a perfect world - everyone should walk away. Staying in denial and telling her therapist she did nothing is not going to help Candiace in the long run.

[Talented Tenth]

On 10/12/2020 at 5:38 PM, PhilMarlowe2 said:

That analogy doesn't feel appropriate to me, though, because your biggest crime is being absentminded. You're not actively participating in the situation at all. I am not excusing Monique here, but Candiace did play a part in escalating that argument - everything from wagging her fingers in Monique's face, to flipping Monique's shirt (after the hair toss) and saying, "You going to drag me?" repeatedly as she is flipping the shirt. That's contact. That's baiting. I for one cannot imagine looking someone in the eye and saying, "Punch me in the face!" and then turning around crying victim when said person punches me in the face. I guess if I were to use your analogy, it'd be like if you purposefully parked your car dangerously close to thief's car specifically to piss him off, let your car door bump into his car and then you said, "Do it! Steal my cell phone!" as you left the parking lot. Does it make it right for him to steal your phone? No. Did you play a very real part in the escalating situation? Hell, yes. I'll never see Candiace as a victim in this.

The bottom line is that Monique initiated physical contact, pulled Candiace's hair, punched her in the head and threatened to kill her.  Candiace is in no way, shape or form responsible for Monique's behavior.  When it's suggested that Candiace needs to "own her part", that actually is trying to absolve Monique of some blame.  Arguing and disagreeing didn't contribute to Monique's attack.  Monique got violent because that's who she is.  Candiace and Monique don't have equal culpability in Monique choosing to physically assault Candiace.  Candiace was not challenging Monique to a fight with the "drag" question.  Last season, Monique threatened to drag Candiace "pregnant" and all because Candiace told her to walk away.  I don't think anyone thought in a million years that a pregnant Monique would get physical.  Candiace and Monique made up and said they were like sisters.  The winery argument was their first major argument since last year so when Candiace asked "are you goin to drag me", that was her way of recalling what Monique said previously and expressing "here we go again".  Any woman who can't fight with her words doesn't need to be on the show.  Monique is a rapper - send her to Love & Hip Hop.

[Persnickety1]

On 10/12/2020 at 9:25 PM, ErikaOnline said:

I think Ray is upset about the rumor from last season about mr. Blue eyes. I think he's being passive aggressive. I also think Ashley was being passive aggressive in her TH about putting a tracker in Michael's butt lol. She's tired of his cheating. I thought when Robyn had the wig on,the producers told her to amp it up for the scene. Cute Juan seems uncomfortable on camera. Karen's family seemed sweet. Was she sitting on her aunt's lap? Gizelle seemed kind of jealous when she was visiting Karen's hometown. Candiace's food setup was nice when she invited Robyn over. But I don't think she should of asked Robyn about her taxes on camera. I'll have to rewatch,but it didn't seem like Monique was really listening to her pastor. What does her nice husband Chris see in her? 

I'd love to know what type of tea cookies Candiace served.  They looked delicious.  

This is my favorite of the franchises and has been for a couple of seasons now.  I can find something to like about all of these women, unlike a few of the other housewife franchises.  Plus, at least for me, Potomac has more of a feel of authenticity than the others at this point.  

I don't post much in here, but I read and enjoy everyone else's insights.  ❤️  

[Talented Tenth]

43 minutes ago, nexxie said:

ANYONE who shrieks, mocks and waves their hands (and sometimes knives) in people’s faces should expect to get their obnoxious butt kicked eventually, even if - in a perfect world - everyone should walk away. Staying in denial and telling her therapist she did nothing is not going to help Candiace in the long run.

I think the divide over the assault comes down to people who believe violence is an acceptable way to resolve verbal conflicts and others like myself who are cut from a different cloth.  You are also providing justifications for the attack that even Monique hasn't given.  When she was in the car on the way home, her comment was "talk crap and get hit".  She then changed her story to not remembering, blacking out and the lie she was feeding to bloggers saying wine in her face caused the assault.  Monique said to the pastor that it wasn't about Candiace and expressed remorse.  Monique also recently stated Candiace didn't deserve it.  Since I don't believe words warrant assault, Candiace rightfully told the therapist she contributed to the argument and had no responsibility in Monique choosing to be violent.

Regarding Candiace and knives, at the winery, she used the knife to tap the wine glass to get the group's attention which is something that is commonly done at gatherings.  It was not being use in a threatening way.  Wendy took the knife away because it's a running joke in the group to keep knives away from Candiace since the incident with Ashley.  When it comes to Ashley, they were eating dinner and Candiace had a butter knife in her hand.  She was not using the knife in a threatening manner nor was she holding it as if she was going to stab Ashley.  Ashley disrespected her in her home and was told to leave.  As Ashley became a trespasser, Candiace threw the knife in her direction to emphasize that she wanted Ashley out.  Had Candiace wanted to assault Ashley, she had ample opportunity to do so.  Clearly, Ashley didn't feel threatened because she went back into Candiace's home twice after being told to leave.

Edited October 18, 2020 by Talented Tenth

[albarino]

9 minutes ago, Talented Tenth said:

I think the divide over the assault comes down to people who believe violence is an acceptable way to resolve verbal conflicts and others like myself who are cut from a different cloth. 

Too funny!!  Thanks for the laugh.

[nexxie]

19 minutes ago, Talented Tenth said:

I think the divide over the assault comes down to people who believe violence is an acceptable way to resolve verbal conflicts and others like myself who are cut from a different cloth.  You are also providing justifications for the attack that even Monique hasn't given.  When she was in the car on the way home, her comment was "talk crap and get hit".  She then changed her story to not remembering, blacking out and the lie she was feeding to bloggers saying wine in her face caused the assault.  Monique said to the pastor that it wasn't about Candiace and expressed remorse.  Monique also recently stated Candiace didn't deserve it.  Since I don't believe words warrant assault, Candiace rightfully told the therapist she contributed to the argument and had no responsibility in Monique choosing to be violent.

Regarding Candiace and knives, at the winery, she used the knife to tap the wine glass to get the group's attention which is something that is commonly done at gatherings.  It was not being use in a threatening way.  Wendy took the knife away because it's a running joke in the group to keep knives away from Candiace since the incident with Ashley.  When it comes to Ashley, they were eating dinner and Candiace had a butter knife in her hand.  She was not using the knife in a threatening manner nor was she holding it as if she was going to stab Ashley.  Ashley disrespected her in her home and was told to leave.  As Ashley became a trespasser, Candiace threw the knife in her direction to emphasize that she wanted Ashley out.  Had Candiace wanted to assault Ashley, she had ample opportunity to do so.  Clearly, Ashley didn't feel threatened because she went back into Candiace's home twice after being told to leave.

Candiace, is that you?

[Talented Tenth]

2 hours ago, nexxie said:

Candiace, is that you?

[My Friend Goo]

On 10/13/2020 at 1:53 PM, eleanorofaquitaine said:

No, she's really not to blame for the situation, unless you believe that Monique is not an adult who has no control over her emotions. She may share blame for the deterioration of their relationship. And she may share blame about contributing to a scene at the winery. But Monique's decision to physically assault her is ALL on Monique, and no amount of "but Candiace runs her mouth!" is going to change that.

 

On 10/13/2020 at 5:10 PM, drivethroo said:

Because people don't like Candiace/have a Candiace-like person in their lives and they are living vicariously through Monique.  A lot of people cheer on Monique for beating Candiace, justifying it with "Well talk shit get hit" when they know good and well they do not go around beating up people who disrespect them in their off-line lives.

 

I appreciate the points made in the quoted posts + RealReality's post re: Remy Ma about controlling one's own actions, vicarious experiences, and cautionary tales.

Most people are not knocking the heads of their annoying co-workers, neighbours, or strangers on the street because they are aware of the real legal repercussions and/or threat of retaliation, personal injury, loss of life. This is the true code that most people live by, not a fantasy one that they will only support online.

The minority of people who do behave like that, more times than not, fuck up their lives with criminal records and lack opportunities for social mobility. In the long run, they are often relegated to only live and socialize among other people who behave like them. Not many people luck into money and status like Monique.

I have no doubt that there are people who relish "keeping it real" and even feel more comfortable being around those who think like them with no desire to be around anyone different. I'm not certain if Monique truly is one of them. Otherwise, she wouldn't be trying to play the role of dutiful NFL wife, busy entrepreneurial mom, gracious host at weekend retreats to women who are not like her, etc.

Furthermore, I think that there is a level of safety that the cast members feel when engaging in confrontations when the cameras are rolling (and the idea of the violence not being spontaneous to the audience like it is offline in person) that is contributing to a disconnect between what one professes they are okay with as it plays out on TV versus how one might actually react to a real-life situation.

If Wendy had not removed the knife from Candiace's hand prior to the fight and somehow Candiace stabbed Monique during the scuffle, would the consensus have been that Candiace went too far or that Monique should have seen it coming because anything goes when engaging in battle? In fact, Candiace did make contact with the broken wine glass and if she had swung higher and damaged Monique's eye, would Monique be as smug about the outcome of the fight?

Reading the responses in support of the "talk shit, get hit" code has reminded me of two incidents that have occurred this year:

In the first incident, a young mother spotted the father of her children and his new girlfriend at a gas station, got out of the car she was in with her children and physically attacked the girlfriend. The girlfriend fired a gun and killed the young mother.

In the second incident, yet another young mother confronted her friend's ex-girlfriend (at the ex's home), to fight on the friend's behalf, and was stabbed to death.

In both cases, the deceased women had an axe to grind with their targets and felt justified in physically fighting them. Should they have known that their targets had a line that didn't stop at fist-fighting and extended to using weapons that would ultimately result in death?

It is a slippery slope when trying to justify physical violence as the consequence of verbally disrespecting someone because one person's level of consequence (getting beat up) may differ greatly from another person's (literally fighting to the death). It does not compare to escalating a fight from verbal to physical. There's a reason why there are harsher legal and social repercussions for physical attacks than there are verbal attacks.

IMO, Monique was 100% dead wrong. She saw Candiace as an easy target physically and socially (within the cast) which makes Monique an even bigger clown than Candiace.

I'm also starting to believe that this points to some of the reasons why Chris' mom had such an issue with Monique.

 

[OnceSane]

Stop making it personal.  A difference of opinion is not an excuse to snark on each other.

[nexxie]

As far as actual physical violence goes, imo Bravo has been negligent in allowing those who cross the line to keep their jobs. Teresa, Nene, LeeAnne, Rinna, Monique and others should’ve been fired asap - the rest of the cast has a right to be safe.

You can draw a firm line about physical violence and still feel that some people on these shows purposely try to provoke a response, and should’nt be surprised to get a response they don’t like. 

Edited October 19, 2020 by nexxie

[RealReality]

23 hours ago, albarino said:

Thank you.  I completely agree with you.  This binary/black/white viewpoint is quite interesting.  Provoking somebody you have seen be unstable is on you.  That is why we have the verb in the English language.  Didn't C throw the wine glass?  Candace isn't blameless as I have said before.  All of this is ridiculous.  

In parting, I guess bulls are to blame when they charge after getting speared by a matador.   

 

I called monique a rabid dog, but I was never in her corner. 

If I were monique I'd be insulted that people who were in my corner felt I was no better than an animal.  A mentally unstable animal at that!

Monique needs to really think  about whether she wants to be the person her fans applaud her for being.   

 

Edited October 19, 2020 by RealReality

[RealReality]

B

 

Edited October 19, 2020 by RealReality

[drivethroo]

On 10/17/2020 at 11:03 PM, albarino said:

 Didn't C throw the wine glass?  Candace isn't blameless as I have said before.  All of this is ridiculous.  

Candiace did not throw the wine glass because it was still in her hand and even if she did (which she didn't), it was AFTER Monique started flicking her hair.  Monique put her hands on Candiace FIRST.

On 10/16/2020 at 10:53 PM, PhilMarlowe2 said:

It's the same thing with Candiace - she played into the escalation, she put her hands on Monique, she repeatedly asked to be dragged -

Everyone saying Candiace asked to be dragged is funny because they're admitting Monique is Pavlov's dog who reacts to stimuli instead of having some self control.  If somebody says "Bitch you gone hit/drag me?" and you hit them, you aren't doing it because you feel threatened or attacked ... you're doing it because you don't want to look like a weak punk in front of others.

 

Quote

I'm also starting to believe that this points to some of the reasons why Chris' mom had such an issue with Monique.

They replayed this episode with extra footage, and one of the bits of extra footage that was cut out of last week's airing was the pastor bringing up Monique having been homeless.  This is what her ex-friend Gigi said on social media, that Monique came down to DC to be a rapper, it didn't work out, and she ended up being homeless until she met Chris, became his assistant and scooted Chris' long-time girlfriend out of the picture.  Sliding in the way she did is probably the real reason why Mama Samuels doesn't like her.

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 10/18/2020 at 9:30 AM, Talented Tenth said:

I think the divide over the assault comes down to people who believe violence is an acceptable way to resolve verbal conflicts and others like myself who are cut from a different cloth. 

That's a huge assumption and it's not true.

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 10/12/2020 at 5:11 PM, drivethroo said:

If you punch somebody in the face just because somebody says "You gonna punch me in the face?" you are no better than a trained dog.  Just because someone says "are you gonna drag me?" does not mean that you in fact need to drag somebody.

By this analogy, if a woman says to a man "You gonna rape me?" then he should absolutely get to raping, right?

The problem is people are trying to equate Candiace's actions with Monique's (and wanting her to get the same consequences) or blaming Monique's actions on Candiace (it's Candiace's fault she got beat) and both premises are wrong. Monique was doing just as much as Candiace before the fight with the handwaving and fingers in the face but Monique is the one who's going to have to get this dance because Monique is the one who decided to put her hands on Candiace.  It is what it is.

Nobody here has said Candiace was right.   But there are a whole lot of people here and on other forums who not only believe Candiace is to blame for getting a beatdown, they are cheering Monique for having done so and it's sad.

"If you punch somebody in the face just because somebody says "You gonna punch me in the face?" you are no better than a trained dog.  Just because someone says "are you gonna drag me?" does not mean that you in fact need to drag somebody."

Right. Nowhere in my post did I say that Monique was right for attacking Candiace. Nowhere in my post did I say that Monique was justified in attacking Candiace. In fact, my post wasn't about Monique at all.  My post was simply saying that Candiace played a role in the escalating situation. And I stand by my original point: I cannot imagine imploring someone to hit me and then acting like a victim when they hit me. And, yes, for the record, I also think Monique was entirely out of line for the way she behaved.

By this analogy, if a woman says to a man "You gonna rape me?" then he should absolutely get to raping, right?

No. I can't even begin to express the extent to which this feels like a total false equivalency. But mileage will vary. And, again, my post never once said Monique "should" have attacked Candiace or that Candiace deserved it.

The problem is people are trying to equate Candiace's actions with Monique's (and wanting her to get the same consequences) or blaming Monique's actions on Candiace (it's Candiace's fault she got beat) and both premises are wrong. 

I actually think "the problem" (if there is one) is that people read the sentiment, "Candiace played a part in the escalating situation" and immediately assume that anyone suggesting this thinks Candiace deserved it, or that Monique was justified in her actions, neither of which are true (for me, at least). 

[RealReality]

2 hours ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

"If you punch somebody in the face just because somebody says "You gonna punch me in the face?" you are no better than a trained dog.  Just because someone says "are you gonna drag me?" does not mean that you in fact need to drag somebody."

Right. Nowhere in my post did I say that Monique was right for attacking Candiace. Nowhere in my post did I say that Monique was justified in attacking Candiace. In fact, my post wasn't about Monique at all.  My post was simply saying that Candiace played a role in the escalating situation. And I stand by my original point: I cannot imagine imploring someone to hit me and then acting like a victim when they hit me. And, yes, for the record, I also think Monique was entirely out of line for the way she behaved.

By this analogy, if a woman says to a man "You gonna rape me?" then he should absolutely get to raping, right?

No. I can't even begin to express the extent to which this feels like a total false equivalency. But mileage will vary. And, again, my post never once said Monique "should" have attacked Candiace or that Candiace deserved it.

The problem is people are trying to equate Candiace's actions with Monique's (and wanting her to get the same consequences) or blaming Monique's actions on Candiace (it's Candiace's fault she got beat) and both premises are wrong. 

I actually think "the problem" (if there is one) is that people read the sentiment, "Candiace played a part in the escalating situation" and immediately assume that anyone suggesting this thinks Candiace deserved it, or that Monique was justified in her actions, neither of which are true (for me, at least). 

But, this sounds like you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth.  On the one hand you say that Candace shouldn't act like a victim because what she said "made" Monique physically attack her by daring her to do so.  But on the other hand you're saying that Monique shouldn't have assaulted her....even though Candace shouldn't see herself as a victim and should have foreseen the attack.  To me, it makes it sound like you think the attack is reasonable because Candace "asked for it," and because she "asked for it" she shouldn't be seen as a victim.  

To me, that actually kinda seems in line with the rape analogy and I think its often the same reasoning that is used in such cases.  You "asked for it" by your actions (wearing a skirt, drinking too much, getting in the car with a stranger, flirting while drunk, walking down a dark alley, not bringing a friend to the bar, etc, etc) and therefore you shouldn't act like a victim when the think you "asked for" happens. 

If Candace hadn't said the magic words "drag me" would you then characterize her as a victim?  Do you honestly think that Candace not saying the magic words would have changed Monique's response?  How much of a difference do these magic words make?  What if she had sarcastically said "hug me" instead, would Monique have been bound to hug her?  The whole thing kinda reminds me of Beetlejuice.  

 

Edited October 20, 2020 by RealReality

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 10/20/2020 at 12:14 AM, RealReality said:

But, this sounds like you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth.  On the one hand you say that Candace shouldn't act like a victim because what she said "made" Monique physically attack her by daring her to do so.  But on the other hand you're saying that Monique shouldn't have assaulted her....even though Candace shouldn't see herself as a victim and should have foreseen the attack.  To me, it makes it sound like you think the attack is reasonable because Candace "asked for it," and because she "asked for it" she shouldn't be seen as a victim.  

To me, that actually kinda seems in line with the rape analogy and I think its often the same reasoning that is used in such cases.  You "asked for it" by your actions (wearing a skirt, drinking too much, getting in the car with a stranger, flirting while drunk, walking down a dark alley, not bringing a friend to the bar, etc, etc) and therefore you shouldn't act like a victim when the think you "asked for" happens. 

If Candace hadn't said the magic words "drag me" would you then characterize her as a victim?  Do you honestly think that Candace not saying the magic words would have changed Monique's response?  How much of a difference do these magic words make?  What if she had sarcastically said "hug me" instead, would Monique have been bound to hug her?  The whole thing kinda reminds me of Beetlejuice.  

 

On the one hand you say that Candace shouldn't act like a victim because what she said "made" Monique physically attack her by daring her to do so. 

Nope. I never said that. I never once said Candiace "made" Monique attack her. I simply said Candiace played a part in the escalating situation. That does not mean she "made" Monique attack her. Monique alone is responsible for her actions. 

If Candace hadn't said the magic words "drag me" would you then characterize her as a victim?  Do you honestly think that Candace not saying the magic words would have changed Monique's response?  How much of a difference do these magic words make?  What if she had sarcastically said "hug me" instead, would Monique have been bound to hug her?  The whole thing kinda reminds me of Beetlejuice.  

Candiace did more than say "drag me" - she also put hands on Monique. Yes, I know Monique touched Candiace's hair first, which is Monique's responsibility, but Candiace did then put her hands on Monique, all the while saying "Drag me." They were going in on each other, they were baiting each other, they touched each other, and then, yes, Monique took it too far. But Candiace was a part of the situation for sure. If this had been, say, the lake house argument - and they were simply sparring and Monique then lunged for her, then I would see Candiace as nothing but a victim - or if Candiace were walking away and Monique lunged at her, then I would see her as nothing but a victim - but for Candiace to claim to her therapist that she played no role in what happened is completely disingenuous to me. She was in the thick of it, she was heated as hell, she was using her hands and she was baiting for sure. It doesn't mean she "deserved" the attack, it doesn't mean she "made" Monique attack her, it doesn't mean Monique has an excuse for her actions - it simply means she played a role in what went down and if I were her, I would be deeply reflecting on how I played a role in what happened. Especially given her own history with outbursts and near-violence.

 

1 minute ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

On the one hand you say that Candace shouldn't act like a victim because what she said "made" Monique physically attack her by daring her to do so. 

Nope. I never said that. I never once said Candiace "made" Monique attack her. I simply said Candiace played a part in the escalating situation. That does not mean she "made" Monique attack her. Monique alone is responsible for her actions. 

If Candace hadn't said the magic words "drag me" would you then characterize her as a victim?  Do you honestly think that Candace not saying the magic words would have changed Monique's response?  How much of a difference do these magic words make?  What if she had sarcastically said "hug me" instead, would Monique have been bound to hug her?  The whole thing kinda reminds me of Beetlejuice.  

Candiace did more than say "drag me" - she also put hands on Monique. Yes, I know Monique touched Candiace's hair first, which is Monique's responsibility, but Candiace did then put her hands on Monique, all the while saying "Drag me." They were going in on each other, they were baiting each other, they touched each other, and then, yes, Monique took it too far. But Candiace was a part of the situation for sure. If this had been, say, the lake house argument - and they were simply sparring and Monique then lunged for her, then I would see Candiace as nothing but a victim - or if Candiace were walking away and Monique lunged at her, then I would see her as nothing but a victim - but for Candiace to claim to her therapist that she played no role in what happened is completely disingenuous to me. She was in the thick of it, she was heated as hell, she was using her hands and she was baiting for sure. It doesn't mean she "deserved" the attack, it doesn't mean she "made" Monique attack her, it doesn't mean Monique has an excuse for her actions - it simply means she played a role in what went down and if I were her, I would be deeply reflecting on how I played a role in what happened. Especially given her own history with outbursts and near-violence.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2020 by PhilMarlowe2

[RealReality]

2 hours ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

On the one hand you say that Candace shouldn't act like a victim because what she said "made" Monique physically attack her by daring her to do so. 

Nope. I never said that. I never once said Candiace "made" Monique attack her. I simply said Candiace played a part in the escalating situation. That does not mean she "made" Monique attack her. Monique alone is responsible for her actions. 

If Candace hadn't said the magic words "drag me" would you then characterize her as a victim?  Do you honestly think that Candace not saying the magic words would have changed Monique's response?  How much of a difference do these magic words make?  What if she had sarcastically said "hug me" instead, would Monique have been bound to hug her?  The whole thing kinda reminds me of Beetlejuice.  

Candiace did more than say "drag me" - she also put hands on Monique. Yes, I know Monique touched Candiace's hair first, which is Monique's responsibility, but Candiace did then put her hands on Monique, all the while saying "Drag me." They were going in on each other, they were baiting each other, they touched each other, and then, yes, Monique took it too far. But Candiace was a part of the situation for sure. If this had been, say, the lake house argument - and they were simply sparring and Monique then lunged for her, then I would see Candiace as nothing but a victim - or if Candiace were walking away and Monique lunged at her, then I would see her as nothing but a victim - but for Candiace to claim to her therapist that she played no role in what happened is completely disingenuous to me. She was in the thick of it, she was heated as hell, she was using her hands and she was baiting for sure. It doesn't mean she "deserved" the attack, it doesn't mean she "made" Monique attack her, it doesn't mean Monique has an excuse for her actions - it simply means she played a role in what went down and if I were her, I would be deeply reflecting on how I played a role in what happened. Especially given her own history with outbursts and near-violence.

 

 

1 You don't have to explicitly say something to put that message forward.  Given the rhetoric of the day, I think most people can recognize an implication even when something isn't explicitly stated.  It seems intellectually dishonest to say "but I never said THOSE EXACT WORDS!" when the words you use put forward the same message.  If you say that Candace shouldn't see herself as a victim and played a role in Monique's actions, it implies that she bears some responsibility for Monique's actions.  

2. So then magic words combined with a flip of the vest makes Candace in some part culpable and responsible for Monique's attack.  I know your explicit words are that Candace isn't responsible for Monique's behavior, but if you say that Candace plays a role in that behavior than you are, to me, saying that she is partially responsible for her behavior.  And as you said, MONIQUE made first contact, so Monique makes first contact and now Candace bears some sort of responsibility for touching her vest?  IMO, Candace is on a show where her job is to antagonize people verbally.  Its MONIQUE who needs to think about her actions and why she signed up for a job she is intellectually, mentally and emotionally unsuited for.  

Candace played no role in what happened because the decision to become violent was Monique and Monique's alone, and saying that she played a role in what MONIQUE CHOSE to do takes agency away from Monique.  

And this is where it comes off again sounding like talking out of both sides of your mouth, explicitly you say Candace isn't responsible for Monique's behavior, but on the other hand, all these....I don't know "dog whistles" sound awful familiar and in line with the rape analogy posted by another member.  Things like "Candace played a role" in Monique's actions, "Candace said the wrong words" "Candace touched Monique's vest while saying the wrong words" "Candace is responsible for the escalation of the situation" which, given that "the situation" was Candace being physically attacked means that you're saying that she bears some responsibility for the physical attack. 

No one has said that Monique shouldn't have been upset by what Candace said (though I didn't think it was that bad), what everyone has said is that being upset is fine, ALL these women upset and annoy each other.  But anyone, particularly on this show, who gets beaten up because they made another person upset is a pure victim with no culpability or responsibility for the other person becoming violent.

3.  Funny how Candace apparently has problems with "outbursts" and "near violent" behavior and was just as baited by Monique but managed not to physically attack her.  But then again, I think the affair of the butter knife has been grossly overdramatized by Monique and her fans.  If Ashley ever felt in danger, her continuously ignoring Candace and coming back and refusing to leave certainly don't paint that picture.  

[PhilMarlowe2]

On 10/22/2020 at 6:06 PM, RealReality said:

1 You don't have to explicitly say something to put that message forward.  Given the rhetoric of the day, I think most people can recognize an implication even when something isn't explicitly stated.  It seems intellectually dishonest to say "but I never said THOSE EXACT WORDS!" when the words you use put forward the same message.  If you say that Candace shouldn't see herself as a victim and played a role in Monique's actions, it implies that she bears some responsibility for Monique's actions.  

2. So then magic words combined with a flip of the vest makes Candace in some part culpable and responsible for Monique's attack.  I know your explicit words are that Candace isn't responsible for Monique's behavior, but if you say that Candace plays a role in that behavior than you are, to me, saying that she is partially responsible for her behavior.  And as you said, MONIQUE made first contact, so Monique makes first contact and now Candace bears some sort of responsibility for touching her vest?  IMO, Candace is on a show where her job is to antagonize people verbally.  Its MONIQUE who needs to think about her actions and why she signed up for a job she is intellectually, mentally and emotionally unsuited for.  

Candace played no role in what happened because the decision to become violent was Monique and Monique's alone, and saying that she played a role in what MONIQUE CHOSE to do takes agency away from Monique.  

And this is where it comes off again sounding like talking out of both sides of your mouth, explicitly you say Candace isn't responsible for Monique's behavior, but on the other hand, all these....I don't know "dog whistles" sound awful familiar and in line with the rape analogy posted by another member.  Things like "Candace played a role" in Monique's actions, "Candace said the wrong words" "Candace touched Monique's vest while saying the wrong words" "Candace is responsible for the escalation of the situation" which, given that "the situation" was Candace being physically attacked means that you're saying that she bears some responsibility for the physical attack. 

No one has said that Monique shouldn't have been upset by what Candace said (though I didn't think it was that bad), what everyone has said is that being upset is fine, ALL these women upset and annoy each other.  But anyone, particularly on this show, who gets beaten up because they made another person upset is a pure victim with no culpability or responsibility for the other person becoming violent.

3.  Funny how Candace apparently has problems with "outbursts" and "near violent" behavior and was just as baited by Monique but managed not to physically attack her.  But then again, I think the affair of the butter knife has been grossly overdramatized by Monique and her fans.  If Ashley ever felt in danger, her continuously ignoring Candace and coming back and refusing to leave certainly don't paint that picture.  

1 You don't have to explicitly say something to put that message forward.  Given the rhetoric of the day, I think most people can recognize an implication even when something isn't explicitly stated.  It seems intellectually dishonest to say "but I never said THOSE EXACT WORDS!" when the words you use put forward the same message.  If you say that Candace shouldn't see herself as a victim and played a role in Monique's actions, it implies that she bears some responsibility for Monique's actions.  

That's actually not what I'm doing, and no matter how many times you project or infer a meaning onto my words, it doesn't change whether it's what I mean or not. I have literally said Monique alone bears responsibility for her own actions. I have said this multiple times. At this point, it's clear that many people in this thread are going to continue to hear what they want to hear, so there's no point in continuing this back-and-forth. 

Edited October 24, 2020 by PhilMarlowe2

[ButterQueen]

Honestly, I’ve been waiting for someone to shut Candace up.  I think she is a horrible, nasty person...to her core.

I hope Monique sees a professional about her anger and unhappiness.  She may have PPD.

Gizelle is becoming just nasty.  Her taking notes on her phone while her lap dog Robin made stupid faces was just as hard to watch as Monique pulling Candace’s wig.  And bringing security.......what a joke.  I’d rather be Monique’s friend than hang out with fake Gizelle, or broke Robin or Candace.  And heaven help Wendy’s students having to listen to her mess.  It’s a sad day when Ashley is the voice of reason.

 

[Jel]

The words people say matter.  Are we in a weird place where people can say whatever the hell they want, no matter how cruel, how damaging, how defamatory, how hurtful? As long as you don't put your hands on someone you can say whatever you want and expect no negative reaction? How is this idea even possible in the current climate where the direction of progress is towards using kinder, more respectful, more inclusive words in society and workplaces and schools?  If a person uses a slur against someone, do we say, okay no problem because there was no physical violence? Words matter too.

Words don't justify violence, so Monique was wrong. But that doesn't mean the conversation is over and there's nothing else to say about it. 

There's a straw man in this conversation and it's the "Candiace deserved to be hit" guy.  That's who people are arguing with, a straw man. 

 

[retired watcher]

I am not liking this season at all. I'm sick of the Monique drama. And Gizelle wake up. You really going back to the man who cheated on you? What does that tell your daughters. We need some new blood, but not Wendy.