Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

SoCharmers in the Media: The Post & Courier

Lola16

By Lola16
in Southern Charm

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

biakbiak
biakbiak

I don’t think that is weird at all. Lots of families enjoy spending time together. I still go on at least one vacation rvey year or year and a half with my parents and sisters family and it has nothin

gingerella
gingerella

I dont want any tr erasure at this point! I want him to show his full fucking asshole, alcoholic ragey misongynisitc abusive self right there on national television, for the world to see, and for his

nexxie
nexxie

Does anyone here want to watch Ashley’s “redemption story?” Not me. Does anyone here want to see Thomas Ravenel on TV again? Not me.

Posted Images

Former Nun

Former Nun

On 5/26/2018 at 8:47 AM, Mindthinkr said:

Can someone in jail pay child support?

He has mucho assets and probably a large bank account.  He may even have inflated his worth when going for custody the first time.  Oops!

22 hours ago, Gam2 said:

Thomas should NOT dance. Ever.

Awwww...I think the guy is a self-important alcoholic jerk, but everyone should dance--especially around their kids.  Kids don't know good from bad dancing; they just know what's fun.

  • Love 14
SuprSuprElevated

SuprSuprElevated

3 minutes ago, Koalagirl said:

It’s now confirmed that TRav won’t be at the Southern Charm reunion.

https://decider.com/2018/06/05/thomas-ravenel-banned-southern-charm-season-5-reunion/?_ga=2.235331395.319682752.1527812320-1688176950.1514581450

This is very convenient and self-serving for Bravo imo.  To leave him in the remaining episodes which will garner advertising revenue, but leave him off of the reunion, where uncomfortable questions would be asked and avoided, is typically smarmy of BTV.  

  • Love 9
Koalagirl

Koalagirl

24 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

This is very convenient and self-serving for Bravo imo.  To leave him in the remaining episodes which will garner advertising revenue, but leave him off of the reunion, where uncomfortable questions would be asked and avoided, is typically smarmy of BTV.  

It’s very possible that because of legalities he wouldn’t have been able to answer certain questions anyway.  This might even be foreshadowing of his eventually being dropped from the show. 

  • Love 4
SuprSuprElevated

SuprSuprElevated

(edited)
4 minutes ago, Koalagirl said:

It’s very possible that because of legalities he wouldn’t have been able to answer certain questions anyway.  This might even be foreshadowing of his eventually being dropped from the show. 

It's not just possible, it's probable, which is why this is no big move to exclude him from the reunion.  His legal team was probably the impetus of this.

Edited by SuprSuprElevated
  • Love 6
slowpoked

slowpoked

39 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

This is very convenient and self-serving for Bravo imo.  To leave him in the remaining episodes which will garner advertising revenue, but leave him off of the reunion, where uncomfortable questions would be asked and avoided, is typically smarmy of BTV.  

I think Bravo was caught between a rock and a hard place when the allegations came out. And they figured they would be in a worse PR situation had they let him be in the reunion even though he cannot even talk about the matter. It's no issue that he acted like an ass during filming, but with these legal allegations coming out while the show is on TV, it became an entirely different ballgame for them. 

  • Love 4
SuprSuprElevated

SuprSuprElevated

2 hours ago, slowpoked said:

I think Bravo was caught between a rock and a hard place when the allegations came out. And they figured they would be in a worse PR situation had they let him be in the reunion even though he cannot even talk about the matter. It's no issue that he acted like an ass during filming, but with these legal allegations coming out while the show is on TV, it became an entirely different ballgame for them. 

I don't think he should be at the reunion.  I think his scenes should be pulled altogether, just as Andy would demand of any of his daily "jackholes", in a similar situation.

  • Love 1
b2H

b2H

There is also still time to edit him down a little bit.  I don't know how far they are in to the season, but I'm sure it's more than halfway.

There are other stories they could highlight.

What will be interesting is what happens with Ashley and what happens with Kathryn.  Ashley can go away and no one would miss her, but Kathryn is still very much a part of the show, redemption arc notwithstanding.

I want her to succeed in her sobriety.  She has every reason to focus on that now, because the alternative (should TRass go to prison) is for her kids to end up in foster care.  This season has gone a long way for the redemption arc, especially with the confrontation shown in the last two episodes.   This whole thing could actually help her, especially since (off camera) she has passed all the random testing.

  • Love 9
SuprSuprElevated

SuprSuprElevated

I'm sure that Bravo would have no problem extending Kathryn's 'story' to include her interaction with TR, should he eventually go to prison.  One simply needs to recall or research when it was done with Phaedra/Apollo in the Atlanta franchise.  Phaedra's pearl clutching and angst about taking her children to the prison to visit with their father, etc.  Bravo has a template to use on that particular storyline.

  • Love 7
slowpoked

slowpoked

5 hours ago, b2H said:

There is also still time to edit him down a little bit.  I don't know how far they are in to the season, but I'm sure it's more than halfway.

There are 4 episodes left. And TRav is the center of that big, climactic blow-up towards the end. So I don't know how Bravo can just magically erase him from the remaining episodes without any explanations, reshoots, revamped storylines, etc. 

  • Love 2
  • Popular Post
gingerella

gingerella

  • Popular Post

I dont want any tr erasure at this point! I want him to show his full fucking asshole, alcoholic ragey misongynisitc abusive self right there on national television, for the world to see, and for his potential judges to see. and for the lawyers of his accusers to use against him in a court of law. I want him to take down his disgusting self, right here on the show that inflated his sad sack ego.

  • Love 30
Natalie68

Natalie68

2 hours ago, Giselle said:

Well where do we put Assley?

Nobody would want her...at least not for long. We  have to be careful because it's a terrible thing we're doing to the chosen area.

We could put her on a dinghy and tow her out to sea.

I personally think a life with TRav is just what she needs.  After Kathryn (or other qualified caregiver) gets custody.  I am rooting for K but want to be realistic.

  • Love 3
zoeysmom

zoeysmom

We have Kathryn and Thomas dancing together, so has Ashley moved on or is she filming the two of them?  Thomas is most likely history as far as the show is concerned and in spite of all the Kathryn love this year I am guessing they want to erase all connections to TRav and his progeny.  Kathryn is just a messy woman, and I doubt anyone really wants to film with her-not even Shep.  

Interesting turn of events-they renewed early this year and there may be some key cast members not returning.  I hope Cameran, Craig and Shep can carry the show.

On 6/5/2018 at 4:22 PM, Koalagirl said:

It’s now confirmed that TRav won’t be at the Southern Charm reunion.

https://decider.com/2018/06/05/thomas-ravenel-banned-southern-charm-season-5-reunion/?_ga=2.235331395.319682752.1527812320-1688176950.1514581450

I don't see the need for a Reunion-especially now since Kathryn and Thomas won't be able to use the Reunion as a way to hook up.  We have Naomie and Craig who have broken up and moved on, Cheslsea and Austin who are like brother and sister, Shep and Cameran who have nothing new to add.  Scrap the Reunion.

  • Love 8
Sun-Bun

Sun-Bun

I’m sincerely bummed about Thomas not being on the show after this season—-yes, of course he’s a sleazebag who shouldn’t be ‘rewarded’ with continual exposure, but still...he *made* the show for me.

All the best drama and storylines centered around him. He brought the wealth and Southern good ol’boy stupidity to the cast. He made me laugh the most just being his typical goofy, drunken lout self. And it seems like every season, the other cast members are basically all left reacting to his own hijinks and main stories while their own dramas/subplots are just used as extra filler to pad each episode. Hell, even with his more limited role this season he’s STILL bringing all the main action to each episode via his reacting to Ashley the psycho and hanging out with his kids. Kathryn simply isn’t all that interesting unless she’s reacting to T-Rav and/or his latest love interest.

I just don’t see this show surviving without him...it’ll sputter on another season, but Shep, Craig and Cameron can’t carry this show alone.

  • Love 8
SuprSuprElevated

SuprSuprElevated

6 hours ago, Sun-Bun said:

I’m sincerely bummed about Thomas not being on the show after this season—-yes, of course he’s a sleazebag who shouldn’t be ‘rewarded’ with continual exposure, but still...he *made* the show for me.

All the best drama and storylines centered around him. He brought the wealth and Southern good ol’boy stupidity to the cast. He made me laugh the most just being his typical goofy, drunken lout self. And it seems like every season, the other cast members are basically all left reacting to his own hijinks and main stories while their own dramas/subplots are just used as extra filler to pad each episode. Hell, even with his more limited role this season he’s STILL bringing all the main action to each episode via his reacting to Ashley the psycho and hanging out with his kids. Kathryn simply isn’t all that interesting unless she’s reacting to T-Rav and/or his latest love interest.

I just don’t see this show surviving without him...it’ll sputter on another season, but Shep, Craig and Cameron can’t carry this show alone.

I'll guaran-damn-tee you that Whitney or Bravo or whomever will find one or more suitable replacements to bring the stupid next season.

  • Love 10
pasdetrois

pasdetrois

(edited)

Tamara Tattles reports that when in court this week Kathryn was found to have fulfilled the demands that were placed on her...and that she promptly asked for full custody and child support. Thomas is objecting and supposedly there was another hearing Friday. 

Why can't they share custody 50-50 without child support being paid to either? Thomas can pay for education, health care, nannies, if he wishes. Kathryn is surely making a lot of money (relative to most Americans) and can support the children using her own money.

ETA: my NoScript security software won't let me copy the TT link.

Edited by pasdetrois
  • Love 5
snarts

snarts

6 hours ago, pasdetrois said:

Why can't they share custody 50-50 without child support being paid to either? Thomas can pay for education, health care, nannies, if he wishes. Kathryn is surely making a lot of money (relative to most Americans) and can support the children using her own money.

That's not how states calculate child support.  They consider both of their incomes, along with the amount of time each parent is awarded, to come up with the figure.  I certainly hope they get a new custody/support order in place before Thomas goes back to prison. 

  • Love 2
Gam2

Gam2

From what I understand, one parent cannot provide a much more luxurious lifestyle than the other parent. For example, one parent cannot live in a mansion with a swimming pool, spa, cook, nanny, driver, etc. while the other lives in a small duplex with none of those amenities. The wealthy parent has to make the lifestyles as equal as possible so as to not influence the children as to preference of one parent over the other. 

  • Love 6
biakbiak

biakbiak

10 minutes ago, Gam2 said:

From what I understand, one parent cannot provide a much more luxurious lifestyle than the other parent. For example, one parent cannot live in a mansion with a swimming pool, spa, cook, nanny, driver, etc. while the other lives in a small duplex with none of those amenities. The wealthy parent has to make the lifestyles as equal as possible so as to not influence the children as to preference of one parent over the other. 

In my experience that is definitely not the case. 

  • Love 3
biakbiak

biakbiak

(edited)
1 hour ago, Gam2 said:

Thanks for joining in on this conversation.  I’m more than willing to hear someone else’s experience with this. We all do have to realize that our one experience isn’t typical of all. Please tell us about yours and how that’s all worked out.

What you described I have never seen in practice and doesn’t actually follow most state child support guidelines that I am familiar with (Washington, California, and New York) the wealthier parent will pay more of education, healthcare, sometimes extracurricular activities expenses, but certainly not housing amenities. Those can be negotiated in a divorce or child custody case privately but it’s not required by the state. 

In South Carolina Trav was only required by the state to pay around $1,800-$2,000 a month when Kathryn had full custody of both children. The specific number was reported around the reunion when Kathryn had full custody which I believe was season three.

Edited by biakbiak
  • Love 5
pasdetrois

pasdetrois

(edited)

I worked on a project on child support enforcement.  It's true that each state may have its own guidelines, but in many states they define typical costs and require both parents to provide a proportional portion of just those typical costs. Unemployed, able parents are often told to get a job.  Wealthy parents are often no longer required to provide huge sums just because they are wealthy. Whether to pay for private school, nannies, health care, etc. can be negotiable. I assume Kensie and Saint are on Thomas' health plan, for example, and he may be paying for therapeutic care.

When Thomas paid Kathryn child support, the court did not force him to pay beyond the minimum guidelines. Also, the children may have a guardian ad litem whose duty is to represent only their best interests.

biakbiak and I posted at the same time.

ETA: I would like to see reform so that people cant use child support for personal gain. There would be a lot less fighting and litigation if huge amounts of money were not at stake. I'm watching Kevin Federline's latest money grab with interest.

Edited by pasdetrois
  • Love 9
ozzy

ozzy

2 hours ago, Gam2 said:

From what I understand, one parent cannot provide a much more luxurious lifestyle than the other parent. For example, one parent cannot live in a mansion with a swimming pool, spa, cook, nanny, driver, etc. while the other lives in a small duplex with none of those amenities. The wealthy parent has to make the lifestyles as equal as possible so as to not influence the children as to preference of one parent over the other. 

Is that true?

  • Love 1
pasdetrois

pasdetrois

Not true. In the past it's been argued, sometimes successfully, but this practice is changing. It's Kevin Federline's current complaint against Britney Spears - that Britney should pay him more child support so he can provide an equally luxurious residence to the children - maybe in Hollywood he will get away with it.

I think part of Kathryn's problem is that the four of them were never a family living a luxurious life together. She can't argue that the children have been accustomed to luxury for a very long time, nor do they need a lot. And, just like shiftless Craig, she's making decent Bravo bucks, which works against her in terms of any plans to plead poverty.

  • Love 5
jumper sage

jumper sage

On 6/8/2018 at 10:00 AM, Sun-Bun said:

I’m sincerely bummed about Thomas not being on the show after this season—-yes, of course he’s a sleazebag who shouldn’t be ‘rewarded’ with continual exposure, but still...he *made* the show for me.

Just say it @Sun-Bun!  You love crap tv.  I know I do.  I would take the TRav crap if the kids were only shown in the minimalist snapshot here or there.

  • Love 5
biakbiak

biakbiak

(edited)
6 hours ago, Major Bigtime said:

Thomas & Ashley, too?

No idea I don’t follow them on SM but Shep, Austen, Chelsea and Cameron and Andy talked about binging the season on his way back from Israel to prep.

etb: They are filming it right now. Shep IG from the crappy green room while on a break. 

Edited by biakbiak
  • Love 1
Rlb8031

Rlb8031

On 6/10/2018 at 12:25 PM, pasdetrois said:

Why can't they share custody 50-50 without child support being paid to either? Thomas can pay for education, health care, nannies, if he wishes. Kathryn is surely making a lot of money (relative to most Americans) and can support the children using her own money.

Because that's not the way it works. The parent generating the larger amount of income is supposed to bear a greater proportion of the cost of the child. Part of the reason for this is that in a family where there is a vast disparity in earnings, you don't want a child to go back and forth between lifestyles that are so economically disparate. CHILD support is just that - its to support the child's lifestyle. This is separate from palimony/alimony which is money that is paid to the partner for their contribution to the relationship. 

Quote

Regardless of how much latitude judges are given, the guidelines in effect in most states specify factors that must be considered in determining who pays how much child support. These factors usually include:

 - the needs of the child -- including health insurance, education, day care, and special needs

 - the income and needs of the custodial parent

 - the paying parent's ability to pay, and

 - the child's standard of living before divorce or separation.

Courts often require each divorcing spouse to fill out a financial statement to provide a complete picture of the parents' financial situations before making a decision on child support. In the financial statement, each parent must detail his or her monthly income and expenses.

When a court sets child support, it often considers the family's pre-divorce standard of living and attempts to continue this standard for the children, if feasible. However, courts are aware of the difficulty of maintaining two households on the income that formerly supported one home. Maintenance of the same standard of living is therefore more of a goal than a guarantee.

Establishing & Calculating Child Support

  • Love 1
pasdetrois

pasdetrois

(edited)

I understand the policies and guidelines (see my earlier post). However I know many parents who share custody 50/50 and neither pays the other child support. In some cases they each agree to responsibility for specific expenditures, working in a way that they both feel it evens out.

Edited by pasdetrois
  • Love 1
Rlb8031

Rlb8031

I've seen that too, but usually in relationships where the parents are closer to being financial equals. So one will cover health insurance and costs (pays for all medical and dental) and the other will pay for all education expenses (school, tutors, testing, etc.). Given the disparity here, I'm not sure that's as much of a possibility - especially as I can see that there may be some pricey must haves (equestrian lessons, cotillions/debutante balls, etc.) as the kids get older.

  • Love 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...