SoCharmers in the Media: The Post & Courier

[Hockey Addict]

Please let Ashley get shipped back to Cali ASAP. 

And compensate Bravo viewers with complimentary trip to Hilton Head. Oh, and Hockey Addict deserves a visa gift card for whatever it cost to dress Ash at Gwyns.

[Natalie68]

45 minutes ago, Hockey Addict said:

Please let Ashley get shipped back to Cali ASAP. 

And compensate Bravo viewers with complimentary trip to Hilton Head. Oh, and Hockey Addict deserves a visa gift card for whatever it cost to dress Ash at Gwyns.

NOOOOOO!!!!!!  Santa Barbara does not want her back!  

[Hockey Addict]

6 minutes ago, Natalie68 said:

NOOOOOO!!!!!!  Santa Barbara does not want her back!  

Maybe she'll just stay in Charleston and be Travs next baby incubator. 

[Natalie68]

5 minutes ago, Hockey Addict said:

Maybe she'll just stay in Charleston and be Travs next baby incubator. 

I think that is what she is hoping for!  Santa Barbara is a fairly small town so one day I hope to run into someone who knows Ashley.  If I do, I promise to get the goods!

[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.

[Koalagirl]

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

[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.  

[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. 

[SuprSuprElevated]

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 June 5, 2018 by SuprSuprElevated

[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. 

[scrb]

Even if he wasn't advised to do so, I would think he'd want to try to keep a low profile, though he's the type to think he can go and be defiant on TV and think he comes off looking good.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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. 

[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 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.

[Giselle]

On 6/5/2018 at 3:11 PM, Natalie68 said:

NOOOOOO!!!!!!  Santa Barbara does not want her back!  

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.

[Former Nun]

2 hours ago, Giselle said:

Well where do we put Assley?

Flush her down the toilet?   Recent photos show she might fit.

[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.

[Former Nun]

7 hours ago, Natalie68 said:

After Kathryn (or other qualified caregiver) gets custody. 

And puts words in the custody arrangement that Ashley (specifically) cannot be around the children.  A Southern Charm video should be enough to convince a judge or commission.

[Giselle]

1 hour ago, Former Nun said:

And puts words in the custody arrangement that Ashley (specifically) cannot be around the children.  A Southern Charm video should be enough to convince a judge or commission.

Oh I bet Katherine's lawyer has quite a collection of Thomas' low lights now she has Assley's too.

[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.

[Babyfoot]

5 hours ago, zoeysmom said:

Scrap the Reunion.

Yes, please. Bravo reunions in any iteration are terrible, and SC is no exception. 

[pasdetrois]

The best thing for Kathryn is to get out of the entertainment business. As the mother of two children, and an addict/alcoholic, she needs to learn how to deal with and flourish in the real world.

Edited June 8, 2018 by pasdetrois

[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.

[ozzy]

Ashley STAAAHP! You are such a fuckin brat. Why do you want hiiimmm. Seek help.

[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.

[pasdetrois]

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 June 10, 2018 by pasdetrois

[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. 

[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. 

[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. 

[Gam2]

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.

[biakbiak]

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 June 11, 2018 by biakbiak

[pasdetrois]

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 June 11, 2018 by pasdetrois

[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?

[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.

[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.

[Atlanta]

Here's a link to the blind item
http://blindgossip.com/?p=92117

[Mindthinkr]

17 minutes ago, Atlanta said:

Here's a link to the blind item
http://blindgossip.com/?p=92117

I have also seen that blind on the AGN Blind Items site. She really seems to have a screw (or a few) loose. 

[nexxie]

25 minutes ago, Atlanta said:

Here's a link to the blind item
http://blindgossip.com/?p=92117

Yikes!!!

[itsadryheat]

3 hours ago, Atlanta said:

Here's a link to the blind item
http://blindgossip.com/?p=92117

Thank You for sharing!  Wildest Reality Tv I've seen - and this is just the beginning.

[biakbiak]

They are all in NY so they must be filming the reunion shortly.

[Major Bigtime]

3 hours ago, biakbiak said:

They are all in NY so they must be filming the reunion shortly.

Thomas & Ashley, too?

[biakbiak]

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 June 12, 2018 by biakbiak

[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

[pasdetrois]

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 June 12, 2018 by pasdetrois

[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.

[biakbiak]

Someone posted the seating chart. No Pat, as usual, no Trav or JD and Ashley is not on the couch the whole time but will come in for at least one segment.

Edited June 12, 2018 by biakbiak

[dosodog]

On 6/8/2018 at 6:44 AM, pasdetrois said:

The best thing for Kathryn is to get out of the entertainment business. As the mother of two children, and an addict/alcoholic, she needs to learn how to deal with and flourish in the real world.

Why do I suspect she will go the Kate Gosselin route.

TV.  It pays better.

[slowpoked]

1 hour ago, biakbiak said:

Someone posted the seating chart. No Pat, as usual, no Trav or JD and Ashley is not on the couch the whole time but will come in for at least one segment.

Even though Naomie wasn't officially a full-time cast member this season, she gets a permanent seat on the couch.