S10.E19: Baptism By Fire

[pamme64]

 

 

The only dress I can think of that is for the over 40 set-the capelet dress.  Don't see 20 year olds wearing them.

I've never seen anyone wearing that particular style and I truly hope that I never do.  

[zoeysmom]

This is a good point. But I don't feel that the issue was so much that other people knew, but it seemed like Ronda was using this information in an intentionally hurtful way. This is pure conjecture on my part, but I felt like Vicki had planned that line with Ronda ahead of time. When Ronda and Billy and Shannon were talking, Ronda kept looking like she was waiting for "her moment", and I felt like when she finally blurted it out it seemed a little out of place. I just got the impression that she came to that event in order to say that line to Shannon, to try and prove something on Vicki's behalf. And that was really vile, IMO. 

 

Yes, everyone knows about the affair, but it's not cool to use it against someone in a disagreement that has nothing to do with said affair. And Vicki had no reason to doubt that Shannon was being truthful with her about it. OTOH, Shannon was totally in Brooks and Vicki's corner UNTIL things started coming out that made them look less than truthful. I feel like Shannon hung in there as long as she could, but things got shadier and shadier, and Vicki was a perfect arse to her, even when she was just trying to look out for her. 

I never quite figures what Shannon would have had to gain by lying about an affair.  Talk about a complex situation.  That would mean she would have to get her husband to lie, and the now dinner where everyone ( I can only assume everyone was Vicki, Lizzie, Tamra and Heather) all would have been lying and according to Vicki providing a name of the affair.  It may have made sense to Rhonda but it made little sense to anyone else.  First and foremost if Vicki's brother was a good brother, he would be watching out for his sister's emotional well being.  So he and Rhonda should have listening to what the others said-not arguing with them.  Apparently, Brother Billy doesn't speak with his niece who has certainly her opinions about Brooks and the cancer.

 

As to the ganging up-did anyone think it odd Vicki brought her brother, brother's girlfriend, dress designer and random brunette woman to Tamra's baptism?  Was she trying to even up the teams?  I don't want to offend anyone by calling it the finale but it just seemed like an odd place to add a plus four-a baptism. 

[goofygirl]

I guess the thing that Vicki said that put me over in the corner of "Bitch KNOWS and HAS KNOWN FOREVER" was her dumbass remark in her talking head.  The one where she says something like, "What if Brooks DOESN'T have cancer.. what's that got to do with ME".... WHAT AN IDIOT!

Like she's been forcing Tamrat to fight her battles, she's lying about Heather and Terry and the whole IV deal. Shannon's been doing everything but pick up Brooks and take his ass to the City of Hope.  Just ridiculous.  Absolutely ridiculous. What a shithead.

[charming]

On a style note, the dress Heather wore to her house show off party was the same dress worn on the show Empire by one of the main cast members. OMG, I LOVE that dress. I want that dress. It's so pretty and the fact Heather can look good in it AND a VERY large curvy lady as well, shows how versatile it is. http://www.buzzfeed.com/iramadison/if-you-want-a-rematch-just-whistle-if-you-can?utm_term=.iyeow0KZ⊂=3729136_5280473

 

Taraji Henson is considered a VERY large woman? Oy.

[yourmomiseasy]

Taraji Henson is considered a VERY large woman? Oy.

 

I was trying to figure out who the VERY large woman in those pictures was because they all looked tiny to me.

[jaybird2]

heather's dress looks like something tamara would wear...fugly! and trashy

[bravofan27]

haha, okay, I guess you are right. She's not very big. 

[happykitteh]

So what exactly is "appropriate" for a woman over 50? This always puzzles me. Not trying to start a fight I just don't get it. I'm 57-I wear skinny jeans, tank tops,flip flops,shorts,etc. I'm not going to stop wearing them because I'm over 55! But yes, I do agree her clothes are to tight....I keep reading about about what you "should wear" after 50 like it's a law! Heck my Mom always told me women over 30 have no business having long hair! 30!!! SOOOOOO  my hair is half way down my back! Good thing I'm not on TV....You guys would have a field day...:) Love you ALL and the conversations here. Just my opinion...

 

I think tank tops, jeans, flip flops are basics, they're not a "trendy" item, and look good on all ages -IF you have the figure to pull off tight jeans and the toned arms for a tank top and assuming the tank top is not low cut. Vicki at times wears things that you usually see on 20 yr old  - low cut, short skirts, back baring - and wears her clothing too tight. IMO, if your late 40's and older it's time to cover the cleavage. By then even women who haven't been pregnant or breastfed kids have sagging issues. If you've had a breat lift there is still the problem of chest lines/wrinkles, sun spots or damage, skin without that "youthful glow" - just not an area to be displaying anymore. It doesn't look sexy, it looks like a deperate ploy for attention. Any impartial man wll tell you he doesn't like to see "older woman" cleavage. Let's leave that to the young ones. Any stylist will tell you the same. After 40 the neckline need to come up and the hemline need to go down. As I've said, over 50 doesn't mean polyester pantsuits and mumus.  Look at Heather as a guide to how to dress over 40. She knows how to show off her great figure in a classy, stylish, age appropriate manner.

[Muffyn]

I think the main problem with Vicki's clothing is fit. I don't agree that women over 50 can never  show some decolletage or cleavage.  Also, knees are knees.  Some people have good looking ones; many people don't.  Even when I was younger, if I hid everything one person or another had a problem with, I would need a burqa.  But everyone looks better in clothes that fit them better.  Vicki tends to wear things too tight.  This actually makes her look large.  She needs a tailor, a common need for women, especially those with curves.  After all, I am 53 and was on stage on Saturday night wearing a miniskirt (with textured tights), tall boots, and my boobs pushed up so high your could serve dinner off of them.  No one seemed to have a problem with it. 

[breezy424]

I think tank tops, jeans, flip flops are basics, they're not a "trendy" item, and look good on all ages -IF you have the figure to pull off tight jeans and the toned arms for a tank top and assuming the tank top is not low cut. Vicki at times wears things that you usually see on 20 yr old  - low cut, short skirts, back baring - and wears her clothing too tight. IMO, if your late 40's and older it's time to cover the cleavage. By then even women who haven't been pregnant or breastfed kids have sagging issues. If you've had a breat lift there is still the problem of chest lines/wrinkles, sun spots or damage, skin without that "youthful glow" - just not an area to be displaying anymore. It doesn't look sexy, it looks like a deperate ploy for attention. Any impartial man wll tell you he doesn't like to see "older woman" cleavage. Let's leave that to the young ones. Any stylist will tell you the same. After 40 the neckline need to come up and the hemline need to go down. As I've said, over 50 doesn't mean polyester pantsuits and mumus.  Look at Heather as a guide to how to dress over 40. She knows how to show off her great figure in a classy, stylish, age appropriate manner.

Sorry but I don't believe there is an 'age' limit on when you have to hide cleavage.  Some woman in their sixties and seventies have better cleavage than other women in their thirties or twenties.  Talk about stereotyping.  What is an 'older' woman anyway?  And who is this 'impartial' man?  Sounds like an ignorant younger person passing judgement on the basis on someone's age.  Got a lot to learn....

[telemachus2]

Re what to wear at 50+, I know I'm gonna get flamed, but the pic showing Lauri Waring Peterson looking very slim in a black lacy dress similar to Vicki's baptismal casing was marred by Lauri's blotchy, knobby bare legs - except for casual, sandal-footed, hot weather wear, most mature women (from Kate Middleton on up) just look cheesy sans hose. I was reading online that Kate's secret for gorgeous gams is ultrasheer stockings - how very civilized!  AND SEXY.

[happykitteh]

Sorry but I don't believe there is an 'age' limit on when you have to hide cleavage.  Some woman in their sixties and seventies have better cleavage than other women in their thirties or twenties.  Talk about stereotyping.  What is an 'older' woman anyway?  And who is this 'impartial' man?  Sounds like an ignorant younger person passing judgement on the basis on someone's age.  Got a lot to learn....

 

By "impartial man" I mean ask one whose not trying to get in your pants and will say "Why yes, you as an older woman have great cleavage!". An anonymous survey would, I believe prove me right. I have never ever seen a woman of 60 or 70 with a cleavage worth showing. Again, show photos to men of a smaller busted 28 yr old and a well endowed 52 yr old and he'd rather look at the 28 yr old. IMO, this is Vicki's problem - she thinks because she has big breasts that makes them worth showing. Quantity doesn't trump quality, IMO. "Older woman to me means nearing 50. Different from "old woman" but certainly not a fresh young sexy thing anymore. And no, I'm not a younger person anymore :(  I'm close to Vicki's age and while at 5'8" with a well toned body wearing a size 0 or 2 I COULD wear mini skirts, back baring tops/dresses, bare midriffs and low cut tops I just don't feel it's appropriate to show that much skin at my age because I feel it makes me look like I can't accept my age and that I'm desperately trying to be young or that I'm an overage rode-hard barfly, lol. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. JMO and YYMV.

[Yours Truly]

In what world does a doctor make a house call? As if physicians keep IV treatments on hand just in case... Worst lie ever.

Married to Medicine: Toya will have her man at your doorstep with that IV drip.. ;-)

[Yours Truly]

I doubt Brooks could or would summon the energy to go to those lengths to deceive Vicki. Plus, she claimed she accompanied him on at least one of his three chemo treatments. If Brooks is faking the cancer, there's no way he would be allowed to get an infusion of any sort at a certified chemo center, even a saline solution. If he's faking, she knows he never had a chemo session.

I love how Brooks is the biggest con artist only in SOME aspects but lazy as all get out in others. Like he couldn't be bothered to produce a REAL looking report and now he couldn't be bothered to show ANY signs of chemo treatement to Vicki. I tell ya boy. I'm not even interested in the alleged cancer con anymore. I'm entertained at the 500 different angles of proof that proves the proof isn't proof at all by the biggest con artist who doesn't actually put on a con.

[Yours Truly]

I have agreed with you about the kids not having an on camera conversation about the affair. All I am saying is that Shannon involved her kids in a story line about her husband's affair, on camera. She did it without considering how the kids would be affected by this being played and discussed for years on television. And her last set of interviews have suggested that she doesn't think she did anything wrong by doing so. Shannon has every right to feel however she wants about the cheating. David can leave or stay and take whatever happens as a consequence. Shannon needs to accept the consequence of subjecting her children to this being played out on national television. How Shannon treats David - whether she is punishing him, or just trying to deal with it on camera - that is on Shannon. Subjecting her kids to her reactions and treatments with a major spotlight (Television) on it, is something that Shannon needs to own.

 

Nothing that I am saying means i believe that Shannon should not have said anything. I just think that her kids should not have been involved in any of it, especially any part that played out on television.

How do you know she didn't consider it? Maybe, as their mom she decided that the consequences won't be as dire as some people think it will be. It's their right to decide whatever they want to decide for their family.  No one knows HER children. She knows her children and see's how their lives are affected by it every day. We don't. There are assumptions about how terrible these childrens lives are going to be or are now without even knowing what their days consist of. For all we know they skip home everyday and manage the issues of their family as a whole and like champs. I  mean obviously it's not going to be all sunshine and roses and there will be solemn moments, expressions etc. noticable during the season but to translate that into some horrible parental behavior goes a bit far for me. I'm just not convinced it's all that heinous and that they are most definitely being subjected to more bad than good because it's being aired.

 

I mean shit, maybe it wouldn't be easy for me to have that shit on TV for all my friends to see but considering that I don't know HER kids personally maybe it ain't all that serious either. Who knows? Kids are resilient that way. They can either shrug it off, handle it like bosses in school and with friends or how about this novel idea. Maybe the kids at school were all over it for about a minute and it became old news got bored and moved on to the next juicy piece of information? I mean, kids either, push through, wait it out, shrug it off, laugh it off, hash it out but kids do tend to get passed things and depending on the kid it may even be a non issue. I mean no one else is an authority on her family or her children, so I'm not too outraged at this particular Mother's decision to share her families life on TV and how she decides to include her children.  Honey Boo Boo on the other hand..

Edited October 20, 2015 by Yours Truly

[Yours Truly]

Except Shannon has been very thorough about the process she went through before her kids were exposed.  She did think about it, talk with counselors about and ultimately talk to her children about it.  So to pretend or assert she did it on a whim is misplaced.  One thing about Shannon is she researches things to death.  What consequences have the children suffered?  Maybe Heather (because their children attend the same school) come Monday will say Shannon's kids were stripped naked painted with honey and thrown into an ant hill and subsequently lynched.  There is a presumption they suffered.   Maybe an equally acceptable assumption is the kids had no harm and in fact garnered sympathy from their peers.

 

I think in Shannon's eyes it wasn't about the affair  it was about saving a marriage and a family.  I guess we can use Vicki's measure and see where the marriage is in five years.

No one has asked what she did.  I think first someone should ask before assuming her life was empty or suspect.

Oh man you beat me to it!!! Totally agreed!

[Yours Truly]

So Shannon should have pretended it never happened? Obviously David was willing to ditch wife and kids. The kids knew about it.  As a family they decided to move forward.  People recover from affairs everyday.  May not be your way but imagine for one minute your husband kicking your ass to the curb, taking all the revenue and your children away for 50% of the time.   Is that such a sick justification to work things out?  BTW  I am not wishing that on you by any means.

People seem to forget the very real ramifications of divorce. Those details alone should be enough to get over this whole get a divorce at the drop of a hat mentality that's way more popular now a days. I really commend Shannons effort and beside after a certain amount of years on this life if you're still dreaming about that "Happily ever after" experience that is "guaranteed" to everyone then that's just a shame because although some people find it, it sure as hell isn't promised to each and every person if they just "wait" for it. I'm 40 years old, experienced "close but no cigar" and to be honest I would hate to waste the rest of my life hoping, praying and obsessing over when my True Prince will come with my happily ever after and this may sound wrong to some but I would be doubly hard pressed to give up an existing partner at this stage in the game ESPECIALLY if I had as many connections and long a history as Shannon and David have. That's just nuts. I mean, without a fight? Hell no. That's just looney toons.

[Yours Truly]

I think the kids can absolutely play a role in it all in the privacy of their own home, I just don't think they need to be shown on TV playing the role of "fixer" to their parents horrendous marriage.  My heart broke watching those girls and I don't even know them. I cannot imagine how their parents were able to watch it and the fact that they were and still think they made the right decision irks me. 

Sounds like it's more about being able to watch it as a viewer than it really is about whether or not this being aired inflicts more on the children. I get it is  heartbreaking to watch but is it really inflicting more pain on the children? The heartbreak is being this close and being able to see it firsthand but does us being able to see it firsthand how it make us feel necessarily equal more heartache for those children? The two shouldn't be confused if that makes any sense.

[happykitteh]

Sorry but I don't believe there is an 'age' limit on when you have to hide cleavage.  Some woman in their sixties and seventies have better cleavage than other women in their thirties or twenties.  Talk about stereotyping.  What is an 'older' woman anyway?  And who is this 'impartial' man?  Sounds like an ignorant younger person passing judgement on the basis on someone's age.  Got a lot to learn....

 

Forgot to add - when was the last time you saw a 60 or 70 yr old Playboy Centerfold? Where are these mythical AARP women with the great racks? Sounds like a delusional older person who doesn't want to acknowledge their time in the spotlight is over.

[Yours Truly]

Allow me to clarify my thoughts.

I never said everbody but Vicki is lying. I am quite certain, however, the entire cast does exaggerate and outright lies to varying degrees.

What I would like to have heard were the original conversations, undiluted and unfiltered by the interpretations of people who did not participate in the conversations.

I would have liked to have known what Shannon's interpretation of what Vicki related to her in regard to the IV story before others came into the picture with their versions of the story.

It seems to me, and this is just my opinion, Bravo is asking viewers to consider as evidence an IV narrative that has been filtered through more than one person. Since the cast is, at minimum, prone to exaggeration, undiluted evidence is important for this viewer to consider before a decision is made as to the possibility two people are lying about a serious illness.

Something was filmed and left on the cutting room floor. It is impossible to know with any certainty the nature of what was filmed and edited unless or until Bravo chooses to air the material.

I have a feeling Bravo will not offer any information which will elucidate anything.

It seems to me Andy Cohen and Bravo have their messy boots on.

Totally get your vibe on the issue. I agree also. I mean not saying that this whole new development isn't suspect but some more "iron clad proof" based on "well what so and so told me about what Vicki told her and now I'm telling you so you can then talk to Terry....." Yes, obviously some red flags going around but I just hate all the necessary stretches we as viewers need to make based off of less than reliable sources who have axes to grind. I think at this point my biggest gripe is the lack of anything solid to base any INTELLIGENT decision on. It's like great they've presented this scandal that needs uraveling but then a bunch of messiness ensues BAM! Smoking gun, wait not really smoking, hold on is it even a real gun, are there bullets? wait, wait not a gun just a bad joke...? Uggghh, I can't even.

You know, when Bravo made the mistake (IMO) of allowing the cast to be filmed insisting someone produce medical records, Bravo set the burden of proof bar quite high for this viewer.

Now I am insisting Bravo meet that high level in terms of proof to convince me two people are lying about a serious illness.

So far, Bravo has only offered high school level gossip as so called evidence.

What's his name is not even a HW, who I don't even like.

How is it that these rich, successful women have nothing else to do but involve themselves in someone's personal health decisions? They need to get some hobbies. STAT!

How did this cancer/not cancer storyline become everybody's storyline?

I would have rather watched Terry and Heather sling their skincare products all season long than watch a nano second of the cancer/not cancer garbage.

As far as the baptism goes, only the portion with the choir should have been aired.

----

I applaud your Bar. This viewer is right there with you. ;-)

[Yours Truly]

By "impartial man" I mean ask one whose not trying to get in your pants and will say "Why yes, you as an older woman have great cleavage!". An anonymous survey would, I believe prove me right. I have never ever seen a woman of 60 or 70 with a cleavage worth showing. Again, show photos to men of a smaller busted 28 yr old and a well endowed 52 yr old and he'd rather look at the 28 yr old. IMO, this is Vicki's problem - she thinks because she has big breasts that makes them worth showing. Quantity doesn't trump quality, IMO. "Older woman to me means nearing 50. Different from "old woman" but certainly not a fresh young sexy thing anymore. And no, I'm not a younger person anymore :(  I'm close to Vicki's age and while at 5'8" with a well toned body wearing a size 0 or 2 I COULD wear mini skirts, back baring tops/dresses, bare midriffs and low cut tops I just don't feel it's appropriate to show that much skin at my age because I feel it makes me look like I can't accept my age and that I'm desperately trying to be young or that I'm an overage rode-hard barfly, lol. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. JMO and YYMV.

LOOOOOOVVVVVEEEE  THHHIIISSS! And hey, do it if ya want. I'm getting your point. There are a lot of NATURAL things happening after a certain age that negates the look a woman is going for when she wears certain things a certain way no matter how good she's looking at her age. That's what age appropriate refers to. Not to put older women in some old lady box that can only wear mom jeans and shop at Dress Barn. Helen Mirren STAYS rocking the sexy but she's not doing it the Miley Cyress way. Same with Jane Fonda. No amount of aging well and staying fit negates the tacky outcome of an outfit that screams twenty something year old on an over whaterver year old. Now the point being made is that anyone can wear whatever they want but most of the time older women don't understand that the statement they think they're making with their much younger style choices isn't the message that's coming across and that's a shame.

 

Also I'm big on fashion so it's not so much an age shaming thing. I just get annoyed at the thougtlessness over the whole process. Skin=Sexy. Tight=Sexy. Young=Sexy  "I can rock it at ANY age" mentality annoys me cause that defeats the whole point of what style is supposed to be about. Not just a bunch of obnoxious, predetermined ideas about what's sexy and what's not. Work with the whole pallet not just obvious details surrounding common perceptions and ideas. Work with the limits, work with the realities and work with what ya got. Otherwise you're not being stylish and that's okay too just don't go around thinking you're pulling off a look in the way it was meant and understand the actual mess that is most likely the reality.

 

Actually this reminds me of the Cindy Crawford Pepsi commercial where they recreated the commercial she did when she was in her twenties. Now even though her outfit is really similar there were adjustments and changes made because well she ain't 20 no more. Original commercial Tank top slight cleveage 20 years later pretty cap sleeve blouse (cause underarm cleveage after a certain age can also look a bit rough too), some mid drift low neckline but no cleveage. Now would Cindy have been able to rock the original look all over again. Probably but still.... and also the idea of her completely recreating that look would probably have come across a bit corny since ya know... she AIN'T 20 no mo..

Edited October 20, 2015 by Yours Truly

[Scrambled Fog]

I love how Brooks is the biggest con artist only in SOME aspects but lazy as all get out in others. Like he couldn't be bothered to produce a REAL looking report and now he couldn't be bothered to show ANY signs of chemo treatement to Vicki. I tell ya boy. I'm not even interested in the alleged cancer con anymore. I'm entertained at the 500 different angles of proof that proves the proof isn't proof at all by the biggest con artist who doesn't actually put on a con.

L O L!

Your post is awesome!

I love it!

This is the best summation of the Babbling Brooks storyline I have read!

I'm dying!

[breezy424]

Forgot to add - when was the last time you saw a 60 or 70 yr old Playboy Centerfold? Where are these mythical AARP women with the great racks? Sounds like a delusional older person who doesn't want to acknowledge their time in the spotlight is over.

So Playboy sets the bar on beautiful women?  Sorry, I disagree.  I have no idea what delusional person you're talking about.  My original response to you was about your generalized statement about women who are over their late forties should cover the cleavage.  Not some, not many, but 'woman' over a certain age.  I don't live in a world that is black and white and blanket statements.    BTW, my statements aren't about my own desire to show cleavage if that's what you're implying.  I really don't even though I'm on the plus side of fifty, have had children and breast fed them but yet my C or D cups, depending on the bra, pass the pencil test.  But that's not what this is about.  It's about stereotyping women and making blanket statements about 'all' women.  So Elle, Michelle, Cindy, Christie, Julianne, Sandra, Sophia (I could go on and on) cover up because you've reached that 'age'.

 

And yes, Vicks wears her clothes too tight and dresses pretty bad most of the time. 

 

I'm done with this.

[RedHawk]

People seem to forget the very real ramifications of divorce. Those details alone should be enough to get over this whole get a divorce at the drop of a hat mentality that's way more popular now a days. I really commend Shannons effort and beside after a certain amount of years on this life if you're still dreaming about that "Happily ever after" experience that is "guaranteed" to everyone then that's just a shame because although some people find it, it sure as hell isn't promised to each and every person if they just "wait" for it. I'm 40 years old, experienced "close but no cigar" and to be honest I would hate to waste the rest of my life hoping, praying and obsessing over when my True Prince will come with my happily ever after and this may sound wrong to some but I would be doubly hard pressed to give up an existing partner at this stage in the game ESPECIALLY if I had as many connections and long a history as Shannon and David have. That's just nuts. I mean, without a fight? Hell no. That's just looney toons.

ITA about the hastiness to divorce due to cheating. It's just overly simplistic for everyone to be of the "he cheated, divorce him!" mentality. From my observation, married people of both sexes cheat, it happens. If the cheater says, "I've found someone else and I want out" well, chances are certainly slim the marriage can be saved. If there's any opening for reconciliation -- even as seems to be the case with David, that maybe he only returned to Shannon because the other woman didn't want him -- then trying to get back on track, especially when there are children, seems honorable and worthy to me. I've seen couples quickly divorce while still red-hot angry over an affair only to later have regrets and wish they had first tried to deal with it.

I've also seen couples deal with cheating and grow stronger and happier because they confronted what was wrong between them. More power to David and Shannon if they can do this. Reality TV seems a strange place to work it out, but i do find it sort of educational and entertaining to follow their progress.

Edited October 21, 2015 by RedHawk

[Granimal]

Thank God that we live in a world where women can wear whatever they want to and don't have to dress to fulfill some arbitrary male fantasy! The statement about men rather seeing 28 year old cleavage than 50 year old cleavage is so gross, and says more about these men than about any woman. Believe it or not, not all men are the same. Yes, there is a good majority that would agree with the above statement, but that doesn't include every single man in the world. And even if it did, who cares? Are women dressing for themselves or dressing so that men are satisfied?

 

I say- who cares what fat balding Gary in accounting wants to see, and wear whatever the hell you feel good, comfortable, and empowered in.

 

To make this more episode-centric- I hate to compare women's bodies, but for the sake of this argument I'll break my rule. Look at Heather, then look at Megan. Also, I think that Tamra and Vicki looked fine at the baptism.

 

The idea of the cakes was cute, but the cakes themselves looked tacky. Maybe Tamra should've asked Heather for her cake-decorator's number.

Edited October 22, 2015 by Granimal

[Yours Truly]

Thank God that we live in a world where women can wear whatever they want to and don't have to dress to fulfill some arbitrary male fantasy! The statement about men rather seeing 28 year old cleavage than 50 year old cleavage is so gross, and says more about these men than about any woman. Believe it or not, not all men are the same. Yes, there is a good majority that would agree with the above statement, but that doesn't include every single man in the world. And even if it did, who cares? Are women dressing for themselves or dressing so that men are satisfied?

 

I say- who cares what fat balding Gary in accounting wants to see, and wear whatever the hell you feel good, comfortable, and empowered in.

 

To make this more episode-centric- I hate to compare women's bodies, but for the sake of this argument I'll break my rule. Look at Heather, then look at Megan. Also, I think that Tamra and Vicki looked fine at the baptism.

 

The idea of the cakes was cute, but the cakes themselves looked tacky. Maybe Tamra should've asked Heather for her cake-decorator's number.

I find it hard to believe that a women who is throwing her cleveage around and have their asses hanging out are dressing for themselves. Let's be real. Being stylish means you are dressing for yourself. Putting thought into a "LOOK" means you're dressing for yourself. Presenting yourself like a piece of meat means that you are obviously dressing for a specific kind of attention and for OTHERS to notice you. Nothing wrong with being sexy after 40, 50, 60 it's just there is a way to do it sucessfully AND with dignity. Skin isn't taboo but pretending that it can be done all willy nilly without at least some sort of thought, adjustments and tweaks after a certain age is just fashion police worthy and delusional and worse fashion suicide. Now granted, women can dress how they want if they don't care about fashion do's and don'ts but my perspective comes from the art of putting a look together and stepping out feeling absolutely fabulous and glamorous. Other women can reach that same feeling by doing it the trashy way I guess but I think being purposely oblivious to the negatives of getting attetion that way is sad especially when there's such a better way to do it. Also let me go on the record that I think even young women need to get a grip with all the meat market advertising however they are able to pull off certain skin showing styles fashionably that older women can't. The same way twenty something year olds wouldn't look flaterring in something Barbara Bush would wear. Honestly I would be estatic if women of all ages wouldn't run to the same ole same ole boring "Look at me" cheap tricks and ya know try and change it up a bit but a las we do live in a world where women are more likely to try and put that "foot" forward before anything else. Who are we trying to kid?

 

signed, Fashion Fanatic... LOL. :-)

Edited October 22, 2015 by Yours Truly

[talula]

from Stoopid Housewives

Edited October 23, 2015 by talula

[link417]

I find it hard to believe that a women who is throwing her cleveage around and have their asses hanging out are dressing for themselves. Let's be real. Being stylish means you are dressing for yourself. Putting thought into a "LOOK" means you're dressing for yourself. Presenting yourself like a piece of meat means that you are obviously dressing for a specific kind of attention and for OTHERS to notice you. Nothing wrong with being sexy after 40, 50, 60 it's just there is a way to do it sucessfully AND with dignity. Skin isn't taboo but pretending that it can be done all willy nilly without at least some sort of thought, adjustments and tweaks after a certain age is just fashion police worthy and delusional and worse fashion suicide. Now granted, women can dress how they want if they don't care about fashion do's and don'ts but my perspective comes from the art of putting a look together and stepping out feeling absolutely fabulous and glamorous. Other women can reach that same feeling by doing it the trashy way I guess but I think being purposely oblivious to the negatives of getting attetion that way is sad especially when there's such a better way to do it. Also let me go on the record that I think even young women need to get a grip with all the meat market advertising however they are able to pull off certain skin showing styles fashionably that older women can't. The same way twenty something year olds wouldn't look flaterring in something Barbara Bush would wear. Honestly I would be estatic if women of all ages wouldn't run to the same ole same ole boring "Look at me" cheap tricks and ya know try and change it up a bit but a las we do live in a world where women are more likely to try and put that "foot" forward before anything else. Who are we trying to kid?

signed, Fashion Fanatic... LOL. :-)

Edit:. On second thought, a simple "MMV" on my part would suffice. However, to disprove all that ageism I have two words: Helen Mirren.

Back to the show: I can't wait for Tams to suffer complete amnesia re: her religious awakening next season. I dunno which concept is worse: regular Tamra or regular Tamra masquerading as a "new and improved Tamra---now extra Christ-y!"

Edited October 24, 2015 by link417

[Anne Thrax]

Brooks must have a big cock or be one hell of a lover for someone like Vicki to stand by this "apparent" lie.

No I don't think that's it.  And anyway, I seriously doubt that Vicki is a true fan of the cock.  I think in her lifetime, Vicki has done what she has to pretending to love it in order to ensnare male attention.  

 

But the truth is, Vicki's enormous narcissistic ego is the only thing that really matters to her.  And big egos need to be fed -- a lot, and often. So my theory is that what Brooks really does for her is constantly feed her ego, tell her every day how amazing she is, sympathize with her victimhood while cheering her on in her good fight, and quote Hallmark platitudes ad infinitum.

 

To Vicki, that's the Love that her Love Tank always needs more of.  And Brooks effortlessly manufactures that crap by the train carload.  Keeping a man in her life who does that without any prompting is why the Vickster has advanced and embellished on the Brooks Has Cancer story at every turn.  Makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

[Anne Thrax]

The eternal question, for me, since Season 3...

WHY does Tamra always come out standing? Is it because she is Satan's spawn?! Unscathed, once again...

I guess the pasteurization kept her "safe" for one more season.

IKR -- my mother used to have a saying "she could fall in a bucket of shit and come out smelling like a rose".  That's Tamra.

[Chicklet]

This wasn't a baptism, it was an effort to see if Tamra was a witch. Only they did it all wrong and she seemed to have floated.

[IKnowRight]

Remember, if the person floats, they are determined to be a witch. If the person sinks, they are deemed innocent. It was definitely a lose-lose test!!

[becauseIsaidso]

Today, I saw more of this episode that I would have ever cared for, but I have to admit, Icky is right about one thing....Satan loves confusion....and Satan's name is Vicki Gunvalson....the woman is nasty beyond all hope of understanding....I may just have to catch up on reunion epis to see whether or not she is called on her hypocrisy and how she slimes her way out of it...or maybe not....it simply sounds more vomitous than my gag-threshold can tolerate...bless these boards for giving information to the faint of stomach...

[pamme64]

ITA about the hastiness to divorce due to cheating. It's just overly simplistic for everyone to be of the "he cheated, divorce him!" mentality. From my observation, married people of both sexes cheat, it happens. If the cheater says, "I've found someone else and I want out" well, chances are certainly slim the marriage can be saved. If there's any opening for reconciliation -- even as seems to be the case with David, that maybe he only returned to Shannon because the other woman didn't want him -- then trying to get back on track, especially when there are children, seems honorable and worthy to me. I've seen couples quickly divorce while still red-hot angry over an affair only to later have regrets and wish they had first tried to deal with it.

I've also seen couples deal with cheating and grow stronger and happier because they confronted what was wrong between them. More power to David and Shannon if they can do this. Reality TV seems a strange place to work it out, but i do find it sort of educational and entertaining to follow their progress.

 Just wanted to add, 'yea, this, very much'.  Further in reflection, I find myself thinking that Shannon's attitude towards her problem and way of dealing with it, seems a very California way of dealing with a personal issue.

 Not that sticking it on TV is the Cali way, rather the attitude of opening it all up for introspection and then repair. *(says a nyer who has lived there on and off for 30 years).

[cherry slushie]

from Stoopid Housewives

 

I think that photo pretty much confirms that Melissa had a nose job.

[Ubiquitous]

Remember, if the person floats, they are determined to be a witch. If the person sinks, they are deemed innocent. It was definitely a lose-lose test!!

If memory serves, one is guilty if one sink AND drowns.

.

 

from Stoopid Housewives

Tamra's thought balloon should read something like "Vicki's stealing my thunder!!!".

[IKnowRight]

Sorry, I rarely harp on a subject, but I have lived, years ago, and visited family for many years in Salem, MA. It is the location of several witch trials in the 17th century. Halloween is the worst time of year, to me, because a resident is inundated with lots of "interesting" visitors. It's like the circus coming to town. IMO, just mine. I'm a student of history and member of Phi Alpha Theta. Timely topic!

When Tamra was discussing being dunked, the very first thing that came to my mind is the witch test. It tells us that if they have special powers they would float. The Witch trials water test process: The person was often bound by a rope or weighed down with rocks. If the person could float, they were pronounced a witch. If they sank, they were considered innocent. They were then supposed to pull the innocent from the water, but in most cases, because of the weight of the rocks, or if the rope was tied so they couldn't swim, they would drown. That's why it was lose/lose test. It was common for the innocent to drown because the officials didn't always rescue the person before it was too late.

I was convinced Tamra would float but with the "Pasteur" there to hold her up the experiment was blown! I am in the camp that Tamra needs her orange retired and felt that way since her first season.

Edited October 26, 2015 by IKnowRight

[Yours Truly]

Edit:. On second thought, a simple "MMV" on my part would suffice. However, to disprove all that ageism I have two words: Helen Mirren.

Back to the show: I can't wait for Tams to suffer complete amnesia re: her religious awakening next season. I dunno which concept is worse: regular Tamra or regular Tamra masquerading as a "new and improved Tamra---now extra Christ-y!"

Actually I mentioned Helen Mirren in my original post as well as Jane Fonda. It isn't ageism on my part. My position is fashion do's and don'ts. I hate meat market styling on any age but it's less offensive on younger women who are still figuring out their style and are trying to get a handle on their self esteem and sex appeal through clothing and style so their "overdoing it" is more forgivable. Plus, even their fashion mistakes can be appealing since they are working with fresher merchandise. LOL.  But you're right mileage obviously varies, if they didn't we wouldn't have all those trainwrecks out there to begin with so there's that.

Edited October 26, 2015 by Yours Truly

[Anne Thrax]

I don't think Vicki really listened to what he said, because she said it correctly with the -or sound on the show. I have noticed the Vicki has a very hard time following conversations. She does the snoring thing to cover up for the fact that she can't follow along. She is very much and in the moment person. It's all about say something-react! Say something- react! She can tell stories (like to waiters) but she has a hard time listening to people That's probably why she never went to college. 

You might be on to something there - didn't Vicki say during a recent episode that she's had numerous surgeries to remove tumors in her inner ear?

[Scrambled Fog]

You might be on to something there - didn't Vicki say during a recent episode that she's had numerous surgeries to remove tumors in her inner ear?

Good catch bravofan27 and Anne Thrax.

[link417]

Actually I mentioned Helen Mirren in my original post as well as Jane Fonda. It isn't ageism on my part. My position is fashion do's and don'ts. I hate meat market styling on any age but it's less offensive on younger women who are still figuring out their style and are trying to get a handle on their self esteem and sex appeal through clothing and style so their "overdoing it" is more forgivable. Plus, even their fashion mistakes can be appealing since they are working with fresher merchandise. LOL. But you're right mileage obviously varies, if they didn't we wouldn't have all those trainwrecks out there to begin with so there's that.

...Well. Ageist joke in ageist comment is not ageist, indeed!

Agree to disagree and all that jazz.

[Yours Truly]

...Well. Ageist joke in ageist comment is not ageist, indeed!

Agree to disagree and all that jazz.

Being a hot mess at any age is pretty undesirable across the board and worthy of snark. :-) That's why, like it or not, there are basic guidelines. Not liking them doesn't make them not exist.  Ignoring them is an individual right but the reactions to that decision doesn't come out of left field the same way deciding not to follow basic hygenic guidelines would cause a reaction by those around. Can't escape social etiquette and social expectations unscathed. Cause and affect and all that jazz. Rather simple recipe actually. Going against the basic formula may result in stumbling upon a masterpiece or it may crash and burn but the foundation is set and the outcome will always be up for public scrutiny.  That's how society operates. It isn't ageism to acknowledge the realities that come with getting older. Nothing sinister or wrong with pointing out the appeal of gracious and elegant style.  #teamkeepfashionclassyandagewon'tevenbeanissueanyway LOL!