Carole Radziwill: She's a Real Princess!

[Happy Camper]

8 hours ago, Jel said:

Honestly Noire, I think you're looking too hard.  They share a similar sense of humor and were making a joke is what I think, and sometimes a joke is just a joke, said for a laugh and nothing more.  

Bethenny says things to people's faces, but that's not too popular either.

These two can't win for losing.

I do think that it was a silly joke between friends.  I have not heard of any rumours out there that Tom is gay. There  are some rumours floating around about some husbands....some people on the boards that discuss Eddie Judge possibly being gay and there are definitely rumours out in the general public who believe that Jim Edmonds is gay.

I do see a difference between a couple of friends making a joke about Tom being gay, and people talking about Jim Edmonds.  With Tom, it 's just Carole and Beth, if you google Tom Agonstino "gay", you would not get any results beyond what Carole and Bethenny are chatting about. 

With Eddie Judge, it is mostly just people who watch the RHOC who are discussing him possibly being gay.

Jim Edmonds.  The rumours of him being gay come from sports fans and people in the gay community, not just housewives fans and housewives making jokes. 

I do not think that Carole and Beth really believe that Tom is gay, and there are no rumours floating around online that would suggest this.

[BBHN]

Something can still be a rumor without being on the internet.

[Mozelle]

As for the "Tom is gay" thing, I will say that I did read to me that they were questioning his long-term single status in that way. I don't think they were starting any rumors (I really don't), but I still didn't think it was a good look. Reading the transcript that film noire gave, I realize that I got that impression largely from Bethenny's mention of a strap-on. Carole's explanation in the TH, though, seemed more like she was calling Tom a broke ass who couldn't make it down the aisle previously because he's a broke ass.

23 hours ago, Ki-in said:

In my opinion Carole is on her rehabilitation tour this season and is trying to play nice to the other HW's because of how horribly she came off last season.  And without Bethenny to protect her she's cozying up to Dorinda who she hopes will be her protector next season. Because Carole is a weak cowardly bitch who only says shit in her TH's and never to someone's face. (unless that face is attached to a one legged woman on a flight of stairs.) That is the only reason she said anything nice about Luann's appearance before spreading rumors like the mean girl she is.  IMO

Is there a rehab tour? As BBHN pointed out, Carole and Dorinda have been pretty friendly since both joined the show. Who knows what the hell Dorinda was tweeting about last year as the season aired, but during the actual filming season she seemed quite OK with Carole, meeting up in London and bonding over their widow status. Dorinda also only invited one other HW--Carole--to the cemetery this season to celebrate Richard. 

For all of the "Carole is awful to the others" stuff, she still consistently gets the invites to gatherings (minus LuAnn's wedding, of course). I'm trying to recall if, since she's started the show, Carole has ever been singled out for disinviting the way Ramona and Sonja (Aviva, too, no?) have been?

Edited July 13, 2017 by Mozelle

[Natalie68]

On 7/10/2017 at 1:35 AM, diadochokinesis said:

OMG, they have a thread???  I must go wander over. I regularly read Free Jinger.

You totally should!  The snark is fantastic!  I bounce between HWs and Duggars with a few others sprinkled in.

 

In regards to Bethenny and the strap on comment.  I thought she was totally joking.  

[zoeysmom]

5 hours ago, Natalie68 said:

You totally should!  The snark is fantastic!  I bounce between HWs and Duggars with a few others sprinkled in.

 

In regards to Bethenny and the strap on comment.  I thought she was totally joking.  

It is not about whether or not they are joking or spreading rumors it is about using being gay in a pejorative sense.  They both know better and claiming "they heard it" or justifying rumors with some sort of bizarre statistic about 50 year olds first time married men doesn't make it any more or less pejorative.

Bethenny and Carole have used each other to launch and various derogatory theories about Tom.  Tom couldn't get laid until he had money was one.  Tom dates women of a certain age on the UES with money.  Tom doesn't have money, Luann married for the penthouse and condo in WPB. 

Carole is part of the conversation whether it is one sentence or ten it is still rumors-some of which they start.  Neither Bethenny or Carole knew Tom before 2016 and certainly didn't know him when he was younger, or with who he was engaged.   

When someone makes mention of someone marrying someone who has been married several times before-that is a fact and it is not necessarily used as a compliment when describing someone.  Rarely do you hear acquaintances gushes about how their girlfriend found true love in marrying Bill and it is his fifth marriage.  Friends leave off the disclaimers whether they are provable or not.

I would hope Bethenny is joking about the strap on-there would be only two ways of knowing-Luann announced it like Lisa Rinna did about Harry Hamlin, or Bethenny was in the bedroom with them. It was a joke and certainly not a LOL joke. 

Edited July 14, 2017 by zoeysmom

[ryebread]

On ‎7‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 2:22 PM, Ki-in said:

Because Carole is a weak cowardly bitch who only says shit in her TH's and never to someone's face. (unless that face is attached to a one legged woman on a flight of stairs.)

 

[KungFuBunny]

[Celia Rubenstein]

On 7/13/2017 at 5:17 PM, zoeysmom said:

It is not about whether or not they are joking or spreading rumors it is about using being gay in a pejorative sense.  

What was pejorative about it?  Is being gay in and of itself a negative thing?  I still don't understand what was so offensive about what Carole said.

 

Quote

They both know better and claiming "they heard it" or justifying rumors with some sort of bizarre statistic about 50 year olds first time married men doesn't make it any more or less pejorative.

The idea that fifty year old unmarried men (who have a certain lifestyle) are often suspected of being gay is not some kind of bizarre thing Carole just made up.  I've heard that suggested about certain men before.   The possibility that people may have whispered about Tom in this way is not surprising to me.  

I don't personally put any stock in the idea that being single at a certain age means anything, of course.  But that doesn't mean it isn't something that many people still believe suggests something.  It's far from the  "bizarre" or unheard of concept that is being suggested. 

I don't believe mentioning the age/lifestyle thing was an attempt by Carole to justify spreading rumors ... I think she was simply explaining the basis of the rumors.  Rumors which, for the record, I didn't get the impression she actually personally believes. 

Edited July 16, 2017 by Celia Rubenstein

[Jel]

Spot on, Celia. (as always! Geez, try writing a crappy post once in a while, mix it up! ;)

You know, the more I think about it, the more I realize that the bigger question to me is why anyone would find it so terrible for someone to suggest a man might be gay.  

[zoeysmom]

6 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

What was pejorative about it?  Is being gay in and of itself a negative thing?  I still don't understand what was so offensive about what Carole said.

 

The idea that fifty year old unmarried men (who have a certain lifestyle) are often suspected of being gay is not some kind of bizarre thing Carole just made up.  I've heard that suggested about certain men before.   The possibility that people may have whispered about Tom in this way is not surprising to me.  

I don't personally put any stock in the idea that being single at a certain age means anything, of course.  But that doesn't mean it isn't something that many people still believe suggests something.  It's far from the  "bizarre" or unheard of concept that is being suggested. 

I don't believe mentioning the age/lifestyle thing was an attempt by Carole to justify spreading rumors ... I think she was simply explaining the basis of the rumors.  Rumors which, for the record, I didn't get the impression she actually personally believes. 

It is saying that Luann a heterosexual female is marrying someone who is not attracted to women but men. That is what makes it pejorative.  To me, it is the same as saying well Tom couldn't get laid until he had money in his pocket.  It demeans people.  I have life long friends who are sisters one is a PE teacher/coach and the other is in law enforcement, the teacher has never married but adopted a foster child, the cop married at age 53 to a 54 year old man who had never been married.  Both women are excellent at home repairs because their father was an electrical contractor. For years people continually speculated they were lesbians and closeted and any trip they would take with female friends was always whispered about.  It was just wrong.  Not marrying or marrying later in life should not give rise to "gay" rumors. 

A stereotype is still a stereotype when it is repeated.  It enforces a style of thinking that was wrong to begin with and gives it some sort of reasoning.   Substitute any racial stereotype and see where it takes a conversation.  I doubt either Carole or Bethenny would make some racial generalization and try and back it up with some stereotypical reasoning.   

It is worse if you spread a rumor when you personally don't believe it. 

[zoeysmom]

3 hours ago, Jel said:

Spot on, Celia. (as always! Geez, try writing a crappy post once in a while, mix it up! ;)

You know, the more I think about it, the more I realize that the bigger question to me is why anyone would find it so terrible for someone to suggest a man might be gay.  

I look at this way, the question itself, if one is wondering if one is available for a heterosexual relationship is not necessarily inappropriate.  When a man is about to marry a woman it is inappropriate.   It is not as if Tom had a series of relationships with men, it was quite the opposite, he had a string of relationships with women.  To me, it is like a bonehead guy who makes a move on a woman and she turns him down and then he claims she is a lesbian.  She isn't, she just thought the guy a bonehead or wasn't attracted to him..

[Celia Rubenstein]

1 hour ago, zoeysmom said:

Not marrying or marrying later in life should not give rise to "gay" rumors. 

It shouldn't, perhaps.  But it often does.  That's just the reality of our imperfect world, I guess. 

And really, after all ...  isn't that what these "reality" shows are meant to reflect?  All the imperfect (and crazy, weird, entertaining things) people out there are thinking and doing?  I believe that is all Carole was talking about - what kinds of things people have actually said about Tom, what some people actually think, however inappropriate, however baseless.  It may not be the idealistic, enlightened world view some of us would prefer, granted.  But if anyone is turning into these shows thinking they are going to get a deep, thoughtful. sensitive portrayal of New York fame-ho society, well, LOL.  I would suggest a switch to PBS or maybe some Netflix documentaries or something because Bravo TV isn't going to give you what you are looking for! 

 

1 hour ago, zoeysmom said:

I look at this way, the question itself, if one is wondering if one is available for a heterosexual relationship is not necessarily inappropriate.  When a man is about to marry a woman it is inappropriate.  It is not as if Tom had a series of relationships with men, it was quite the opposite, he had a string of relationships with women.

So it is okay to question a womanizing man settling down with a wife, but people can't question it when a man that some people think might be gay takes a wife?  What is so sacrosanct about that type of relationship?   Why can you talk about one but not the other? 

 

Quote

Substitute any racial stereotype and see where it takes a conversation.  I doubt either Carole or Bethenny would make some racial generalization and try and back it up with some stereotypical reasoning.  

I wish it had been some sort of racial stereotype because then it might have been more clear to people that Carole was in no way supporting the belief behind it.  For some reason, some people are willing to assume mentioning this particular stereotype means Carole is secretly homophobic.  There is just nothing about her that I have ever seen that supports such an idea.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Celia Rubenstein

[zoeysmom]

6 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

It shouldn't, perhaps.  But it often does.  That's just the reality of our imperfect world, I guess. 

And really, after all ...  isn't that what these "reality" shows are meant to reflect?  All the imperfect (and crazy, weird, entertaining things) people out there are thinking and doing?  I believe that is all Carole was talking about - what kinds of things people have actually said about Tom, what some people actually think, however inappropriate, however baseless.  It may not be the idealistic, enlightened world view some of us would prefer, granted.  But if anyone is turning into these shows thinking they are going to get a deep, thoughtful. sensitive portrayal of New York fame-ho society, well, LOL.  I would suggest a switch to PBS or maybe some Netflix documentaries or something because Bravo TV isn't going to give you what you are looking for! 

 

So it is okay to question a womanizing man settling down with a wife, but people can't question it when a man that some people think might be gay takes a wife?  What is so sacrosanct about that type of relationship?   Why can you talk about one but not the other? 

 

I wish it had been some sort of racial stereotype because then it might have been more clear to people that Carole was in no way supporting the belief behind it.  For some reason, some people are willing to assume mentioning this particular stereotype means Carole is secretly homophobic.  There is just nothing about her that I have ever seen that supports such an idea.

No, I think my point was if one is wanting to pursue a relationship with an available single man it is not inappropriate to inquire from a mutual acquaintance if he is straight or gay.  When my best friend moved to San Francisco, it was not uncommon before pursuing interest in a single man to inquire whether or not he is straight or gay.  If a man is gay it saves some energy on the part of the pursuing heterosexual woman and life goes on.  Compared to when an openly heterosexual man marries a woman to start questioning his sexuality and essentially his motives for marrying the woman.  One is done for expediency the other is done for malicious gossip.

As you said about reality shows-there fodder is often conversations that are totally inappropriate which give rise to people questioning the "stars" expressing a thought.  With these shows it is all about the speaker owning it.  The same goes for their choice of clothing, their products, their plastic surgery choices and their hairstyles.  People who watch weigh in.

Well I would hold any of them accountable if they expressed a racial stereotype out of either a quest for humor or ignorance.  Not believing a stereotype to be true and stating it does relieve someone of the responsibility for promulgating such a thought.   I have never thought Carole homophobic from her comments, I just think she is  hypocritical and malicious. 

[film noire]

On 7/13/2017 at 1:31 PM, Mozelle said:

seemed more like she was calling Tom a broke ass who couldn't make it down the aisle previously because he's a broke ass.

Pretty sure she meant the opposite -- that Tom having all the financial means necessary (a penthouse and a "nickel in his pocket") to support a wife is part of what makes it suspicious he's not married. 

[Celia Rubenstein]

9 hours ago, zoeysmom said:

When my best friend moved to San Francisco, it was not uncommon before pursuing interest in a single man to inquire whether or not he is straight or gay. 

 

11 hours ago, zoeysmom said:

 I have life long friends who are sisters one is a PE teacher/coach and the other is in law enforcement, the teacher has never married but adopted a foster child, the cop married at age 53 to a 54 year old man who had never been married.  Both women are excellent at home repairs because their father was an electrical contractor. For years people continually speculated they were lesbians and closeted and any trip they would take with female friends was always whispered about.  It was just wrong.  Not marrying or marrying later in life should not give rise to "gay" rumors. 

A stereotype is still a stereotype when it is repeated.  It enforces a style of thinking that was wrong to begin with and gives it some sort of reasoning.  

The above examples seem to be the exact same thing Carole was referring to regarding Tom - that things about his lifestyle have given rise to whispers about his sexuality.  

I'm not understanding why is it wrong to speculate about Tom or the women mentioned but it's okay to question the sexuality of every man who lives in San Francisco.  It seems that all are examples of relying on stereotypes and if one is wrong, they should all be considered wrong.  

[zoeysmom]

35 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

 

The above examples seem to be the exact same thing Carole was referring to regarding Tom - that things about his lifestyle have given rise to whispers about his sexuality.  

I'm not understanding why is it wrong to speculate about Tom or the women mentioned but it's okay to question the sexuality of every man who lives in San Francisco.  It seems that all are examples of relying on stereotypes and if one is wrong, they should all be considered wrong.  

They are not even close.  My friend was inquiring because she was interested in dating the guy(s).  If a guy was gay, there was no need to pursue him she would not be his type.  My friend didn't question the sexual orientation of every man in San Francisco as she did not care to date every man in San Francisco.   She didn't have anything negative to say about a gay man anymore than a guy who was married.  It is about availability.  She was not whispering about his sexuality.  It is like the on-line dating sites-one pretty much declares their sexual preference.  It is just a way to direct dating traffic to the correct lane. It is like asking if someone is married or has a girlfriend-you are checking availability.  Carole is not checking availability of a newly married Tom-she is gossiping.  It is not stereotyping when you ask if someone is available.  It is stereotyping when you start questioning a newly married man's sexuality because he waited until his 50th birthday to get married. 

Edited July 17, 2017 by zoeysmom

[Celia Rubenstein]

28 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

It is stereotyping when you start questioning a newly married man's sexuality because he waited until his 50th birthday to get married. 

... I think it's stereotyping to  question a man's sexuality because he lives in San Francisco. 

[WireWrap]

Carole and Bethenny weren't slamming Tom, they were slamming Luann. It was yet another dig at her, basically they have said that Tom was with her for her money, then it was that Luann was with Tom for his money/penthouse and now they are together because Tom needs Luann to be his "beard". These are all slams aimed at Luann much more than they are at Tom. This goes along with Bethenny's crazy out of control rage/tirade against Luann, she is a "slut, a whore, a sugar momma, a gold digger and now a beard". 

[RedheadZombie]

Geeze guys, what's the big deal?  It's not like Carole said something transphobic like, does it look like I'm transitioning . . . .

[KungFuBunny]

[film noire]

21 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

What was pejorative about it?  Is being gay in and of itself a negative thing?  I still don't understand what was so offensive about what Carole said.

Carole's rumour mongering presented the possibility that Tom was not just gay (using a list of stereotypes to do so) but -- because of the context - also a gay man tricking a straight woman into being his beard, which is hardly a positive presentation of being gay. It's an old and near-predatory image of gay men as dishonorable, untrustworthy, and incapable of being honest about who they are, choosing instead to ruin a woman's life to avoid discovery of their sexual orientation -- that's why it's a "negative" thing.

And it's especially offensive because it's not fifty years ago when being gay was illegal,  and many gay men (and women) entered into marriage as the only option for children and family life and so called "normalcy", many hoping they would change.  Carole's version of Tom has no such reason to hide in the closet -  we now know gay people don't "turn straight" when they get married, we know women unknowingly married to gay men are miserable, and we know that NYC society doesn't give a fuck about unmarried older men, etc  -- so Tom is a rich privileged white gay man fooling a woman into marriage for some obscure, ugly reason known only to him.  Carole Radziwill would never tolerate anybody hauling out similarly ancient ideas about women  ("Hillary Clinton is too emotional to be president, all women are!" "The women accusing Trump can't be trusted, women lie all the time to get attention when jilted!" "An older woman dating a younger man is sick and wrong and against nature!") but she felt perfectly comfortable doing the same thing when the stereotypes involved being gay.  And all played for laughs. She should apologize for what she said at the reunion - reach down deep and pull it out of her wooden social conscience.

Edited July 17, 2017 by film noire

[motorcitymom65]

4 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

... I think it's stereotyping to  question a man's sexuality because he lives in San Francisco. 

Exactly. I am not sure how in the world it is more stereotypical to mention that a man might be gay because of his age/marital status/station in life than to do because of his geography. 

4 hours ago, RedheadZombie said:

Geeze guys, what's the big deal?  It's not like Carole said something transphobic like, does it look like I'm transitioning . . . .

Yea, I noticed that the very notion seemed to be offensive to Lu. 

Edited July 17, 2017 by motorcitymom65

[Celia Rubenstein]

Quote

Carole is not checking availability of a newly married Tom-she is gossiping.  It is not stereotyping when you ask if someone is available.  

Even if she was just gossiping, does that really mean Carole is more guilty of promoting a stereotype than she would be if she were asking about a guy she wanted to date ?  Isn't it the same kind of stereotype being promoted?  And isn't it the stereotyping itself that is wrong?  Does the reason the stereotype got mentioned really make that big a difference?  

 

10 minutes ago, motorcitymom65 said:

Exactly. I am not sure how in the world it is more stereotypical to mention that a man might be gay because of his age/marital status/station in life than to do because of his geography. 

Yeah.  Something just isn't adding up here.  I'm starting to think the reason Carole is being shredded is not because she was promoting a gay stereotype as much as she (supposedly) dinged Luann and that's not okay because Luann is a sacred cow or something.  

Well, she isn't.  Not to me, anyway.  Especially not when she says crap like:

 

2 hours ago, RedheadZombie said:

Geeze guys, what's the big deal?  It's not like Carole said something transphobic like, does it look like I'm transitioning . . . .

And she said it with such clear disdain, too ... I'm surprised it doesn't seem to have caused anywhere near the level of outrage as what Carole said.  I thought it was a very mean - and demeaning - thing to say.  I can't believe anyone actually found it funny.  

When she goes around saying things like that, any tiny amount of sympathy I might have had for her over it being implied she might be Tom's beard goes right out the penthouse window.  Screw her. 

 

2 hours ago, WireWrap said:

Carole and Bethenny weren't slamming Tom, they were slamming Luann. It was yet another dig at her, basically they have said that Tom was with her for her money, then it was that Luann was with Tom for his money/penthouse and now they are together because Tom needs Luann to be his "beard". These are all slams aimed at Luann much more than they are at Tom. This goes along with Bethenny's crazy out of control rage/tirade against Luann, she is a "slut, a whore, a sugar momma, a gold digger and now a beard". 

Well, see.  The thing is ... they don't like Luann.  I realize that upsets people who do like Luann, and when they disparage her it bothers some people.  But Luann isn't special.  She's not gonna get the elbow-length kid glove treatment some think she deserves.  She has just offended certain people on the show too many times. 

I realize many think Bethenny (and guilty-by-association Carole) have just gone too far with re: Luann.  But while they may have taken it the furthest on this particular franchise, their behavior doesn't stand out to be as wildly disproportionate to things I've seen on other franchises.  It seems to be how these shows roll.  They are built upon season after season of hashing out some pretty ugly interpersonal conflict.  People who don't bring it get handed walking papers.  Just ask Luann, who had her bags placed on the curb for being boring - until she found herself at the center of the storm and was made relevant again.

I think if Luann was nearly as bothered by the way Carole and Bethenny talk about her as some viewers are, she would quit.   The fact that she hasn't suggests to me she doesn't mind at all, probably because she knows it's the biggest reason she is still on the show.  

 

46 minutes ago, film noire said:

Carole's rumour mongering presented the possibility that Tom was not just gay (using a list of stereotypes to do so) but -- because of the context - also a gay man tricking a straight woman into being his beard, which is hardly a positive presentation of being gay. It's an old and near-predatory image of gay men as dishonorable, untrustworthy, and incapable of being honest about who they are, choosing instead to ruin a woman's life to avoid discovery of their sexual orientation -- that's why it's a "negative" thing.

 

Your description of the context is faulty, though.  No one has suggested that Luann is some innocent who went into the relationship blindly and is being taken advantage of.  So the idea that Carole was characterizing Tom as some kind of dishonorable predator who was using her and ruining her life does not follow. 

 

Quote

And it's especially offensive because it's not fifty years ago when being gay was illegal,  and many gay men (and women) entered into marriage as the only option for children and family life and so called "normalcy", many hoping they would change.  Carole's version of Tom has no such reason to hide in the closet -  we now know gay people don't "turn straight" when they get married, we know women unknowingly married to gay men are miserable, and we know that NYC society doesn't give a fuck about unmarried older men, etc  -- so Tom is a rich privileged white gay man fooling a woman into marriage for some obscure, ugly reason known only to him. 

Right off the bat, I have to say that I think it is incredibly presumptuous to try and judge whether or not a person has a sufficient reason to keep his sexuality private or engage in a mixed-orientation marriage. 

That being said, with regard to Tom (hypothetically speaking), maybe New York society would be fine with him being gay.  But maybe Tom feels the circles of Palm Beach society he moves in wouldn't be.  And we don't know the mindset of people he does business with.  They could be quite conservative and he fears their reaction.  Perhaps most importantly, Tom might believe his family would be displeased if he was gay.  There could be any number of perfectly understandable reasons a man like Tom might choose to keep his sexuality private, or even take steps to make himself appear heterosexual.  

It's a shame that such a thing would go on in this day and age, of course.  But to relegate it to history as an extinct practice whose only purpose was to avoid prosecution or obtain a magical cure for homosexuality is getting a little bit ahead of ourselves as a society, I think.

[zoeysmom]

7 minutes ago, motorcitymom65 said:

Exactly. I am not sure how in the world it is more stereotypical to mention that a man might be gay because of his age/marital status/station in life than to do because of his geography. 

Yea, I noticed that the very notion seemed to be offensive to Lu. 

My friend's experience, and she worked in media and advertising is there were a lot of "single men" but unavailable to her because they were gay.  San Francisco has the largest population per capita of gay men.  This isn't a newsflash it is readily available information and something the City of San Francisco embraces and we west coasters are proud of having led the way in LGBT rights.  My friend worked with and supervised many gay men, she doesn't have any bias against gay men nor does she question when a co-worker heterosexual female marries if the husband is gay..  This is about Carole questioning a newly married man's sexuality.  It was pejorative.  

I don't know if this will get any traction at the Reunion, and if it does I will be interested in listening Carole.  I just thought she was above gay slaps.  Bethenny not so much.

[WireWrap]

8 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

 

 

Well, see.  The thing is ... they don't like Luann.  I realize that upsets people who do like Luann, and when they disparage her it bothers some people.  But Luann isn't special.  She's not gonna get the elbow-length kid glove treatment some think she deserves.  She has just offended certain people on the show too many times. 

I realize many think Bethenny (and guilty-by-association Carole) have just gone too far with re: Luann.  But while they may have taken it the furthest on this particular franchise, their behavior doesn't stand out to be as wildly disproportionate to things I've seen on other franchises.  It seems to be how these shows roll.  They are built upon season after season of hashing out some pretty ugly interpersonal conflict.  People who don't bring it get handed walking papers.  Just ask Luann, who had her bags placed on the curb for being boring - until she found herself at the center of the storm and was made relevant again.

I think if Luann was nearly as bothered by the way Carole and Bethenny talk about her as some viewers are, she would quit.   The fact that she hasn't suggests to me she doesn't mind at all, probably because she knows it's the biggest reason she is still on the show.  

 

 

Yes, Luann could quit, as could Bethenny and/or Carole, the same for all of them. And, that Bethenny/Carole are on the same show as Luann/the others, they too have to be able to take hits from the viewers as well. We talk smack about all of them and call them out for their ugly behavior, it just happens that for me, Bethenny leads the pack in ugly/gross behavior followed closely by Ramona. Carole isn't that bad nor is Luann or Tinsley. The list would be, IMO only, Bethenny (the worst) followed in order by Ramona, then Dorinda, then Sonja, then Carole, Luann and least of all would be Tinsley. 

[Celia Rubenstein]

56 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

San Francisco has the largest population per capita of gay men.  This isn't a newsflash it is readily available information 

I guess Carole's mistake was not breaking out a couple of studies that show how many 50 year old, wealthy, never-married, penthouse dwelling men who live in NYC are gay.  Because if the statistics back her up, then it's not a stereotype, it's just "information," lol  

Edited July 18, 2017 by Celia Rubenstein

[zoeysmom]

19 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

I guess Carole's mistake was not breaking out a couple of studies that show how many wealthy, never-married, penthouse dwelling men who live in NYC are gay.  Because if the statistics back her up, then it's not a stereotype, it's just "information."  

No Carole's mistake was questioning a newly married man's sexuality.  There are many things I appreciate about Carole and her opinions about society and politics.  This was an example of her having shown a side of her that is unexpected.  It is not if Luann is a flawed human being and it gives Carole some sort of pass to make pejorative statements about Tom and Luann's marriage.  It has to do with Carole's character.

Maybe a better question would be should Carole and Bethenny be questioning never been married 50 something John Mahdessian's sexuality?  I mean John still lives in the family home, he has never been married he works in the fashion industry,  He is dating a widow who clearly still burns the light bright for her late husband.  Would it be acceptable to question John sexuality and maybe why he can't seal the deal and get Dorinda to marry him?

This why it is dangerously unfair to publicly question anyone's sexuality.  Not to mention how base it is to ask about a man's penis size on TV. (Bethenny)   I think Carole is allowed a Mulligan if she gives an explanation-something as simple as I was trying to make a funny like my wooden tutu joke that made no sense.

[Mindthinkr]

6 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

I think Carole is allowed a Mulligan if she gives an explanation-something as simple as I was trying to make a funny like my wooden tutu joke that made no sense.

How many mulligans does she get? The way the game is played I believe one is fair. 

[motorcitymom65]

2 hours ago, zoeysmom said:

No Carole's mistake was questioning a newly married man's sexuality.  There are many things I appreciate about Carole and her opinions about society and politics.  This was an example of her having shown a side of her that is unexpected.  It is not if Luann is a flawed human being and it gives Carole some sort of pass to make pejorative statements about Tom and Luann's marriage.  It has to do with Carole's character.

Maybe a better question would be should Carole and Bethenny be questioning never been married 50 something John Mahdessian's sexuality?  I mean John still lives in the family home, he has never been married he works in the fashion industry,  He is dating a widow who clearly still burns the light bright for her late husband.  Would it be acceptable to question John sexuality and maybe why he can't seal the deal and get Dorinda to marry him?

This why it is dangerously unfair to publicly question anyone's sexuality.  Not to mention how base it is to ask about a man's penis size on TV. (Bethenny)   I think Carole is allowed a Mulligan if she gives an explanation-something as simple as I was trying to make a funny like my wooden tutu joke that made no sense.

But the assumption is being made that Carole is questioning Tom's sexuality, which has become her grave sin. As far as I could tell, she wasn't doing the San Francisco inquiry and asking if a man were gay or straight as if it were something that needed to be ironed out straight away. She was saying that she had heard others ponder it. She never said said that she herself was questioning it. 

[WireWrap]

3 minutes ago, motorcitymom65 said:

But the assumption is being made that Carole is questioning Tom's sexuality, which has become her grave sin. As far as I could tell, she wasn't doing the San Francisco inquiry and asking if a man were gay or straight as if it were something that needed to be ironed out straight away. She was saying that she had heard others ponder it. She never said said that she herself was questioning it. 

When did Carole say she "heard others saying Tom was gay"? I must have missed that. 

[motorcitymom65]

6 hours ago, film noire said:

Carole's rumour mongering presented the possibility that Tom was not just gay (using a list of stereotypes to do so) but -- because of the context - also a gay man tricking a straight woman into being his beard, which is hardly a positive presentation of being gay. It's an old and near-predatory image of gay men as dishonorable, untrustworthy, and incapable of being honest about who they are, choosing instead to ruin a woman's life to avoid discovery of their sexual orientation -- that's why it's a "negative" thing.

I would have to watch the scene again, because I didn't get the impression that Carole was claiming that Lu was not wise to whatever Tom might be up to. I didn't read her stating that others had mentioned that he might be gay as a slam against him because he was using Lu as some sort of a "beard". Mileage may vary, but my impressions of both Carole and Bethenny specifically are that they believe Lu wants to marry the dude, is well aware of his character flaws (talking about him potentially being a money grubbing famewhore who is incapable or interested in being faithful) and is quite OK with it all. And that if indeed he is gay, Lu is fine with it and that this is part of their arrangement. I think they have been pretty open and honest about the fact that they think Lu is settling for certain things in her quest to win. Although I believe the comments about Tom and his sexuality were just throwaway comments. Not serious in any meaningful way. 

11 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

When did Carole say she "heard others saying Tom was gay"? I must have missed that. 

Maybe I am confused. Isn't that what started this whole conversation? Because Carole said there were "rumors". Rumors about a man who was 50, had never been married, had failed engagements. Or something like that? I thought this all got started because Carole mentioned rumors. Rumors in my mind mean that someone must have said something, although she didn't use those specific words. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by motorcitymom65

[WireWrap]

49 minutes ago, motorcitymom65 said:

I would have to watch the scene again, because I didn't get the impression that Carole was claiming that Lu was not wise to whatever Tom might be up to. I didn't read her stating that others had mentioned that he might be gay as a slam against him because he was using Lu as some sort of a "beard". Mileage may vary, but my impressions of both Carole and Bethenny specifically are that they believe Lu wants to marry the dude, is well aware of his character flaws (talking about him potentially being a money grubbing famewhore who is incapable or interested in being faithful) and is quite OK with it all. And that if indeed he is gay, Lu is fine with it and that this is part of their arrangement. I think they have been pretty open and honest about the fact that they think Lu is settling for certain things in her quest to win. Although I believe the comments about Tom and his sexuality were just throwaway comments. Not serious in any meaningful way. 

Maybe I am confused. Isn't that what started this whole conversation? Because Carole said there were "rumors". Rumors about a man who was 50, had never been married, had failed engagements. Or something like that? I thought this all got started because Carole mentioned rumors. Rumors in my mind mean that someone must have said something, although she didn't use those specific words. 

Carole saying "there are rumors" is not the same as her saying she heard others talking about it. She could well be THE source of said rumor for all any of us know. Again, if this is a rumor others are talking about, Ramona would have thrown that at Luann at the beginning of this season and she didn't. Sorry, I really do think Carole made this up thinking it/she was funny.

Edited July 18, 2017 by WireWrap

[ShawnaLanne]

8 hours ago, RedheadZombie said:

Geeze guys, what's the big deal?  It's not like Carole said something transphobic like, does it look like I'm transitioning . . . .

Bwa, ha,  ha!

[film noire]

8 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

Your description of the context is faulty, though. 

Carole said nothing that implied that LuAnn was aware she was marrying a (supposedly) gay man -- the rumour is about Tom's sexuality being hidden, not about two people blithely entering into a mixed orientation marriage.

Quote

 I think it is incredibly presumptuous to try and judge whether or not a person has a sufficient reason to keep his sexuality private

If privacy is the issue, I would think the presumption lies in spreading "He's a closet queen" rumours on television.

Quote

It's a shame that such a thing would go on in this day and age, of course.  

Carole Radziwill feeling free to say what she did is proof lots of people still live in a sniggering swamp (although it is odd to find it in a self avowed social justice warrior like Radziwill -- someone who lathers on to a woman of NA heritage about the appropriate use of "First Nations" as a cultural identity -- shouldn't be surprised that turned out to be just as fake as everything else about her).

Edited July 18, 2017 by film noire

[Celia Rubenstein]

1 hour ago, film noire said:

Carole said nothing that implied that LuAnn was aware she was marrying a (supposedly) gay man -- the rumour is about Tom's sexuality being hidden, not about two people blithely entering into a mixed orientation marriage.

But Carole also said nothing that implied Luann was being misled by Tom about his sexual orientation.  So the idea that what Carole said was pejorative because it implied Tom was some kind of gay predator who is exploiting Luann remains baseless in my opinion.

 

Quote

If privacy is the issue, I would think the presumption lies in spreading "He's a closet queen" rumours on television.

I don't agree she was seriously suggesting Tom was a closet queen.  She just got done talking about what a womanizing man-ho he is, for goodness sake.  I think that is more the lane Carole is really in.  Not the "he's an evil gay bloodsucker who is just using poor innocent Luann as a beard" lane.  YMMV. 

 

4 hours ago, motorcitymom65 said:

I believe the comments about Tom and his sexuality were just throwaway comments. Not serious in any meaningful way. 

 Exactly.

At worst I think it was just another random barb aimed at Luann, meant to underscore what a complete cluster of a fuck her whole relationship with Tom is.  It's gone from "he chases women with money" to "he is a cheating scumbag" to "hell some people say he might even be gay."  Be angry about the constant attempt to belittle Luann if you must. But accusing Carole of living in a sniggering homophobic swamp of hypocrisy is a bit much, I think.  

Edited July 18, 2017 by Celia Rubenstein

[lunastartron]

Carole's never said anything approaching transphobia ... like playing for laughs the premise that LuAnn is really a man? The whole formula for that joke relies on the trope of Lu actually being m2f trans or a drag queen. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by lunastartron

[film noire]

15 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

But accusing Carole of living in a sniggering homophobic swamp of hypocrisy is a bit much, I think.  

Between "LuMan" and spreading rumours Tom is gay -- all for kicks and giggles (because gay & trans people make the best punchlines!) -- she's deep in the snigger-swamp.  She lectures the world about appropriate beliefs and appropriate vocabulary, but in the end,  she's no different than a frat boy who thinks saying, "Dude, that's sooooo gay!!" is totes cool and edgy.

Edited July 18, 2017 by film noire

[Celia Rubenstein]

17 minutes ago, lunastartron said:

Carole's never said anything approaching transphobia ... like playing for laughs the premise that LuAnn is really a man? The whole formula for that joke relies on the trope of Lu actually being m2f trans or a drag queen. 

I think Luann's disgusted reaction to someone making an innocent comment about her "transitioning" in life was a lot worse.  Talk about transparent transphobia ... 

At least the jokes about Luann being a drag queen - however ill advised - are meant as jokes and fall short of the display of revulsion toward trans people which Luann treated us all to the other night. 

[ShawnaLanne]

48 minutes ago, film noire said:

Between "LuMan" and spreading rumours Tom is gay -- all for kicks and giggles (because gay & trans people make the best punchlines!) -- she's deep in the snigger-swamp.  She lectures the world about appropriate beliefs and appropriate vocabulary, but in the end,  she's no different than a frat boy who thinks saying, "Dude, that's sooooo gay!!" is totes cool and edgy.

I generally defend Carol, as long as she isn't mean girling it,  but I agree,  her repeated references to homosexuality\transgender for laughs or to poke at LuAnne falls into that grey category of passive homophobia. She's not being funny or edgy. I mean she hasn't gone the Dorinda route and condemned buggery as unclean and immoral as an indication of what she really feels,  but she's been clear enough. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by ShawnaLanne

[Celia Rubenstein]

I don't like the references to Luann as "LuMan," either.  But I always took it as just another way Carole expresses her contempt for Luann as opposed to being evidence of passive homophobia.

That being said, I do wish they would ALL stop making that particular joke about Luann.  Because it does set up being trans as some kind of joke, and I have no patience for that.  

I have even less patience for someone pulling a face when a person merely uses the word "transitioning" in her presence like it is some kind of foul thing the way Luann did.  That is much worse in my opinion, and seemed far more suggestive of actual contempt for trans people than anything Carole has ever said.

[motorcitymom65]

10 hours ago, WireWrap said:

Carole saying "there are rumors" is not the same as her saying she heard others talking about it. 

Unless I am misunderstanding the definition of the word "rumor", it is exactly the same as her saying that someone else had pondered this, gossiped about it, or speculated about it at some point. If it is just in Carole's head, it is not a rumor. 

[Ki-in]

Carole just needs to shut her stupid mouth because people could easily say things about Adam, a man with serious vocal fry, frosted tips, wears turtlenecks, dates creepy older rich cat ladies and who is a salad tosser by trade. If Adam was called salad tosser it would be accurate since that's what he does for a living but saying it with a certain expression is what would make it pejorative. Much like when my bff is called blonde, she is in fact a blonde but when it is said with disdain it becomes an insult. And as far as statistics go, 1/3 of millennials consider themselves bi/gay so a millennial man with a whiney voice who tosses salad for a living and shacks up with an elderly looking woman is more likely to get pinged as gay than a 50 something ladies man with a reputation for actually having sex with multiple women. 

And being told you look like you're transitioning is an insult, being trans is not. It is the spirit in which it was said.  It was to insult and demean her. And no woman wants to be told they look like a man no matter how much we love them. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by Ki-in

[ryebread]

Great discussion, peeps.  I have nothing more to add.  I was going to post another obnoxious gif of popcorn munching, slow clapping, riotous laughter because, sometimes, a gif can paint a thousand words.  But that would cheapen the terrific discourse happening here.

 

On ‎7‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 11:57 PM, Happy Camper said:

With Eddie Judge, it is mostly just people who watch the RHOC who are discussing him possibly being gay.

Jim Edmonds.  The rumours of him being gay come from sports fans and people in the gay community, not just housewives fans and housewives making jokes. 

I do not think that Carole and Beth really believe that Tom is gay, and there are no rumours floating around online that would suggest this.

There are now.

Thanks to Frankenzill.

[motorcitymom65]

35 minutes ago, Ki-in said:

Carole just needs to shut her stupid mouth because people could easily say things about Adam, a man with serious vocal fry, frosted tips, wears turtlenecks, dates creepy older rich cat ladies and who is a salad tosser by trade.

People can, and people have. Right here on these very forums. It is so funny that folks expect for people like Carole to be pristine in the things they says about others, while at the same time saying all kinds of unsubstantiated things about her and Adam. Even pejorative things. Everyone knows the type of things I am talking about. He doesn't love her, or even like her. He is just with her to try and pull a career out of his ass. She is only with him because she could never get such young fresh meat if he weren't so desperate to gain exposure. Go figure. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by motorcitymom65

[Mindthinkr]

I think (emphasis on the word think) that one of the reasons that Carole and Adam are together still is that they share something in common that we don't see. I think they enjoy burning one together and hanging. I remember once Ramona said to Carole "Put that in your pipe and smoke it." I saw in Carole's eyes the warning of Do Not Go There. 

Hey, if they like to Netflix and "chill" then good for them. I think that they both genuinely like each other but both know that either partner isn't end game. 

[ryebread]

21 minutes ago, motorcitymom65 said:

People can, and people have. Right here on these very forums. It is so funny that folks expect for people like Carole to be pristine in the things they says about others, while at the same time saying all kinds of unsubstantiated things about her and Adam. Even pejorative things. Everyone knows the type of things I am talking about. He doesn't love her, or even like her. He is just with her to try and pull a career out of his ass. She is only with him because she could never get such young fresh meat if he weren't so desperate to gain exposure. Go figure. 

I don't expect Carole to be pristine at all.  As if.

But I do expect snark on a snark forum when she does the stupid things she does.  That goes for all the Hos. And for all of us. 

And by that, I don't mean that all of us deserve snarking on, for HOW we snark on the Hos.  Because that would just be dumb.  No matter how hypocritical or pejorative their posts might seem.  Because A.) we snark on people who put themselves out there and are paid to be snarked upon, and B.) I don't think there's a single person here that hasn't been hypocritical in the way they post sometimes.  

I prefer agreeing and disagreeing on all the HWs.  Doesn't really matter how down and dirty any one gets.  I just keep on defending my HW of choice, or ragging on the ones I dislike.  While trying hard not to dog my boardmates for HOW they post.

[motorcitymom65]

27 minutes ago, ryebread said:

I don't expect Carole to be pristine at all.  As if.

But I do expect snark on a snark forum when she does the stupid things she does.  That goes for all the Hos. And for all of us. 

And by that, I don't mean that all of us deserve snarking on, for HOW we snark on the Hos.  Because that would just be dumb.  No matter how hypocritical or pejorative their posts might seem.  Because A.) we snark on people who put themselves out there and are paid to be snarked upon, and B.) I don't think there's a single person here that hasn't been hypocritical in the way they post sometimes.  

I prefer agreeing and disagreeing on all the HWs.  Doesn't really matter how down and dirty any one gets.  I just keep on defending my HW of choice, or ragging on the ones I dislike.  While trying hard not to dog my boardmates for HOW they post.

Agreed. But it seems obvious to note the truth in the notion that Carole should watch out because people could say things about Adam, while also saying things about Adam, to point out that the thing Carole should watch out for is in fact a reality. That this is already happening/happened to her. By folks that watch the show, and by Lu when she went after her a few years ago. When she is giving her opinion about the others, she has also had her behavior and choices discussed in snarky ways. Bethenny jokes that Adam is a "baby". It does not appear that she believes she is off limits or that she is special. 

[jaync]

Quote

I doubt either Carole or Bethenny would make some racial generalization and try and back it up with some stereotypical reasoning.   

Well, Beth did generalize WOC as being "loud". (No need to back up her reasoning, though, since she knows it all.)

Quote

  While trying hard not to dog my boardmates for HOW they post.

Yeah, once that deflection is used, the argument is pretty much lost.

[Celia Rubenstein]

3 hours ago, Ki-in said:

Carole just needs to shut her stupid mouth because people could easily say things about Adam, a man with serious vocal fry, frosted tips, wears turtlenecks, dates creepy older rich cat ladies and who is a salad tosser by trade.

... I think you just did, lol.   People do all the time.  And I'm sure Carole is well aware of it.  Yet she still seems willing to run the gauntlet of public commentary on her life by being on this show, go figure

I wonder if it is possible that she doesn't care what the people on PTV say about her.  Could such a thing be true?!?!?   LOL

 

32 minutes ago, jaync said:

Yeah, once that deflection is used, the argument is pretty much lost.

Ordinarily I might agree, but in this case I think a nice pot-kettle reference is long overdue, given the subject of the discussion is what a horribly heinous thing Carole said, and all.   I think it is spot-on! 

[jaync]

Quote

Ordinarily I might agree, but in this case I think a nice pot-kettle reference is long overdue, given the subject of the discussion is what a horribly heinous thing Carole said, and all.

But, it can't be due/overdue without the need to change the subject of the discussion to the discussers.