Carole Radziwill: She's a Real Princess!

[film noire]

4 hours ago, ryebread said:

 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.

Amen (we just had a forum shutdown last weekend because of that).

2 hours ago, jaync said:

Well, Beth did generalize WOC as being "loud". 

....and also in need of a white male face to represent their WOC-run business (funny, she didn't take her own advice re: Jason and her own company). No wonder she and Carole are such good friends -- they're the queens of micro-aggression.

Edited July 18, 2017 by film noire

[Celia Rubenstein]

20 minutes ago, film noire said:

Amen (we just had a forum shutdown last weekend because of that).

err, if that is a concern perhaps maybe the dogging of the dogging should stop because the dogging of the dogging has gone on longer than the original dogging.  Just sayin'

 

Quote

...and also in need of a white male face to represent their WOC-run business (funny, she didn't take her own advice re: Jason and her own company). No wonder she and Carole are such good friends -- they're the queens of micro-aggression.

That is not what Bethenny said.  This was all hashed out in her thread.  If you actually take the time to listen to the recording of the event, she was responding to a question from someone asking if it was ever okay for a Black woman to hire a white guy to be the face of her business to get past certain barriers.  Bethenny just said you have to do what you have to do, and if you think you have to do that to succeed, then go ahead, essentially beat the fuckers at their own game.  She never said Black women NEED a white a white man to be the face of their business.  There was no "micro-aggression" in that part of her statement whatsoever.  

The "loud" thing I won't even attempt to defend - it's just obnoxious and I hate it when she tries to be *cute* and *down* that way.  But she never told Black women they had to hire white guys.  Nope.  Didn't happen. 

Wait, isn't this the Carole thread?  Sorry, LOL!  

 

5 hours ago, Mindthinkr said:

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. 

I think you may have summed up their basic attraction to each other.  They like to kick back and do a whole lotta nothing, probably facilitated by a considerable amount of smokables.   It would certainly explain why neither one of them seem to really be accomplishing much, career-wise (that I know of, anyway).   

[jaync]

Quote

....and also in need of a white male face to represent their WOC-run business (funny, she didn't take her own advice re: Jason and her own company).

That (along with her slut shaming and referring to women's genitalia as fish) makes me wonder if there's some misogyny going on there, too.

[WireWrap]

8 hours ago, motorcitymom65 said:

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. 

I can say that there are "rumors" about anything when in fact I am the one starting said rumor, which is exactly what I believe Carole did. Carole did not say she heard others saying/claiming/questioning if Tom was/is gay. 

[film noire]

Quote

That is not what Bethenny said.  This was all hashed out in her thread.  If you actually take the time to listen to the recording of the event,

I did listen (in fact, iirc, I'm almost certain I posted a link to the recording  -- as well as links to commentary from WOC who had been at the event). And the only thing "hashed out" in the thread was that people disagreed as to whether or not Frankel said something untoward -- there was no consensus,  just disagreement.

2 hours ago, jaync said:

That (along with her slut shaming and referring to women's genitalia as fish) makes me wonder if there's some misogyny going on there, too.

I think there is, especially when Carole and Bethenny get together (and not just their treatment of Luann -- Carole with Tom/LuMan, Bethenny with "Single white drag queen" -- but their horrible treatment of Jules  -- so hateful).  Carole has earned points all by herself (like when she cracked up at Reid mocking Ramona and Sonja's bodies with his comment “overweight, old ladies gone wild") but together, they make for a truly poisonous pair.

It'll be great when Frankel is gone - Tinsley might act as a remedy on Carole -- a Charlotte to let Radziwill play out her SATC fantasy.

 

~“I have my own opinions and a lot of the time my opinion is, I agree with what Bethenny thinks.” Radziwill, WWHL  June 29th 2016

Edited July 18, 2017 by film noire

[Gam2]

Wow. I think this thread is getting ready to be locked down again and I wouldn't blame the mods. It seems to be going around and around with nothing new to read or report or talk about. Same old shit every day. 

[Celia Rubenstein]

52 minutes ago, film noire said:

I did listen (in fact, iirc, I'm almost certain I posted a link to the recording  -- as well as links to commentary from WOC who had been at the event). And the only thing "hashed out" in the thread was that people disagreed as to whether or not Frankel said something untoward -- there was no consensus,  just disagreement.

No, I am the one who posted the link sometime after it happened when I was finally able to track down a recording of it online when it came up in discussion again.  I doubt many people really listened to it because it was SO LONG, but Beth was clearly just answering a question - the whole idea of hiring a white guy was brought up by an audience member.  It didn't come from her. 

The disagreement you refer to took place before anyone heard what she said for themselves -  once they did, discussion of it essentially died.  There was just no "there" there.  

 

3 hours ago, jaync said:

That (along with her slut shaming and referring to women's genitalia as fish) makes me wonder if there's some misogyny going on there, too.

Are you talking about Bethenny or Carole?  I guess it doesn't matter either way, because all I wanted to say is after 9 seasons of RuPaul's Drag Race, I no longer find references to "fish" offensive, lol.  I've become immune! 

 

On 7/17/2017 at 11:59 AM, KungFuBunny said:

Kung Fu Bunny, is this a real newspaper article or something you cobbled together for laughs?  What is the story about (if it is real)?  

[Jel]

I'm still rehashing Grandpa Hoppy, in his underpants, perusing the crew buffet.  

How exactly did he help himself to food? Was it a balls to the wall stride up? Did he slowly meander over, maybe scope out the sitch before casually picking up a ham and cheese croissant?  Was there any whistling? Did he stand there and eat right at the buffet, like a grab and go? Or did he take the time to sit, placing his napkin over his underwear before he dined?

[motorcitymom65]

1 hour ago, Jel said:

I'm still rehashing Grandpa Hoppy, in his underpants, perusing the crew buffet.  

How exactly did he help himself to food? Was it a balls to the wall stride up? Did he slowly meander over, maybe scope out the sitch before casually picking up a ham and cheese croissant?  Was there any whistling? Did he stand there and eat right at the buffet, like a grab and go? Or did he take the time to sit, placing his napkin over his underwear before he dined?

It is possible that because I am in the middle of a move from my beloved Detroit area to a place much less sexy in the midwest, and am looking for fun, that all of these images completely cracked me up. Why in the world aren't there more images available of Grandpa Hoppy in his underpants. It's a damn shame I tell you. 

[Jel]

16 minutes ago, motorcitymom65 said:

It is possible that because I am in the middle of a move from my beloved Detroit area to a place much less sexy in the midwest, and am looking for fun, that all of these images completely cracked me up. Why in the world aren't there more images available of Grandpa Hoppy in his underpants. It's a damn shame I tell you. 

High five, MCM!  I am happy to sit with you, at our table for two, enjoying our Grandpa-Hoppy-underpants-scenarios crack ups. :)

[Celia Rubenstein]

Scoot over, I'm joining you.

My favorite Grandpère Hoppy scenario entails him sashaying around the apartment in a thong and everyone in the room going all Samantha from Sex and the City, scrambling to leave when they saw his droopy, wrinkled ass!

Edited July 19, 2017 by Celia Rubenstein
because someone around here is picky about the direction apostrophes face!

[OnceSane]

Topic, please.

[ShawnaLanne]

23 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

....

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.  

I know we're beating this topic to death, but the issue for me is the casual way she uses gay and transgender comments as slurs. Except for her mean girl phase, I've never had a problem with Carol, but this is an issue throughout the HW franchises. 

Edited July 19, 2017 by ShawnaLanne

[Celia Rubenstein]

23 minutes ago, ShawnaLanne said:

I know we're beating this topic to death, but the issue for me is the casual way she uses gay and transgender comments as slurs. Except for her mean girl phase, I've never had a problem with Carol, but this is an issue throughout the HW franchises. 

It's all too common on Bravo and I don't like it either. 

[film noire]

3 hours ago, ShawnaLanne said:

I know we're beating this topic to death

We've beaten far less important topics to death  :)

Quote

but the issue for me is the casual way she uses gay and transgender comments as slurs.

Yes  -- and I think it's bizarre she keeps doing it, because not dropping gay/transgender slurs as punchlines or insults is pretty basic for someone who says they have a social conscience. If she were a good-old-boy-girl-type (north or south, country or city) it would still be awful, but there'd be *slightly* more room for me to think "Okay, you still don't understand that (at core) these 'jokes" / slurs are a way to shame & control people different than you." It would still piss me off, but there'd be the possibility of someone becoming aware, down the road.  But she lives at the fucking corner of Should Know Better and QUILTBAG -- so if she's not getting it already, what fucking remains? 

And it annoys me no end that she'd tweet her ass off if Trump -- no darling of mine, so her attitude towards him is not a problem for me -- had said the equivalent of "LuMan" to a female reporter, but she thinks she's quite the daring little Oscar Wilde when saying it herself. And she keeps doing this shit, over and over; the slut shaming episode last year / LuMan; this year it's  LuMan + "Tom Tom, the piper's gay son, stole a straight girl and away he run" --  by next year she'll be 'quipping' in confessionals about gay men, faggots, and her fire building skills, while laughing as if she didn't have a care in her (straight) world.

Edited July 19, 2017 by film noire

[Mozelle]

On 7/18/2017 at 1:58 AM, ShawnaLanne said:

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. 

 

22 hours 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. 

So, this reminds me of the "LuMan" thing and what I find interesting about the handwringing now--Carole is not the first to have coined it. I distinctly remember it being tossed around on TWoP, well before Carole joined the cast. A quick Google search also brought up a Jezebel piece from 2010 about LuAnn in which the writer refers to her as "LuMan" (as well as "countless," which I also think started on message boards and Twitter, and Mario picked up and repeated in one of the episodes). Should Carole call LuAnn "LuMan"? No, I say for multitude of reasons*. But pinning it all on her simply because she's Carole? I mean...

*Some of which include not thinking that because someone voted for, say, Obama or Clinton that they are 100% pristine/sensitive about every social issue.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Mozelle

[Ki-in]

I think Carole was crushing on Jared.  She doesn't seem to mind his politics here.

 

Edited July 19, 2017 by Ki-in

[Mozelle]

1. That pic is from before he was married to Ivanka.

2. A woman smiling at a man now equals crushing on him, I suppose. 

3. You're probably right--she didn't mind Kushner's politics in that pic since he wasn't aligned with Trump at the time...

[Ki-in]

Her body language is screaming "Give me some Kush! I want to smoke some Kush right now"

She looks like she wanted some Kush action right then and there and not the kind you put in your bong.

[diadochokinesis]

38 minutes ago, Ki-in said:

I think Carole was crushing on Jared.  She doesn't seem to mind his politics here.

 

Kushner (actually, all of the Trumps) were Democrats. The switch to Republican has been fairly recent. Supposedly the rest of the Kushner family is appalled at the whole Trump and Jared thing. 

[motorcitymom65]

19 minutes ago, diadochokinesis said:

Kushner (actually, all of the Trumps) were Democrats. The switch to Republican has been fairly recent. Supposedly the rest of the Kushner family is appalled at the whole Trump and Jared thing. 

I am shamed by the knowledge now, but I use to like him once as well. Things change. 

[zoeysmom]

2 hours ago, Mozelle said:

 

So, this reminds me of the "LuMan" thing and what I find interesting about the handwringing now--Carole is not the first to have coined it. I distinctly remember it being tossed around on TWoP, well before Carole joined the cast. A quick Google search also brought up a Jezebel piece from 2010 about LuAnn in which the writer refers to her as "LuMan" (as well as "countless," which I also think started on message boards and Twitter, and Mario picked up and repeated in one of the episodes). Should Carole call LuAnn "LuMan"? No, I say for multitude of reasons*. But pinning it all on her simply because she's Carole? I mean...

*Some of which include not thinking that because someone voted for, say, Obama or Clinton that they are 100% pristine/sensitive about every social issue.

You do realize what you have just done-Carole is now not only questionable in the use of term LuMan she didn't give proper credit.  If it is not ghost writers it is joke stealing.  She just can't outrun the shame.

I believe Carole attaches herself to a certain platform and just very publicly fails to live up to what she is promulgating.  Besides the show she has some cringeworthy moments on Twitter. 

There is never a reason for Mario to call Luann-LuMan or Countless.  I get being married to Ramona can be arduous but Luann never did anything to Mario. 

[Mozelle]

14 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

You do realize what you have just done-Carole is now not only questionable in the use of term LuMan she didn't give proper credit.  If it is not ghost writers it is joke stealing.  She just can't outrun the shame.

I believe Carole attaches herself to a certain platform and just very publicly fails to live up to what she is promulgating.  Besides the show she has some cringeworthy moments on Twitter. 

There is never a reason for Mario to call Luann-LuMan or Countless.  I get being married to Ramona can be arduous but Luann never did anything to Mario. 

That's quite a leap, zoeysmom, but OK lol.

[film noire]

4 hours ago, Mozelle said:

So, this reminds me of the "LuMan" thing and what I find interesting about the handwringing now--Carole is not the first to have coined it.  A quick Google search also brought up a Jezebel piece from 2010 about LuAnn in which the writer refers to her as "LuMan" 

If enough people weren't aware enough of the problems with  "LuMan" eight and a half years ago, at least we're aware enough now -- but that aside,  people often use slurs not coined by them -- still makes it wrong to use the slur. 

Quote

*Some of which include not thinking that because someone voted for, say, Obama or Clinton that they are 100% pristine/sensitive about every social issue.

I don't think that applies to Carole, as both her storyline criticizing Trump and the "First Nations" comments showed her (supposed) sensitivity around language on the show itself, not just in her private political choices.  (Although her using "First Nations" was the opposite of what she intended -- FN is a status created in the Canadian constitution back in the eighties, referring to indigenous people/ the Metis/but not the Inuit. It's a specific thing in Canada, and -- as far as I know -- I don't think American Indians have taken on the designation themselves as a people.) 

Edited July 19, 2017 by film noire

[film noire]

2 hours ago, Mozelle said:

That's quite a leap, zoeysmom, but OK lol.

I think ZM meant it as a joke ; )

Edited July 19, 2017 by film noire

[Ki-in]

13 minutes ago, film noire said:

If enough people weren't aware enough of the problems with  "LuMan" eight and a half years ago, at least we're aware enough now -- but that aside,  people often use slurs not coined by them -- still makes it wrong to use the slur. 

I don't think that applies to Carole, as both her storyline criticizing Trump and the "First Nations" comments showed her (supposed) sensitivity around language on the show itself, not just in her private political choices.  (Although her using "First Nations" was the opposite of what she intended -- FN is a status created in the Canadian constitution back in the eighties, referring to indigenous people/ the Metis/but not the Inuit. It's a specific thing in Canada, and -- as far as I know -- I don't think American Indians have taken on the designation themselves as a people.) 

She's only sensitive when offends her delicate sensibilities. Otherwise she accuses castmates of buttfucking (her word) and calls then bitch but gets offended when Ramona said she was screwing Adam even though Carole used the exact term and wanted an emoji for it.

Of course she steals jokes, every one of her jokes in her talking heads is so rehearsed, there is no spark or spontaneity. Except of course the one time she wasn't joking and she said she didn't care that Lu's niece got hurt, that rolled off her tongue effortlessly. That's the real Carole right there.

She was so dumb and over the top being offended at the Indian remark. I was driving behind a Seminole Indian just the other day and I knew they were because that's what their license plate said. And they just had the Miccosukee Indian festival here recently. Maybe she should come down and protest the Native Americans calling themselves Indian or take it up with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

[film noire]

5 minutes ago, Ki-in said:

or take it up with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

Don't give her any ideas (she'd turn up dressed like this ; )

[Mozelle]

2 hours ago, film noire said:

If enough people weren't aware enough of the problems with  "LuMan" eight and a half years ago, at least we're aware enough now -- but that aside,  people often use slurs not coined by them -- still makes it wrong to use the slur. 

I don't think that applies to Carole, as both her storyline criticizing Trump and the "First Nations" comments showed her (supposed) sensitivity around language on the show itself, not just in her private political choices.  (Although her using "First Nations" was the opposite of what she intended -- FN is a status created in the Canadian constitution back in the eighties, referring to indigenous people/ the Metis/but not the Inuit. It's a specific thing in Canada, and -- as far as I know -- I don't think American Indians have taken on the designation themselves as a people.) 

At no point did I say or intimate that it was OK to use. What I am saying is that people are laying it Carole's door as though she originated it--and holding her feet to the fire for it--when they likely use(d) the same word to refer to LuAnn...and I'm not just talking eight years ago either. I've seen it in these very forums this season, last season, the season before...

And my asterisk comment actually still does apply because as I was saying, Carole, like many others, is not 100% pristine/sensitive about every social issue, even when we're talking about her telling LuAnn that she shouldn't say "Indian." That Carole ticked a box for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton certainly does not mean that she's (going to be) 100% correct about various social issues. What I saw from that exchange between Carole and LuAnn was more about Carole learning from the cultural/societal shift in language ("You can't say 'Indian,' LuAnn.") but also not understanding that someone within the marginalized group has more leeway with the language they choose for themselves. 

[Natalie68]

On 7/18/2017 at 1:44 PM, Celia Rubenstein said:

err, if that is a concern perhaps maybe the dogging of the dogging should stop because the dogging of the dogging has gone on longer than the original dogging.  Just sayin'

 

That is not what Bethenny said.  This was all hashed out in her thread.  If you actually take the time to listen to the recording of the event, she was responding to a question from someone asking if it was ever okay for a Black woman to hire a white guy to be the face of her business to get past certain barriers.  Bethenny just said you have to do what you have to do, and if you think you have to do that to succeed, then go ahead, essentially beat the fuckers at their own game.  She never said Black women NEED a white a white man to be the face of their business.  There was no "micro-aggression" in that part of her statement whatsoever.  

The "loud" thing I won't even attempt to defend - it's just obnoxious and I hate it when she tries to be *cute* and *down* that way.  But she never told Black women they had to hire white guys.  Nope.  Didn't happen. 

Wait, isn't this the Carole thread?  Sorry, LOL!  

 

I think you may have summed up their basic attraction to each other.  They like to kick back and do a whole lotta nothing, probably facilitated by a considerable amount of smokables.   It would certainly explain why neither one of them seem to really be accomplishing much, career-wise (that I know of, anyway).   

Its almost as though you are looking into my living room!  JOKE!  

Adam seems like a nice guy and its nice he and Carole do their relationship however it works for them.  I know he wouldn't work for me.  I need more than sexy salads.  Like tantalizing tacos or delectable donuts.

[zoeysmom]

6 hours ago, Mozelle said:

That's quite a leap, zoeysmom, but OK lol.

It was more like a Olympic pole vault.  And it was meant in jest-thanks for rolling with it. ;-D

[film noire]

1 hour ago, Mozelle said:

At no point did I say or intimate that it was OK to use. .

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you did -- I was addressing creation/mitigation.

Quote

What I am saying is that people are laying it Carole's door as though she originated it--and holding her feet to the fire for it--when they likely use(d) the same word to refer to LuAnn...and I'm not just talking eight years ago either. I've seen it in these very forums this season, last season, the season before...

I can't speak  for anybody else, but I don't care who originated it. 

I also don't think people mistakenly assuming Carole coined the phrase lessens anybody's right to think it's a creepy thing to say.  

And people can change their minds about acceptable usage pretty quickly. Something that struck you as funny (even recently) can suddenly feel ugly and othering. Even that 2010 Jezebel article you mentioned had several people taking the writer to task for using "LuMan", and I'm sure that word (if used today) would burn a hole in the comments section.  So unless people are simultaneously calling her "LuMan" in the same post they're attacking Carole for calling her "LuMan", you can't know if they just changed their sensibilities without telling you.

Quote

That Carole ticked a box for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton certainly does not mean that she's (going to be) 100% correct about various social issues.

I'm not basing my reaction to Carole's attitude on who she voted for: I'm basing it on her behavior on the show.

And I'm also not expecting Carole to be pure about every social issue -- but when she makes a social justice issue out of someone else's behavior,  I AM expecting her to then apply the same standard to herself.  

Quote

was more about Carole learning from the cultural/societal shift in language ("You can't say 'Indian,' LuAnn.") 

She also said using "Indian" was "racist" (which is a moral/social justice evaluation of Luann's behavior, and not just an example of being unaware of a cultural shift in language).

Quote

but also not understanding that someone within the marginalized group has more leeway with the language they choose for themselves. 

I don't agree with that reading of what happened; but even conceding that to you, Radziwill (in her blog, having had time to think things through) doubled down.  She dissected Luann's relationship with her own NA background, only to find Luann's grasp of her own cultural heritage deeply wanting:

" Sigh. The term "Indian" is a pejorative term, here and in Canada, too. I have Indian friends. Ranjana and Naeem are Indians, they're from India. Luann's just messing with me, right? She has to be. Columbus thought he landed in India and called the people he saw Indians. He didn't and they're not. They're Native Americans. It's not complicated.

It seems to me that LuAnn calls attention to her background not out of pride but out of vanity. Pride is about your opinion of yourself. Vanity is how you would like others to see you. In this case LuAnn wants people to think she is exotic, so she refers to her background without knowing much about it. We have a shameful past with Native Americans in this country -- we nearly annihilated the native population and have a long history of negative stereotypes and discrimination toward them."

What the fuck? That is barely one step removed, in attitude, from "school-marming the natives" in a residential school. She set herself up as an arbiter of racist language and "negative stereotypes", and then called the subject of her lecture LuMan -- she earned the judgements coming at her.  To me, this is clearly about Carole Radziwill's behaviour, not anybody else reaction to that behaviour.

Her final line in that awful blog is: "Call me crazy, but I think jokes about scalping and rape and pillage are inappropriate."

But jokes based on passive trans/homophobia are just fine,  as long as you're a straight white woman.

Edited July 19, 2017 by film noire

[jaync]

Quote

Her body language is screaming "Give me some Kush! I want to smoke some Kush right now"

Seriously, she looks ready to climb him like a tree. Hah, I bet they screwed. Good find.

[Mozelle]

filmnoire, you've literally split one of my sentences that's arguing exactly what you're arguing to say that you don't agree but really we're saying the same thing lol:

2 hours ago, Mozelle said:

What I saw from that exchange between Carole and LuAnn was more about Carole learning from the cultural/societal shift in language ("You can't say 'Indian,' LuAnn.") but also not understanding that someone within the marginalized group has more leeway with the language they choose for themselves. 

I am saying that someone being attuned to social issue X, Y, Z doesn't mean that they're exactly attuned to social issue 1, 2, 3. Carole demonstrated that. 

Carole was taking what she'd learned about the more politically correct term ("Native American"; "We're supposed to say 'Native American' now"...across the board, no nuance) and applying it to LuAnn, a member of that group, not understanding that LuAnn--as a member of that group--has more leeway with how she chooses to identity or call herself. 

The excerpt from Carole's blog demonstrates that Carole was applying a broad stroke because she knows that she can't use a term and thinks that it applies to everyone, including the member of the group in question. That's where I'm going when I say Carole isn't (and isn't going to be) 100% pristine even though she's attuned to a number of social justice issues.

I witnessed it firsthand at the women's march in D.C. this year, which is why the sign I carried said "Black & a woman." ;)

Edited July 19, 2017 by Mozelle

[film noire]

1 hour ago, Mozelle said:

I am saying that someone being attuned to social issue X, Y, Z doesn't mean that they're exactly attuned to social issue 1, 2, 3. Carole demonstrated that. 

 Right -- but I'm saying she IS attuned to issue X  (language matters) only when she thinks it's a club to judge others  (Luann) not herself (LuMan). Her blind spot is self-inflicted,  not ignorance of issue X.  

Quote

 Carole was applying a broad stroke because she knows that she can't use a term and thinks that it applies to everyone, including the member of the group in question. 

Okay, I get where you're going! -- I think we're focusing on different issues, here  -- it's more complex than this, but most simply put (for me) it's this: when you assess negative stereotypes and racism in somebody else's language, you need to do the same with your own. If you say Luann can't say "Indian" (even if you're ignorant of her right to do so, even if you're ignorant that "Indian" is a perfectly fine word for white people to use, according to many NA) if you say that word is verboten because it is racist, you have demonstrated that you understand that language -- even just one word -- can contain a larger social issue within that word. That's the issue for me with her-- she's aware language can be a bomb, and then goes about using language that doesn't meet the standards she applies to other people -- and not through ignorance (language matters?) b/c she's shown that she knows a word can carry a whole history (language matters!)

Quote

I witnessed it firsthand at the women's march in D.C. this year, which is why the sign I carried said "Black & a woman." ;)

 Ha  (I couldn't get to the march, but my sign would have said something like, "Panicked white female resident alien AND I HAVE ALL MY PAPERS PLEASE DON'T DEPORT ME" so you know, not much help to anyone :)

Edited July 20, 2017 by film noire

[Ki-in]

I would agree with the Carole only has one story to tell if she herself hadn't be relentless and gone on and on and on about how she's a writer girl and her craft! HER CRAFT! She made it seem like she ate, breathed and slept writing, like she wrote day and night, rain or shine, come hell or high water. Her blogs sucked when she did write them and I think there was truth to the ghostwriter claims. I don't think Carole writes at all except her twitter/ig posts

I know it's a YMMV many authors write daily, with or without inspiration. 

 

https://nothingintherulebook.com/2017/01/27/on-writing-the-daily-word-counts-of-famous-authors/

Edited July 20, 2017 by Ki-in
Thought post didn't take but was in a different thread. This is almost same as Oil and Vinegar post, but I'll leave it anyway unless mods have issue :)

[motorcitymom65]

28 minutes ago, Ki-in said:

I would agree with the Carole only has one story to tell if she herself hadn't be relentless and gone on and on and on about how she's a writer girl and her craft! HER CRAFT! She made it seem like she ate, breathed and slept writing, like she wrote day and night, rain or shine, come hell or high water. Her blogs sucked when she did write them and I think there was truth to the ghostwriter claims. I don't think Carole writes at all except her twitter/ig posts

I know it's a YMMV many authors write daily, with or without inspiration. 

 

https://nothingintherulebook.com/2017/01/27/on-writing-the-daily-word-counts-of-famous-authors/

There are other authors who only had one book in them. Emily Bronte only wrote Wuthering Heights. Margaret Mitchell only Gone with The Wind. Harper Lee only To Kill a Mockingbird. She worked on another novel for years, but could not bust it out. I believe that another novel was published last year, but that was 40 years after Mockingbird. There are tons of other examples of folks who only had one great work in them. She has said that she wished she were the kind of person who had the ability to just sit down and write, but she does not. She has never tried to claim differently. 

[Ki-in]

28 minutes ago, motorcitymom65 said:

 She has never tried to claim differently. 

She claimed to be a writer devoted to her craft.  That is my problem, she was full of shit herself and acted like she would die if she couldn't put pen to paper everyday. If she had said I'm not inspired or I have writer's block I wouldn't have cared but since she herself proclaimed herself a writer I expected her to always be working on something.

 

Margaret Mitchell  got a job writing feature articles for The Atlanta Journal Sunday Magazine.  During the time Mitchell worked for the Atlanta Journal, she wrote 129 feature articles, 85 news stories, and several book reviews. She also wrote four other novels that weren't published.

Bronte also wrote poetry, one poem was published and I think she and her sisters published a book of poetry together where Emily's contribution was 21 poems. In a letter to her editor she said she was working on a second novel but they think her sisters burned the manuscript.

Harper Lee wrote a few articles

Edited July 20, 2017 by Ki-in

[HunterHunted]

24 minutes ago, Ki-in said:

 

Harper Lee wrote a few articles

And so did Carole. She did some celebrity interviews and her lunch date series. They were silly trifles, but I quite liked the Lunch Date series. She wasn't writing in-depth exposes, but she was writing.

Edited July 20, 2017 by HunterHunted

[ryebread]

1 hour ago, HunterHunted said:

And so did Carole. She did some celebrity interviews and her lunch date series. They were silly trifles, but I quite liked the Lunch Date series. She wasn't writing in-depth exposes, but she was writing.

I would argue that the 'Lunch Dates' isn't really writing.  It wasn't even particularly creative.  She went to lunch, asked some questions (some of which where inane.  Remember her awkwardness with the blind date Lu set up with the actor?  Times that by 10 with actors like Annette Benning, Julianne Moore, Alex Baldwin.) and then transcribed their answers. 

I dunno.  She probably 'wrote' some of the questions, so I suppose those could be considered the writing part of the interviews. 

[HunterHunted]

19 minutes ago, ryebread said:

I would argue that the 'Lunch Dates' isn't really writing.  It wasn't even particularly creative.  She went to lunch, asked some questions (some of which where inane.  Remember her awkwardness with the blind date Lu set up with the actor?  Times that by 10 with actors like Annette Benning, Julianne Moore, Alex Baldwin.) and then transcribed their answers. 

I dunno.  She probably 'wrote' some of the questions, so I suppose those could be considered the writing part of the interviews. 

I think she settled on "writer" as her profession because it's hard to explain a journalist who no longer works in journalism, but might sell a random piece for an outlet about something of note in contemporary society.

To a certain extent, I'm sure Malcolm Gladwell and Stephen Dubner had similar issues after Tipping Point and Freakonomics had been out for awhile, but before any new notable projects had come out. In that weird in between time, they were doing some journalism, but not in a way that a working journalist would recognize. Gladwell and Dubner would go on to replicate their success with other books and projects. Now, when people describe Gladwell and Dubner they almost never refer to them as journalists, sometimes as writers.

I'm not saying that Carole is exactly like those two, but she's in this weird limbo. She is a journalist, but she wasn't working as one. She'd written two books and some articles, but she wasn't a writer in the sense that she had to produce a piece every week or month to keep the lights on. She reminds me of Chris Kluwe in his post NFL career. They both are modern media celebrities, reasonably amusing, and fairly intelligent, but don't really have a niche to display that.

[lunastartron]

On July 19, 2017 at 2:42 PM, film noire said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you did -- I was addressing creation/mitigation.

I can't speak  for anybody else, but I don't care who originated it. 

I also don't think people mistakenly assuming Carole coined the phrase lessens anybody's right to think it's a creepy thing to say.  

And people can change their minds about acceptable usage pretty quickly. Something that struck you as funny (even recently) can suddenly feel ugly and othering. Even that 2010 Jezebel article you mentioned had several people taking the writer to task for using "LuMan", and I'm sure that word (if used today) would burn a hole in the comments section.  So unless people are simultaneously calling her "LuMan" in the same post they're attacking Carole for calling her "LuMan", you can't know if they just changed their sensibilities without telling you.

I'm not basing my reaction to Carole's attitude on who she voted for: I'm basing it on her behavior on the show.

And I'm also not expecting Carole to be pure about every social issue -- but when she makes a social justice issue out of someone else's behavior,  I AM expecting her to then apply the same standard to herself.  

She also said using "Indian" was "racist" (which is a moral/social justice evaluation of Luann's behavior, and not just an example of being unaware of a cultural shift in language).

I don't agree with that reading of what happened; but even conceding that to you, Radziwill (in her blog, having had time to think things through) doubled down.  She dissected Luann's relationship with her own NA background, only to find Luann's grasp of her own cultural heritage deeply wanting:

" Sigh. The term "Indian" is a pejorative term, here and in Canada, too. I have Indian friends. Ranjana and Naeem are Indians, they're from India. Luann's just messing with me, right? She has to be. Columbus thought he landed in India and called the people he saw Indians. He didn't and they're not. They're Native Americans. It's not complicated.

It seems to me that LuAnn calls attention to her background not out of pride but out of vanity. Pride is about your opinion of yourself. Vanity is how you would like others to see you. In this case LuAnn wants people to think she is exotic, so she refers to her background without knowing much about it. We have a shameful past with Native Americans in this country -- we nearly annihilated the native population and have a long history of negative stereotypes and discrimination toward them."

What the fuck? That is barely one step removed, in attitude, from "school-marming the natives" in a residential school. She set herself up as an arbiter of racist language and "negative stereotypes", and then called the subject of her lecture LuMan -- she earned the judgements coming at her.  To me, this is clearly about Carole Radziwill's behaviour, not anybody else reaction to that behaviour.

Her final line in that awful blog is: "Call me crazy, but I think jokes about scalping and rape and pillage are inappropriate."

But jokes based on passive trans/homophobia are just fine,  as long as you're a straight white woman.

 

Wow. This whole blog is sick. And the bolded part ironic.

Carole's ignorance and colonialistic white savior myopia with respect to American Indians is not a matter of nuance in which she has simply misapplied a standard of terminology to self-referential diction by indigenous peoples.

She is just flat-out wrong when she asserts that "anyone" beyond "the third grade" knows that the noun "Indian" is "offensive" and/or "racist."

National Congress of American Indians. Indian Country Today. American Indian Movement. Last Real Indians. NDNS.*

That a wealthy urban white woman like Carole feels comfortable to not only pontificate about the lexicon of appropriate designations for tribal North Americans but actively dissimeniate misinformation about the matter is a textbook example of limousine liberalism at its worst and most grotesque. 

That she's an abject dumbass injects a bit of unintended humor into her disquisition but, really, when you're clutching your pearls over the historical plight and marginalization of American Indians and you haven't even bothered to cursorily acquaint yourself with the most superficial elements about their current existence, you're not doing anything more than intellectual masturbation - and, at worst, Carole was leveraging that plight about which she is simultaneously so concerned and so uninformed just to take a dig at some pretentious coworker who she didn't even know at the point in question.

*There is no daylight between what Carole did and clutching her smelling salts over someone calling themselves black/editorializing in her talking heads that "African-American" is the appropriate term and then penning a blog dissecting the racial "vanity" of the black person in question. While some indigenous peoples prefer their own tribal distinctions and/or "Native American," "Indian" is not a regarded as a racist or offensive designation or verboten for non-Indians anymore than "black" is (even though some black Americans may prefer "African American" and/or "Caribbean  American" for an array of reasons).

----------------------------------

Interestingly, it also echoes - or I guess I should say, it predicted - in certain respects Bethenny's appointment of herself as arbiter of Jules's racial/ethnoreligious legitimacy as a Jew.  

Edited July 21, 2017 by lunastartron

[Mozelle]

19 hours ago, motorcitymom65 said:

There are other authors who only had one book in them. Emily Bronte only wrote Wuthering Heights. Margaret Mitchell only Gone with The Wind. Harper Lee only To Kill a Mockingbird. She worked on another novel for years, but could not bust it out. I believe that another novel was published last year, but that was 40 years after Mockingbird. There are tons of other examples of folks who only had one great work in them. She has said that she wished she were the kind of person who had the ability to just sit down and write, but she does not. She has never tried to claim differently. 

All of this. And to add, there are writers who approach writing differently. There are those who believe you should write everyday, even if it's eventually crap; there are others who think that you shouldn't have to force yourself to write everyday just to call yourself a writer. Neither is wrong, however very many people believe that writers only come in the tortured Hemingway variety, so...

[RHJunkie]

On 7/19/2017 at 5:42 PM, film noire said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you did -- I was addressing creation/mitigation.

I can't speak  for anybody else, but I don't care who originated it. 

I also don't think people mistakenly assuming Carole coined the phrase lessens anybody's right to think it's a creepy thing to say.  

And people can change their minds about acceptable usage pretty quickly. Something that struck you as funny (even recently) can suddenly feel ugly and othering. Even that 2010 Jezebel article you mentioned had several people taking the writer to task for using "LuMan", and I'm sure that word (if used today) would burn a hole in the comments section.  So unless people are simultaneously calling her "LuMan" in the same post they're attacking Carole for calling her "LuMan", you can't know if they just changed their sensibilities without telling you.

I'm not basing my reaction to Carole's attitude on who she voted for: I'm basing it on her behavior on the show.

And I'm also not expecting Carole to be pure about every social issue -- but when she makes a social justice issue out of someone else's behavior,  I AM expecting her to then apply the same standard to herself.  

She also said using "Indian" was "racist" (which is a moral/social justice evaluation of Luann's behavior, and not just an example of being unaware of a cultural shift in language).

I don't agree with that reading of what happened; but even conceding that to you, Radziwill (in her blog, having had time to think things through) doubled down.  She dissected Luann's relationship with her own NA background, only to find Luann's grasp of her own cultural heritage deeply wanting:

" Sigh. The term "Indian" is a pejorative term, here and in Canada, too. I have Indian friends. Ranjana and Naeem are Indians, they're from India. Luann's just messing with me, right? She has to be. Columbus thought he landed in India and called the people he saw Indians. He didn't and they're not. They're Native Americans. It's not complicated.

It seems to me that LuAnn calls attention to her background not out of pride but out of vanity. Pride is about your opinion of yourself. Vanity is how you would like others to see you. In this case LuAnn wants people to think she is exotic, so she refers to her background without knowing much about it. We have a shameful past with Native Americans in this country -- we nearly annihilated the native population and have a long history of negative stereotypes and discrimination toward them."

What the fuck? That is barely one step removed, in attitude, from "school-marming the natives" in a residential school. She set herself up as an arbiter of racist language and "negative stereotypes", and then called the subject of her lecture LuMan -- she earned the judgements coming at her.  To me, this is clearly about Carole Radziwill's behaviour, not anybody else reaction to that behaviour.

Her final line in that awful blog is: "Call me crazy, but I think jokes about scalping and rape and pillage are inappropriate."

But jokes based on passive trans/homophobia are just fine,  as long as you're a straight white woman.

If only she understood the immense irony in that comment. We can't call them Indians because they aren't from India but you can call them Native AMERICANS even though that is a reflection of the oppression their people faced when Europeans invaded their land. "America" nor "Canada' existed until Europeans came in and named it that. What's offensive is doubling down on a subject matter that she isn't well versed in beyond the 'politically appropriate' terms that she runs across when catching up with her newspaper readings. There are many Indigenous people who insist that they are Indian because that is the term used in the Constitution and Charter of Rights which reference their rights as an "Indian" on the land. Sure, we don't use that term often, particularly in Canada, but generally speaking, an Indigenous person would much more appreciate you call them by their name or recognize them by their tribe/community than to label a broad stroke of some politically correct term. Despite the atrocities done against their people, they are still often gracious in helping others understand them better and would not likely take great offense to any of the terms available so long as it's said with respect and good intentions.

While both US and Canada had residential schools, Luann's family is originally from Canada and her native ancestry is likely from Canada where residential schools and displacement ran rampant. If Carole had taken the opportunity to bring up the topic for the sake of education and not for the opportunity to put down Luann, she may have discovered in some very accessible readings that displacement and the attempt to erase Indigenous culture was an objective of the Europeans. There are a lot of Indigenous people who don't know about their ancestry at all because at some point their family line was displaced from their community.

Bottom line, don't apply the same standards you use to speak of other races and cultures and apply it to those who are within that marginalized group. In an effort to seem informed, you potentially achieve the opposite, much like Carole did.

Edited July 21, 2017 by RHJunkie

[jaync]

Quote

Emily Bronte only wrote Wuthering Heights. Margaret Mitchell only Gone with The Wind. Harper Lee only To Kill a Mockingbird.

True, but writing a novel is creatively different than penning a memoir.

[Mondrianyone]

On 7/20/2017 at 4:52 PM, ryebread said:

I would argue that the 'Lunch Dates' isn't really writing.  It wasn't even particularly creative.  She went to lunch, asked some questions (some of which where inane.  Remember her awkwardness with the blind date Lu set up with the actor?  Times that by 10 with actors like Annette Benning, Julianne Moore, Alex Baldwin.) and then transcribed their answers. 

I dunno.  She probably 'wrote' some of the questions, so I suppose those could be considered the writing part of the interviews. 

Bingo.  Having worked at a couple of magazines in my time and been the person who turned these sorts of "interviews" into publishable pieces, I'd bet you anything that it was the editors who did most of the actual work that didn't involve having lunch and cocktails.  I would also take issue with the term "journalist" for what she did in her TV job.  I knew someone who was a producer in the early days of 48 Hours, and most of what she did involved scheduling, arranging for transportation, securing locations--kind of glorified secretarial work.  The image of a combat journalist is very glamorous, but I have a feeling there wasn't a whole lot of journalism involved in Carole's job.  I could be wrong, but I think she's a poser through and through.

[WireWrap]

1 hour ago, Mondrianyone said:

Bingo.  Having worked at a couple of magazines in my time and been the person who turned these sorts of "interviews" into publishable pieces, I'd bet you anything that it was the editors who did most of the actual work that didn't involve having lunch and cocktails.  I would also take issue with the term "journalist" for what she did in her TV job.  I knew someone who was a producer in the early days of 48 Hours, and most of what she did involved scheduling, arranging for transportation, securing locations--kind of glorified secretarial work.  The image of a combat journalist is very glamorous, but I have a feeling there wasn't a whole lot of journalism involved in Carole's job.  I could be wrong, but I think she's a poser through and through.

I believe that when Carole first started with ABC, she did just that, schedule interviews, arranging travel/hotel but then she actually went on location as well. 

[Mondrianyone]

1 hour ago, WireWrap said:

I believe that when Carole first started with ABC, she did just that, schedule interviews, arranging travel/hotel but then she actually went on location as well. 

Oh, sure, I know that.  I've seen the photos.  But being on location to provide support services for actual journalists doesn't necessarily make you one.  Like showing up at Cape Canaveral to watch a space launch wouldn't necessarily make me an astronaut.

I just think that Carole has been dining out on an inflated résumé and the accomplishments of other people for a long time. IMO, of course.

[ShawnaLanne]

16 hours ago, jaync said:

True, but writing a novel is creatively different than penning a memoir.

Yes. Very much so. As a one time journalist major myself, who writes creative non fiction, fiction is hard, yo.

[diadochokinesis]

6 minutes ago, ShawnaLanne said:

Yes. Very much so. As a one time journalist major myself, who writes creative non fiction, fiction is hard, yo.

Dude, seriously. I freelance occasionally as an academic writer/editor. I can write academic subject papers all day long but give me a short fiction story and I'm stuck.  I'd love to be that type of writer but it doesn't come naturally to me.

[Mozelle]

Good lord. Carole was a producer for a hard hitting news show, which means she gets rolled under the umbrella of journalism. 

This pic is from Carole's IG story. She changed her mind about exercise! *horror* *shock* *she's a phony for having a new opinion about something*