I saw it. I might’ve made an exception and commented on that one. I like Obama. But let’s be honest here. You can’t make an exception for you”team”.
If you are fighting corruption in politics, you can’t turn a blind eye when it is your “team” doing it for your “team”’s benefit. Corruption is corruption. And that is what these paid speeches are - a payment for future favors, i.e. legalized corruption. We can be honest , at least with ourselves, and say it, right?
I am not surprised.She is irrational about anything that has to do with Angelina.It is weird how a grown woman can be so obsessed with someone.
I think even her dislike of Vilkander has something to do with Vilkander doing the Tomb Raider, which used to be Angelina’s part.
It’s so hard as a POC to share any opinion that goes agaisnt the grain because once you do, everyone jumps on you.
It’s not right.
——————————————————-
That is how CB is on everything, really. If you go against consensus, people immediately jump on you and actually misinterpret what you said on purpose, to make it seem worse than it is.
And then, for the coup de grace, Kaiser bans you, so you can’t even say that those misinterpretations of your words are completely off the mark. You have to read 50 posts telling you how awful you are, even though you didn’t even say the things the people are arguing against.
They love to build a strawman and then to keep fighting it.
Kaiser used to love Benedict Cumberbatch and Michael Fassbender, until both of them got into serious relationships. They were her favorite internet boyfriends.
Now she claims they are not hot anymore and finds all kinds of faults with them.
She also figured out that if she posts these passive-aggressive posts abut their SOs then it brings all kinds of clicks from the subset of their fan girls who hate their SOs. And what is weird, the CB regulars, who didn’t care one way or another, piled on just for the fun of it.
With Cumberbatch it got so awful even Kaiser understood it was too much and one day she banned all those crazy fan girls. And that was the end of the Cumberbatch click bait.
The same story with Fassbender. Vilkander is a useful click bait.Fortunately there are enough CB posters who like her, so it doesn’t go down to the same level of crazy.
Oh, wow. The discussion on the Aladdin casting is really something. Who are these people claiming the actress is not “brown enough”? This is wrong in so many ways.
Additionally, as shocking as it might seem to many Americans, who have their own homegrown race classifications, Arabs are white. They identify themselves as white. Many of them are as light skinned as Europeans.
In this context a half-Indian half-white actress is absolutely fine.
I liked this comment by teacakes, among the sea of the cringeworthy ones. She gets why the reverse-paperbag test is wrong.
teacakes says:
…. it’s all very well to talk about how this is a fictional country and any brown person will do, but the 1992 movie literally opened with a song called Arabian Nights. I’d say that’s a pretty strong hint about where in the world this story is set and the origins of the characters.
That said, the ‘not brown enough’ Internet racial purity paperbag test Naomi Scott is being subjected to following her casting, is gross. I’m Indian and I have friends of full Indian descent like me who are lighter skinned than her – one of them was my best friend from school, and Naomi actually looks a freakish lot like her when she smiles.
Colorism is real but I have to say it, it doesn’t give anyone the right to declare her not Indian. And neither does ethnic ambiguity – plenty of non-white Indians look like they could be from other places, it doesn’t make them not Indian. I really feel like this anger is being misdirected at this girl because everyone is more caught up in how she isn’t Indian enough, than in targeting Disney for their screwups) And don’t even get me started on the ridiculousness of people going off on Mena Massoud’s being Coptic – he’s still Arab, isn’t he? As Aladdin should be.
Middletons can do no right on CB. Just the other day Pippa got criticized for wearing a fairly cheap “basic” knee long white dress/ suit to Wimbledon, for being “basic”.
OK. So today Kate gets criticized for wearing a breathtaking white McQueen suit because it is too expensive. So, which way do they want it - cheap or expensive?
Oh, and apparently the skirt on the suit was too full and that it is not OK because it is prone to “flashes”. But I also remember Kate being criticized for dressing too dowdy and too old for her age.
Pippa got raked over the coals for her long white floral dress she wore today. When I saw it, my first thought was - I wish I could afford to buy that dress. I love long lean summer dresses. Only after reading CB I learned how wrong I was about that dress -)).
I have noticed that Kaiser loves to use her opinion of events and people as facts. Last week in regards to Kate’s jewelry during the state visit by the Spanish Royals.
Kaiser said,“ The Queen also made Kate wear some big jewelry, and of course it didn’t work.”
How does Kaiser know what the Queen made Kate do or didn’t make Kate do? All of her speculation and bias is fact. Of course I attempt to comment that this isn’t fact at all and just speculation. Surprise it didn’t make it through the moderation.
Kaiser is a snake oil salesman in the business of selling speculation, bias, and BS.
———————————————————
Yes, Kaiser also thinks she knows what Taylor Swift thinks about anything. But the worst is when she intentionally misinterprets some celebrity news item to make a celebrity look bad. I think she does it on purpose because then she gets dozens of posts from the said celebrity fans trying to explain that this is not what actually happened.
I don’t know myself. When I came across Celebitchy about 3 years ago, I think, it was already like this. It bothered me right away and I posted something positive a few times, but I was immediately drowned by a dozen of negative posts, so after a few tries I gave up and avoided Kate posts.
As to why this is happening, that I have an answer for. Kaiser is simply trolling for clicks. She has a few topics which she knows will bring a lot of comments from longtime loyal posters, who stick around CB for that one subject only.
Sometimes she also intentionally misinterprets actions or words of the celebrities who are her bait to generate ore controversy and more clicks.
Middletons are one of these baits, Amal Clooney is another, Hiddleston used to be, and before that Fassebender and Cumberbatch, before Kaiser fell out of love with them and turned nasty. Then their fans left. I am not sure who her internet boyfriend du jour is these days.
It was funny to watch how for the last 2 days Kaiser tried to get Cumberbatch fans bite, like in the past, to get some clicks out of them, but they didn’t.
Yes, that is how ban works. You write a post and submit it but it never appears.
Their obsession with Trump is disturbing. It is not like the US was a paradise on Earth before Trump. But somehow this gets completely lost in the hysterical reactions to Trump.
So much energy is being wasted on anger. It is time to let go and work towards the next elections.
People should be asking questions such as - what do they want the country to be like? Do we want more socialism, in what form? What about religion? What about foreign wars? What are our views of the American empire? If we let go of our dominance, what kind of the world we will be living in? Who is a valid alternative to Trump by whom progressives can stand?
There are so many questions without answers. And we need answers because at this point we don’t know where we are heading. How can you get anywhere if you don’t even know where you are going?
Yes, absolutely. On the other hand, I read a really good post by Josie on this topic on Lianna and it helped me a lot to understand why so many POCs react negatively when white people participate in the race discussions.
She says “ For white people, talking about race is uncomfortable. For people of color, it’s a necessity. “ This sentence made me understand.
At the end of the day, for many white people race relations is an intellectual discussion, where we want to analyze all sides of the issue so that we can relate it to our own experiences. But for POCs it is an every day struggle and to them the urgency of the issue is much greater and their patience has worn thin. They have no patience for analyzing, relating and translating it into experiences whites can relate to.
But I don’t see any other way than continuing to talk to each other. In the end, only through talking we’ll reach better understanding. Shutting down the ability of people to talk is counterproductive because it prevents us from forming that mutual understanding.
True. It reminds me of the days people were wanting Prince William to be named the heir instead of his father. He looked so much like Diana, people idealized him. Something similar is happening with Markle. People project their expectations on her. But I think she is going to be a disappointment. She is going into the highly scripted and restrictive life of a a royal with her eyes wide open. She is fully prepared to sacrifice her freedom for a status.
Yes, I noticed it too. And isn’t it ironic that they were slut shaming the woman they don’t like while with the women they like they always say that slut shaming is anti-feminist.
You know, you are probably right. It does sound like Lyan. He/she is so over the top.
The political articles there are the worst. No discussion of what might’ve gone wrong and how the country could be improved is allowed. The posters turn on anyone daring question the official Democrats party line and start blaming that person for everything that is wrong under the sun.
I am not sure. I think it is because of the racial aspect. She is a “white feminist” and it is not good enough for the posters there.
This comment explains it :
“
She didn’t mean Spielberg she’s cast more roles for women. She meant for white women lol this is such white feminism. She dismissed the color purple bc it was a film of women of color.
“
And to add to this. I don’t find Banks likeable myself.But I see the point she is making, albeit she made it very badly and picked a really bad target. If you want to talk about misogyny in Hollywood you shouldn’t be making Spielberg your target, you should be making Spielberg your ally.
But you know what. Banks might be a “white feminist” and she might not be good enough, but if she is speaking for your cause, maybe hold your horses a bit with criticism. Don’t let the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
And I think that is exactly the problem with CB. Unless someone is pitch perfect, they get torn to shreds. And you get to the point where nobody is good enough. And that is very negative and soul destroying.
130 comments discussing every minor detail of Kate Middleton’s blazer and capri outfit. It is so strange. I’d understand if the posters were professional stylists. Then these things could be very interesting and important. But otherwise? It is just bewildering. Most people judge fashion in a passing manner - does it look good overall or not.
To me she always looks good and presentable. Maybe she is not a fashion icon, but she is inoffensive in her wardrobe choices. You have to look very closely to find something to criticize.
OMG. What an awful blog on Tinashe. I won’t go there because I am not qualified. But all those people denying her experience, it is just so hurtful.The Original TC and QQ are the worst.
Ha, Kaiser was just told ever so politely that Joe Alwyn is not getting work because of Swift but due to his own qualifications. We know nothing about this guy but Kaiser already hates him by association. She has really strong feelings about Swift.
“ Alba says:
I see, but this article sort of says Alwyn wasn’t getting work. I think thats a slight misrepresentation . He is a guy who graduated recently from a very distinguished drama school in London ( The Royal Central School-Judi Dench, Vanessa Redgrave and tons of great actors from that school, most recently Andrew Garfield who is earning rave reviews for Angels in America at The National Theatre ). He has already scored jobs with Oscar winning/nominated directors such as Lee and Lanthimos and worked with some stellar actors in that year since he graduated, so hes way ahead of the heap of recent graduates already. The fact that such good directors cast him as an unknown makes me think he must have something. Lee is an actors director.”
For what it is worth, I think Alwyn is very handsome, and if he has any sort of talent on top of it, he’ll go far.
He and Swift also seem to look strangely similar. This must be a real thing, if that is possible with Taylor Swift. I noticed that many people get really attached to people who look like them.
I just saw this comment under the Sessions article. What an excellent comment. Well said.
Manzur says:
There are SO many other things to comment on besides appearance. Can we just stop? It brings the discussion down to junior high level. And YES i KNOW Trump has picked on physical appearance but does that mean we ALL have to now too? Is that mature reasoning? I despise that. Who cares what Sessions looks like? Who cares what about his accent? Just because the mean kids on the playground throw insults about appearance around does not mean the entire school should start. It dumbs down the conversation. Ivanka sleeps with her father. Eric Trump is ugly. Melanie sounds funny. Trump is Cheeto. There. Now we’re all five years old. It’s like a bad Saturday Night Live skit. Funny for the first 10 seconds and then lame and groan worthy as it drones on. Let’s all rise above. We are too good for this.
I don’t get it either.You would think a self-proclaim feminist site would support a woman coming out and saying what she really thinks. Yes. monogamy is not for everyone. If it works for someone, great, if not, fine.
Also, relationships are hard work and there are enough people who feel that the benefits they get from stable relationships are not worth the work required to maintain them.
I think Kaiser always disliked ScarJo, but now she can openly dislike her because of the whitewashing controversy with the Ghost in a Shell.
On top of that there is a certain racial bias purposely cultivated on the site. You will see comments along the lines that so and so is white and pretty and skinny and for this reason doesn’t have to struggle like the others, and it is a strike against that person. And ScarJo happens to be white, pretty and skinny. The only women who seem to be exempt from this criticism are Angelina and Katy Perry. And possibly Naomi Watts. Naomi is so likeable, people just can’t find it in themselves to criticize her.
Discussions of Vilkander and Fassbender bring back disturbing memories of Hunterbatch 2015. That was my first encounter with so-called “fans” viciously attacking a woman for her relationship with their internet boyfriend, and idle bystanders cheering them on from the sidelines, just for the fun of it.
Now, the second time around, I recognize all the signs.
*Claims that he (the internet boyfriend) looks unhappy and is just not the same, not attractive anymore. Yes, Kaiser, that is in reference to your comment “ He just seems so neutered with Vikander. “.
*That she (the woman) has abuse issues, snobby, unfriendly, unaccomplished.
*That the relationship is fake.
*That something just seems off.
*Bystanders claiming that this is no big deal, this is just regular gossip. I remember how lilacflower’s “Comet Sophie” references used to drive me mad during Hunterbatch. She didn’t care about it one way or another, she is a Hiddleston fan, or should I say “stan”. But she still went on and continued pouring gas on the fire, just for the fun of it. With Vilkander the same thing is going on.
In fairness, there are a couple of posters with factual information who refute the made up stories. But they drown in the sea of awfulness.
*
I just noticed this comment by Skylark got deleted. I wondered how did it make it through -)).
—————————————————————-
Let’s not forget that the CB writer who used to wet her knickers over everything (single) Fassbinder did has actively encouraged this deeply unpleasant madness purely because Fassy has taken up with a woman who is not her.
Make no mistake, that’s at the absolute root of it. Click on ‘Michael Fassbender’ for a history.
—————————————————————
I think it is just a way to drive traffic to the site because traffic means more advertisement revenue for the site and more money for the owners. Trump posts are the ones getting the most comments. A lot of people hate Trump with passion. Though, I don’t know how they don’t get tired of talking about him every day for hours. It is the same thing over and over.
#ban #celebitchy
Why does Celebitchy have an issue with men talking about objectification of men? I remember Kit Harrington talking about it and the CB commenters ridiculing him for it. Now Sam Clafin talks about it and it is a similar reaction, though a milder one.
Just because women have it worse, it doesn’t mean men should just shut up and take it when it happens to them. When both men and women talk about it then it only makes it the cause stronger.
Maybe it is because CB itself loves to indulge into objectification of men and this hits a bit close to home?
Well, I’ve noticed Kaiser is trying to build up Taylor Swift to be the new Kate Middleton. It doesn’t seem to take. While there are a number of posters who seem to have irrational hatred of Swift, there aren’t enough of them. Swift posts can’t even break 100 comments.
I found it a bit surreal how in today’s comments people were blaming Swift for being immature and so on because she is still ‘beefing’ with Perry. Except Swift hasn’t said anything in years, it is all from ‘sources’. I guess it is fun, building a strawman and then pummeling it to death.
So I got banned and after getting banned, I decided to go on Twitter and ask Kaiser why.
Because I didn’t do anything wrong, I didn’t break any rules, I read the rules and I was following them.
And I came across a tweet of her saying “Swifty fans” were “butthurt” (her favorite insult) and basically pissed off. Because in today’s thread (the Katy Vs Taylor Thread) people weren’t on Kaiser’s side about the “dated” (another word K uses to death) beef that Katy keeps bringing up.
And it made me laugh because you’re butthurt that people aren’t here for petty old dusty beef? We get that you hate Taylor Swift, but really? Am I as a black woman, supposed to stand up for Katy who was accused by a black rapper of saying the N word (multiple times)? Or someone who made fun of someone having a mental breakdown?
But no, let’s get pissed at T Swift for making love/hate songs about boyfriends and that Kanye bullshit.
It’s stupid and I love how Kaiser is so bent out of shape that she went to Twitter to complain about her readers not agreeing with the pettiness between two petty women.
But that’s okay, stick up for problematic Katy because she hates Taylor Swift.
You are so basic Kaiser.
Honestly. I love how you can ignore things that go against the “beliefs” you so call hold, because you hate someone that much. Kaiser did bring up people saying Katy was “trash” but not why people were saying it. They were saying the song is trash, Katy’s is like Kaiser who says one thing and does another. I’m way more offended by the few things Katy’s done then anything TS has ever done.
And I say this as a fan of neither, I’d take a immature, stunt queen, over a fake woke problematic Katy any day.
Because I don’t let hate overshadow my beliefs.
I’m sorry for the rant but it pissed me off and made me laugh.
I am quite sure this is how banning works on CB. Some other sites do it this way as well. They put your IP address or the name/ email on the blocked list. And your post just goes into limbo and never gets published.
I think on Disquis you do get a message that you are banned, but it is not the case with many other ‘comments’ applications.
Yes, you are banned if you type a comment and submit it, but it never shows up.
If you submit it and it shows up ‘in moderation’, then you are being moderated, i.e. your comments are only let through after a review.
For May 3rd the most commented articles were the one about Hiddleston vs. Fassbender and then Brad &Angelina. The usual click-bait.
o I am surprised so many poster there don’t think Fassbender is handsome. As far as looks go he has a strong jaw and a proportionate face. I am not one of his fans but I think Fassbender is better looking and a better actor than Hiddleston. At the same time Hiddleston’s fans were very amusing with their over-the-top defense.
o Brad vs. Angelina - I see Kaiser couldn’t find anything to spin in his interview so she just left it for posters to rip him apart. And rip him apart they did. I don’t dislike either Brad or Angelina. They both seem like good people, so I am just going to stay away from this one and not take sides.
Three Trump articles for the day, we are getting desperate, are we?
A Kate Middleton article. There was one comment that got under my skin. The one that slammed Will for bringing up Diana’s death in the paparazzi trial. Who are the posters to tell whether he should be still affected by his mother’s death and the paparazzi behavior or not? I don’t necessarily like him and I am against the monarchy, but I know that this kind of trauma stays with people for their whole lives and I am not going to deny how it affected him just because I don’t like him. And people twisting themselves into pretzels trying to make it look like the pictures taken in France by the paparazzi are somehow Will &Kate’s fault, just stop. Laws are laws. You don’t argue against the laws and common decency just because you don’t like somebody.
Netflix ’13 Reasons’ show sounds like a big and dangerous mess. But I don’t watch, so no opinion there.
Susan Sarandon article – Celebitchy posters are Hillary supporters and Susan Sarandon committed an unforgivable sin of disliking Hillary and supporting Bernie. That means it is an open season on Susan Sarandon on the site. I think Susan Sarandon probably knows Hillary personally and is a better judge of who Hillary truly is than Celebitchy posters who don’t know either woman.
My own opinion of Hillary is very much in line with the post below. The only thing I don’t agree with is that it calls Hillary’s followers ‘bots’. Everyone is entitled to support whoever they like, it doesn’t make them a bot. Though acting that it is impossible for a rational person to understand why people don’t support Hillary even though other posters explained it over and over again does come over as willful denial.

I don’t think it is Kaiser. I don’t think she would pay any attention to me, some obscure blog which posts once in a blue moon.
Also, the writing style of that anon felt like she was pretty young, in her early 20s.
Japanese and Chinese are the majority in their respective countries. And they also have their own entertainment and movie industries. They don’t view Hollywood the same way Japanese-Americans or Chinese-Americans do. This perspective is not understood at all by the Celebitchy posters and if anyone dares to voice it, they are quickly shut down.
I am not sure I understood you right, anon. I think all my posts have ‘Notes’ feature enabled where you can write comments. If that is what you are asking.
Or are you talking about the Celebitchy site?
OK.
I meant I wasn’t going to censor you.
I post this because I don’t believe in censoring. But I have nothing further to say on this. I am neither ignorant nor uneducated, I simply have a different frame of reference and different life experience. If you want to discuss facts, give me an example of cultural appropriation that you find so damaging, and we can talk about it. I’ll tell you what I think.
But I can tell you right away that I find impossible to understand the Celebitchy's outrage du-jour about Wes Anderson’s animation about dogs set in Japan being voiced by white actors. If we take it as one example.
I am sweetheart to you now, am I. You know that is a belittling term just like “boy”, correct?
You take an issue with me but you cannot keep your own prejudices in check.
I have no vendetta with Celebitchy. But our exchange here is quite illustrative. On Celebitchy all of my posts disagreeing with the approach to “cultural appropriation” would be moderated while yours would be allowed to stand. And this is why I created this blog.
Discussion happens when both parties can express their opinion freely. It doesn’t happen when one party is shut out and is forced to accept the other’s opinion as the ultimate truth.
You see my earlier post as a rant. But I was actually trying to explain where I am coming from. You are not interested in understanding it. And that is fine. It is your right. But don’t expect me to change my opinion just because you think I should.
I am not going to argue. It is my opinion and my experience coming from a mixed ethnicity family and a multi-cultural society.
Not everybody looks at the world the American way or any other specific way. I live in the US now and I can see how often Americans think that their way is the only way. That their way is the only way and everybody else is wrong. It isn’t so.
You think your way is right. I think my way is right, more productive and less adversarial.
That is probably why I was banned from Celebitchy. I am not going to agree with something that in my experience is a negative/ unproductive approach, just because I am told that I am supposed to think a certain way.
What some people don’t seem to understand is that calling others names is not going to convince them to change their opinion. If you are certain you are right, then SHOW how you are right. That means - SHOW through your own experience and actions. Words are empty. Actions speak louder than words. That means you cannot say one thing one day and then act differently another day, that would be hypocrisy, something that Celbitchy is full of.
Oh my. All the race baiting going on in and under the Rachel Dolezal article. “Peak white supremacy”, really?
For example this part, what is that about?
“It is a bit extreme, but it is in no way new for white people to take what they want from other cultures in the name of love and respect, while distorting or discarding the remainder of that culture for their comfort”
Is that about so-called cultural appropriation? Cultures always borrowed from one another and adapted what they borrowed to their tastes. It makes cultures richer. I’ll go even further and say that this is how the human society progresses, through synthesis. It is not a bad thing.
And are some of the regular posters seriously arguing that race is a biological trait and not a social construct?
Melania Trump is another woman “Celebitchers” love to hate. I think they are so free with derision of her because she is a wife of “the enemy”. And they feel free to engage into some “therapeutical steam release” using her as a target dummy. There is nothing about Melania herself to justify this level of derision.
Almost every comment under the article starts with “ I don’t feel sorry for her”, “she made her choice” and so on.
As someone who grew up outside of the US I also find the US office of First lady to be archaic and patriarchal. And this is not a new position for me. I always thought so. For Europeans this concept of a whole family representing their country is too similar to monarchy. In addition, the office of the First lady is not official, unelected and is unpaid. The First Lady is treated as a property of her husband. And that is just not right. I don’t see how American feminists square the concept of the First Lady with women rights. No woman should be treated as a property or pressured into doing something she doesn’t want to just because of who her husband is. Again, for Europeans this is unthinkable.
Here is one of very few balanced comments on Melania I tend agree with. Especially about the bitchiness she provokes in others.

And here is another one, which is more representative of what you see BTL at Celebitchy.

Doesn’t any capitalist society operate on this principle? Especially one such as the US, which practices unrestrained laissez-faire capitalism? So it is OK that everyone else does it, just Melania is not allowed? Celebitchy is a wrong name for his site. It should be called Hypocrisy by any other name.
It’s funny how “white cis males/women” are the enemy over at CeleBITCHY, yet Kaiser writes a thread dedicated to picking at Kate Middleton’s accent and not even being clever about it, because they ALL HAVE SUBTITLES.
So you hate this woman so much or you love hate clicks so much that you have to make two posts a day just to trash her for no reason.
I love all the skinny shaming in the comments about KM (by Lainey no less) and I kept imagining, “if someone were overweight, would they allow anyone to talk about how unhealthy they are? That’s rude and wrong right?’
So why do they do it so freely to skinny women? As a overweight women myself I would never comment on another woman’s weight, because it’s a senstive topic.
I wouldn’t comment on anyone’s weight tbh.
I swear CeleBITCHY is one of the most backwards hypothetical websites I have ever been on.Writers who call themselves Feminist, but more often then not are more racists,sexist and judgemental than the people that are the so called enemy.
As a black woman, I find CeleBITCHY as a whole to be a negative counterproductive place.
On every level.
They are casually racists, sexist, shaming and often accuse men of being gay in a discriminatory way.
Backwards.
——————————-
It is clear that Kate Middleton is a pure click-bait. Just like Tom Hiddleston. The only difference is that Tom Hiddleston is a click-bait for his fans and Kate Middleton is a click-bait for people who love to demean her and I am actually not sure what they find in it.
I am against the monarchy myself. But that is what I would talk about. Not the color of Kate’s shoes.
No, these women derive some sick pleasure in ripping someone apart. And I guess they don’t feel guilty about doing it to Kate Middleton because she is privileged. Privileged or not, it is still very wrong. She is still a human being. Not to mention that everyone in the royal family is privileged but Celebitchy only loves to hate Kate.
ha ha! i can’t believe how ultra sensitive kaiser is regarding Angelina Jolie.
twice i submitted this in response to the AJ and Tom Ford post:
can he teach her how to use HD makeup?
she needs help.
REJECTED. TWICE!
i took a screen cap of it the 2nd time because i had the sneaking suspicion she just didn’t care for the joke and everything else i posted today went through after moderation.
I see Melania Trump won her defamation case against Daily Mail. The news was in all major newspapers yesterday. But Celebitchy is mum on this.
They sure loved dragging Melania through the mud when Daily Mail printed their story about her being an escort. But now that it is retracted all you hear from Kaiser is crickets.
This is just another instance of faux-feminism.
I checked Celebitchy.com latest stats, They are doing much better last 2 months. I don’t really see the reason, but I am guessing it is all those Trump articles that attract people. Expect more of the same then. If it is working for them, they are going to continue.

A couple more thoughts.
* Celebitchy is so repetitive, they are just going through motions. You almost know what you are going to see every day - Royals, Trump, Hiddleston, some random 3rd tier celebrity clickbait. This is usually a sign of a site on life support where the writers (in this case the writer, I guess) spend no time on new research, just automatically going through motions. I haven’t looked at their traffic stats in a while. I need to do that.
* If you are supposed to be an entertainment / celebrity blog and you are short on topics to cover how about you cover Olivier Awards, for example? This is a pretty high profile event.