Absolutely. I remember they racked Scarlett Johanson over the coals for going out with Shawn Penn, once. She was cancelled. Charlise dated Penn for a few years, but because she was liked, that was OK. Robin was actually married to the guy.
Lol. Isn’t that the truth. I always found it strange how some posters knew what happened to this and that royal on a given day 20 years ago, and what engagements they had and how many, and was it official or unofficial.
It is bad enough that some people track this type of staff for a living, but at least they are paid for it. But then there are also people who do this because they have nothing better to do with their lives, and it is just sad.
I think you are right. I think many of them don’t even realize that Amal is a WOC. I’ve been puzzled for a long time by their hatred of Amal until recently Kaiser herself clued me in. It turns out they see her as an Angelina’s competitor. The whole thing is just wild.
It is funny how Otaku Fairy is never there to educate them about slut shaming.She knows she’ll get banned in no time.
You are welcome!
My comment on yesterday’s Salma Hayek post got deleted. All I said was that I thought it was demeaning to refer to her as a “trophy wife” but alas, the poster didn’t agree with my feedback
—————————————————————————————————-
I agree with you. Salma Hayek might be attracted to power and money, but so are most people. That alone doesn’t make her a trophy wife. Otherwise, by the same argument, Meghan Markle is a trophy wife too.
I agree completely. The journalists, and that is who she works as, even though she is not qualified and has no idea what the expectations are, are not supposed to be anonymous. They are supposed to fact check and stand behind what they write.
And attacking other women’s looks just because they don’t like the woman is just gross. I saw this today on Miranda Lamert’s post. I don’t know much about her, I don’t listen to her music, it does seem like she is not a very nice person. But then, you know what, come out and say it. Don’t attack something that nobody has any control over, i.e. their looks. That is what women 2-3-4 generations before us used to do, because that is what the society valued in women most - their looks. But one hopes we are past that point.
If women want to end sexism, then they should stop behaving in a sexist manner themselves.
VPN works even against Chinese government censorship. )))
So, after the trainwreck of the Cassel’s post I got to the Krainski’s post. And people are annoyed at him praising his wife. Really? Wow. Now, ask yourself, if a woman was saying something like that about her more famous husband, would we think anything amiss? Of course, not! But, when the genders are reversed, people are uncomfortable with it. They internalized the patriarchy and they don’t even know it about themselves.
Absolutely. So, according to Kaiser, women (a.k.a Kardashians) are free to choose what to do with their bodies , but at the same time we (Celebitchy) are going to shame Kate Middleton for potentially having extensions.Hey, it is completely logical. Who pays (that is Kardashians) that is who orders the music.
Lol. I just wrote about that too. Again,
Today’s post about Vincent Cassel is so lame. And right there you know that Kaiser has no convictions of her own. She doesn’t know what to say, how people will react, and so she hedges.
Let me tell you, Kaiser, how you should react when a powerful 51 y.o. man marries a woman 30 years his junior, whom he groomed since she was 18 y.o. You should be outraged, and the man should be “cancelled”.
And the same goes for the CB commenters, who also didn’t know how to react without Kaiser telling them, and chose to talk about how pretty the woman is , and how she looks older, and her dress, and anything else, other than the issue at hand.They were so pathetically avoided it, it was ridiculous.
Thankfully, towards the end some sane people showed up and put it to rights. I liked the post which reminded everyone about their reaction to Priyanka and Nick, and how everybody thinks 11 years difference is too much. But, here , apparently, 30 y.o. difference with a power imbalance is just OK.
Also, allow me to remind you about their reaction to Karlie’s engagement, and how people pointed out that she started dating her fiance when she was 18 y.o. and he was 26 y.o. People said it was gross, and I tend to agree. But, hey, that was easy, that was Karlie and Kushner, whom Kaiser doesn’t like, so it was easy for posters to know how to react.
For Nota it seems personal, as if she planned on marrying William herself.
What gets me is when people on CB bring up “Waity Katy”. It is so offensive. We don’t know what went on, but even if William did take advantage of her desire to marry him, then why is she shamed for it and not him?
I think there are less comments, and definitely less posters. But it is hard to tell whether there are less clicks.
Of course Kate benefits from white privilege. But it doesn’t mean it is OK to attack her individually for it. I don’t agree with this sort of collective punishment approach. Everyone should be judged on their own actions.
And, of course, Meghan is judged harsher, just as I mentioned in the previous post. It is not only her race that is an issue for the British society, it is also her nationality and her class. And those things are very deep rooted, and people often are not even aware of them.
Ironically, the best way to make British society more equitable is to abolish roaylty. And yet, it is some of Meghan’s fans who’ve become very vocal defenders of the BRF, because they want the fairy tale to last.
Sure, British society is racist, just like American, and on top of it, it is also obsessed with class and is very insular. In the US the other two things don’t matter nearly as much. Here money trumps both class and nationality.
So, Meghan has to deal with at least three things at once. She was familiar with racism, of course. But I don’t know if she was aware of the other two, and the degree to which they would affect her. This is one of the reasons I ended up in the US and not in Western Europe. I worked there and I decided life was too short to deal with that kind of nonsense.I was never going to be good enough for some people, simply because I wasn’t born there.
As for comments, I judge people on their own merits, on their actions. It has nothing to do with who CB likes or dislikes. But I can’t speak for other people who comment here. And I am not going to ignore them, even if I disagree. Everyone can discuss their disagreements in the open.
I’ve been promising to look at the stats. I use Alexa.com, which is a free tool. Last time I looked at the stats was a long time ago. From what I am seeing since then Celebitchy.com rankings both in the US and globally are up about 2 thousand points, in comparison to other sites. Last time they were ranked in the 8th thousand and now they are in the 6th thousand in the US.
So, what do I know . )))
The funny thing is their traffic pattern matches almost exactly with the Daily Mail. Maybe people are just reading more gossip.

That is right, because despite their claims to the contrary, the reason they come to CB is not to better themselves (and who would come to a gossip site for that! ) but for distraction, at best, and at worst to spend their negative emotions there. In the past people used to come home and lash out at their family, and now people go to social media and do the same. It is a form of stress relief.
I was at CB originally for some light, snarky gossip. But outright bullying and over the top attitudes of some posters never sat well with me. So, I objected and got banned pretty quickly. Then I gave it another try, and that time was very careful to avoid certain hot button issue posts. but I got banned in a month again anyway.
Celebitchy has an identity crisis - it cannot decide whether it wants to be a gossip site or a social justice site. And, frankly, Kaiser isn’t qualified to write for either one, anyway.
Now they seem to have abandoned all pretense and decided to become “influencers” for Kardashians. I imagine they weren’t making much money otherwise given that they have banned 90% of their active posters over the time, and got really aggressive with banning last 2 years. Their click count must’ve declined pretty badly.
And when your last name is Alamuddin, on top of it.
Their true feelings make themselves known whenever they talk about Priyanka and Amal.
I was just reading the post on Amal vs. Angelina and kept saying to myself - what? what? in what universe does this make any sense? But one thing does make sense now - the irrational dislike of Amal on Celebitchy. She is Angelina’s competition in their eyes!
It was also funny how posters kept addressing their posts to Brad, as if he reads Celebitchy, lol.
Wow they really like to go the ageist route when it comes to Madonna. I heard old while lady, hag, has-been, comments about her puffy face. Dang, the woman is 60 and in the worst industry that scrutinizes a woman’s appearance. Kaiser really doesn’t get the pressure of being in the public eye as opposed to sitting at home writing blog posts in sweatpants dragging women who achieved 100x what she has for stupid crap like fashion and hair choices.
Madonna was there as a fan of Aretha Franklin, so told her story from an inspired fan’s perspective. She didn’t break into a rendition of RESPECT or anything. And if you were outraged, blame MTV who chose her to do it. But don’t make awful ageist comments about her appearance and act like Madonna never did anything worth a damn.
I’m amazed these women who support women, these woke feminists are so ageist.
Also they seem to wait for a way the narrative is going to go in the comments to chime in, because days ago they were calling Madonna an icon. Depending on the day and the outrage about cultural appropriation, Madonna is either a washed up old hag or a pop icon. Ridiculous.
—————————————————————————————————
My first reaction was - why Madonna? I mean, really, they could not find a respect black musician to do it? I have absolutely nothing against Madonna, but it just didn’t make any sense, even on the surface. But it is not Madonna’s fault, you are right about that. This decision is on MTV.
I also noticed that when CB commenters don’t like someone, they attack the person’s looks, even though they know better than that. I remember reading something really nasty about Ivanka’s looks a few days ago.And I thought - , really, is that is what important? It is so petty. Plus, what about people who resemble Ivanka’s looks? Her look is not that uncommon in Eastern Europe. Are we going to call all those women “strange looking” too, just because they look like Ivanka?
And, triple yes to the groupthink observation. Kaiser herself is like that. Half of the time she doesn’t know what to think on issues and takes lead from people she thinks are “woke”. Either people on other sites or on CB. On top of it the merciless moderating out of people with any kind of independent opinions also naturally leads to groupthink.
Ha-ha-ha. I just read the post where Meghan’s father said that the BRF as like a secret cult, and then the comments below. Quite surreal, I must say.
You know what, he is right. The BRF, as an institution, is old, secretive, has many skeletons in the closet, and I am sure, is guilty of covering up many crimes. As recently as Andrew’s involvement with Epstein.
You can feel whatever way you want about Meghan, and her extended family, but let’s not whitewash the BRF, just because you like Meghan. Remember, this is the same family that Diana couldn’t wait to get out of. This is an institution which should’ve been gone 200 years ago, at least.
It is telling that the posters go on and on about how awful he is, but don’t address the core of this claim, which is actually true. They can’t bring themselves to admit that they were seduced by the Cinderella story to the point where they are willing to overlook quite the real harm that the BRF inflicts on the society.
Ok, that one is a shocker. I do think, though, that a victim of abuse can also become an abuser, as abuse gets internalized. Though, I would say it seems to be usually the case with abuse sustained over a period of time, such as domestic abuse. I was a bit taken aback that a couple of CB posters were very offended by this observation.
In fact, this is why abuse is so awful - it not only damages the direct victim, but also people close to the victim and also can create a cycle of abuse and many victims down the line.
Exactly. One can’t go much lower than making excuses for Kardashians. But then they turn around and rip to shreds women like Kate Middleton, Taylor Swift and Amal Cloonie.
Taylor Swift actually had the strength to go through an ordeal of standing up to the guy who groped her! For that alone she should have a free pass with feminists. She made a stand for all the women out there. But Kim Kardashian, who makes money on objectification of women gets better treatment than Taylor.