Undercover Sistah Day on Suits

On Wednesday night, two of my guilty pleasures came together… well, three, actually. Suits + Pretty Little Liars + two of my favorite undercover sistahs, Meghan Markle and Troian Bellisario.

Claire and Rachel face off (Getty Images)

 

 

picture courtesy of Getty Images

I know I’ve mentioned many times how I enjoy being the “Biracial Whisperer.” PLL‘s Troian Bellisario and Suit‘s Meghan Markle are two of my favorite examples of biracial incognegroes — beautiful biracial women (each has a black mother and white father—like my girls; Troian’s mom is actress Deborah Pratt) who many people are shocked to find out are black [though at least Suits has helped uncover that mystery by revealing in season 3 that Rachel Zane, Meghan Markle’s character, is biracial].

In a Yahoo Entertainment interview this week about Claire’s return to Suits, the interviewer mentions to Troian how much she and Meghan look alike, which adds an interesting layer to the story that Rachel and Claire have dated the same man [“Mike Ross,” Claire’s ex and Rachel Zane’s current fiancé on the show, who is played by Patrick J. Adams, Troian’s fiancé in real life. Wrap your mind around that one]. They kind of do. Observe:

Meghan Markle on Suits (Getty Images)

 

Troian Bellisario

 

It was both awesome and weird seeing these two share screen time together. I was still riding off the high of the Pretty Little Liars summer finale [OMG, was that crazy, or what???], and in waltzes Claire / Spencer / Troian. Wild! Although I would love to see more of them together hanging out, becoming BFFs, braiding each other’s hair, whatever), I won’t hold my breath, seeing how Troian’s a little busy running from some new A every season.

Why I’m Now (Probably) an Ulta Customer for Life

When you’re a woman of color, particular if your skin tone skews more brown than beige, shopping for makeup is exhausting, frustrating, and sometimes even humiliating. Even though it is 2015, many makeup companies haven’t attempted to make many shades for us darker ladies. Even those that make darker shades make far less of those hues than they do beige, and they often get the undertones completely wrong. Many beige women of color aren’t completely exempt from the awful makeup-buying experience either. The problem here is, again, undertones. Well, really, the problem is bias.

Just a typical day of buying makeup for women of color. Let's see... there's super light beige, kinda light beige, and beige. Um... is this what passes for diversity these days?

Just a typical day of buying makeup for women of color. Let’s see… there’s super light beige, kinda light beige, and beige. Um… is this what passes for diversity these days?

This isn’t a new problem, really. Ask any brown woman about her experiences with buying makeup or using makeup artists, and you’re bound to get an earful.

Enter Nykhor Paul. She’s a South Sudanese model, and she’s gorg. She’s also dark-skinned. On Monday, she posted this (much warranted) rant on Instagram:

Dear white people in the fashion world! Please don’t take this the wrong way but it’s time you people get your shit right when it comes to our complexion! Why do I have to bring my own makeup to a professional show when all the other white girls don’t have to do anything but show up wtf! Don’t try to make me feel bad because I am blue black its 2015 go to Mac, Bobbi Brown, Makeup forever, Iman cosmetic, black opal, even Lancôme and Clinique carried them plus so much more. there’s so much options our there for dark skin tones today. A good makeup artist would come prepare and do there research before coming to work because often time you know what to expect especially at a show! Stop apologizing it’s insulting and disrespectful to me and my race it doesn’t help, seriously! Make an effort at least! That goes for NYC, London, Milan, Paris and Cape Town plus everywhere else that have issues with black skin tones. Just because you only book a few of us doesn’t mean you have the right to make us look ratchet. I’m tired of complaining about not getting book as a black model and I’m definitely super tired of apologizing for my blackness!!!! Fashion is art, art is never racist it should be inclusive of all not only white people, shit we started fashion in Africa and you modernize and copy it! Why can’t we be part of fashion fully and equally?

A photo posted by nykhor (@nykhor) on Jul 6, 2015 at 9:55am PDT

Her message resonated very deeply with women of color, famous and not so famous alike. My pal from law school, Robinne Lee, expressed similar sentiments on her Facebook page about her frustration of dealing with on-set makeup artists who are not prepared for women of color:

I never ever show up on a set without my own foundation and powder. Never ever. I’ve been in this business for twenty years and you only need a couple of bad experiences to learn a lesson…” (reprinted with permission from Robinne Lee) 

All over Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, black women, celebrities and non-celebrities alike shared stories of makeup artists, hairstylists, and stores that treated our blackness—our black hair, our black skin—as an inconvenience. Like nearly every other brown woman of color in this country, I have been there before. This May, when I was browsing through Ulta, looking at aisle after aisle of “30 shades of beige and two of brown, but not YOUR brown” and “our colors only come in light, light/medium, and medium. ‘MURICA!”, the frustration was just too much for me. I tweeted the following, not really expecting anything to come of it [because nothing ever does]:

So imagine my surprise when Ulta actually responded:

So, I took this open invitation, and I ran with it. Below is the part of the very long e-mail I fired off to Ulta the next day:

In response to your request to me on Twitter …, here is the recurring problem I have in Ulta’s stores … :
 
As is evident by my signature line, I am a woman of color. Now, it’s hard enough being a woman of color and trying to find makeup. Most brands, unless they are minority-owned, simply just don’t make enough colors for women of color. So I’m not going to fault Ulta for not carrying more colors if the brand itself doesn’t carry them. However, if a brand carries a more diverse line of makeup, I would expect that your stores—particularly those in diverse neighborhoods—would. I can’t tell you the exact demographics for … However, just looking at the schools zoned in the areas near this particular Ulta, this neighborhood is about 40% non-white. Looking around, I can tell you that there is a heavy population of black, Hispanic, Indian, Vietnamese, and Filipino. Although there are huge variations of colors within those communities, we tend to have a lot of tan-to-brown people. So I would expect that for brands that actually carry makeup in brownish colors, Ulta in our neighborhood would have them.
 
No, it doesn’t. I have requested several times. I have been in the store when other customers have requested more colors (and have been told, sometimes mistakenly, that the brand doesn’t carry them. I’ve looked online, this isn’t true). I’ve even had people who work in the store complain to me that they can’t find colors for themselves either. So, obviously, this is either a management or corporate problem. And, from what I can see on Ulta.com, this is a corporate problem.
 
Yesterday I was looking for Dermablend. From their color match system, I know that my concealer color is Cocoa. Looking at Ulta.com, “Cedar” and “Cocoa” (the only two brown concealers) are listed as “online only,” which means none of your stores will carry this. Similarly, every brown color of Dermablend’s Cover Creme except for the very darkest brown, which is a good 8 shades or so darker than the darkest beige you carry (which means you’ve missed pretty much every tan or brown woman who isn’t extremely dark with red undertones—a description which actually matches exactly no one I know), is listed as online only. I looked for the color of Smashbox Photo Filter Powder Foundation that matches my tone per Smashbox’s website. That, too, was available online only. You used to carry Iman (a brand for women of color) in stores. Now it’s online only. The Smashbox Try It Kit: BB+Halo comes in a “Dark” variety, and Ulta doesn’t even bother to carry that one online (but Birchbox does, and so does Amazon.com…).
 
Basically, everywhere I look in the Ultaverse for colors that might fit me, Ulta has deemed that these colors are “online only” and not fit for store shelves—if it carries them at all. While I love very much to shop online, the one thing I loathe buying online unless I absolutely have to is makeup (foundation and powder, at least). This is for obvious reasons. I mean, how do I know that a foundation or powder is going to actually work for my skin without trying it on? Is it really necessary to have space for 25 shades of beige but only 1 shade of brown (if any)? This is ridiculous and biased. It’s also demoralizing. …. I shouldn’t feel like a second-class citizen when simply trying to buy powder foundation.
 
I’m sure your response will be that these colors just don’t sell and that’s why you can’t stock them in store, but how could they if, based on experience, women of color don’t actually expect to find colors in your store? Honestly, I didn’t even go looking for foundation/powder yesterday …, since every time has been a disappointment. But I looked anyway, and, as expected, I was disappointed.
 
You may not realize this, but blacks have the most purchasing power of any single ethnic group in the United States. Combine us with Hispanics, Indians, and certain Eastern and Southeastern Asian groups, and are you really prepared to say that our purchasing power isn’t worth a little bit of effort to make some room on your physical shelves to make our shopping experience more pleasant? I really like Ulta’s branded products, but I can’t continue this game of purchasing in store and then having to go home to complete my makeup purchases online. And I know a lot of other women who feel the same way.
 
In closing, I would like to add, I would greatly appreciate it if you took the time to give me a thoughtfully crafted response rather than a canned “Thanks for your input. We’re looking into it.” In addition to it being insulting to the intelligence, the fact is, you guys reached out to me after my small 140-character rant on Twitter. I obviously took the time to send you a detailed response of the problem, and I would appreciate some reciprocity.
 
Regards, [Pop Culture Mom]

Honestly, I really expected that all I might get out of this very long, soul-bearing e-mail was a bit of catharsis. So imagine my surprise when the next day, I received a voicemail from the Ulta corporate office.

Now, my phone number was never on the e-mail. However, I’m an Ulta rewards member (and, despite my difficulty finding makeup in-store, a platinum one at that), and the Ulta Guest Services Manager [shout out to Ron!] was able to get my phone number and purchase history from my account. The message let me know that my e-mail had been received and was being taken very seriously and let me know that I could expect a response after the Memorial Day holiday. I was also given a direct phone number in case I wanted to talk before I had gotten a complete response.

After the holiday, Ron and I touched base to schedule a call to discuss his findings in more detail. Honestly, even though Ulta corporate had reached out to me and was clearly making a concerted effort to keep the lines of communication open, I was not expecting much to come from the call. So when Ron started out by telling me that the various corporate heads he had spoken with to inquire as to why there weren’t many products available in store for women of color had responded that they also didn’t understand why that was the case in this day and age and saw it as a problem, I was shocked. But then when the blame shifted to the corporations manufacturing the makeup, my shock waned, and I expected another conversation reciting business as usual. But I shouldn’t have, because Ron continued to surprise me.

Among other things, Ron explained to me that Ulta’s old corporate model could not allow for stores to be diversified, and the result was that every single Ulta store carried what was basically the national average in terms of sales. So the Ulta store in, for example, Sandy, Utah carries exactly the same merchandise as the store in Atlanta, Georgia, even though the demographics of those cities are vastly different [Sandy, Utah is, by the way, 86% non-Hispanic white per Census data; Atlanta, on the other hand, is 36.3% non-Hispanic white and 54% black]. And because this nationwide data is collected based on a country where the vast majority of people are white and where non-white people (particularly those that are either darker than “honey beige” or don’t have pink or blue undertones) don’t actually expect for most cosmetic stores to service them, you can pretty much guess which way the data skews. [And, unless you’re bathing in a sea of privilege, you can also see where the problem lies.] But Ulta is now in a position where it can customize its offerings by region. So in areas like mine where dark people of various ethnicities abound, come early 2016, we should expect to see more of our hues offered not just “online” but also in-store.

Ron also informed me that this “bigger and better” Ulta extends not only to their technology and inventory tracking but also to their ability to court more diverse brands and put some pressure on those brands who haven’t caught up with the times to join the rest of us in the ultra-diverse 21st century. That pressure has apparently worked on some brands, and a few are now expanding their offerings to add several new shades. There were more details, more happiness to share about Ulta’s coming changes to accommodate its customers of color. But the bottom line is that Ulta isn’t just giving lip service; it clearly cares about customer satisfaction—all customers, not just the beige and pink-undertones ones. And as if all of these changes and all of this time spent meaningfully addressing my concerns wasn’t enough, Ron also arranged for the Prestige Manager [since my purchase history is primarily of those cosmetics they consider their “Prestige brands”] at my local Ulta store to meet with me one on one and introduce me to some of their newer lines and colors that might work for me better. The P.M. totally hooked me up, and I have found a new foundation to love. Her name is Becca (one of Ulta’s newer offerings), and, miracle of miracles, there are several shades of brown with various undertones available.

The sad fact is, beauty woes are just one source of the microagressions that daily confront people of color with white privilege in this country. It may not seem like a privilege to buy makeup, but when you’re a person of color denied the simplicity of that experience that others feel, it is evidence what a loss of privilege it is for makeup purchases to become an ordeal. For anyone who would respond, “Well, then don’t buy makeup” (ignoring the flippancy and ignorance of such a comment), the simple fact of the matter is that for many women, buying makeup isn’t really an option. Yes, it would be great if we lived in a perfect world where sexism didn’t make work life easier for women who wear at least natural looking makeup or if women were imbued with so much self-confidence that we didn’t feel the need to wear makeup ever. But this isn’t reality. Additionally, when we live in a world where models and actresses of color feel compelled to bring their own makeup kits to their jobs—a job necessity that is automatically provided for their paler skinned counterparts—or otherwise risk re-inviting the feelings of despair and embarrassment experienced after someone has half-heartedly attempted to do their hair or makeup without putting in any real effort to account for different skin tones or hair textures. It is absolutely galling that someone would think this is equal, fair, or trivial.

This world is diverse. This country is diverse. On most continents on this planet, you can find people ranging from the palest of pale beiges to the darkest of dark browns. There are many different hair types and shades. It shouldn’t be asking too much for professionals be able to do their jobs for every person who might sit in their chairs, and not just the white ones. And it isn’t “baiting” to require that stores selling beauty products be able to service the clientele present in the areas where they chose to setup shop.

Note: Ulta did not ask me to write this post, nor is this an advertisement for Ulta. However, I’d be lying if I said that, given their stated commitment to improve diversity, I’m not interested in ringing the bells and sounding the alarms that Ulta is a store women of color need to add to their rotation. I will always be of the firm belief that the same way we should buycott those brands who have absolutely zero interest in tolerance and diversity [I’m looking at you, Almay, Simply Aryan], we should similarly reward those who do.

Inside-ish Out-like: A Pop Culture Mom Font

Two of the things I’m totally addicted to now, the iFontMaker app for iPad and Disney/Pixar’s Inside Out. So I’ve decided to marry them.

For those who don’t know, iFontMaker is an app that allows you to draw your own fonts. The website says you can draw a font in 5 minutes. This is probably true for some people, but I’m Type A and complicated when it comes to anything creative, so for me, it’s often the equivalent of five days. The font that appears on the web version of this site is my handwriting. This font was probably redone, oh, six or seven times. I have various fonts I’ve created for the purpose of one-key shortcuts (for example, a private signature font I use at work to sign PDFs), fonts of cartoons of my family just because I ran out of ideas, chalkboard fonts, fonts to make diecuts for my Cricut (also in the top five on my current addictions list) and of characters my kids love. That’s where Inside Out comes in.

Inside Out is easily one of the best family movies I’ve seen in a long time. It has unseated Frozen as far as the Pop Culture Girls’ obsession meter goes. You heard me, Disgust is more popular than Elsa. Seriously.

So after we saw Inside Out the first time, I started working on a font. I’m not exactly sure what we’ll do with it other than using it in the Cricut and basically just randomly inserting it in documents just because we can [fan art made easy!], but my kids were super excited when I finally finished it today.

I’m not selfish, so I’m sharing it with you all. All I ask is that you let people know where you got it. So Inside-ish Out-like is all yours for the low cost of attribution. Just click here. I hope you experience lots of Joy and make Core Memories using it! 

Originally posted on Blogger (http:/www.popculturemom.com) http://ift.tt/1LLyzTY

Rachel Dolezal and the Problem of Colorism

Like many people, I’ve been fascinated (in horror) watching the Rachel Dolezal “passing” story unfold. I’m not going to rehash the various layers of how what she did was so very wrong or why “transracial,” as it has been used with respect to this story, is not a thing and should not be compared to Caitlyn Jenner or any other transgendered person. Those issues have all been artfully discussed and dissected ad nauseum, and there is little more I could add to them that hasn’t been said before. One thing I have seen very little discussion on, however, is how the discussion regarding Rachel Dolezal’s deception relates to colorism.

“Colorism,” for those who don’t know, is an intraracial form of bigotry, prejudice, discrimination, or supremacy based on the lightness or darkness of skin tone. Colorism does not really exist within the white community as an intraracial issue (as there is not as wide a range of skin tones among whites as there are in other races and ethnicities), though whites may exercise some bit of colorism against other groups, where they prefer the lighter-skinned of those groups to the darker [however, I would still classify that as just “racism,” rather than “colorism”]. Although the roots of colorism in the black community can be traced back to the benefits and status afforded blacks during slavery and Jim Crow, colorism continues to persist to this day. And it is a two-way street.

In 2013, OWN (the Oprah Winfrey Network) ran a documentary called “Dark Girls,” in which dark-skinned black women discussed the ways their skin color has affected the way they have been treated and perceived, largely hurtful. This documentary was followed this January by “Light Girls,” which shared the stories of hurt and rejection experienced by light-skinned black women by questioning the belief that light skin makes for an easier life. Both documentaries have their fair share of acclaim and criticism, both of which is beyond the scope here. My issue is the idea of questioning someone’s “blackness” based on his/her appearance.

Let me make it crystal clear from the outset that I am in no way arguing that Rachel Dolezal can consider herself black. As I have previously stated, self-identification is important, but that self-identification must be rooted in reality. Unless Rachel Dolezal presents a 23andMe or Ancestry.com DNA report verifying some African ancestry [doubtful], there is no reality in which she can be considered a black woman in this country. I am only discussing those people who self identify as black or part-black whose reality and ancestry would support that claim.

Moving on…

One of the things that has disturbed me the most as this story unfolds is watching the amount of colorism spewing forth. From the black men who make comments insinuating Rachel Dolezal “can stay” because she’s hotter than most black women to the comments that people “should have known that she wasn’t black,” because she doesn’t look the part, this story has brought forth my uncomfortable feelings with colorism.

The latter charge feels like an assault on the claims of blackness by those who don’t pass a color check. During slavery and Jim Crow, lighter blacks exercised colorism against darker blacks by way of the “paper bag test” (those whose skin was darker than a paper bag were not allowed to enter) and the “comb test” (you “pass” if a fine-tooth comb can go through your hair without stopping). I don’t know where the color line is allegedly drawn by those asserting Rachel Dolezal doesn’t look black by any reasonable standards of blackness, but it appears that some combination of beige skin + light eyes + fine-ish hair + European features = you fail the Blackness Test. It is not 100% clear to me if, say, Rashida Jones fails because she’s more olive than tan or she passes because her dad is Quincy Jones. Or if she is over the color line, do we get to welcome Catherine Zeta-Jones to the tribe, too? Pete Wentz, yay or nay? How about Mariah Carey? What are black people going to do if we lose Mariah Carey? Does her 20+ year career now become cultural appropriation? And does Amber Rose retain membership to the black community based on that fantastic ass alone?

You see where I’m going with this. The possibilities are endless, numerous, and utterly ridiculous. It’s also hurtful. How dare someone else decide that your black isn’t “black enough.” If someone (rightfully) self-identifies as black or part-black, how messed up is it to say that they just don’t look the part enough to be who they were raised to be? And how ironic is it that the same people who would deny membership in Club Black because someone’s hair or nose is too straight or eyes are too light usually flock to those articles and blog posts about “people you didn’t know are black.” I guess now some of us are ready to kick them all out until we can further investigate their claims of blackness. Oh… We are…

Look, I’m not denying that someone who appears white to most white people is enjoying a great deal of white privilege that darker people of color will never share; but that doesn’t mean we throw away someone’s ancestry, their culture, their life experience, or their identity, simply because they have those privileges. Does it mean there are certain discussions to which they can’t relate because they have never and will never have those experiences? Of course. Does that make them any less black? No.

I guess the only solution here is we’re just going to have to start issuing Black Cards. If your children, siblings, or other loved ones are too light to pass the Black Test, make sure they know to carry their cards at all times when they are not with you until we can get this whole thing sorted out.


Never leave home without it
 
Or, you know, we can stop telling other black people that they are too white-looking to sit with us.

Originally posted on Blogger (http:/www.popculturemom.com) http://ift.tt/1G9TMzd

Spoiler Alert! There are Spoilers on Social Media

All morning, my Facebook and Twitter feeds have been filled with people upset that they saw spoilers on Facebook and Twitter about last night’s episode of Grey’s Anatomy. Everywhere I look today there are a lot of “Thanks a lot!”s and “You guys suck”s and “Whatever happened to warning ‘SPOILER ALERT!!!’ first???”s. Sorry, my beloved friends and family members. I can’t believe I still have to explain this to adults in 2015, but…

There are spoilers on social media. This is especially true on Must-See-TV nights. And this is most certainly especially true on nights of shows where the network and the show’s creator have not only foreshadowed the “shocking ending” for weeks, but they have repeatedly run ads on television and social media warning you that something huge was going to happen and just how big it was going to be. Heck, it’s not even that hard to figure out from the promos what was going to happen.
Source: Grey’s Anatomy Facebook Page

But you didn’t know anything was going to happen last night, right?

Not to mention, anyone who’s paid attention to media reports already knew that a certain someone committed a cardinal sin in Shondaland—the kind of thing that almost always gets you booted off a Shonda Rhimes show. Apparently, this person didn’t learn any lessons from Isaiah Washington (who at least managed to get himself not killed and was invited to guest on a subsequent episode), Katherine Heigel (don’t let the door hit, you Izzy!), and Columbus Short (RIP, Harrison!). Anyone who is a fan of Shonda Rhimes’s shows know that she does not suffer fools lightly.
But, apart from this one incident in particular, how—seriously, how—do people not know in 2015 that the last place you need to hangout, if you’re the type of person who hates spoiler alerts, is on social media??? Complaining about seeing spoilers on social media when you voluntarily have looked at your newsfeed on an immensely popular television night—particularly one that has been advertised as “changing everything”—is like bitching about getting your hair wet because you left the house without an umbrella when you knew the forecast showed a 90% chance of rain. I repeat:
Sorry, but this one isn’t on your Facebook friend and Twitter follows. If your enjoyment of one of your favorite shows was ruined because you looked at your newsfeed before you watched the episode, to quote Raven Symone, “That’s your fault, boo-boo.”
One of my friends (probably the only one with a potentially palatable excuse) runs her business off Facebook and explained to me this morning that as much as she tries to avoid social media on nights where spoilers are heavy, it’s hard to do that and run a business. I get that, I do. But (as I explained to her) you can use Facebook and Twitter without looking at your newsfeed. Maybe this is conceited of me, but I’ve had entire weeks where I’ve been active on Facebook and haven’t seen my newsfeed once. I go straight to my own profile page, my groups, or the pages of people I feel like seeing that day. Same with Twitter. You can search for hashtags or certain Tweeters or simply just post your own updates and never look at anyone else’s. You can answer Facebook messages without ever looking at a newsfeed, and, in fact, if you are using Facebook Mobile, you don’t even have a choice in this matter, because Facebook now forces you to use the Facebook App and Facebook Messenger separately. There is absolutely no excuse in this day and age for being outraged by spoilers on social media when you have voluntarily put yourself in a situation where spoilers abound.
Some of the comments I saw this morning had people claiming they saw 12 (you heard me, 12) spoilers on their newsfeed last night. Assuming this number is true and not an exaggeration, that person went trolling for spoilers on her newsfeed. In fact, anyone who saw more than three spoilers went trolling for them. With the way Facebook is setup these days, it is impossible to see more than three alerts on your newsfeed at a time (yes, even without pictures). One person even claimed she clicked a link to an article about the episode and was “so upset” that the headline after she clicked spoiled the episode. SERIOUSLY??? Look, if you don’t like spoilers, then avert your eyes when it becomes apparent you’re in dangerous territory. Continuing to scroll through your newsfeed just hoping and praying the next post won’t be a spoiler or, goddess forbid, clicking on news articles about episodes you haven’t watched yet, isn’t the smartest way to avoid something you allegedly hate.
This is social media, folks. Social. Media. The entire idea is for people to interact and engage about their interests, and, yes, sometimes that means they are going to be reactionary about what they are watching on television as they are watching it. If you don’t want to engage, then, until you’re prepared to have that discussion with the rest of the world, maybe you need to unplug?

Originally posted on Blogger (http:/www.popculturemom.com) http://ift.tt/1das6Uc

Dear Reality TV and Other Camera-Whoring Celebs—Cut the Bullshit

Earlier this afternoon. Bruce Jenner was in a car accident that proved fatal for at least one person. While causes of the accident are still under investigation, there has been some speculation that the accident occurred when Bruce was trying to get away from paparazzi. If this is the case… Are you fucking kidding me???

I’m sorry, but you don’t get that right. Sure, any other oerson walking down the street, even kids of celebrities or celebrities who (other than red carpet or multi-celebrity events and parties) generally seem to avoid the limelight—we all get that right for a life free of paparazzi intrusion. But reality TV “celebrities” and other stars who constantly pimp their mug for camera time? Nope, not you.
I mean, we are talking about someone who has voluntarily spent several seasons having cameras follow him and his entire awful family around, a man who is currently whoring himself on camera through one of the most difficult life experiences a person can have (and who all but called a national press conference to announce he was doing so). Now someone in the Kardashian/Jenner clan wants to hide from cameras? 
Hmm… Not hiding here…

No. Not this time, buddy. 
You already thrust yourself upon us, practically ramming the life of the Kardashian/Jenners down our collective throats. You wanted fame and 24-hour, around-the-clock cameras? You got ’em! And now you need to take your celebrity (as we say in the legal field) cum onere. You can’t have all the benefits and ignore the burdens. No cherrypicking! You get the entirety of this in-your-face star status you so desperately wanted. You don’t get to run from the paparazzi, no matter how despicable they are.
You signed up for this. You weren’t a royal who was forced to deal with the media. You aren’t the child of a celebrity who didn’t ask for any of this. You aren’t even one of those celebrities who basically stays as far away as you can from cameras until it is time to promote your next movie or album. And you definitely aren’t the other people who were just on the street, minding their own business. And now, because you were (possibly) outrunning those few cameras who were going to sell your picture without the profits coming back to you, someone has lost a life.
Not cool. Not cool at all.
So to the Kardashian/Jenners, the Real Housewives of Wherever USA, and every other actual real celebrity out there who likes to throw his or her face (boobs, abs, and whatever else) in front of the camera at every turn [say, for example, a Justin Bieber-type], you don’t have the right to endanger the lives of civilians simply because a camera who actually didn’t call (this time) was thrust in your face.

Originally posted on Blogger (http:/www.popculturemom.com) http://ift.tt/1zuv9yd