May typically marks the start of summer blockbuster season and lately that means two things: Get ready for some superhero movies, and get ready to mix up some Chrises.
And as far as classically handsome hero types in recent Hollywood blockbusters go, he’s definitely got the first part right.
Unfortunately for him, however, Pine bears a strong resemblance to the white, male stars of other comic-book adaptions, and, through a coincidence that says a lot about the state of on-screen diversity, they also share a first name. Although individually talented human beings, Chris Evans, Chris Pratt and Chris Hemsworth all too easily illustrate the continuing problem of on-screen representation ― particularly among superhero movies.
On Saturday night, “SNL” cast members gleefully confused the four Chrises, who star in various Marvel and DC Comics franchise installments, throughout Pine’s opening monologue.
(”Thank you, Thor,” Leslie Jones says after snapping a selfie. Thor, an “Avengers” character, is played by Hemsworth.)
While their other look-alikes are taking a break for the moment, you’ve likely seen Pratt, who recently embarked on a press tour for “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” now in theaters. Pine’s “Wonder Woman” is out June 2. As the actor, who also plays Captain Kirk in the “Star Trek” movies, pointed out himself, superheroes, like Star-Lord, all have the same look ― white, male and as inoffensive as possible. Or, as Kate McKinnon phrased it, “you’re all kind of scruffy and squinty and jacked but in a sweet way.”
A change in optics hoped for by fans of “Wonder Woman,” starring Gal Gadot ― who is, yes, a woman ― seems to be coming at a glacial pace keenly illustrated by the way that film languished in various stages of production from the 1980s. Given our knowledge of how on-screen representation affects viewers’ self-worth, the pace is unfortunate. A few other breaks from the norm will arrive over the next three years: “Black Panther,” starring Chadwick Boseman, will be out in 2018, “Captain Marvel,” starring Brie Larson, in 2019, and a stand-alone Cyborg film in 2020.
At least it’s something. For decades, superhero movies have served as a genre that celebrates white male achievement like no other, emblematic of the widespread Hollywood diversity issues that inspired #OscarsSoWhite. Studios may have wizened up to public perception, featuring women and people of color in roles that get less screen time in films such as “Deadpool,” “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice,” “Captain America: Civil War,” “Avengers: Age of Ultron” and “X-Men: Apocalypse.” But you’ll notice the figures at the front of promotional posters are not women, black actors, Asian actors, gay actors or anyone beyond people who’d feel easily at home in the Chris Quartet.
While the Oscars offered wider diversity in its nominations this year, it’s the most pervasive, biggest moneymaking titles ― the movies that won’t take home prestigious awards but will nonetheless be known to every household in America by September ― that seem to need the most work.
Most recent statistics on representation among film leads continue to find gross inequality; 2015’s top films showed minorities underrepresented 3 to 1 and women underrepresented 2 to 1, according to the UCLA’s Bunche Center. The problem is even worse among the people leading production of top films: the study found that their directors continue to skew white (90 percent) and male (92 percent). Among the people ultimately responsible for getting these movies made and shipped out to massive screens nationwide ― studio executives ― the majority are, again, white men.
This summer’s “Wonder Woman” will offer some respite from the onslaught of white guys in movies wearing shiny, tight-fitting suits, who look like white guys in directors’ chairs wearing T-shirts, who look like white guys in board rooms wearing normal suits. (And it’s directed by one Patty Jenkins! Huzzah!)
But it remains symbolic that Pine is seen promoting the film on the set of “SNL”― not Wonder Woman herself.
For now, we’re still living in the Age of the Many Chrises.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
An Ohio mom’s viral Facebook post is shedding light on the reality of postpartum depression.
On May 1, Kathy DiVincenzo shared two photos taken by her friend, photographer Danielle Fantis. While one picture shows the mom dressed up and smiling with her children in their clean house, the other shows DiVincenzo looking tired and unhappy with a classic messy bun and cluttered home.
DiVincenzo explained in the caption that May is National Maternal Depression Awareness Month. Because she has struggled with postpartum depression, anxiety and OCD, she decided to speak out and show people what the experience can look like ― and “not just the side of me that’s ‘Facebook worthy.’”
The two pictures DiVincenzo posted represent her life, “depending on the day,” she wrote.
“I would only ever comfortably share one of these realities though and that’s the problem. The only thing more exhausting than having these conditions is pretending daily that I don’t,” she explained, adding that she works hard to hide the harsh reality from the social media world because she’s worried it would make people feel uncomfortable.
“I’m afraid you’ll think I’m weak, crazy, a terrible mother, or the other million things my mind convinces me of, and I know I’m not alone in those thoughts,” she wrote. “We need to stop assuming that the postpartum period is always euphoric, because for 1 in 7 it’s not. We need to start asking new parents how they’re doing in a deeper way than the normal, “so how are you doing?” that triggers the knee jerk, “everything’s great!” response. We need to learn the signs, symptoms, risk factors, and support plans for postpartum conditions.”
DiVincenzo called upon parents to smash the stigma and #EndTheSilence around PPD by sharing their stories and letting others know they are not alone in their struggles.
Addressing her fellow moms, she concluded, “In case no one has told you, you’re doing an amazing job. You are loved and you are worthy. You’re not alone. Information to local and national support will be in the comment section. I know how unbelievably hard it is to reach out, but I promise you it is worth it. YOU’RE worth it.”
The mom’s post received over 43,000 likes and 67,000 shares.
DiVincenzo has a 3-year-old daughter named Gia and an almost-4-month-old son, Dominic. Though she struggled with postpartum anxiety after giving birth to her daughter, she didn’t address the issue until she developed crippling postpartum depression and OCD with her second child. She told HuffPost she’s in the thick of it and only just started seeking help.
“It was important for me to post this during my struggle because I wanted other new parents to know that while reaching out was the hardest step for me, it was the most important as well,” DiVincenzo explained. “I just realized that I was going through such a dark time, but my Facebook was full of smiling pictures of my kids. I was talking to Danielle one day about what a disservice that is to other postpartum mothers and how I wish someone could just post what postpartum really looks like for so many women.”
DiVincenzo and Fantis hoped that just one mom might be moved by their photos, so they’ve been blown away by the overwhelming amount of positive comments and responses to the post. They hope that women facing these challenges feel inspired to seek help and that others choose to educate themselves on the risk factors, signs and symptoms of postpartum disorders.
“It’s important to know that this can affect you if this is your first child, or your 20th,” DiVincenzo told HuffPost. “This isn’t something that only happens within the first few months either. These disorders can also affect men.”
She added, “While I certainly am not trying to represent postpartum mental illness as a whole, I hope to raise awareness that these are real conditions that could be affecting you, your sister, your friend, etc. It’s crucial to be checking in with parents, especially throughout that first year, to really know how they’re doing.”
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Al Madrigal is returning to his politically driven comedy in his newest stand-up special.
“Shrimpin’ Ain’t Easy,” which premiered Friday on Showtime, begins with the former senior Latino correspondent for “The Daily Show” unearthing a “cilantro plot” against Donald Trump before delving into other bits about parenting, anger and a real-life revenge story involving shrimp.
The Mexican-American comedian recently spoke with HuffPost about the special and Latinos’ responsibility in putting Trump in the White House. During what Madrigal jokingly described as “the heaviest comedy interview of all time,” the 45-year-old star also discussed his role in Showtime’s upcoming dark comedy “I’m Dying Up Here,” and how he’s hoping to nurture future Latino stand-up comics.
You start the special going in on Trump and discussing a cilantro-inspired revenge plot against him from Mexico. Jokes aside, what’s your take on where Latinos stand in U.S. politics right now?
I think a lot of Latinos in the United States, by all means, should be Republicans. They are super hardworking and religious. My dad and mom, they voted for both Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush because they felt they earned all their money. My mom used to clean houses. My dad was a warehouse worker and had zero to start with and then started a company and sort of built this fortune. They had this ridiculous rags-to-riches story and a lot of Latinos who have had success in the United States find themselves leaning that way, where they’re fiscally conservative and think everyone should be able to pick themselves up by the bootstrap because they did. But the fact is that they feel so villainized by the right, and especially the far right, that they can’t help but side with the Democrats even though their values scream that they should be Republicans.
Oh yeah, I really did think that! The other thing I brought up in that same bit was when Trump told Jorge Ramos to go back to Univision. I was like, “What?! The Latino people will not stand for this! You will not get elected because we decide who gets elected.” And then it happened.
I [went] on Anthony Bourdain’s show and I think I said that [Latinos] may not be one of the next presidents but we will certainly decide who gets elected as president. So there might not be a Latino in the White House in the near future but we, the Latinos in the United States, will determine who gets elected.
Yeah, the crabs in the bucket analogy. Absolutely. But it’s not just a Latino problem. A lot of people use that analogy. And this is something that I sort of covered on “The Daily Show” constantly: When people try to lump all Latinos together, it’s just impossible. You can’t do that. There is no spokesperson for all Latinos. There is no unifying Latinos. Puerto Ricans don’t give a shit about immigration. I mean there’s [Puerto Ricans], the same as anyone else, who may feel like having an opinion on the issue but they’re not just naturally inclined to [care just] because they fall into that Latino category.
I mean, I think it’s fair to say immigration isn’t an inherently Latino issue, but then what about someone like you? You’re Mexican-American with several generations in the U.S.; is immigration at the top of your list as an issue?
Oh yeah, exactly. So that’s what I’m saying. But I’ve seen fellow Mexicans being so mistreated and we have a lot of employers that are taking advantage of this cheap labor and mistreating these employees. I definitely, I always side with the Mexicans even though I’m established in the United States. But just as a human. That’s something I try to address in the special.
Shifting off politics, you’re also in Showtime’s upcoming dramedy, “I’m Dying Up Here,” about a group of stand-up comedians struggling to make it in 1970s Los Angeles. Can you tell us about your character, Edgar Martinez?
That was a desperate time for a lot of people, so we really do show that desperation really well. My character is sort of a mash-up of a couple of different Latino comedians. I think there’s some Freddie Prinze in there, there’s some Cheech in there, there’s some Carlos Mencia in there. I was fortunate enough to be able to be in the writers room for the entire time on this thing, and I couldn’t be more proud of the product.
Do you think the show truly captures that real-life struggle? How have things changed or stayed the same?
Well, you still have to sort of start the same way [in comedy]. When you start doing stand-up comedy you need to take the leap. I left a job, a lot of people have done that. Howie Mandel was a carpet salesman whose friends pushed him to do an open mic and everyone has their origin story. We see a lot of that on the show.
But then as people pass others and you climb up this ladder of the stand-up world there’s backstabbing, stealing, fights, accusations flying around, the competitiveness of being a sort of independent contractor in this world where you sacrificed a lot on the hopes that you might make it as a comedian. It’s crazy.
Are you describing the show or your experiences in real-life?
Both. That’s everyone’s experience. We’re all surrounded by it. Everyone is not standing around slapping each other on the back. I mean, there’s a great community of comedians that I’m very good friends with but we all have the same stories. That’s why when we get together, we love talking about, “OMG, have you ever done this gig?” So we’ve all sort of gone to war together and most of the big comics have paid all of the same dues.
It’s also nice to see Latinos represented in the cast, because honestly it feels like there aren’t enough Latinos in stand-up.
There’s certainly not a lot of popular Latino comics right now. I mean there’s George Lopez, Gabriel Iglesias ― now you tell me who the others are.
Louis C.K. is part Mexican?
Yeah. Louis C.K. is half Mexican. OK, we’ll take him. But he doesn’t have a lot of material about it. But I’m just saying, where are all the others? There’s just not enough. I’m starting the Latino Comedy Festival so we can actually do sort of TED-style talks for people in Los Angeles about careers in comedy because I feel we’re so underserved.
I got yelled at when I told my dad I was going to be a stand-up comic. I was trying to work a job and do comedy at the same time, and he thought I was a crazy person. So I actually just started a scholarship at my high school [St. Ignatius College Preparatory in San Francisco] that will be given to a junior Latino, ideally but not exclusively, who shows some sort of proficiency in comedy. Then I’ll meet with them and pay for a chunk of their tuition for the next year just so their parents see that their child has a future in comedy and don’t give them a hard time trying to make them a lawyer or a doctor.
Watch “Shrimpin’ Ain’t Easy” on Showtime’s streaming services and “I’m Dying Up Here” when it premieres Sunday, June 4.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Many Americans would have imagined that reality TV star Donald Trump would become the President of the United States on the day pigs fly.
Well, Trump is the president. And thanks to an upcoming project by Chicago-based architectural firm New World Design Ltd., for one day this summer, pigs will fly.
The firm, led by Jeffrey Roberts, plans to install four gold pig balloons in front of the facade of Trump Tower, for a one-day public installation titled “Flying Pigs On Parade.” Four golden swine balloons will float in mid-air, effectively concealing Trump’s name from public view. The goal is to provide passersby a brief yet glorious reprieve from seeing the omnipresent name of you-know-who, thus continuing to resist his normalization at all costs.
Visually, the installation is inspired by the album art for Pink Floyd’s 1977 “Animals,” which itself is a tribute to George Orwell’s Animal Farm. The 1945 allegory and classic middle school read follows a barn full of farm animals to symbolize a totalitarian dictatorship built upon a cult of personality ― a scenario bearing some alarming similarities to our current political state.
Roberts’ vision incorporates elements of Pink Floyd and George Orwell with a few additional digs at our nation’s leader. As he explained in a statement: “The references are many, from flying pigs and Miss Piggy comments to a taste for gold embellished interiors. Ultimately, this is a very rational design and is in direct contrast to the chaotic nature and bizarre antics of our current leadership.”
Roberts announced his idea for the piece in November 2016, shortly after Trump won the presidency. Recently, Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters himself approved the idea, a necessity since the musician owns the image rights to his 1977 album cover.
Now Roberts’ final challenge, aside from actually building the four 30-by-15-foot golden pig balloons, is fundraising. The architects are currently collecting donations to help pay for costs including balloon fabrication, technical specialists, barge rental, rigging, prep costs, security and permitting fees. If interested, you can donate here.
Roberts has not yet confirmed when his piece will be installed, but hopes that pigs will fly (for one day only) come late summer. The goal is to then take the pigs on the road, traveling from city to city, blocking other Trump Tower facades one day at a time.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
In the American Declaration of Independence some of the most historic and lasting words are “all men are created equal” and that those are endowed the unalienable rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
But what about those two tiny, seemingly unassuming words? All men.
If all men have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, it begs the question: What about a woman’s right to pursue all three, specifically happiness? Feminist writer and author Jill Filipovic explores just that in her new book The H-Spot: The Feminist Pursuit Of Happiness.
“What I was interested in exploring in the book is not just how do we make women equal to men in a system that men have built for themselves, but what does the female pursuit of happiness look like?” Filipovic told HuffPost. “If women were writing that founding document, what kind of system and institutions would we build around it to make that promise possible for women as well?”
What I was interested in exploring in the book is not just how do we make women equal to men in a system that men have built for themselves, but what does the female pursuit of happiness look like? Jill Filipovic
In the book, Filipovic explores the intersections of feminism and women’s happiness over the course of American history: Why were women, quite literally, written out of the history of happiness? How does the notion of “having it all” effect women’s happiness? Has feminism doomed us to be unhappy in our pursuit of equality? Is happiness, in fact, a feminist issue?
For that last one, Filipovic responded that happiness is “absolutely” a feminist issue. “What we’re trying to do is create a universe in which women can at least have the ability to pursue happiness,” she said, “if not the ability to actually be happy every day.”
Filipovic spoke with HuffPost to expand on that response and answer more questions about the intersections of happiness and feminism. What she learned about women, happiness and feminism while writing The H-Spot: The Feminist Pursuit Of Happiness might surprise you.
What prompted you to write a book about the intersections of feminism and women’s happiness?
The more that I reported on feminist issues, it became clear that a lot of what I was writing about underlined the bad experiences women have; so many of the ways in which our lives are made to be less good than they could be. It made me wonder: what does real hostility to female happiness and female pleasure look like? Everything from access to birth control and abortion rights, which seems really vested in this cultural disdain for the idea of women having sex for pleasure, to a lot of the advice that young women get about how to avoid rape, which is essentially saying don’t go out and have fun. There seems to be a real value in this hostility to women having good lives. So when I put those pieces of it together, it seemed like a ripe argument to make. And not just to say here’s the problem, but to at least attempt to make a real moral case for the good of female happiness.
A post shared by Jill Filipovic (@jillfilipovic) on
In your chapter “Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions” you talk about how the concept of happiness, as written into the Declaration of Independence, wasn’t made for women. Can you talk to me a little bit about the history of happiness and how women were ― for lack of a better term ― written out of it?
When the founders were writing that all were entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the only people that were actually entitled to those things at the time were land-owning white men. So it wasn’t even just men, it was a small subsection of the American male population at the time. The reality is that while men may not have been able to achieve happiness, they’ve had the ability to pursue it on the backs of free and invisible labor of women and people of color. The way that this system has been constructed, with this subgroup at the top of it, couldn’t exist unless you had the rest of us doing the legwork to make it happen.
What I was interested in exploring in the book is not just how do we make women equal to men in a system that men have built for themselves, but what does the female pursuit of happiness look like? If women were writing that founding document, what kind of system and institutions would we build around it to make that promise possible for women as well?
In your introduction you write: “Women today live in a world of unfinished feminism, where we’re told we’re equal but see our basic rights up for grabs, where we’re told to push harder at work, or recognize we can’t have it all, or marry Mr. Good Enough.” Can you expand on this notion of “unfinished feminism” and how it impacts women’s happiness?
Obviously, the feminist movement has done incredible things for American women and women around the world, and it’s had massive victories. It’s obviously valuable to show how far we’ve come in such a short period of time, especially in the grand scheme of human history. But, it’s not complete yet. We’re living at this intersection of old cultural values that are really butting up against a more feminist world.
Most women do work outside of the home, most of us work for pay, we go to college and graduate college in greater numbers than young men. But our laws and policies ― not only have they not caught up ― but we have lawmakers who have intentionally blocked them from catching up as a way to essentially make it almost impossible for women to succeed in the modern world. And a lot of this becomes very individualized: If I feel overwhelmed by trying to raise children and have a job that must be my problem and my problem to solve. Rather than making it a collective, societal problem and creating collective mechanisms to actually make a more feminist life livable.
Women today live in a world of unfinished feminism, where we’re told we’re equal but see our basic rights up for grabs, where we’re told to push harder at work, or recognize we can’t have it all. Jill Filipovic
You discuss the cultural definition of being a woman as always defining yourself in relation to others ― “she’s someone’s mother, sister, wife.” You coined this the “cult of female sacrifice,” which I really love. What are the consequences of this sacrifice?
I think what you see is that women are pushed into putting others before themselves, in terms of their sex lives, in terms of their relationships ― whether that’s a romantic relationship or a parental relationship or even a friendship ― I think it’s just ingrained in us. It’s almost an inability to get up in the morning and think ‘OK what is it that I want?’ It’s not just internal either, there’s this cultural expectation that women will do this. When women break that mold it can have really negative consequences. There’s been a lot of great studies that say that women don’t negotiate for more money and therefore they get paid less. But one of the reasons women don’t negotiate for more money is because when they do they’re perceived as pushy and aggressive and unlikable and they’re penalized for it. That to me is a pretty good encapsulation of a woman putting herself and her own needs and desires for fair compensation ahead of somebody else’s comfort. And we see women face financial consequences for doing that.
Another example is the advice young college women get about how to avoid sexual assault. Usually they’re told to not drink, to not go out ― basically, don’t do the normal things that everyone in your peer group is doing and that young men always do. If you don’t forgo this kind of pleasure, you may be punished for it. The punishment may be you get raped and the further cultural punishment is that everybody looks at you and says “What did she think was going to happen?” The consequences of this idea that women should always sacrifice their own pleasure or their own needs are pretty far-reaching and pervasive.
A post shared by Jill Filipovic (@jillfilipovic) on
In your chapter about female pleasure and happiness you discuss sacrifice as a “central part of womanhood” that leads to a missing “road map for basic female demands.” How do you think this lack of guidance to demanding self-pleasure coupled with the “cult of female sacrifice” informs women’s happiness?
Obviously, one of the ways to be happy and to feel happy is through basic hedonistic pleasure ― stimulated in the five senses. Whether that’s eating a great meal or having a good sexual experience, all of these things are the kind of small things that add up to a life that feels good and happy and pleasurable.
Of course this does not apply to every single person, but for most people sex is one of the most pleasurable things that we do. For many women, sex is also a locus of fear and sometimes a locus of violence, and that obviously undercuts our ability to have happy and healthy sex lives. So does this idea of performative female sexuality and the idea that we’re sexual objects to be enjoyed by someone else. Women are told we’re not sexual actors to figure out what our enjoyment even looks and feels like.
You discuss how traditional “women’s work” remains undervalued and underpaid. How do you think this gap affects women’s happiness and pleasure?
One thing we know is that although money doesn’t buy happiness, economic instability does decrease people’s happiness. It’s only true that money doesn’t make you happy above a certain level. So when the work that women have traditionally done is both underpaid and undervalued the following happens: A) It makes someone economically insecure, which is a very quick route to unhappiness; and B) It means that women are less likely to derive the kind of identity and sense of purpose from their work that men long have. Certainly, for a lot of people care work can feel quite meaningful, but it becomes an issue when we send the message that that kind of work is not particularly valuable and is not valuable in part because women do it. We really undercut not only women’s paychecks but also our psychological and emotional health as it relates to our jobs.
Women are funneled towards certain options because our choices are constrained and then we’re told that we’re the ones doing the choosing and so it’s our responsibility. That’s the path that needs to be upended. Jill Filipovic
In your chapter “Summer Sisters: Women And The Power Of Female Friendships” you write about the effects platonic female friendship have on women’s happiness and how, often times, they’re more integral to personal growth than romantic relationships.
Female friendships have always factored into the lives of women, but especially now when women are getting married later than ever before; when we live so much more of our lives outside of the nuclear family structure. Many of us leave our homes at 17 or 18 to go off to college or to go into the workforce and the average age of marriage for women now is 27. The average woman has a decade in there where she’s living at least semi-independently and where a romantic partner is not her primary outlet into the rest of the world. Even after we marry, women are much more likely to work outside of the home now than we used to. We have far more connection and especially in those formative years when we’re becoming full human beings in our 20s ― for a lot of women that happens surrounded by other women.
And while female friendships are not new, the length of time that women spend single, living with other women and having them be our primary outlets is new. And that’s something we haven’t really caught up with policy-wise: how to recognize that often the chief person in your life is not a romantic partner.
It’s raised the bar for romantic relationships, as well. Most of my adult life I’ve lived with other women, so I know it’s perfectly possible to split doing the dishes and both take out the garbage. To be able to share space with somebody and have an equal division of labor, to love somebody and not only love them because you’re romantically attached to them, because you do have this enduring connection to both share the chores and share the emotional labor of the relationship: I think all of that leads to better romantic relationships later in life if that’s the path that you go down. It’s frankly one of the reasons you see women who marry after the age of 25 having longer-lasting, happier, more stable marriages. We learn a lot of these really valuable relationship skills from our female friends.
So, what does the female pursuit of happiness look like?
It looks like a policy landscape that opens up opportunity for women and doesn’t constrain our options and then tell us everything is about individual choice. I think by now our politics rely quite a bit on “choice” language ― it’s a choice to work or stay home, it’s a choice to have kids or not have kids, it’s a choice to eat what you want. This is all very individualistic. But because of certain policy decisions we’ve made, many parts of women’s lives don’t feel like much of a choice.
Women are funneled towards certain options because our choices are constrained and then we’re told that we’re the ones doing the choosing and so it’s our responsibility. That’s the path that needs to be upended. We need a policy landscape that makes real choices available for women. It has to be a collective, social and political effort to say that female happiness matters ― and male happiness matters, too ― and that one of the roles of government is to make people’s lives better.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Richard Simmons is suing the National Enquirer, Radar Online and American Media, Inc. for their “cruel” coverage of false claims.
The lawsuit was filed Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court and accuses the defendants of libel and invasion of privacy-false light, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The publications allegedly used Mauro Oliveira ― a former assistant who has apparently stalked, harassed and blackmailed Simmons ― as their source for stories about the “real reason he disappeared” between June 2016 and March 2017.
The Enquirer and Radar Online claimed Simmons underwent gender confirmation surgery, which his rep called a “complete fabrication,” in a series of “cruel and malicious” articles.
“The National Enquirer and Radar Online have cheaply and crassly commercialized and sensationalized an issue that ought to be treated with respect and sensitivity,” the suit says. “Principles of freedom of speech and press may protect their prerogative to mock and degrade the LGBTQ community. But freedom to speak is not freedom to defame. Mr. Simmons, like every person in this nation, has a legal right to insist that he not be portrayed as someone he is not. Even the most ardent supporter of sexual autonomy and LGBTQ rights is entitled to be portrayed in a manner that is truthful.”
People magazine spoke with AMI about the filing.
“We stand by our reporting about him, all of which was based on solid sourcing and material evidence,” the company responded. “Should he choose to proceed with his lawsuit, we will defend it vigorously, and we look forward to the public vindication of our reports.”
“This has reminded me that when you need help you can’t be afraid to reach out and ask for it,” he said. “We all think we should always be able to solve our problems all by ourselves and sometimes it’s just bigger than we are.”
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Mamet ended “Girls” as the voice of reason: Her garrulous Shoshanna declared it time to move on from the “exhausting and narcissistic and ultimately boring” dynamic that had seized the central characters’ relationships. She begins “The Boy Downstairs” as the voice rattling around her own head: Her drifting Diana stands shivering outside a New York apartment building, returning a sweater to an ex-boyfriend.
Even though she’s anxious about moving forward without the security that multiple seasons of television provide, Mamet is off to a fine start. “The Boy Downstairs,” written and directed by newcomer Sophie Brooks, is a romantic comedy about the aftermath of first love. Because Diana is a creative type ambling through New York in her 20s, the movie can seem one with the “Girls” universe. But Mamet insists it’s a world removed ― she took the role because Brooks’ script massaged the gender roles of a “classic setup.”
“We fall in love sometimes when we’re younger in this way that feels so epic and all-encompassing, but you’re sort of too young to experience the true depth that love as an adult is,” Mamet said, reflecting on her character’s experiences. “And when you have that and you might not be ready for it, I think it’s really paralyzing to some humans. I think Sophie wrote this character who just isn’t ready for what all of that is.”
Diana has just returned to New York after a creative stint in London. A writer who can’t find a spark upon moving home, Diana is working at a bridal boutique and asking her best friend (Diana Irvine) for leads on finding an apartment. She quickly lands a unit in a Manhattan brownstone where, conveniently, the ex-boyfriend (Matthew Shear) she left three years earlier resides. Bumbling encounters and self-conscious exchanges conjure up bittersweet memories of their time together, depicted in flashbacks. Amid professional aimlessness, Diana realizes she still isn’t over this nice, vulnerable guy whose commitment once frightened her.
That’s where “The Boy Downstairs” diverges most from “Girls”: It chronicles the evolution of a single relationship and its emotional tolls, and its primary male character is sensitive and approachable. “Those are the types of guys I dated,” Brooks said. “I like nice guys. I’m not trying to date a fratty douche” ― or a “frouche,” per Mamet’s abbreviation.
For the record, Mamet liked the “Girls” series finale, even though Shoshanna’s send-off came in the penultimate episode. “As an observer, I thought it was amazing, but as a human who was on the show for six years, I have lots of emotions about it,” she said. “It’s hard. It’s hard to watch the last episode of something you spent so much time on.”
Even if Mamet wants to avoid parallels between “Boy Downstairs” and “Girls,” the movie functions as a nice bookend for the show. It lets the 29-year-old actress shine, propelling her toward more left-of-center roles. She recently wrapped “Under the Silver Lake,” a crime noir from “It Follows” director David Robert Mitchell, and she is set to play Patti Smith in a biopic about iconoclastic photographer Robert Mapplethorpe. As her career progresses, she says she has time to be “picky” about jobs.
“I think we’re in this interesting place and time in our industry, and I think the scales are still quite uneven when it comes to truly well-rounded characters for women, I think particularly for people of my age,” she said. “I’m often sent scripts where I say the female role is sort of like a piece of furniture. You need to have a couch in the room, so she’s there, but that’s kind of the purpose she serves, which is one of the reasons I was so, so drawn to Sophie’s script. Not only was this an amazing opportunity to play a leading role, but I felt like Sophie was really saying something with the story that she was telling. It was very multi-dimensional, and that’s rare, sadly.”
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
For over six years, photographer Tricia Messeroux has been recreating iconic style moments with adorable kids through a project she calls Toddlewood. Her latest photo shoot brilliantly tackles the incredible fashion at the 2017 Met Gala.
“I was excited but nervous to give the Met Gala the Toddlewood treatment,” Messeroux told HuffPost. “The Met Gala is the gold standard for high fashion and creative costumes by some of the most amazing designers.”
Messeroux make-up artist Shameika Simmons, hair stylist Peta-Gaye Antoine and wardrobe designers Mo Glover and Quianna Mercurius to transform a group of kids, ages 3 to 6 into the standout stars of the Met Gala red carpet.
The photographer said it took 48 hours to make the designs, and for the first time ever, she put her camera down to work on the costumes ― along with some help from Michaels craft stores and her daughters, Skylar and Sunday.
“Mini Rihanna’s dress was the biggest challenge, so I did it myself,” Messeroux said. “It was the best arts and crafts project my daughters and I have ever done.” Photos of “mini Rihanna” quickly went viral on Twitter.
Messeroux was excited to pay homage to Rei Kawakubo and Comme des Garçons, especially because she plans to launch her own line of high fashion costumes called “Toddlewood Red Carpet Stars” just before Halloween.
“The line features costumes inspired by this year’s award season (Golden Globes, Grammys and The Oscars) as well as the mega event for fashionable costumes, The Met Gala,” she told HuffPost.
Messeroux said the kids had a blast wearing the costumes and posing for pictures.
“The Migos boys were on cloud nine,” she told HuffPost. “We even put on the song ‘Bad and Boujee’ to keep their swagger going. Mini-Anna Wintour loved knowing that she was the queen of the night. Mini Janelle Monae loved the feathers.”
Though the girl who dressed as Rihanna loved her outfit, she was admittedly happy to get out of it by the end of the shoot, as it wasn’t the easiest to walk in.
“All the kids had funny one liners and silliness like kids do,” said Messeroux. “Great day for dress up.”
Keep scrolling and visit the Toddlewood Instagram to see more of the Met Gala series and some behind-the-scenes photos.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
“I feel like we’re living in fictional times,” said Black at the event. “If this was in a book, you go, ‘Fuck, this is a great book.’”
He continued, “Who could imagine these, the people that are around him, who could imagine those as characters? I mean, I find it hard. I look at Kellyanne Conway, but is she real? I’m not sure. Alternative facts? Who the fuck says that?”
(FYI, that whole quote could probably be in all caps.)
With such a reputation for ranting, HuffPost asked Black what angers him most about the results of the presidential election.
His answer: The White House’s stunning lack of grown-ups.
“There are no adults in the room. I don’t care which side you’re on in terms of the legislature, there are no adults,” said Black.
Perhaps it’s that lack of parental supervision that’s taking a toll on the comedian’s patience.
Black also gave us his thoughts on Trump’s first 100 days, saying it’s all blurred into years in his mind.
“Two and a half years is what it feels like. That’s my assessment. That’s all you need to know. For all the bitching, he did make time seem longer. You can yell all you want, but it’s literally like, ‘Really? It’s only day 79? Really!?’ Because all of a sudden three and a half years seems like forever. It didn’t used to before. It used to go like that!” said Black.
Hang in there, Lewis. There’s still a long way to go.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
The sun is shining, the air is clear, and we have your new favorite book right here. Yes, summer means reading in the park, on the beach, beside the pool, and well into the night — so with that in mind, we’ve chosen 21 of our favorite new and upcoming releases. Some are just out, some are to look forward to, but all will keep you entertained even on the longest, hottest day. Even better? Each and every author is a woman.
From the whip-smart and LOL-funny Jami Attenberg comes the tale of Andrea, a kinda-adult 39-year-old single gal forced to finally figure things out when her family is thrust into unexpected crisis. Expect lessons both instructive and of warning.
It’s a memoir from a former editor-in-chief of Paris *Vogue.* Basically, your perfect rooftop read. Buck is the first and only American to ever fill the Paris *Vogue* editor-in-chief position, so get your heels on and pour yourself some rosé for an honest look at a glossy life.
Borrowing its title from Virginia Woolf, *Too Much and Not in the Mood* is a poetic and personal collection of essays on artistic growth among female writers from Durga Chew-Bose, one of the best essayists writing today.
A memoir about growing up different and Catholic, but unlike any you’ve read before. Poet and writer Patricia Lockwood brings her uniquely bracing yet humorous prose to the story of where it all began: home.
For nearly 30 years, Pamela Paul kept a record of every book she read. That record was in a notebook named Bob. Follow Bob and Pamela’s adventures, and then record this in your very own book tracker.
From the author of *The Girl on the Train* comes the story of a town with a water problem: Women keep turning up dead in the river. First a teenage girl, then a single mother. Who — or what — is down there?
Fans of *Brooklyn* will enjoy this multigeneration tale of two Irish sisters—Nora and Theresa Flynn—who leave their home for life in Boston, only to confront even harder circumstances when one of them becomes pregnant.
A mystery, a coming-of-age story, and an ensemble drama are woven together in this tale of love, loss, grief…and human remains found deep in the desert.
A fantastical and surreal look at modern life, in gorgeous pencil sketch. Perfect for fans of *Black Mirror,* Daniel Clowes, and getting introspective as hell.
A biting satire about a trend forecaster gone rogue who begins to see that the “IRL” experience of touch technology isn’t *quite* the same thing as life offline.
The story of two families vacationing together, this novel weaves a tapestry of viewpoints, hopping from family to family, children to adults, as they deal with the repercussions of becoming briefly separated.
Author Nina Riggs was 37, the mother of two young sons, and married to her best friend when she was diagnosed with terminal breast cancer. This is the story of how she faced the unthinkable with humanity and most of all with love.
Following her breakout debut *Nobody Is Ever Missing,* Catherine Lacey’s second novel introduces us to Mary, a young NYC woman dealing with debilitating pain who works as the “emotional girlfriend” of an eccentric actor to pay for her expensive treatments.
A rich, romantic, and sprawling tale that plays out across India through time and space. You’re guaranteed to fall in love with the characters and be swept up by the writing.
A gripping memoir about growing up in—and growing out of—a deeply dysfunctional, abusive family. Jessica Berger Gross’ childhood may have looked happy from the outside, but it wasn’t until she left home for good and cut her abusers off completely that she found happiness.
Clemmons’ debut novel is a stunning work about growing up, losing your parents, and being an outsider. Perfect for fans of tangled immigrant stories like *Americanah.*
If you’re hungry for another mystery after finishing *Big Little Lies,* pick up this story about Billie Flanagan, a Berkeley mom who disappears one day while hiking and the unnerving circumstances that bring her daughter Olive into the case.
Amid a glut of tomes preaching to American women about how to act/live/dress French, Catherine Malandrino’s stands out. First of all, she’s a bona fide fashion designer. Second, she’s quintessentially French. Finally, she’s lived in the States for decades. If anyone can teach us how to do it, she can.
It’s the nineties, and Maria truly has it all. Beautiful fiancé, hip apartment, exciting new projects, and a starring role in a cool documentary. But she can’t stop daydreaming about another man. She really can’t stop.
From the author of the best-selling *How to Raise an Adult* comes a memoir about the insecurities and microaggressions that come with growing up biracial in today’s America. This is a necessary and timely read for anyone looking not just to learn but to understand.
The debut collection of stories from National Magazine Award winner Jenny Zhang, *Sour Heart* is all about the chaos and wonder of being young in the city.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
