Embed from Getty Images

The pandemic is still affecting everything. Just… everything. There’s a surge in cases across the US, Canada, France, Spain, the UK and more. European countries are debating whether a second lockdown is needed to control the recent spike in cases. The stock market tumbled yesterday largely because of coronavirus numbers and fears of new lockdowns. A new range of social restrictions is coming worldwide (but probably not here in America). In the US, there’s so much misinformation being spread by Donald Trump, it’s hard to keep up with the real-time fact-checking. While the mortality rate doesn’t seem to be as bad right now as it was in March/April, the virus is no f–king joke and people of all ages are dying from it. Yes, the most at-risk demographic is “seniors with existing health problems.” But younger people, healthy people and kids are all getting the virus and suffering from it. According to Donald Trump though, the coronavirus “affects virtually nobody.” We’ve crossed 200,000 coronavirus deaths this week in America.

As the U.S. death toll from the novel coronavirus prepares to eclipse 200,000, President Trump on Monday incorrectly claimed at a campaign rally that covid-19 “affects virtually nobody” under the age of 18, again downplaying the extent of the pandemic and contradicting his previous statements that the virus poses a risk to “plenty of young people.”

In front of a crowd of mostly maskless supporters not adhering to social distancing in Swanton, Ohio, Trump suggested only older Americans with heart problems and preexisting conditions truly need to fear the virus.

“It affects elderly people, elderly people with heart problems and other problems. That’s what it really affects,” the president said. “In some states, thousands of people — nobody young. Below the age of 18, like, nobody. They have a strong immune system, who knows? Take your hat off to the young, because they have a hell of an immune system. But it affects virtually nobody. It’s an amazing thing.”

Trump’s sentiments go against the guidance of most public health experts and what he told Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward in an interview in March. In one of his interviews with Woodward for his book “Rage,” Trump acknowledged downplaying the severity of covid-19, saying that the virus affected “plenty of young people.”

“Now it’s turning out it’s not just old people, Bob,” Trump told Woodward. “But just today, and yesterday, some startling facts came out. It’s not just old, older.”

[From The Washington Post]

I’m including the clip below. Maybe it’s just the quality of the video, but Trump’s voice sounds different? He sounds sick. Which is this really strange cognitive dissonance: an old man in poor health, with an alleged history of mini-strokes and a history of bragging about passing his dementia test, talking in a strained, sickly voice about a deadly pandemic only affecting old people in poor health, in front of a crowd of maskless morons. “Virtually nobody.” Tell that to the thousands of families grieving loved ones. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of people who got evicted, or lost their jobs or who got really sick.

“It affects virtually nobody,” Trump says of the coronavirus, which has now killed 200,000 Americans and counting pic.twitter.com/qHrZvUWNhX

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 22, 2020

God, this really is the Coronavirus Superspreader Tour. There was maybe one mask to every twenty maskless people in Ohio. Ugh.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

The Duchess of Sussex’s barristers and the Daily Mail’s barristers were in court again this week for another… something. I guess it was the equivalent of a pre-trial hearing, and there also seem to be some depositions floating around. Each and every update I read about this case drives me further and further off the deep end. I honestly cannot understand the logic behind the arguments being made by the Mail. I guess they’re really just throwing everything against the wall and seeing what argument “works.” Their latest argument is that they had every right to publish Meghan’s letter to her father (and misrepresent that letter) because… Finding Freedom, a book published roughly 18 months after the Mail published Meghan’s letter! That’s it. That’s the argument. The Mail’s coverage is all over the place and they fail to even make THEIR OWN CASE sound logical. Oh, and they say Meghan plans to be in town to testify in the trial, which is scheduled to begin on January 11th (a ten-day trial). So maybe that will be her first time back to that pile of colonialist bones.

Meghan Markle 39, is suing the newspaper, it breached her ‘deepest and most private thoughts and feelings’. But the publisher’s lawyers said it was ‘difficult to see’ how she could complain about that, if she and Harry had helped with Finding Freedom which exposed their private thoughts and feelings. At a preliminary hearing, Antony White QC said in written submissions the biography ‘gives every appearance of having been written with their extensive co-operation’.

He added: ‘The book contains a great deal of detailed information about [Meghan’s] personal life, including a number of passages referring to her relationship and communications with her father, and a section referring to the letter which is at the heart of this case.’ The newspaper alleged Meghan, either directly or through friends, allowed the bombshell book to use intimate details to paint a ‘favourable’ picture of her life. He added that Meghan has previously stated she had disclosed the contents of the letter to the Kensington Palace communications team and she has also stated that she discussed it with them prior to it being sent.

Meghan’s lawyers have denied that she co-operated with authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand on ‘Finding Freedom,’ which was published in August, and said that any reference to her letter in the book were simply ‘extracts from the letter lifted from the defendant’s own articles’. They also deny that she used her friends to influence press and public opinion. In a written submission, Justin Rushbrooke QC said: ‘The claimant and her husband did not collaborate with the authors on the book, nor were they interviewed for it, nor did they provide photographs to the authors for the book.’

He added that neither Meghan nor Harry to spoke to Mr Scobie or Ms Durand, who he said, ‘were not given the impression that the claimant wanted the contents of the letter to be reproduced in the book’.

Mr Scobie has also submitted a witness statement to the High Court as part of the Duchess’ case – in which he denied allegations that Meghan had helped with the book. He insisted that he has spoken to both the Duke and Duchess ‘on occasions in the past,’ in his role as a royal correspondent – but ‘never about the book.’ Mr White QC challenged that assertion and said that he wanted to ‘test’ Mr Scobie’s evidence in cross-examination, when the full trial takes place next year.

He argued that the newspaper should now be allowed to file an amendment to its defence because the book contains descriptions of her ‘relationship and communication with her father,’ with her approval. He said that Meghan had ’caused or permitted information to be provided to the authors and co-operated with them – including by giving or permitting them to be given information about the letter’.

[From The Daily Mail]

I told you it was insane. The Mail’s legal argument really is “we had every right to publish this private letter because… a year after the publication of the letter, details about the letter appeared in Finding Freedom!” It makes no sense. And whether or not Meghan in any way participated in FF has zero to do with this case either. The Mail is just trying to trap her, drag her and create content and clickbait about her.

I’m also super-curious about the fact that Meghan spoke about the letter to people at Kensington Palace. Did that happen after the fact? Was she telling her media team that she wrote a letter to Toxic Tom and he continued to lie about her? Again, that has little to do with the actual lawsuit, but it is interesting.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

There were several big headlines yesterday about Ellen DeGeneres and “what she was going to say” in her first show back, after a summer full of awful headlines. The stories about Ellen’s toxic behavior started alongside the pandemic lockdown, and I think maybe it was just part of a “let’s talk about some sh-t that rarely gets talked about” movement. I also think Ellen was particularly vulnerable in that moment – her show had always been popular with advertisers and celebrities, but she was forced to record from home and the vibe fell flat. In any case, by the summer, the social media stories had turned into Buzzfeed articles about the toxic work environment, and actual rampant sexism, abuse and harassment behind-the-scenes on the show. Warner Bros did an internal investigation, and there was some chatter about how Ellen might just not come back.

Ellen did come back though. I’m left with the impression that she just won’t accept that the thin veil of “likeability” has been lifted and now we all see her for who she really is! So she’s been issuing vague apologies and promising her staff paid sick days and eye contact. A few higher-ups have been fired. Maybe that will help. So, I wanted to actually watch her first monologue of the season cold, and I think you should too!

First off, she looks like she had been crying just before she came out. She also looks like she’s gained some weight? Which actually looks great on her – she looks younger. As for what she says… much of it struck the right tone and I appreciate the fact that she stood there and said “the buck stops here, with me” basically. It is her responsibility, and I hope that the changes really are meaningful and that her employees have an easier time. She talks about how “Be Kind” kind of blew up in her face, but that she never meant it to be her sole characteristic and that of course she’s a multi-dimensional person and some of those dimensions suck (I’m paraphrasing).

I think the part of her argument which sort of falls flat is when she says “But I don’t think that I’m that good (of an actress) that I could come out here every day for 17 years and fool you. This is me, and my intention is to always be the best person I can be. And if I’ve ever let someone down, if I’ve ever hurt their feelings, I am so sorry for that.” Yeah. She’s been phoning it in for years, and the “Be Kind” mask slipped often enough to show the Real Ellen – someone who is mean, someone who enjoys casual cruelty, someone out-of-touch, someone who laughs at people, not with people. That was one of the reasons why I wondered if Ellen would even fight to keep her show, since she’s so clearly been bored with it for years now. Maybe this year was a wake-up call which invigorated her and the show will be better for it. But I think the mask will continue to slip, quite honestly.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red.

A post shared by Chara Chic (@chara_chic) on Sep 12, 2020 at 7:39pm PDT

The snack company, Bagel Bites, is asking a very pressing question: what we should properly classify as pants for the dogs in our life – two legs or four? Why does a snack company that turns mini bagels into little pizzas that teenagers rip the roof of their mouths of for care about dog pant classification? Who cares? The important part is the debate is finally here for us to witness. Okay, there is some logic. The consideration is in honor of National Dog Week that started on Sunday and runs through Saturday. And if you’ve ever left a Bagel Bite unattended for any amount of time, you know that the dog in your home is as invested in it as your teen, molten cheese be damned.

Bagel Bites is attempting to answer one of the internet’s biggest animal debates — What should dog pants look like?

Opinions on this important issue are divided into two camps: those that think dog pants should have four openings for all of a pooch’s legs, and those who think dog pants should only have two openings for just a canine’s back legs.

Bagel Bites has launched a campaign in celebration of National Dog Week (Sept. 20-26) to settle this argument, and, of course, they are taking it to Twitter, the internet’s Colosseum for bickering over just about anything.

A Twitter poll on the dog pant conundrum is now live on Bagel Bites’ Twitter and will be open for votes — for either four leg openings or two leg openings — through Sept 22.

“Bagel Bites pizza snacks have a long history as the unlikely snacking combination that everyone can agree with, “Maya McDonald, brand activations lead at Kraft Heinz, said in a statement to PEOPLE. “We’re leveraging the universal appeal of the brand to start a healthy discussion, because no matter what side of the debate you’re on — we’re all winners when dogs are wearing pants.”

[From People]

The Great Dog Pants Debate, as it will hence be known in the annals of history, is the latest in the #BiteSizedDebates Bagel Bites has posited. Other notable discussions were: what comes first, the cereal or the milk? Is it called soda or pop? AutoCorrect or no? But I think we can all agree, this is by far the most important conversation yet.

So how are you leaning? My first reaction was back end/two leg is the suitable dog pant protocol. But those front appendages are not dog arms, they, too, are dog legs. So by adding clothing to the back and not the front, are we prioritizing a dog’s legs? But then there’s the four-legged pant argument and all I have against it is that the four-legged pants look absurd. However when it comes to dressing one’s pet, is absurdity not the end goal – always? So am I not winning by going with this choice? You see, this has really ripped the lid off the dog sartorial world. I’m not going to tell you how to vote, only that it is crucial that you do vote by the deadline – which is today!

If a dog wore pants, how would they wear them? For #NationalDogWeek, we’re asking you to cast your vote and settle the debate! See the big reveal on 9/23 ?#BiteSizedDebates

— Bagel Bites? (@BagelBites) September 18, 2020

The winning pant will be available on the howdodogswearpants.com website so vote intelligently; we don’t want a bunch of improperly attired pooches out there. But we do know one thing for sure: a shirt does not a dog pants make. So for the Shirters out there – find another arena.

Also – cat parents – start negotiations with Mr. Whiskers now, because you know the feline version will follow and it won’t be an easy sell.

If you are looking for clothing options for your canine counterpart, check out the Instagrams below, including overalls and waterproof joggers!

A post shared by BNYDOGS (@bnydogs) on Sep 11, 2020 at 11:16am PDT

A post shared by Spencer (@spenny_doodle) on Sep 5, 2020 at 11:16pm PDT

A post shared by Bark & Fitz (@barkandfitz_) on Aug 14, 2020 at 8:50am PDT

A post shared by Ruff Stitched ™? (@ruffstitched) on Sep 4, 2020 at 11:01am PDT

A post shared by Ruff Stitched ™? (@ruffstitched) on Sep 11, 2020 at 11:01am PDT

Photo credit: Instagram

I’m not a political pessimist, I’m a realist. Which is basically the same difference these days. Almost four years ago, I knew how bad it would get with Donald Trump as president. People didn’t want to believe it. They wanted to normalize him or put in some kind of nonsensical historical context. The Republicans in Congress moved in lockstep with him. And here we are: Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell are going to put someone in Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat before the election. I’m telling you that as a realist: it’s going to happen. Of course we should fight. Of course we should be outraged about it. But all of us need to know that the worst is going to happen, and the Senate is going to replace RBG in the next few weeks.

Ever since RBG passed, the Democrats have been raking in money from donors. I would imagine that that Biden-Harris campaign and all of the Democrats running for the House and Senate have easily raised in $50-70 million or more in the past three days. Suddenly, all of the hypotheticals about SCOTUS we hear every four years have become less hypothetical and more like a living nightmare. I sincerely hope that we vote a Democratic majority in the House and Senate and Joe Biden as president. But again, it will be closing the barn door after the horses have bolted. Trump and McConnell are going to replace RBG in the next few weeks. So now Democratic Senators are trying to figure out what to do and what threats to make:

Facing what they acknowledge to be a nearly impossible task of blocking President Donald Trump from filling a Supreme Court vacancy, Senate Democrats are divided over what precise tactics they should deploy in the days and weeks ahead. On a caucus call Saturday, members laid out two types of approaches that they thought would best suit the party in its efforts to stop the president from filling the seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Friday from complications of pancreatic cancer. One faction felt that a dramatic show of resistance with overt political threats would provide the pressure needed to at least slow down the march of Senate Republicans towards confirming Trump’s inevitable nominee.

Another faction, composed mainly of moderates, felt that members should stay squarely focused on the implications that the confirmation would have on health care—arguing that the public, especially in key swing states, would be moved by fears that a new court (and even the current eight-member one) could allow for the full destruction of the Affordable Care Act.

“Those kinds of conversations are going on as we speak,” said one senior Democrat privy to the conversations. “Some want to keep the focus on the impact the court will have on health care, others want one or more message-type events to try and clarify what exactly is at stake.”

The divide was confirmed by two other sources, one of whom downplayed the disagreement as part of standard strategy sessions. A separate source, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the contents of the call, said that an additional fear was expressed by some members over the party openly contemplating adding court seats as retribution for Republicans filling Ginsburg’s post.

“There was a discussion of, ‘OK, if we talk through this and lay out the things we are willing to do, what happens if we lose?’” the source, a Senate Democratic aide, said. “That’s an obvious concern because we’ve just given [Senate Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell the basis and moral authority to go do it himself. Suddenly, it’s an eight-three court.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Even if the Democrats get a majority in the House and Senate and we get Biden-Harris in the White House, I seriously doubt they’ll add seats to the Supreme Court. I just… doubt it. I feel like the Supreme Court is just… lost for several generations. Also: it’s asinine that Democrats in Congress can’t just RUN on reproductive rights and the court. This is why they’ve been raising money hand over fist for days – because WOMEN know what’s going to happen to the court, and we know Roe is about to be overturned.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

For years, I used to phone-bank for Democrats during the big election cycles. I haven’t done that this year, because… I don’t know, the pandemic or something. I’m sure the Biden-Harris campaign probably has organizers around and they could give me a call sheet, but honestly… as I get older, I sort of understand more and more that most people know who they’re voting for by September anyway. So by calling them, you are possibly harassing them or annoying them. Still, many voters on the fence genuinely like the attention of people calling them or speaking to them in person. You never know. It turns out, the Duchess of Sussex has cold-called voters. Hm.

The Duchess of Sussex has cold-called people to ask them to vote, Gloria Steinem revealed, claiming she “came home” for the presidential election. The duchess, who as a member of the British royal family could not share her political views publicly, “came home to vote,” Ms. Steinem said.

In an interview with Access Hollywood, Ms. Steinem was asked how Meghan inspired her.

“She has a kind of stereotype over her head that is ‘princess’…The whole idea of ??’princess’ is a problem. We [America] had a whole revolution to get rid of royalty. Meg is herself smart, authentic, funny, political. She came home to vote. The first thing we did, and why she came to see me, was that we were sitting at the dining table where I am and we cold-called voters.. Said ‘Hello, I’m Meg’ and ‘Hello, I’m Gloria’ and ‘are you going to vote?’ That was your initiative.”

[From The Telegraph]

Wait… did Gloria have a call list or not? Were they just going through the phone book or something? No. I doubt it. If you have Gloria Steinem meeting with the Duchess of Sussex, of course someone gave her a call list. Surely, what they were really doing is cold-calling potential donors to various feminist and political campaigns?? That would be a much better use of everyone’s time, to have Meghan calling Emily’s List donors or Democratic Party megadonors. But of course, if Gloria admitted that, that would be “politics.” Lordy, I hope Meghan is actually doing more than cold-calls to potential voters.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Backgrid.

A post shared by Jodie Turner-Smith (@jodiesmith) on Aug 12, 2020 at 12:39pm PDT

Jodie Turner-Smith gave birth to her daughter with Dawson’s Creek actor Joshua Jackson in April. Jodie is known for her beautiful and smooth complexion and many people have wondered what she does to maintain such healthy looking skin.

Post giving birth Turner-Smith had issues with hormonal break outs and she told Vogue that she would use her breast milk for spot treatments. Recently, Jodie interviewed with Vogue again and stated that she now uses her breast milk in her serums. She believes that the lactic acid in her breast milk is doing wonders for her skin. Here are a few quotes about her new skin care regimen and how she wishes to raise her daughter:

“My current beauty secret is that I put breast milk in all of my face serums,” the actress, 34, told Vogue on Wednesday, September 16. “My skin is very sensitive, so I use a light cleanser, and then I put on a serum with aloe and breast milk that I literally squeeze right into my hands from my boob. I think it’s the lactic acid. I’ve just found that the milk has been revolutionary.”

The Queen & Slim star previously spoke about using her breast milk to combat postpartum pimples.

“I’ve been getting so many spots lately (hormones)?,” the England native said in her Instagram Story in May. “I put breast milk on them last night and today my skin looks much better.”

She and husband Joshua Jackson welcomed their baby girl in April. The model said on Wednesday that she plans to teach their little one about self-confidence in the future.

“That self-­assuredness is what is going to help her navigate life,” Turner-Smith explained to the outlet. “It’s important to impart to my daughter what is beautiful about her, and about who she comes from and where she comes from and what is powerful about that.”

[From Us]

Jodie is stunning. Every time I see a picture of her she reminds me of a young Grace Jones. It’s unfair how beautiful she is. I personally like her relationship with Joshua Jackson because he was her teenage crush, similarly to Lisa Bonet and Jason Momoa’s relationship.

I love how she says she will raise her daughter with confidence and I feel that is important. Especially in a society that pushes a narrative that women’s confidence should be connected to external factors and validation. Anyhow, I wonder if breast milk in homemade breast milk serums must come from the person using them? In any case, I think she may be on to something with these homemade remedies. Women for centuries had a profound understanding of the human body before modern western medicine.

In the meantime, I am going to take a page from Jodie’s book and look for some face serums with lactic acid. I want to see if they will help me get that glow because I am in desperate need. My skin lately has been going through its 40+ phase of getting dry and patchy in spots.

A post shared by Jodie Turner-Smith (@jodiesmith) on Sep 3, 2020 at 12:31pm PDT

A post shared by Jodie Turner-Smith (@jodiesmith) on Sep 6, 2020 at 12:50pm PDT

A post shared by Jodie Turner-Smith (@jodiesmith) on Jul 17, 2020 at 3:17pm PDT

Embed from Getty Images

The Emmys this year was a real mixed bag. I think nominees enjoyed chilling at home while they waited for their categories to come up. A few casts chose to hang out together to await the results, like the Schitt’s Creek cast and, inexplicably, half the Friends cast to represent The Morning Show. Maybe that was because the other half of The Morning Show, Reese Witherspoon, was in her own front yard with her show, Little Fires Everywhere. Reese and co-star, Kerry Washington, hosted their own party on the same night of the Emmys, only it wasn’t an Emmy party. The ladies decided to host a New Years Eve party because, like the rest of the world, they’ve had it with 2020.

Like many of us, Reese Witherspoon and Kerry Washington are done with 2020.

The Little Fires Everywhere costars took in Sunday night’s virtual Emmy Awards from a backyard gathering with a New Year’s Eve theme, complete with sparkly sunglasses, champagne flutes and hats.

When host Jimmy Kimmel asked why, Witherspoon, 44, said, “Well, cause we’re ready for this year to be over.”

“You can do that? You could just end the year?” Kimmel asked.
“Well, yeah, I mean, we’re Emmy-nominated television producers,” Witherspoon joked, before Washington, 43, began a 10-second countdown to 2021.

[From People]

Like most bits, it wasn’t especially funny (you can see the clip below), but it was cute. The show was only nominated in two categories, Outstanding Limited Series and Kerry got a nod for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Limited Series or Movie. They lost both, which wasn’t too much of a surprise, so the NYE angle to their gathering was a fun way to handle it. To their credit, the ladies seem to be having a good time with it. Reese looked on the bright side of not receiving any acting nomination for any of her shows this season by focusing on the positive, like her especially short Emmy commute. Neither let a virtual celebration stop them from pulling out the fashion stops, all of which are posted below. Kerry’s “Red Carpet’” floral Oscar de la Renta gown was delightful and I loved how her sleek bob really showed off her Monica Vivander earrings. For the NYEmmy party, Kerry slipped into a Dolce and Gabbana leopard print gown that she paired with Chopard emeralds. I’d give my eye teeth for either pair of earrings. Reese wore a LBD by Nicolas Ghesquiere from Louis Vuitton Fall/Winter 2020.

I really liked the Little Fires Everywhere adaption and I loved the book. I did think it was some of the best range I’ve seen from Reese. Kerry was excellent but I’ve always found her a versatile actor. I thought the series deserved more recognition but it was a very tough year because there was just a lot of great television. So I’m happy the show was recognized and I’m really glad the co-producers celebrated the victory of having turned out some quality programming. I know there’s talk of a sequel so maybe they’ll be back for another NYEmmy’s Party.

Why NOT just skip to 2021? @KerryWashington @ReeseW #Emmys pic.twitter.com/jjJcDXIT2o

— Jimmy Kimmel (@jimmykimmel) September 21, 2020

Instagram and Twitter

Does anyone watch the later hours of the Today Show? Today is the biggest property of the NBC News division and they milk it for all its worth, but hey, at least they finally got Megyn Kelly out of there. Nowadays, the later hours are hosted by Hoda Kotb and Jenna Bush Hager. On a recent episode, they bonded over being mom-shamed by viewers/fans. Hoda’s story was especially rough – Hoba became a mom via adoption in February 2017, then again in April 2019 (both girls). Hoda was 52 when she adopted her first daughter, and 54 for the second daughter. That’s “why” she was mom-shamed: her age.

Hoda Kotb and Jenna Bush Hager are opening up about their experiences with mom-shaming. On Friday’s edition of TODAY with Hoda & Jenna, the co-hosts and fellow mothers talked about how they have been on the receiving end of critical comments in terms of how they parent — and in Kotb’s case, her decision to even become a parent at all.

“I got a physical letter in the mail … from a woman who wrote, ‘Who do you think you are, having kids at that age?’ ” said Kotb, 56, who’s mom to daughters Hope Catherine, 17 months, and Haley Joy, 3½. “I literally read it and thought, ‘Oh my God, I can’t believe someone put a stamp on it and sent it.’ ”

While the television journalist “literally tore it up,” she admitted that she “felt horrible in that moment, because there is something that bothers you inside about that.”

“But then I thought, ‘Who would take a piece of paper and a pen and write that and fold it and put it in the envelope with a stamp and go to the trouble of mailing it?’ It took effort,” she added.

Bush Hager, 38, chimed in with words of affirmation for her friend, telling Kotb, “Anybody that would see the way you are with [Haley and Hope] … that stranger that took the time to write something so mean when she doesn’t even know what you’re like as a mother. She’s never seen you hold those little girls. That infuriates me. And I think why it’s so hard is that, as parents, we’re already questioning ourselves constantly.”

“Yes, that’s why it hurts,” said Kotb. “Every parent is second guessing. [And] we don’t know. Have you ever been on a plane with your kid crying? You know what that feels like. And anyone who gives you that disdained look either doesn’t have children, doesn’t understand or forgot how hard it is to deal with.”

[From People]

That really is awful. I’ll admit to thinking a certain negative sort of way when I was much younger, and the idea of new-motherhood in a person’s late 40s or early 50s seemed crazy (that’s a bit generational for me too – growing up, new moms Hoda’s age were not common whatsoever). Like, when you’re young, you can’t comprehend it. But as I get older, I understand how it feels like various choices slipped away – a woman thought she was going to meet a guy, get married, have a baby and a career and then suddenly she’s 40 and she only has the career. There are no guarantees in life, sh-t happens, and I’d rather see a woman become a mom in her 50s who really WANTS to be a mother and has the means to do so. As opposed to many of the horror stories we hear about, you know? And Hoda seems to just love being a mom so much.

Jenna’s story of being mom-shamed was less about age and more about the fact that she dared to, you know, travel for work and leave her kids behind for a few days. Jenna spoke about traveling to Vietnam with Michelle Obama and leaving her three children, including son Hal (who was born August 2019) behind because she thought the trip was that important. She got slammed on social media by busybodies who were like “why do you care about kids in Vietnam, care about your own kids!” People just suck. People are so eager to shame a woman at the drop of a hat.

Photos courtesy of WENN, covers courtesy of People.

As CB reported yesterday, Schitt’s Creek was one of the big winners during Sunday’s Emmy broadcast, sweeping all the major comedy categories for which it was nominated. Not that it needs to be justified, but those 15 Emmys were the first Emmys the show has won, being only nominated for the first time last year and in just four categories (they won none of them).

As everyone knows by now, I could not be happier. I didn’t come to the Rose(bud) Motel until late in season two, but as a devoted fan I was consistently disappointed with the lack of recognition the show got in the US. Canada, of course, knew the value of the show and rewarded it consistently season after season. But this was the Roses’ year, in what Daniel Levy called one of the Schittiest real life storylines ever. In that interview, Dan casually mentioned that he’d hoped the gang would get together, possibly in Eugene Levy’s backyard, to celebrate their evening. And that they did. But in even more typical Rose fashion, the casual backyard bbq turned into a glam evening at Casa Loma in Toronto. Unfortunately, their initial plans to invite cast and their SOs got scrapped when Canada increased COVID restrictions by reducing the number of inside gathering from 50 attendees to 15. Limited numbers didn’t stop the Schitt gang from celebrating the hell out of it, though- and all while taking every COVID precaution necessary. They were all tested and quarantined prior to the party.

While the Schitt’s Creek watch party in Canada looked like the place to be to view the 2020 Emmy Awards as the show racked up win after win — Eugene Levy (who himself took home outstanding lead actor in a comedy) revealed the cast had actually planned a bigger bash but were forced to downsize due to the ongoing coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

Explaining how the party came about, Eugene, 73, told PeopleTV: “I kind of first heard about a get-together on a few interviews that my son [Daniel Levy] had given, talking about ‘Oh, we might have a big party in the backyard of my parents’ home.’ We went, ‘Really? Okay!’”

“Then it transformed itself into a lovely gathering at Casa Loma in Toronto, obeying every COVID rule of how we could get 15 people” to the party, Eugene said. “Originally we had all our nominees and plus ones and that was like 38 people — because up until two days ago in the province of Ontario, you could have 50 people indoors and 100 people outdoors.”

He shared, however, that just two days ago, “because the [case] numbers started to spike close to 400, they brought the [party limit] down.”

“So, unfortunately, a lot of people couldn’t come. But being able to celebrate with everyone who works so hard on the show was just a great way to cap it off,” Eugene said.

[From People]

By the looks of things, the diminished number did nothing to curb their joy. And not being there certainly didn’t stop any of the other cast members from celebrating. Dan posted this collection of his sister’s, Sarah Levy who played Twyla on the show, reactions to her real and TV family’s wins:

Last night happened so that this montage of my sister’s reactions could exist. Love you, @sarahlevy_ . Wish you could have been there with us…but this is almost better? Thanks for capturing it @outerbridge_g. ? pic.twitter.com/qKCIcdZtjj

— dan levy (@danjlevy) September 21, 2020

Following the party, the cast returned to their homes and plus ones. Some of them ,like Eugene’s wife Deborah Levy and Catherine O’Hara’s husband Bo Welch, have waited decades for this night.Dan celebrated with his true love, Mariah Carey, on Twitter:

I love you!

— dan levy (@danjlevy) September 21, 2020

Asked the next morning about the show’s historic wins, San said that they could not have gone out on a better note, “what an absolutely unbelievable way to end our series. I don’t think you could ever ask for a better conclusion to a story than tonight. We are absolutely thrilled.” He also said that, while movie is not out of the question, we shouldn’t hold our breath.

Chris Elliott was not present last night and his absence from most things Schitt’s usually raises an eyebrow or two. Chris is a notoriously private guy and almost always abstains from awards show, cast shows and reunions. He did record a video for Eugene’s Lifetime achievement award at the Newport Beach Film Festival and has spoken of his fondness for the crew and show many times. Well, many times for Chris, at least.

One of the shows that lost to Schitts in the Outstanding Comedy Series category was The Good Place, another which ended its run last season and also one of my faves. Even though they didn’t win, they were gracious and clever in their loss:

Congratulations to Schirt’s Creek!

Wait, why can’t we say Schirt’s?

— The Good Place is taking it sleazy (@nbcthegoodplace) September 21, 2020

Congratulations to everyone at Schitt’s Creek. I’m sorry to see it go but delighted it went out on top.

REAL recognize REAL!! Congrats Dan and thanks for the @insecurehbo love!! https://t.co/hX7fmyXyCa

— Yvonne Orji (@YvonneOrji) September 21, 2020

Photo credit: Twitter and Instagram