Funnyman Jimmy Kimmel and his pregnant wife, Molly McNearney, radiated the premiere of Office Christmas Party in Westwood, Calif. on Wednesday (December 7).

The expectant mama, 38, looked beautiful in a black maternity dress paired with red heels.

On Monday, the comedian announced the couple’s second pregnancy on Jimmy Kimmel Live!

At the same time, Kimmel revealed that he will host the 89th Academy Awards in February.

“Also, my wife, is hosting a baby inside her body,” he joked. “So that’s what’s coming.”

He went on to joke about the baby’s gender and moniker.

“We got the ultrasound — which is weird because it’s like you’re already spying on the baby — but we asked the technician not to tell us whether we’re having a boy or a girl,” he said. “Our plan is to let the child decide for itself. We want that to be a surprise, but I have been trying to think of names that would work for a boy or girl. So far, I’ve come up with two: No. 1 Dyson after the vacuum or Gelatin with a J. No? That’s exactly what my wife said.”

He added: “So — there’s a lot of exciting stuff going on. Congratulations to me. I’m hosting the Oscars and I had sex. Two things as a teenage boy I never thought would be possible.”

The new addition will join 2-year-old big sister Jane.

Kimmel is also dad to daughter Katie, 25, and son Kevin, 22, with ex-wife Gina Kimmel.

View Slideshow »»

View All Photos »»

There has been a long-simmering feud between Prince Charles and Prince Andrew for years, really. But the feud got ramped up this year, as it is believed that Andrew has basically asked his mother, the Queen, to intervene. The feud is about a lot of things, but the main argument these days is that Andrew isn’t a fan of Charles’ idea for a “streamlined monarchy” with only William, Harry and Kate getting any kind of priority and/or status. Andrew wants his two daughters, Eugenie and Beatrice, to always retain their HRH-status, and to be acknowledged as full-time working royals, with all of the perks and status that come along with that. The Queen is said to be in agreement with Andrew, mostly because she’s very fond of Eugenie and Beatrice, but who knows what will happen long-term, especially when Charles is king?

Well, apparently Andrew is thinking long-term. Especially now that it’s looking more and more like Eugenie is close to announcing her engagement to her long-time boyfriend Jack Brooksbank. Eugenie, I feel, plays the long game more than Beatrice. Eugenie seems to have made peace with the Duchess of Cambridge and the Middletons, and Eugenie has taken an apartment at Kensington Palace this year too. She seems to want to do what it takes to become a working royal. And now Andrew is advocating on her behalf (and on behalf of Beatrice) that his daughters’ future husbands should be given earldoms, lest his girls be treated like mere commoners once they marry.

While all of the Queen’s children got to be HRH, only those grandchildren born to the monarch’s sons do so. Thus, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie – daughters of Prince Andrew – are HRHs but Peter and Zara, children of Princess Anne, are not.

Now Andrew wants to improve the status of his daughters by persuading the Queen and her heir Prince Charles to allow their future husbands to have earldoms.

‘Otherwise his daughters’ children will be commoners, defined as one of the ordinary or common people, as opposed to the aristocracy or to royalty,’ my source explains. Imagine!

[From The Daily Mail]

In case anyone is wondering, it really is that easy to get an earldom. The Queen only has to, like, sign a paper or publicly declare it, and BOOM! Jack Brooksbank gets an earldom. I remember in the lead-up to then-Kate Middleton’s wedding to Prince William, there was so much conversation about what title should would get, and how gaudy it could possibly be. In the end, I’m glad that Kate was only made into a duchess. Something I’ve always wondered about blood princesses though… when they marry, can they choose to keep their “maiden name/maiden title”? Like, say Eugenie marries Jack. Can she publicly declare, “I’m keeping my maiden name” and she’ll just be Princess Eugenie, rather than Mrs. Brooksbank? Anyway, I think it’s interesting that Andrew wants to get this settled right now, while his mother is alive. Because you know King Charles isn’t going to give Bea and Eugenie’s husbands any earldoms.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Tina Fey is the recipient of this year’s Sherry Lansing Leadership Award, given by the Hollywood Reporter as part of their annual Women In Hollywood event. I think Tina is a good choice – she’s a writer, producer and actress, she’s creating hit TV shows and developing scripts, and she is a role model in and out of the industry. Does Tina have some flaws? Sure. She can be a bit myopic about diversity issues, and she can be a full-on Mean Girl to other women who she doesn’t respect. But overall, the world is a better place because of Tina Fey. For her award, THR gave her this week’s cover, and they sent David Letterman to interview her in New York. The result is actually a great read about politics, feminism, child-rearing, comedy and more. You can read the full piece here at THR. Some highlights:

On President Trump: “How are we going to proceed with any kind of dignity in an increasingly ugly world? And I actually was thinking — because I’ve got to write something for when I get the award — to use Sherry Lansing as an inspiration because she was a lady who worked in a very, very ugly business and always managed to be quite dignified. But in a world where the president makes fun of handicapped people and fat people, how do we proceed with dignity? I want to tell people, “If you do two things this year, watch Idiocracy by Mike Judge and read Leni Riefenstahl’s 800-page autobiography and then call it a year… She grew up in Germany. She was in many ways a brilliant pioneer. She pioneered sports photography as we know it. She’s the one who had the idea to dig a trench next to the track for the Olympics and put a camera on a dolly. But she also rolled with the punches and said, “Well, he’s the fuhrer. He’s my president. I’ll make films for him.” She did some terrible, terrible things. And I remember reading [her book] 20 years ago, thinking, “This is a real lesson, to be an artist who doesn’t roll with what your leader is doing just because he’s your leader.”

Whether she worries about her daughters dealing with jerky men: “I worry, [but] I have confidence that they are both strong enough to fight back, and I think they will feel empowered to call attention to any wrongdoing in their lives.

How she feels about getting awards: “This one makes me a little nervous. Have I really done enough to warrant this? Sometimes I tell myself, “Well, what would a guy do? He’d take it.” They wanted to give me that Mark Twain Prize [for humor] in 2009, and I said, “I don’t think this is appropriate.” And Lorne Michaels said to me, “Just take it while your parents are alive,” which is very smart.

Awareness of feminism: “It feels like we were on the precipice of things getting pretty good, and now we’re in a bit of a throwback moment. I definitely came out of last month feeling misogyny is much more real than two years ago. But the thing I worry about [more] than actual human interaction is the internet. Because that’s just despicable: people just being able to be awful to each other without having to be in the same room. It’s metastasizing now, thanks to our glorious president-elect who can’t muster the dignity of a seventh-grader. It’s so easy for people to abuse each other and to abandon all civility.

On Alec Baldwin’s Twitter beef with Trump: “Did you see that my friend Mr. [Alec] Baldwin is in a Twitter feud with our president-elect? At one level, it just makes me feel sick for the state of the world because it’s so beneath a president, but also my feeling is: “You think you’re good at being a jerk on Twitter? You will now face the grandmaster of being a jerk on Twitter.”

TV is better than film: “I went to vote for the People’s Choice Awards online because actors in our show got nominated, and I realized that I hate everything. Every movie. “That was dumb, didn’t see it, haven’t seen it, hated it.” TV might be better than movies. Shh, don’t tell anyone… No, I stand by it. TV’s better than movies. Everybody knows it. I mean, we act like they’re so great, but what was the last great movie you saw?

[From THR]

The last great movie I saw was Moonlight, and I would recommend it to Tina Fey! But I agree, we’re living in a golden age of television, but that’s only because network television screwed the pooch a decade ago. Now premium cable and basic cable have all of the best stuff. As for what she says about Trump… what I find interesting is that I’ve never gotten the impression that Tina Fey is a liberal person. She’s said before that her father was a Republican, and for the most part, she avoids talking politics in interviews. But it’s clear she absolutely loathes Trump. Also: “I definitely came out of last month feeling misogyny is much more real than two years ago.” Yes. And it’s heartbreaking, isn’t it? Like, it just feels like we’ve taken a giant step back. It’s sickening.

Photos courtesy of THR.

Sarah Jessica Parker covers the January issue of InStyle and yes, we’re already getting the January 2017 covers. I won’t say that this year has flown by, but it does feel like the past few months have gone by in the blink of an eye. I’m still sitting around here, thinking it’s September. Anyway, SJP is promoting her HBO show Divorce, which I already believe will prove itself to be even more white-privilege-y and one-percenty than HBO’s Girls. But we’ll see! SJP talks to InStyle about why she decided to go back to HBO, and she chats about her style and more. Some highlights:

On her style influences as a young woman: “…street imagery and girls on the subway more than anything. I was like, ‘How can I do that? How can I afford to do that? What’s my version of that?’ Honestly, thrift stores played such a huge part in my life before Sex and the City. And, of course, my mom was the biggest influence. She had pretty firm ideas about how we would dress.”

On the evolution of her style: “I dress based on what I have. I’m not a huge shopper, but I love beautiful things. To be able to borrow them is ridiculously fortunate, and I enjoy every second of that. I have a pretty standard wardrobe, though I’ve got wonderful shoes. That’s more so the case now. I genuinely don’t know what people think of me or want from me.”

On playing a less-than-enviable character in HBO’s Divorce: “It’s taken me a long time to find anybody who I thought had as much potential as [Sex and the City’s] Carrie Bradshaw, who was as complicated, human, layered, and objectionable yet understandable, relatable yet foreign. People think she was a second skin for me, but she wasn’t. I didn’t know her at first. She was different from me as anybody I’d ever played or known. So I feel like Frances is equally as interesting and unknown to me.”

On deleting her Twitter: “I don’t have the constitution for Twitter. It’s a boneyard, a feast of vitriol. I just don’t want to participate in it. But on Instagram people tend to be more civilized. And they can disagree and have objections, but I don’t find it as mean-spirited a community.”

On handling celebrity as a parent: “We talk about it with the kids to the degree that they want to, but we don’t do it unsolicited…Like any parent, I just try to be present, pay attention, ask questions, and then allow them the freedom to monitor themselves. Hopefully, they’ll live by our example. It’s hard, because you want to give them freedom, but as a parent you have to be willing to not be liked by your child sometimes.”

[From InStyle]

Twitter is “a boneyard, a feast of vitriol.” Eh. While it’s difficult to be a woman on the internet full-stop, I don’t really believe that somehow Instagram followers are nicer than Twitter followers or vice versa. And the stories behind SJP leaving Twitter are kind of interesting too – she left Twitter after the Met Gala, when no one understood her silly Hamilton-cosplay outfit and SJP went a little bit crazy trying to defend it online. But there were other incidents too, like tweeters talking sh-t about her kids. Basically, if SJP doesn’t want to be on Twitter, God bless. But the trolls will still find her on Instagram, I’m just saying.

As for what she says about her complex character on Divorce… I think she’s already preparing herself for the thinkpieces about why her character is an awful, privileged whiner. Let the games commence!

Photos courtesy of WENN, cover courtesy of InStyle.

As we discussed yesterday, Brad Pitt’s lawyers requested an “emergency hearing” so that all current and future custodial documents could be sealed. Sources claimed that Brad was very irritated by Angelina Jolie’s filing last Friday, which basically solidified the temporary custodial situation which has exists since October, meaning that Brad’s visitation with the kids is still monitored, and he only sees the kids when the shrink says so. Brad’s irritation was that Angelina “publicized” their custody situation, only it felt like he publicized (and has been publicizing) it too, with strategic leaks to People Magazine and TMZ. Well, long story short, Brad got his emergency hearing, only his request was denied. Nothing will be sealed… for now.

Brad Pitt‘s request for an emergency hearing to have all his and Angelina Jolie divorce documents sealed has been denied, PEOPLE has confirmed. A judge ruled on Wednesday that the filing did not meet the requirements for sealing details at this time. Both Pitt and Jolie’s attorneys were present in court for the decision.

Laura Wasser, Jolie’s attorney, says the actress does not oppose sealing documents to prevent details from becoming public, but that Pitt’s team didn’t consult with them before their hearing, which is why she opposed it at this time. While the two sides continue to hash out legal custody, per previous agreement, the couple’s six children remain with Jolie, with Pitt granted visitation accompanied by a therapist.

[From People]

And because Brad and Angelina are both pro-privacy, it seems both their sides went to TMZ to talk sh-t about the other side. Brad’s side says Angelina is hellbent on airing their dirty laundry. Angelina’s side says that his bad behavior started this whole thing and he’s trying to push around his weight and short-change the system:

His side has been fuming since Jolie filed their temporary custody arrangement in court last week — a move Brad believes only served to air their dirty laundry in public and damage the children.

We’re told Angelina felt it necessary to file the docs in order to have the court enforce the terms — specifically the part about letting a therapist make the call on when Brad can start having unmonitored visits.

In docs, Angelina’s lawyer says Brad’s effort to seal the whole case isn’t so much about protecting the children — as his side has claimed — but more about keeping his own actions hidden … because it was “[Brad’s] conduct at the center of the DCFS and FBI investigations.”

Sources connected to the case tell us Brad has been trying to “push past the process.” As one source put it, he was acting like a “celebrity who is used to getting whatever he wants” … and after the DCFS investigation cleared him of criminal wrongdoing, what he wanted was to have solo time with the children.

Our Brad sources deny he’s made any effort to change the temporary custody deal. We’re told Angelina also wants the whole case to remain private — as long as Brad sticks to the custody arrangement they both signed off on months ago.

[From TMZ]

Yep, SUPER MESSY. After that, all hell broke loose with tit-for-tat leaks to TMZ. Pro-Brad sources got the ball rolling, with TMZ reporting that Brad “thinks he’s getting the short end of the stick when it comes to his visitation time with his kids, and has a plan to change that.” His plan involves extra monitored visits every week with the kids, broken up into two-kids per meeting. Brad has apparently been pleading with the therapists and the court that he wants more time with the kids and he’s been trying to circumvent the custodial deal, in which those visits would be approved by the therapists. Like, his lawyers have been emailing Angelina’s lawyers, trying to get more meetings without consulting the therapists. That’s why Angelina wanted to ensure that the current custody arrangement was enforced. After that, TMZ did another story which seems to come from Angelina’s team. Angelina’s lawyers have been imploring Brad’s lawyers to allow the kids (and Brad and Angelina) to participate in trauma counseling following what happened on the plane. Sources say “Jolie thinks the kids are so bad off because of what they witnessed on the plane, and the therapy process they’ve been going through isn’t getting the job done.” Apparently, Pax and Maddox still have no interest in seeing Brad either.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Over the past few days, People Magazine and Us Weekly have had competing stories about the Kimye marriage. I believed that people deep within the Kardashian camp – perhaps even Kris Jenner – were leaking stories about Kim Kardashian and Kanye West’s marriage for the past few weeks, but the competing narratives have sort of fallen off a cliff and now I don’t know what to believe. People Mag’s story has sources saying things like “Kanye and Kim had a stressful few months. It’s been a tense time.” Tense is an understatement. Kim is also described as “the dutiful, responsible, loving spouse that one would expect.” And sources insist that Kanye is doing better, that he has a lot of people around him, supporting him, and that he has seen North and Saint since he returned home. But Us Weekly says there are bigger issues going on and that Kim “wants a divorce.”

Kim Kardashian is considering a new story line for 2017. Two and a half years after she and Kanye West wed in a multimillion-dollar affair at a 16th century Italian fortress, “she wants a divorce,” a Kardashian friend claims in the new issue of Us Weekly. Previously married to record producer Damon Thomas and basketball pro Kris Humphries, the 36-year-old isn’t rushing to file papers just yet, adds the pal, but she is planning her next steps.

“It will take some time before she can do anything,” claims the friend, alleging that she’s trying to build a case for full custody of kids North, 3, and Saint, 12 months, “but she doesn’t want to stay married.”

The Keeping Up With the Kardashians star is already distancing herself from the “Fade” rapper, 39. Since his November 30 release from UCLA Medical Center’s Resnick Neuropsychiatric Hospital — following a nine-day stay for what his physician Michael Farzam dubbed an episode of “temporary psychosis” — West has been receiving outpatient treatment at an L.A.-area rental, multiple sources tell Us. Kardashian, who has remained with the children at their 9,000-square-foot spread in L.A.’s Bel Air, “is being very protective and doesn’t want Kanye around the kids right now,” explains the friend.

The Kardashian friend says she won’t make any decisions until West is fully recovered. Until then, adds the pal, “she’s being a supportive wife.” And the reality star — who has been in self-imposed seclusion since being robbed in Paris October 3 — is happy the musician is on the mend. “She cares about Kanye and feels relieved he’s getting the help he needs,” continues the friend, “but she’s felt trapped for a while.”

[From Us Weekly]

Basically, they’re making it sound like Kim has already decided to file for divorce once Kanye gets back on his feet. There’s a PR angle to that too – Kim would look so bad if she “abandoned” her husband when he was struggling with mental health issues so publicly. Of course, she’s going to be villainized no matter what, all you have to do is look at the pretzel logic people used to attack Kim for being the victim of an armed robbery. My guess is that Kim probably has considered divorce, but I also think she probably just wants time to breathe, to reassess, and to figure out her next steps after a horrendous few months.

Also: since Us Weekly published their story, “sources” have gone to TMZ and People Mag to say that divorce is not on the table in any way.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Embed from Getty Images

Apparently two weeks ago The Walking Dead had another one of those capsule episodes, and this one involved Tara and a group of new people. The actress who plays Tara, Alanna Masterson, 28, had her first baby in November of last year, right before she filmed that episode. I haven’t been keeping up with Walking Dead recently but it was cute to see the creative ways they hid Masterson’s pregnancy before the midseason break, by putting her in hoodies and filming her from different angles. Anyway people said nasty sh-t on the internet about Masterson I guess, because that’s the world we live in now, where internet trolls get elected to higher office. Her costar, Josh McDermitt (Eugene, the dude with the mullet), went off about it during an interview with The Huffington Post, saying that those people need to be called out, essentially. A brief excerpt is below and you can watch the video on Huffpo’s site:

“She just had a kid. That’s why she hasn’t been in the first six episodes because she was recovering from pregnancy and then people are talking trash about her appearance, and it’s like, screw you,” he said.

McDermitt continued, “I’m going to bully you into stop bullying. That’s what I feel like we need to do. I don’t know how this is gonna work, but we have to stop bullying each other and calling people out for their appearance.”

The actor said he often acts self-deprecating to take the wind out of the bullies’ sails, but he explained, “Not everyone’s gonna do that, and, honestly, I wish I didn’t have to do that.”

“People need to chill the F out with the crap that they’re putting on the internet. It’s very disturbing because we are people, everyone. And I’m not talking about actors. I’m talking about anyone on the internet. I mean, I just read something on CNN the other day where a teenage girl committed suicide who was cyber bullied. This is bullshit. This should never happen,” he said.

McDermitt said social media companies aren’t doing enough and called on them to go after bullies and shut down accounts.

[From Huffington Post]

He’s not wrong and it’s particularly bad on Twitter as we’ve seen because there are hardly any tools for users to delete nasty comments, they can only hide them from their own view given the way the platform works. I think Instagram and Facebook are better as the comments are made on your own page and you have the ultimate control. In Twitter it’s just people talking crap out in the open where the targets have less recourse. It’s sad when it happens to adolescents and teenagers especially because they’re less equipped to deal with that vitriol. That said, there’s a saying “don’t feed the trolls” for a reason. It’s better not to respond to these people directly or they’ll just keep it coming. Calling them out in general like this is a good way to handle it though. I checked McDermitt’s twitter and he’s not feeding the trolls at all and mostly posts links to his recaps of Walking Dead on EW and professional stuff.

I did find this post that Masterson made responding to the trolls in general, which is probably what he’s referring to, although it’s not mentioned in the Huffpo video. This is new to me but you may have heard about it as it’s been up for a while. Good for her. Her daughter’s name is Marlowe and she’s adorable!

Dear Instagram trolls, body shamers, and the men and woman who think it’s ok to comment on my weight: I hope that you don’t have children. And if you do, I hope you teach them about kindness and acceptance. I hope they learn that it isn’t ok to make fun of people or call people names. I hope one day YOU learn what it takes to be a parent. A kind, selfless parent. A working parent. A parent that puts themselves in someone else’s shoes. Maybe you can’t get it through your thick f-king skull, but nursing a baby for a year (and pumping in a van between takes, in the dead of summer in Georgia) is a lot of work, determination, and scheduling. So before you decide to make a comment about my chest being “too large” or how “fat” I’ve become, just know that this little girl got the best start to life. I wouldn’t have changed it for a second. I would’ve gladly continued to eat enough calories to produce milk for her little bones to grow. Also, grow the f-k up. Your mother should be ashamed for raising such a judgmental bully. I’m sure she knows how “courageous” you must be for trolling and hiding behind your Iphone and computers. P.s. I would LOVE to see any man or woman give birth to a baby, nurse the baby, and then work 17 hour days and NAIL their own stunts. P.s.s. Be kind to each other. We need it now more than ever. ?????

A photo posted by Alanna Masterson (@lucytwobows) on Nov 29, 2016 at 2:32pm PST

Embed from Getty Images

photos credit: WENN and Getty

#IfEveryDayWasChristmas out now on @AppleMusic!! All proceeds to @globals_make_some_noise ?smarturl.it/IEDWCi ?

A photo posted by Cruz Beckham (@cruzbeckham) on Dec 6, 2016 at 11:41pm PST

Last April, we discussed how the next Beckham to get a career of his own was 11-year-old Cruz Beckham, David and Victoria’s youngest son. Since model (Romeo) and photographer (Brooklyn) were taken, Cruz was poised to become “the next Justin Bieber.” Fast forward to December and guess what? That’s right, the pre-teen has a single, his own Instagram and Bieber’s manager, Scooter Braun, to send his career into orbit. His single, If Every Day Were Christmas, debuted on England’s Capital FM yesterday. It is also available for purchase on Apple Music and the proceeds go to Global’s Make Some Noise who assist small, UK-registered, youth charities. So, let’s get down to it – here’s the single:

I am going to admit two things: 1) It just sounds like an 11-year-old singing to me. I am not “wowed” or “amazed” but he holds his own for a ‘tween. 2) As non-plussed as I was, I found myself bobbing my head at the end. Whoever was in charge of the “fluffy, bubblegum hook” part of the song deserves a raise. And please don’t tell anyone I was bobbing along to that song. I’ll lose all my street cred.

I realize this is all the result of ambitious parents with a famous last name. However, because his first effort is being released for charity, I’m going to go easy on him. Marketing genius or genuine charitable act, it’s going to a good cause so I’ll leave it there. Plus, look at his little face when it comes on the radio:

Not his average morning before school… Proud of my little man with his new Christmas single and also helping children around the UK with the proceeds from this… #ifeverydaywaschristmas @cruzbeckham @AppleMusic @globals_make_some_noise ???? smarturl.it/IEDWCi ??

A video posted by David Beckham (@davidbeckham) on Dec 7, 2016 at 1:10am PST

Lord, the holidays have made me a sap. You know who is not a sap and is not having ANY of this? Piers Morgan. Just as he did back in April, Piers sounded off on what a terrible job the Beckhams are doing raising their kids.

Although Cruz’s goal is to raise money for charity (while also trying to launch a music career), some aren’t as embracing as his fans and parents. Piers Morgan took to TV, Twitter and his column to slam the Beckham family.

“It’s not his fault. He’s 11,” Morgan said on Good Morning Britain. “But how did he manage to release this? It’s sickening.”

Morgan later added, “He should be at school, poor kid.”

He and Braun also got into an Internet kerfuffle on Twitter. “He is an 11 year old who wanted to make a song to help other kids,” Braun tweeted after seeing Morgan’s segment. “Once again Piers shows why he is a jackass and why his show was cancelled.”

“He’s an 11yr-old child being cynically pimped out by his famous parents with your collusion,” Morgan responded. “Be proud Scooter!”

[From E! News]

I mean, he’s not wrong? I do appreciate the song is for charity but it would be naïve of me to think this was a one off. Cruz has his power agent and his first track recorded, I doubt his album is far behind. But – it’s the holidays so I am going to focus on the positive: this 11-year-old recoded a song for a good cause that will do a lot of good. Plus, Yuletide Law says I don’t have to admit to agreeing with Piers Morgan during this time of year.

Embed from Getty Images

Photo credit: Instagram, Fame/Flynet Photos and Getty Images

One of the strangest stories of 2015 was Nick Loeb’s lawsuit against his ex-fiancée Sofia Vergara. Sofia and Nick were together, on and off, for years, and at one point, they were going to have a child together via surrogacy. Nick’s sperm fertilized Sofia’s eggs in a lab, and two separate implantations were attempted, and neither stuck. In the end, Nick and Sofia broke up and she moved on with Joe Manganiello. But there were still some embryos left in the freezer, and Nick sued Sofia for “custody” of the embryos. He wanted to implant them in another surrogate and raise the daughter (they were gender-selected girl embryos) by himself. The whole thing was an absolute mess, and Loeb ended up cozying up to the anti-choice crowd in a big way. Sofia maintained that the embryos belonged to both she and Nick, and until they could agree, the embryos would stay in the freezer.

Loeb’s original lawsuit was filed in California, and there are still motions and judgments and filings and whatever. Basically, that part of the craziness has not been settled. But then in one of the strangest twists ever, the embryos are now suing Sofia. I sh-t you not. A rabid anti-choice group has sued Sofia on behalf of the embryos, and the group has even NAMED the embryos (Emma and Isabella). The lawsuit was filed in Louisiana, a state which has a much heavier anti-choice record across the board. Page Six has the whole breakdown of the crazy new lawsuit here. It’s too stupid and disturbing to even excerpt, honestly. When media outlets went to Sofia’s lawyer, Fred Silberberg, for a comment about this new crazy lawsuit, Silberberg said:

“Next week the judge presiding over the case was to rule on Ms. Vergara’s request for sanctions against Mr. Loeb for refusing to comply with a court order, and on her motion for summary judgment-seeking dismissal of the case he filed against her, attempting to get control of pre-embryos that he created with Vergara. That genetic material was created pursuant to a written agreement that required both parties written consent to attempt to create a pregnancy. … Reports are out that Mr. Loeb has caused a lawsuit to be filed on behalf of the pre-embryos in Louisiana, essentially trying to get the same relief that he was trying to get through his failed legal attempt in California.”

“The media reports contend that Mr. Loeb has caused a lawsuit to be initiated claiming that the pre-embryos – which are not embryos, but rather frozen fertilized ova, have been given names by him and have a right to live.” Silberberg went on to say he believes this new lawsuit will “result in failure” for Loeb, and that Vergara is “happily married” and should be spared “another unnecessary legal battle.”

[From Us Weekly]

If this all wasn’t so dystopian, it would be an interesting legal dilemma. The main thrust of Loeb’s argument is that by refusing to implant the two embryos (or ova), Sofia is effectively “killing” them. But that’s not true – those embryos can be frozen indefinitely, right? She never said “throw them out.” She just said, “Keep them on ice until further notice.”

Another legal argument against Loeb is that he’s only come-to-Jesus on the “right to life” issue recently, and that (allegedly) at least two of his previous girlfriends had abortions when they were with him. Sofia’s lawyers tried to get Loeb to identify those two women, but HE ACTUALLY SAID “I would rather go to jail than reveal the names. I believe we have to protect a woman’s right to privacy.” Yes, he has so much respect for a woman’s right to privacy. That’s why he’s suing his ex for her intimate genetic material, attempting to emotionally blackmail her, and cozying up to the ultra-right-wing anti-choice fringe. Because he has so much respect for a woman’s right to privacy.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

After recently revisiting one of her most iconic roles, that of Lorelai Gilmore on the Netflix reboot of Gilmore Girls, Lauren Graham is taking being America’s surrogate mom to the next, perhaps obvious level. The actress and author is the cover girl for the January issue of Good Housekeeping, which hits the streets on December 13 – and hits the reception area of your doctor’s office a few months after that, if you can wait that long.

Lauren, who I can’t believe is 49, is promoting her new memoir, Talking as Fast as I Can: From Gilmore Girls to Gilmore Girls (and Everything in Between). She shares lots of behind the scenes stories from the set of the show, so if you’ve got a GG fan in your life, this could be the perfect stocking stuffer. She’s also working as fast as she can in the process of writing her second novel, a follow-up to 2014’s Someday, Someday, Maybe: A Novel, and also producing a screenplay.

In the magazine, Lauren shared her “7 Biggest Life Lessons,” and they are ones I think we all could use in our lives too – I know I sure could. Of particular note is Life Lesson #4, “The best pairings come naturally,” the proof of which comes from her relationship with her 51-year-old beau, Peter Krause, who played her brother on Parenthood from 2010-2015. She also talked about playing Lorelai from GG and Sarah from Parenthood, some sage advice she received from a beloved Hollywood idol and her inspiration for writing. Check out some highlights from the interview:

On playing two similarly unconventional single moms: “There are things that I’m good at and there are things that are just not for me. I’m not gonna play a cop, I’m not gonna play a doctor…and that’s OK. I’d rather be in [roles] that are really verbal and smart and funny. As Diane Keaton said to me, ‘Funny doesn’t age.’”

On which character she relates to more: “I relate more to Lorelai Gilmore, probably. I mean, I speak quickly more in attitude and just in athleticism of what that work is and was for me, as an actor, that’s a place I feel really comfortable and exhilarated, so, in that way I guess I relate a little more to that world and that language.”

On her relationship with Peter Krause: “We couldn’t stop talking. Not about ourselves, but about the world and books and family. Once we got together, there was no game play. It was like, You like me, and I like you. It gave me an understanding of life: This is how things happen, and it’s completely random.”

On her surprising hidden talent: “I really like to entertain. None of my characters ever cook, so I would think it’s surprising that I actually really like to.”

On her inspiration to become an author: “One day in my trailer in Parenthood I looked up and I had the afternoon, and it just kind of occurred as a way to be creative and but not have to be part of any other structure. It was kind of a revelation that I could just do something on my own and the fact that it has now given me other work is like icing. I just did it for fun.”

[From Good Housekeeping]

Lauren went on to say of her relationship, “It’s not a big, loud life. We have a lot of neighbors, people come by, we’re with Peter’s son a lot and we keep it small.” She also confessed that she likes to spend her spare time doing very un-celebrity-like things, admitting, “This is deeply dorky, but I really like to organize…I’ve taken the ‘Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up’ book and really gone too far!”

Full disclosure, I never watched Gilmore Girls (sorry) and I never watched Parenthood (again, sorry) – but I do watch This is Us, which is kind of like Parenthood 2.0, so does that count for anything? I did enjoy Lauren in Bad Santa though, and she seems like a put-together kind of woman. I totally want to hang out with her, providing she’d help me tidy up my hot mess of a house.

Embed from Getty Images

Photo credit: Good Housekeeping/Brian Bowen Smith, WENN.com, Getty Images