Claire Fallon and Emma Gray obsessively analyze our cultural obsessions, from fashion trends to books to the buzziest TV shows.
patreon.com/claireandemma
php/* */ ?>
Claire Fallon and Emma Gray obsessively analyze our cultural obsessions, from fashion trends to books to the buzziest TV shows.
patreon.com/claireandemma
Copyright: © CLAIRE AND EMMA LLC
We watched Netflix's latest experiment in romance, the age-blind dating show "Age of Attraction," with a blend of boredom and horror that eventually shaded into a spicier blend of horror and fascination. The show's finale dropped this week, and we are finally ready to weigh in. So let's go!
"Age of Attraction" brings together a group of mixed-age singles to explore relationships without learning each other's ages, in the interest of showing that age is just a number, that we shouldn't put each other in boxes, yada yada yada. The show concept is not only ludicrous on its face, as singles can see each other while dating and should be able to assess what age their potential partners are, but is quickly given the lie during a quick montage midseason, which reveals that all of the couples who turned out to be close in age were summarily cut from the show. (You guys age-blind dated too hard, sorry!)
This is a show that invites us to both gawk at and romanticize relationships between people who are decades apart and in completely different life stages. We are asked to consider the deeper compatibility between a 38-year-old father of tween daughters and a 22-year-old who seems just about old enough to be hired as their babysitter. After all, he is young at heart, and she is desperate for a man who is emotionally mature enough to listen to Taylor Swift without spontaneously combusting. (Dear God, are the Gen Z lads okay?) We are told that a 33-year age gap has nothing to do with the breakdown of a relationship between a 60-year-old man who treats his 27-year-old girlfriend like an underperforming intern; they simply didn't share communication styles.
The immaturity on display is immense, and it is mostly from the older partners, who are drawn to the youthfulness of their younger loves but also easily retreat to the authority of their bigger ages to regain control in their relationships. This is particularly unsettling when it involves one woman being pressured for sex by her older boyfriend, who clearly hopes to defeat her boundary through superior debate skills. But it's not just Vanelle and Jorge; unhealthy dynamics are all over this show.
In this episode, we discuss the show's concept and structure, the cultural moment it's speaking to, and how the central relationships unfold – plus, that reunion trailer and how it hints at the state of these romances today. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Season 4 of "Secret Lives of Mormon Wives" is a dark one, but its darkest moments arrive in the second half of the season. Most of them involve star Taylor Frankie Paul, whose toxic cycle with her ex Dakota Mortensen is fully reignited as the season progresses, even as she's gearing up to star on "The Bachelorette." By the end of episode 10, it's abundantly clear that Taylor is in no way prepared to cut off Dakota, responding with coy ambivalence when he asks her to save him a rose. And she's in no way prepared to take on this role.
As we were preparing our coverage for the second half of this season, more news broke: Taylor and Dakota were involved in a domestic dispute last month, and both have alleged physical violence by the other. The police were called, though no arrests were made. Dakota has also reportedly accused Taylor of other assaults, and of abusing their young son. There is an ongoing investigation with DCFS, as well as with the local police, regarding these allegations. (Note: We will be discussing these allegations in some, though not excessive, detail in this episode. Please listen with care.)
Taylor has said very little publicly about these reports, and ABC and "The Bachelorette" production have said even less. It appears that the show will air as scheduled; the network clearly hopes to weather the storm. But the backlash to ABC's decision to cast Taylor, who already had a documented history of domestic violence (she was still on probation for the prior incident while filming the show) has been intense.
In this episode, we discuss what we see unfold between Taylor and Dakota in the last five episodes of "SLOMW," as well as the current allegations and the implications for "The Bachelorette" and the reality TV genre as a whole. Then we turn to the other women's storylines for this batch of episodes, notably Whitney and Jen's falling out, Layla opening up about her struggles with an eating disorder, Jessi and Jordan's functionally defunct marriage, and Jace and Mikayla's separation.
Related Reading and Resources:
National Domestic Violence Hotline
"Taylor Frankie Paul’s Turn on ‘The Bachelorette’ Is Coming Under Fire," by Shivani Gonzalez, NYT
"The Price of Perfection: Layla Taylor on Mormonism and the weight of belonging," by Shaquille Heath, The Cut
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
There are few moments more off-putting in season 4 of "The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives" than when Jessi Draper's husband, Jordan Ngatikaura, earnestly tells the camera that "DadTok is a lot funnier than MomTok." But in a way, it also sets the tone of the season.
"SLOMW" is now a reality show about Mormon (and lapsed Mormon) mom content creators who have become bonafide celebrities. And that celebrity status is kind of upending everything in their lives – most prominently, their patriarchal family structures and their wider ambitions.
Many of the husbands are navigating stepping into primary caregiver roles and trying not to lose their own identities in the process. Some, like Jordan, are lashing out and resentful as a result. Others, like Connor, are purely magnanimous, while the rest of them fall somewhere in the middle. DadTok becomes a refuge for a lot of the male partners (or in the case of Dakota and Chase, former partners), which is part of why Jordan is so desperate to insist that the brand can stand apart from MomTok.
At the same time, the women are getting a plethora of opportunities outside of MomTok – "The Bachelorette," book deals, modeling gigs, "DWTS," Broadway shows, major brand deals – while still keeping one foot firmly planted in MomTok world. It's these two overarching dynamics which create the majority of conflict throughout season 4. And then, of course, there's Taylor and Dakota. Those two are a hurricane of toxicity that stands alone.
In this episode, we'll get into all the major action of episodes 1-5: Jessi and Jordan's marriage, DadTok heading to Vanderpump Villa, Whitney and Jenn moving to LA for "DWTS," Taylor and Dakota's total inability to detach from each other, and the fascinating pre-"Bachelorette" storyline the show is crafting for Taylor. In a separate recap next week, we'll dive into the back half of the season.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
And she's finally ready to talk about it. So, let's get into it in the way we know best – a podcast chat. 😉
If you haven't already linked your subscriber Rich Text feed to your podcast-listening app of choice, instructions are here.
If you’re a Substack subscriber, go check your email for a gift link to access Rich Text! (If it's not there, it will be within an hour or so.) Everyone else, welcome!
A little over five years ago, we started Rich Text on Substack because we needed a change. We had been at HuffPost for a decade, from the peak of its heyday to its somewhat ignominious acquisition by BuzzFeed. We had cycled through different positions as writers and editors, and we had survived round after round of layoffs. We had started Here to Make Friends, a feminist reality dating show podcast, and it had lasted despite occasional attempts by management to pivot it to video. We had been lucky enough to collaborate with brilliant editors, writers and producers, but we had also watched those colleagues leave. We were burnt out and rudderless. Our hope was that a little side project on Substack would give us a low-stakes, chill place to mess around, blog, try random stuff, and get back in touch with our voices. A creative refresh, if you will.
Then, almost exactly five years ago, the layoff cycle finally came for us. We were called into our virtual HR meetings with a taped (but unedited) “Bachelor” recap still dangling. It was never published. But we weren’t ready to say goodbye to podcasting, and we were suddenly energized by the possibility of taking control of the show, of our writing, and of our creative futures. Substack became not just a space to experiment, but the home base of our entire body of work. And our wonderful subscribers allowed us to keep doing that work – while paying our bills, including Claire’s eye-popping daycare tuition.
In so many ways, our time at Substack gave us all of the things we had ever hoped for. We were able to build, brick by brick, a tiny media company of two. We were able to pay for our health care (Emma) and child care (Claire). We found a vibrant community full of brilliant, challenging, funny people – all of whom wanted to analyze culture in the way that we did! After years of being limited to “Bachelor” recaps on our podcast, and following the whims of editorial leadership when it came to story selection, we were able to truly take the reins, writing and podcasting about all the reality shows, rom-coms, weird viral essays, prestige dramas, and sociopolitical trends our little hearts desired. And we got to do it all on our terms, for the best audience in the business. We have never taken these gifts for granted, not for one single day. We recognize how very lucky we are to be able to make a living doing something that we truly love, and we're incredibly, profoundly grateful to all of you for supporting our work.
But as with any media ecosystem, even a relatively scrappy indie one, there came challenges. After years of natural growth and support from Substack staffers, both waned. The platform began to prioritize bringing over large, institutional publications and celebrity writers over mid-size publications like ours. Discoverability became more challenging, and Substack kept ending up in the news because of its tacit support for Nazis and transphobes. The latest big development is that Substack has partnered with… Polymarket. All of these things left us with the looming sense that we would have to make the leap to another platform at some point in time. But, of course, making a big change is really fucking scary. Especially when that change could upend your ability to pay your bills.
So when Patreon reached out, it felt like a golden opportunity to make a leap with real support – and one we might never get again. Patreon is a platform built originally for podcasters, which is a big part of what we do on Rich Text. We loved the idea of being in a place where audio content is truly valued, and where we can be an active part of shaping what the newsletter product will be in the future. We loved that the financial investment that Patreon was willing to make into our scrappy little media project would allow us to rebuild without complete and total panic haunting us at every turn.
Patreon, of course, isn’t perfect. No platform will be. But the hope is that we can write our next chapter sustainably. We want to set ourselves up so that Rich Text is something we can continue making for the next five years and then another five years after that. And we feel like some of the new features we’ll have access to on Patreon – organized collections! The ability to pay for one-off posts or series! More tier options! – will allow us to grow in a healthy way.
Now that we’re here, in our unfamiliar new home, surrounded by moving boxes and art we don’t know where to hang yet, it feels a little scary and stressful. There’s a lot to do. But that also means a lot of possibility. All the same things you knew and (hopefully) loved back at Substack will be here: weekly recommendations and podcasts, occasional essays, subscriber chats. We’re also looking forward to experimenting with new features and bonus content – and implementing your feedback from our big reader survey last month! – as we figure out what will make Rich Text itself an even richer text in the coming years. There will be more conversations about the motherhood divide, our personal lives, reality television scandals, bizarre made-for-streaming holiday rom-coms about sexy snowmen and viral essays that set your group chats ablaze. There will be more writing about girl culture, the ways fatherhood is treated vs. motherhood, books we love, TV we love, and progressive politics.
Trust us: We KNOW that asking you to change over your subscription to a whole different platform is super annoying. The whole point of a subscription is that it’s seamless! You should never have to think about it! We, too, hate dealing with the process of moving our information over to a new app, linking up custom podcast feeds again, etc. We did not make the choice to inflict this on you lightly. We really believe that Patreon will be a more sustainable and welcoming space for our work and for this community. And we are here – along with the REAL HUMANS of the Patreon team – to make this transition as easy as possible!
⚠️ Important note for Substack subscribers
If you’re coming from Substack, we're gifting you access to our paid membership on Patreon. You should have received an email with your redemption link and details on how to claim it.
Check your email for details on claiming your FREE access
If you’re still running into issues → submit a support request
Free Membership
Weekly Recommendations: Get our weekly dispatch on what we’ve been reading, watching, listening to, buying, and making.
Weekly Podcast Previews & Occasional Full Episodes: Listen to periodic full-length episodes of the Rich Text podcast.
Essays: Read our occasional musings on topics cultural, political, and personal.
💬 Frequent Texter ($6 per month) 💬
Access to Rich Text Podcast Episodes: Access our weekly member-only podcast, and the full archive of episodes.
Weekly Recommendations: Get our weekly dispatch on what we’ve been reading, watching, listening to, buying, and making.
Essays: Read our occasional musings on topics cultural, political, and personal.
Comment Access: Post comments on any post and join the community!
Rich Text Chat: Connect with other members and discuss your favorite topics, from appointment TV to political news to random gossip, in private, subscriber-only spaces.
Reminder: If you’re coming from Substack, your gifted access link is in your email. (If it's not there, it will be soon.)Make sure to redeem it so you’re all set.
Thank you for being here! xo Claire & Emma
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The bosoms, they are heaving. The corsets, they have been unlaced. With the release of Emerald Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights,” a film that offers such a stickily horny and romanticized take on Emily Brontë’s tale of emotional trauma and Gothic horrors that multiple critics glossed it as “fan fiction,” it seems that the cultural triumph of the spicy historical romance has been made complete. The arrival of “Bridgerton” season 4 part 2 (the sexy half!) just a couple of weeks later only underlines this. And, generally speaking, we’re not complaining! (Though, in the wake of the overwhelmingly steamy “Heated Rivalry,” the bar for success has been raised.)
But, after absorbing the sight of Jacob Elordi lifting Margot Robbie effortlessly by the corset strings to the throbbing beats of Charlie XCX, we’re left wondering if things have been taken a bit far. What is lost from “Wuthering Heights” when it is reduced to a tale of star-crossed lovers who have a boinkfest all over the moors? Is our obsession with smut giving all of us, including Fennell, just the teensiest bit of brain rot?
In this episode, we discuss the ongoing boom in sexy costume dramas and its implications. Then we dig into “Bridgerton” season 4 part 2, which manages to bring most of its storylines to a satisfying conclusion after a part 1 overstretched with table-setting. We get into the impossibility of a happy ending for our class-crossing couple that didn’t rely on one fortuitous exception for one lucky illegitimate maid, and the rather rote sex scenes. In an unlikely twist for the romance series, the heart of this drop was its depiction of grief, which was the subject of its most deeply felt and moving scenes. We also discuss Penelope’s retirement, Varley’s return, Lady Danbury’s voyage, and what seems to be coming next for the series.
Finally, we turn our focus to “Wuthering Heights.” We share our prior relationships with the Brontë novel, our first impressions of the movie, and our reactions to all the finger-licking and smashed egg yolks. We try to figure out why Robbie and Elordi felt like uncanny dolls, or children in adult bodies, and we talk about Sara Petersen’s essay about the removal of mothers and motherhood from this adaptation. We also discuss the discourse around the whitewashing of Heathcliff and the notable choices Fennell made in casting and storytelling that seem to pointedly center whiteness — and intentionally sanitize the central couple to present them as romantic heroes.
References and reading:
“Emerald Fennell’s Wuthering Heights Is Fan Fiction,” by Annie Berke
“‘Wuthering Heights’ Is Pure Fan Fiction,” by Emma Camp
“Finally, a Smooth-Brained Wuthering Heights,” by Allison Willmore
“Wuthering Heights Has No Space For Mothers,” by Sara Petersen
“Margot Robbie’s hot take on filmmaking goes viral as critics slam her latest movie, ‘Wuthering Heights’,” by Jude Cramer
“Wuthering Heights: Emerald Fennell Defends Her Controversial 'Version' of Emily Brontë's Classic Novel,” by Benjamin VanHoose
“Wuthering Heights is at its heart a story of class and race. Emerald Fennell has got it all wrong,” by Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett
“How the Latest "Wuthering Heights" Interpretation Is More Than Just Whitewashing; It’s a Pattern,” by Jess, the PrideBrarian
“Jacob Elordi, Heathcliff and the Controversy Over ‘Wuthering Heights’,” by Esther Zuckerman
"Is Heathcliff White?” by Jasmine Vojdani
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — What’s going on with all the period piece smut?
6:27 — The second half of “Bridgerton” S4
41:50 — Emerald Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights”
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Substack!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
In 2009 on “Tell Me Lies,” Lucy’s life is crashing and burning right into the ground. In 2009 in the real world, Tyra Banks was teaching young women how to “smize” on the hit show “America’s Next Top Model.” This week, we dive into both versions of the late aughts — fictional and reality.
After three dark, twisted, and completely fucked up seasons, “Tell Me Lies” came to an end on Tuesday. Showrunner Meaghan Oppenheimer announced the news on Instagram on Monday night, writing that “this was always the ending my writing team and I had in mind, and we are insanely proud of it.” She added that the audience’s “incredible response to this season inspired us to explore whether there was another organic way to continue the story, but ultimately we felt it had reached its natural conclusion.” So in the wee hours of Tuesday morning, viewers were left to see if the team could stick the landing and wrap up all of the chaos that had been building in both the 2009 and 2015 timelines.
The result was a mixed bag. Some major plot holes that left us yearning for a fourth season, but also some “imperfect justice.” The series’ ambiguous final moments leave some things up to viewer interpretation, and as two culture critics, we often find that that’s where the real fun begins. (Plus, that “Toxic” needle drop was simply perfection.)
We also traveled back in time to the glory days of “ANTM,” via Netflix’s new documentary, “Reality Check: Inside America’s Next Top Model.” The three part docu-series, which features interviews with Tyra Banks, Ken Mok, Jay Manuel, Nigel Barker and Miss J. Alexander, as well as prominent former contestants like Shandi Sullivan, Danielle Evans, Whitney Thompson, Keenyah Hill, attempts to grapple with the dark and complex legacy of the reality juggernaut.
And boy is there a lot of darkness to sort through.
“Reality Check” attempts to contextualize “ANTM” within the racist, homophobic, fatphobic time period it emerged during, and the even more racist, homophobic, fatphobic industry that it was attempting to broaden. But what becomes clear is that whatever lofty goals Banks had when she created “ANTM,” were overshadowed by the utter lack of protections in place for the cast members — who were predominantly vulnerable, very young women. Not only were the aspiring models cast subjected to microaggressions — Ebony Haith, a Black cast member from Cycle 1, has her hair texture mocked by white stylists during makeover day; Thompson, who won Cycle 10, shows up to castings where they’ve refused to pull clothes in her size — but also to physical dangers. (Sullivan’s story of being sexually assaulted on camera in Milan during Cycle 2, and then being framed as a cheating harlot on national television, is particularly harrowing.) And unfortunately, the decision makers interviewed still seem unwilling to take full accountability.
In this episode of the Rich Text podcast, we get into it all, from our own experiences watching “ANTM” as teenagers, to the lingering questions “Tell Me Lies” left us with. We hope you enjoy!
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — The “Tell Me Lies” series finale
43:12 — The twisted legacy of “America’s Next Top Model”
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
A decade or so ago, it seemed like the coolest kind of mom to be was a bad one. They blew off PTA meetings, were fueled by rosé, and wrote irreverent blogs about their children’s tantrums and diaper blowouts. They rejected the sentimentalized idea of motherhood as a sacred calling in service of which a woman must relinquish her independence, her sexuality, her anger, her very identity. Smash cut to 2026, and the mothers of America seem to be locked in a constant, frenzied battle about who can gently, authoritatively, attachedly, and and intensively parent the best. The government lionizes white, conservative mothers who bear large broods, while separating immigrant mothers from their children and smearing liberal women who oppose the administration as “gangs of wine moms.” The labels of “good mom” and “bad mom” seem more oppressive than ever. How did we get here?
The central theme of this season of Netflix romance series “Bridgerton” comes into sharp focus at the end of the first episode.
After charming rakish second son Benedict Bridgerton at his mother’s masquerade ball with her witty banter and sense of wonder, our masked heroine rushes home. We see her remove her formal glove, shoes and mask. Suddenly, she is staring into the humble mirror in her bedchamber, her full face in view for the first time. And instead of finery, she is dressed in a maid’s outfit. The major roadblock to a relationship between Sophie Baek and Benedict Bridgerton will not be a misunderstanding or a clash of personalities or a one-sided desire to end a bloodline. Instead, it will be something quite tangible, especially during the Regency era. It will be about class.
It’s a fascinating moment for this season to hit our screens. On the one hand, as many viewers have noted, the uneven power dynamics of a Cinderella-inspired story — as this one definitively is — feel less fun to explore in fiction when we’re seeing the very real rollbacks of the rights of women in this country. (Part of why “Heated Rivalry” felt like such a salve to so many women viewers.) On the other hand, it’s clear that the writers injected some real class consciousness and modern labor politics into the text of the show. And that revamped text feels quite timely. (See: Mrs. Varley telling Lady Featherington off for using the language of “family” as a way to underpay her for two decades.)
In this episode, we get into it all: the class dynamics, the power of AAPI representation, the ways in which the Cinderella tropes work and don’t, the many ancillary B-plots, and the pointed ways that the writers changed the plot of the show from its source material. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
This week, we’re diving into two topics that, somehow, both involve evil Stephens who want women to have their babies for nefarious reasons: the recent wave of high-profile, propagandistic pregnancy announcements in the Trump White House, and the current season of the dark teen soap “Tell Me Lies.”
First, we get into the MAGA baby boom. Over the past month, three prominent Trump administration officials — Vice President J.D. Vance, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, and Chief Architect of Evil Stephen Miller — have announced that they are expecting babies. For Vance and Miller, these will be their fourth children; Leavitt, who is just 28, is expecting her second. Having a baby shouldn’t be a political act, nor should it be right- or left-coded. But it’s clear from how these officials, and the White House, have framed these announcements that a mini baby boom within their ranks is doing valuable political work for them: it’s not only a sweet and fuzzy distraction from the violence being wreaked on American communities by ICE, but an advertisement for their so-called “pro-family” policies. We also unpack the telling language used by the Vances and Leavitt to discuss their pregnancies, how these ideologically tinged announcements work to brand motherhood as inherently conservative, and how the right’s pronatalism and anti-child policies devalue the lives of actual kids.
Next, we catch up on the first few episodes of “Tell Me Lies,” season 3, which finds our flawed heroine Lucy still emotionally entangled with her controlling and toxic ex-boyfriend, Stephen. We discuss the major narrative developments so far this season, including a reshuffling of the romantic deck that we didn’t see coming. We also try to figure out why this season feels like it’s really driving discourse; perhaps in part because its feminist lens on male toxicity and emotional abuse is more striking as the story continues unfurling and Lucy still can’t free herself from Stephen’s orbit of control.
Meanwhile, Meaghan Oppenheimer, the show’s creator, has spoken in interviews about how critical the show’s audience is of Lucy’s bad behavior; the torment she endures this season, Oppenheimer says, is the punishment fans have been asking for. “I was posing a question to them with this season: are you happy now?" We unpack how the show and the discourse around it illustrate the reactionary desire to find female blame in a story of male abuse. We also discuss how the show’s 2008-2015 setting offers a bit of nostalgia for the Obama years, when we were still blissfully ignorant of the descent into fascism that lay ahead of us. Maybe flat irons and side parts will always make us think of simpler times.
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — The spate of pregnancy announcements from Trump’s White House
44:00 — Why season 3 of “Tell Me Lies” is hitting
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
On this week’s episode of the Rich Text podcast, we’re tackling two totally disparate topics: the rage-fueled war on liberal white women and the end of “Love Is Blind Germany” season 2. Because, as we alway say… women contain multitudes.
First, we dive into the right-wing ire being directed at white women who are choosing to mobilize against ICE. In the wake of Renee Good’s Jan. 7 killing in Minneapolis, right-wing media has found a new target for its hate-filled rhetoric: middle-class wine moms! Fox News commentator David Marcus warned that we are “seeing across the country as organized gangs of wine moms use Antifa tactics to harass and impede Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.” Some on the right are even deploying a fun new acronym: AWFULs (Affluent White Female Urban Liberals), a group which morning radio host Pierce Outlaw labeled “the scourge of polite society.”
Much ink has been spilled over the years about the ways in which white women as a voting bloc often prioritize access to patriarchal and white supremacist power structures over gender solidarity. During the 2024 presidential election, exit polls showed that 53 percent of white women voted for Trump, and the majority of white women have broken for the right in nearly every presidential election since 1952. So what’s going on here?
Turns out, it’s a few things. (1) As a bloc that the right has invested heavily in wooing — see: the MAHA movement, tradwife content, Erika Kirk — white women who become part of the resistance are the ultimate traitors. As Michelle Goldberg wrote in her NYTimes piece on this subject: “In the right-wing imagination, these women are acting like harpies — an epithet often seen online — when they’re supposed to be helpmeets.” (2) The right sees these increasingly politically mobilized women as a threat to their fascist project — in part because of their numbers and in part because of their privileged place in society. And (3) There is a need to cleave these women from their white privilege in the public sphere in order to neutralize their power as part of the resistance. Hence, wine moms and childless cat ladies become Antifa domestic terrorists.
After this conversation, we do an abrupt tonal change and get into the final two episodes of “Love Is Blind Germany” season 2. We discuss which of our three final couples tied the knot, and whether any of them are still married a year later. Plus, one cast member makes an announcement during the reunion that’s a “Love Is Blind” historic first.
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — Why the right is so furious at liberal white ladies
44:20 — “Love Is Blind Germany” weddings episode and reunion
Reading materials referenced in the episode:
“After Renee Good Killing, Derisive Term for White Women Spreads on the Far Right,” Clyde McGrady, NYTimes
“The Right Is Furious With Liberal White Women,” Michelle Goldberg, NYTimes
“Wine Moms Gone Wild,” Erin Gloria Ryan, Just Enjoy It While You Can
“After Renee Good’s Murder, Wine-Mom Gangs Are Now the New Antifa,” Virginia Heffernan, The New Republic
“white woman is the white woman of the world,” B.D. McClay, Notebook
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
You know we had to come back and finish discussing the first drop from “Love Is Blind Germany” season 2, and we are doing that today! But first, we needed to unburden ourselves about a couple other Cultural Conversations: the Golden Globe Awards adding a Best Podcast award, and Ashley Tisdale French’s essay in The Cut about leaving her toxic mom group.
First, we get into the momentous decision of the Golden Globes to finally recognize all the valuable podcasting work being done by celebrities. We get into our feelings about celebrity podcasts in general (with all due respect to our queen Amy Poehler), the swamping of the industry by big-money deals for big-name movie stars, and the Golden Globes’ approach to recognizing this entire diverse genre of art and journalism.
Next, we turn to actress and businesswoman Ashley Tisdale French’s underbaked but provocative essay in The Cut about how her mom group turned toxic — and how she bravely chose to leave. We break down the speculation that followed about the mom group, which was instantly identified as likely being Hilary Duff and Mandy Moore’s well-publicized crew of celeb and celeb-adjacent moms. The speculation was followed by a denial from French’s camp that the piece was about Duff’s group, but also tacitly confirmed by the prickly reactions from the direction of that particular social circle. Duff’s husband Matthew Koma posted a parody of French’s Cut portrait and headline strongly implying that she was squeezed out of the group for being self-involved and tone-deaf! Meghan Trainor posted an “I’m so unbothered” TikTok about the gossip! We discuss the essay’s weaknesses, why it seems to have backfired on French to some degree, and why we’re so fascinated by the idea of “mean” or “toxic” moms.
Finally, we run through the major plot points of “Love Is Blind Germany” episodes 5-8, which take our newly engaged couples from honeymoons in Crete to daily life together in Munich, culminating in the beginning of their weddings. There are a couple of relationship casualties on the way, and cracks begin to form in some of the stronger couples. But there’s one real exception: Josy and Gunnar seem to go from strength to strength, slowly blossoming in each stage of the experiment. They remain our sweethearts, our favorites, our babygirls. Don’t fail us; we need this right now.
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — A rant about the Golden Globes podcast category
14:06 — Ashley Tisdale French toxic mom group drama
47:19 — “Love Is Blind Germany” eps 5-8
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
We have long been fans of the Emily Henry romance-novel universe. So when we heard that “People We Meet On Vacation” would be getting the movie treatment, we were unquestionably excited.
“People We Meet On Vacation,” which was published in novel form in 2021 and dropped on Netflix in movie form on Jan. 9, follows polar opposite best friends Poppy (Emily Bader) and Alex (Tom Blyth), who after meeting in a gender-swapped “When Harry Met Sally” post-college road trip, decide to go on vacation together every summer… platonically, of course. Poppy is quirky and chaotic and wanderlust-y — a classic free-spirited gal. Alex, on the other hand, loves structure and steadiness and home. But when he goes on vacation with Poppy, his more adventurous side awakens.
The book, which we unfortunately did not have time to re-read before recording this podcast, is a delight. The movie… is fine?
Like most rom-coms that make it to Netflix or commensurate streaming platforms, “People We Meet On Vacation” is watchable and cute. But when it comes to the things that differentiate a rom-com you watch once and a rom-com that burrows into your soul — distinctive and dense dialogue, truly funny comedy, a story that makes you really feel something — the adaptation falters. It’s hard to put your finger on exactly what’s missing. Perhaps it’s the fact that the interiority of a character in a novel is simply tough to translate into movie form. Perhaps the story’s non-linear structure would have been better served with a mini-series. Perhaps it’s that Bader’s Poppy is a little too much of a caricature, and Blyth’s Alex is a little too flat. (These deficiencies are particularly notable when we meet Poppy’s parents, played by Alan Ruck and Molly Shannon, who pop more in their one scene than most of the other characters do in the entire film.) Perhaps the screenplay packs too much plot in without enough room to let us see why these two unlikely friends are so ultimately right for each other.
Whatever it is, “People We Meet On Vacation” left us wanting more — even as we found a few moments of true enjoyment. This rom-com ultimately felt neither like a true escape from real life nor a reflection of it.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
In 2026, the sun never sets on the “Love Is Blind” empire. With two US seasons a year, plus endlessly proliferating international spinoffs, there’s a new set of pod daters clamoring for our attention every time the last reunion has begun to fade from memory. And this month, we’re headed to Deutschland!
“Love Is Blind Germany” season 2 has landed, and if you watched any of the first season (which Claire accidentally did, assuming, in a post-holiday fog, that she was viewing screeners for the new drop), you’ll quickly see that this edition has leveled up. The characters are popping, the love geometry is mathing, and one man takes it upon himself to innovate a dastardly new form of pod dumping. Let this be a lesson to us all: Never trust a tall 42-year-old with a stacked roster.
The first drop was a staggering 8 episodes, so we took it upon ourselves to break it into two manageable halves. This week, we’re discussing the first four, which carry us through the drama-packed pod dating and into the beginning of the couples’ dreamy honeymoon in Crete. We get to know the new daters, form some snap judgments, and discuss the ongoing tyranny of gender role discourse in contemporary dating shows. And of course, we have many, MANY words for the audacity of Andi.
Next week, we’ll be back to break down episodes 5-8 — and in the meantime, we have a pod coming soon with our thoughts on the Netflix adaptation of Emily Henry’s rom-com “People We Meet On Vacation.”
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
2025 felt more like a lifetime than a year. Personally and globally, a lot happened in the last 12 months — much of it filled with darkness and despair, but also punctuated by bits of joy and light.
To round out 2025 and welcome in 2026, we decided to sit down and tape a bit of a reflection. We discussed our highlights (Emma’s wedding! Claire’s home purchase!), the lowlights (everything that the current administration is doing to our nation and the world), and our hopes and dreams for the year to come.
Thank you for being a part of this community of ours — one of the bits of light in the darkness. We are so grateful for you. Cheers to a 2026 we can all be proud of.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
When I got screener access to the season finale of “Heated Rivalry,” aptly titled “The Cottage,” I knew that the holiday break simply couldn’t stand in the way of a conversation about the back half of the super-gay hockey show that has become a solid 75 percent of my personality.
Unfortunately, Claire had to do things, like… spend time with family… and her children… and celebrate Christmas (fine, fine, fine), but as a Jew who found herself with some free time on her hands while in South Florida this week, duty called. Luckily, pop culture commentator Josh the RHONY Stan was game to watch the finale of the little Canadian show that has taken two nations by storm and hop on to chat all about it with me. We got into the overarching plot points of episodes 3-6, and then zoomed out to talk about the heated discourse that has surrounded “Heated Rivalry.” We laughed, we swooned, and we shared our hopes and dreams for the show’s second season.
Hope you enjoy! (And please forgive any slight audio quality issues. I was recording this from the floor of a bedroom in my mother-in-law’s Boca Raton home. We all do our best over Christmastime.)
“Down to Puck: Why Women Are Going Wild for ‘Heated Rivalry,’” Seth Abramovitch, The Hollywood Reporter
“Heated Rivalry Scores Big, With Hockey and Sex,” Erik Piepenburg, New York Times
“Heated Rivalry’s Elder Statesman,” Jason P. Frank, Vulture
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Happy holidays, y’all! Here are the presents you didn’t ask for: two staggeringly bad seasons of scripted TV.
First, “Emily in Paris” is back, and this time she’s Emily in Rome, Emily Back in Paris, Emily in an American Embassy, Emily in Venice, and Emily Back in Paris Forever This Time. Emily is madly in love with Marcello — her new Handsome Boyfriend, Italian Edition — but Emily also misses her family of origin, Pabst Blue Ribbon and Pop-Tarts. Emily and her glamorous French mentor, Sylvie, are kissing their way across Europe, too boy-crazy to notice that Agence Grateau is on life support. Mindy is singing in every episode, sometimes in a giant martini glass. Alfie is just there to be toyed with by beautiful women, and Gabriel lives on a yacht now. Somehow, this is still not the last season of “Emily in Paris.” Send this girl back to the greater Chicago area already!
Next, the so-bad-it-must-be-camp Hulu drama “All’s Fair” has crash-landed into its season finale. (Don’t worry: season 2 is coming.) Allura is in divorce mediation with her sociopathic sex-addict NFL-star husband, during which he suddenly falls madly in love with her again and begs her to start over. Immediately afterward, he begins fucking her nemesis. Carrington Lane commits a series of ethical and conduct violations so profound that disbarment seems like the only reasonable consequence, but instead her long-time enemies begin to court her as a possible partner for their lady lawyer firm. Liberty becomes insecure that her best friends are judging her for being a posh blonde Brit who eats scones. And the law firm’s matriarch, Dina, is arrested for the murder of Emerald’s assailant — was she framed??
These two shows each offer us a heightened reality — one bubblegum Technicolor, the other raunchy and lurid — that, despite their differences in aesthetic and tone, both bend towards a nightmarish sense of wrongness. We discuss all the problems, and all the unhinged details we could remember, in this two-part episode. Hope you enjoy! xo
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — “Emily in Paris,” season 5
1:04:08 — “All’s Fair,” end of season 1
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
On this week’s Rich Text podcast, we’re talking about a spicy new television show, and a “Secret Lives of Mormon Wives” reunion special that dangled the possibility of spice and instead fed us white bread.
First, we get into “Heated Rivalry,” a Canadian sports romance show that has broken out into the mainstream since it’s first two episodes dropped (on HBO Max for U.S. viewers) on Nov. 28. The show, created for Crave by actor/writer/producer/director Jacob Tierney, is based on the second novel in romance writer Rachel Reid’s Game Changers novel series. “Heated Rivalry” follows two rising hockey stars of Major League Hockey (a fictionalized NHL): Canadian Shane Hollander, who plays for the Montreal Metros, and Russian Ilya Rozanov, who plays for the Boston Raiders. They meet during their rookie years, and the tension is basically immediately palpable. They quickly end up developing a very public heated rivalry (see what we did there?), while entering into a private situationship that spans years.
In this episode, we get into why “Heated Rivalry” has broken through into the cultural conversation so quickly, the insane chemistry between the lead actors, whether it matters that this queer romance was written by a woman in a genre largely consumed by straight women, and why more romance shows should take the genre as seriously as Tierney clearly did.
Then we move on to the much-anticipated, but deeply disappointing, season 3 reunion of “The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives.” As fans of the show who have been breathlessly following the adventures of MomTok both on-screen and off, we had high hopes. But unfortunately, this reunion special offered a lot of throat-clearing and very little that actually cleared much of anything up.
The hour-long special, hosted by Stassi Schroeder, gave us… nothing? We were left with multiple frustrating back-and-forths that only ended when Stassi stepped in — not to ask a follow-up question, but to simply move right along to the next segment. It left us wondering who is to blame here: The filming schedule? The fact that the cast is holding back for Season 4? The host? The editing? All of the above?
Before we wrapped up, we also got into some of the far-more-interesting off-screen “SLOMW” news, including the big Fruity Pebbles reveal, and Jessi and Jordan’s dual Viall Files appearances.
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — “Heated Rivalry”
50:06 — “SLOMW” S3 Reunion
1:16:45 — “SLOMW” non-reunion gossip
Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
It was a big week for vampy girlbosses with flawless blowouts and questionable politics.
Olivia Nuzzi, the wunderkind politics reporter who left NYMag in disgrace when her digital affair with her source and then-presidential candidate RFK Jr. became public, has returned with not only a plum gig at Vanity Fair but a splashy memoir that seems to position her ethical lapse as a romantic tragedy. Meanwhile, her problematic ex Ryan Lizza, who left his own prestige media job in disgrace after being accused of sexual misconduct, has begun dropping Substack missives accusing Nuzzi of more and more lapses: another affair in 2020 with another source and then-presidential candidate, Mark Sanford; writing strategy memos and doing catch-and-kills for RFK Jr. while still covering the race as a reporter. (We recorded this episode before his second installment dropped on Friday night.) We discuss the framing of Nuzzi’s comeback tour, the purple prose and the emptiness behind it, the media rot that enabled it, and the grotesque parade of older, powerful men (very much including Lizza) who have participated in her rise and fall.
Next, we dug into season 4 of “Selling the O.C.” After season 3 ended in complete chaos, it’s unsurprising that the cast has been completely overhauled — but it is surprising, and disappointing, that the show has been almost completely whitewashed in the process. Yes, Alexandras Rose and Jarvis, classic MAGA Barbies, are gone, but they’re not the only ones. Every cast member of color was either ousted or reduced to occasional cameos. And to replace them? A host of new white women from the San Diego office. We discuss the new additions — Ashtyn the pregnant pot-stirrer, Fiona the Alex Hall acolyte, and Kaylee the raver chick — and break down the major points in this season’s drama. We also discuss the MAGA drift in the “Selling” franchise, the return of a much weepier Tyler Stanaland, and the persistent unlikability of the show’s central protagonist, Alex Hall.
Finally, we get into the hit Hulu drama “All’s Fair,” which stars Kim Kardashian, Naomi Watts, and Glenn Close as feminist divorce lawyers serving the fairer half of the uber-wealthy, alongside a crack investigator played by Niecy Nash-Betts. The show had been panned so roundly that we couldn’t resist taking a peek. And yes: it is that bad. It’s so bad that, while watching, we felt unmoored from reality. The pacing is off-kilter, the dialogue is flat and stilted, the plot is unhinged and leans too hard on half-baked feminist politics, the lighting and visuals are harsh and ominous, and the acting is so wooden that it’s hard not to root for the one person really going for it in her performance: Sarah Paulson as the villain, a female misogynist divorce lawyer whose sole objective is to destroy the show’s heroines. We talk about all of the above, as well as the show’s obsession with wealth and conspicuous consumption — including the consumption of expensive beauty procedures.
Timestamps for easy listening:
0:00 — The Nuzzi drama
51:06 — “Selling the O.C”
1:29:37— “All’s Fair”
Hope you enjoy, and happy Thanksgiving! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
As people who talk and write about reality television professionally, we know that being on a high-profile show can incentivize people to act in all sorts of ways. Everything is heightened, everyone has an agenda, and everything is — even when it’s very real and raw — in some part for TV. So when you combine that landscape with sexual assault allegations, things very quickly become very icky.
In this episode, we’re tackling the back half of season 3 of “The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives,” episodes 6-10. (If you missed our earlier coverage, here it is!) And, unfortunately, much of this half of the season is spent parsing assault allegations made by Demi against “Vanderpump Villa’s” Marciano. We tried to approach this as sensitively and thoughtfully as possible, but, as always, please listen with care.
But we promise this episode isn’t all doom and gloom! We also get to talk about Whitney’s rise from the social ashes, Stagecoach fuckery (if you’ve watched “Bachelor In Paradise,” you know that a Stagecoach hookup is never a good idea), and the final nail in the Taylor and Dakota relationship coffin. We hope you enjoy! (As much as possible, given the subject matter.)
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Season 3 of “The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives” is back, and it’s full of the juicy answers we’ve been waiting for: Did Jessi have an affair with slimy “Vanderpump Villa” star Marciano? Did Demi have an affair with slimy “Vanderpump Villa” star Marciano? Is Whitney still in MomTok? Did Jen and Zac Affleck fix their crumbling marriage? And what unspeakable thing finally blew up Taylor and Dakota’s on-again-off-again relationship?
In this episode, we tackle the first half of the season, which mostly revolves around the first two questions. Marciano has become a de facto cast member, as his shifting accounts of his relationships with Jessi and Demi keep upending the narrative. But we finally do get some answers — with the help of a polygraph test that the women trust a little more than the science warrants. We also discuss the darker side of Jessi’s marriage to Jordan, the DadTok/MomTok rift, Whitney’s burning desire to audition for “Dancing With the Stars,” and so much more.
We’ll be back soon to discuss the deeply upsetting second half of the season, but for now… we hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
For this week’s episode, we’re trying something a little different: a grab bag! We had three topics we wanted to cover — our reactions to this week’s elections, Lily Allen’s buzzy divorce album, and the deeply unpleasant “Selling Sunset” S9 reunion — so we chatted about all three.
First: We all needed a shot in the arm, and the off-year election gave it to us good and hard. Tuesday’s elections were a Democratic rout, with candidates from 34-year-old Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani to bland liberal Mikie Sherrill romping to victory with eye-popping margins. Abigail Spanberger won easily in the VA gubernatorial race, as did the rest of the Democratic ticket. But Dems also notched massive wins in state legislature races and in ballot measures, notably California’s Prop 50 (which backs Gavin Newsom’s retaliatory redistricting plan). They flipped two state utility board seats in Georgia and won a campaign to retain three Democratic state Supreme Court justices in Pennsylvania. Moms for Liberty candidates lost almost every contested school board race. We discuss the unfamiliar feeling of hope and the importance of channeling it into the fight ahead, as well as our (cautious) takeaways from how this election cycle played out.
Second: Lily Allen’s “West End Girl” has dominated the cultural conversation since it hit the airwaves — and we, too, have been enjoying our sonic trip from the West End to the “Pussy Palace.” The raw and diaristic album tells the story, inspired by the breakdown of Allen’s marriage to David Harbour, of a woman whose husband asks for an open marriage while she’s across the ocean, performing in a play in London. While she’s wracked with jealousy and anxiety about their new arrangement, he bends and breaks their rules; the infidelity destroys her, though she tries to get her own back by also taking advantage of the open relationship. Ultimately, the marriage falls apart.
The gruesome details, which Allen has coyly hinted may or may not be entirely factual, are delivered in candy-sweet melodies that only make her rage more pointed. We discuss our reactions to the music, the dark story it tells, Lily Allen as a public figure with a troubled history of her own, and the popularity of confessional pop music.
Third: The “Selling Sunset” reunion made a dark season even darker. Nicole refused to properly apologize for bringing up Chrishell’s late parents. Chrishell revealed more about the offensive language she’d witnessed and experienced from Emma’s on-and-off manchild boyfriend Blake, but was dogpiled by the rest of the cast for failing to be sufficiently supportive of Emma. Mary offered a limited apology to Chelsea for overreacting to the flower arrangement Chelsea sent her, but the depth of the racist subtext to the interaction was never addressed. And with Chrishell and Chelsea seemingly isolated from the rest of the group, it’s impossible to ignore how undercurrents of bigotry have shaped the social dynamic of the office. Will this season be the last we watch? We discuss this, along with the ins and outs of the reunion.
Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Our favorite stiletto-wearing, drama-producing, luxury real estate agents are back, baby! Season 9 of “Selling Sunset” premiered on Netflix on Oct. 29., and it faces the difficult task of balancing petty grievances between modelesque agents at The Oppenheim Group with a genuine mass tragedy — the 2025 Los Angeles Wildfires.
The first few episodes of the season are a return to form. Nicole and Chrishell are feuding. Mary and Chelsea are feuding. Bre and Chelsea are feuding. And Emma’s dating a 27-year-old real estate heir who has NEVER EATEN A FRUIT OR VEGETABLE! There’s a lot of feuding! And a very alarming manchild!
And then the wildfires break out, and the city of Los Angeles — and certainly the real estate industry — is thrown into crisis. “Selling Sunset” is more frothy intrigue than hard-hitting documentary, but the show does its best to thread the needle. Some of the most affecting scenes of the season are when we meet real women who had to flee their homes during the fires, and ended up losing everything.
In this episode, we discuss the shifting dynamics of the office, the cracks that are beginning to show in the Chrishell-Emma best friendship, Mary’s unraveling, and Nicole’s last hurrah. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
The first season of “Nobody Wants This” was, fortunately for a show with that title, a smash hit. Based on the life of show creator Erin Foster, who converted to Judaism for her now-husband, the show followed the unlikely interfaith love story between unfiltered podcaster Joanne (Kristin Bell) and hot rabbi Noah (nerdy millennial women’s fantasy boyfriend, Adam Brody). In the process, we and some other critics believed, the show fell into replicating some nasty stereotypes about Jewish women, while positioning Joanne and her sister Morgan (Justine Lupe) as the blonde shiksa goddesses of every onscreen Jewish man’s dreams. But hey, at least the central couple shared banter, chemistry, and a searing first kiss that left its audience weak in the knees!
Recapturing the magic of Joanne and Noah’s meet-cute is a tall order for season 2. And while the season does get a lot right — fleshing out some of the ensemble characters, exploring a flaw or two in the almost too-perfect Noah — it seems to have been too tall of an order to fulfill. “Nobody Wants This” spends the entire season taking us in what feels like a perfect circle, rehashing the same fundamental conflict between Noah and Joanne: she doesn’t want to convert, and if she doesn’t, being in a relationship with her is damaging to his rabbinical reputation. In the repeated argument and tabling of the argument and reintroduction of the argument, the sizzle of their spark is a bit dampened. What’s more, Joanne’s resistance to truly considering conversion only underscores how mismatched they seem, how much he seems to be willing to sacrifice for her without receiving much in return. The struggle to like, or even enjoy hating, our heroine remains real — and that’s a real issue for a rom-com.
At least, in developing side characters like Noah’s sister-in-law Esther (Jackie Tohn) (and, sadly, mostly dispensing with his mother Bina (Tovah Feldshuh)), season 2 of “Nobody Wants This” dials back the cartoonish stereotypes of Jewish women and offers a more three-dimensional, sympathetic portrayal. But the walking-back and course-correcting of certain plots strains credulity — after a season of seeming sexually hypnotized by Morgan, Noah’s brother Sasha (Timothy Simons) is now a sincere wife guy who views Morgan as Just A Friend!!! — and results in a season that feels more like table-setting for next time around.
In this episode, we discuss the major plot points that stood out to us from this season, including the reveal that Noah really is such a Good Boyfriend that he actually becomes a Bad Boyfriend, Sasha’s attempts to reignite the spark with Esther, Morgan’s horrifying romance with her therapist, and Noah’s new job at a Reform temple so laissez-faire about, well, Judaism that it verges on the offensive. We also discuss the revealing (dare we say, telling?) Hollywood Reporter deep dive on the messy making of season 1, and we get into how the showrunners and creator have reacted to the criticisms of season 1’s portrayal of Jewish women — and how those portrayals has shifted in season 2. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Diane Keaton was one of those rare public figures who seemed to collapse the space between celebrity and the rest of us. She was relatable, ethereal, warm, effervescent. She was magic in corporeal form.
That’s probably why for so many of us the news of her passing hit especially hard. Maybe you first met her as the unbearably charming Annie Hall in “Annie Hall,” or mom extraordinaire Nina Banks in “Father of the Bride,” or as reformed doormat Annie in “First Wives Club,” or as yuppie girlboss J.C. Wiatt. Regardless, you probably fell in love with her through the screen.
As Rhonda Garelick wrote of Keaton in a tribute for the New York Times: “In seeming so authentic and unfettered — both physically and personally — Ms. Keaton felt like a reminder of those promises [of 1970s feminism], like a rare bird soaring in from bygone days when progress and growing freedoms for women seemed inevitable.”
The two of us were struck by how genuinely sad we were when we learned over last weekend that Keaton had passed away at the age of 79. We knew that we wanted to use this week’s Rich Text episode to explore what she and her work meant to us. We contemplated rewatching a beloved movie of hers to discuss, and then realized that both of us had the same gap in our Diane Keaton knowledge: 1987’s “Baby Boom.”
“Baby Boom” follows yuppie self-described “Tiger Lady” J.C. Wiatt. She’s married to her high-powered job, having four-minute sex with her live-in boyfriend Steven (Harold Ramis), and gunning for partner at her firm. A wrench is thrown into her carefully constructed plans when she ends up saddled with a (very cute) baby after her distant cousin dies and designates her as the guardian. Hijinks — so many hijinks — ensue. She and Steven break up, she ends up mommy-tracked at her patriarchal office, and eventually she buys a Vermont estate on a whim and moves to the country, where she meets a very handsome veterinarian (Sam Shepard), and she manages to launch a multimillion-dollar business of artisanal baby food within approximately six months.
In a 2020 Vulture interview, Keaton spoke warmly about the experience of making “Baby Boom” and her adoration of J.C. Wiatt. “I love the woman I was playing,” she said. “I mean, it was fun. And let’s not forget Sam Shepard. Let’s not forget him … because wow. [Laughs loudly.] That was really fun too.”
Watching the 1987 film in 2025, we found that after nearly 40 years, the themes still resonate. Women are still navigating inequities in the workforce, and negotiating the motherhood penalty, and contending with the allure of the cottagecore fantasy. And for all of “Baby Boom’s” imperfections — including some fairly egregious plot holes — Keaton’s performance stands the test of time.
So cheers to you, Diane. We’re so glad that your work gets to live forever.
“Why Diane Keaton’s Death Hits Harder,” Rhonda Garelick, NYT
“A Delightful Conversation with Diane Keaton,” Rachel Handler, Vulture
“FEMINIST HEROINES; Women As Victims,” Charles Shyer & Nancy Meyers, NYT
“FILM VIEW; Are Feminist Heroines An Endangered Species?,” Caryn James, NYT
“Putting Down The Independent Working Woman,” Chicago Tribune
“Film Review: Satire That Lowers The ‘Baby Boom,’” Kevin Thomas, LA Times
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Just when you thought she hadn’t even left yet, Taylor Swift is back again with yet another album, complete with a color-based theme (orange), theatrically released music video, and multiple vinyl variants. “The Life of a Showgirl," which dropped October 3rd, is her third fully new album in four years; between 2019 and 2025, she has released at least one new or rerecorded album every year. Like any savvy creative in the influencer era, Swift knows the importance of feeding the beast with an unceasing flood of new content!
Sure, her primary medium is confessional pop hits, not a curated Instagram grid. But Swift’s business model — the frequent drops, the mining of her personal life for intriguing material, the outsized parasocial relationship between her and her fans (in which she is positioned both as aspirational and, increasingly implausibly, as relatable), and the harnessing of backlash, outrage cycles, and “haters” to fuel her career — is almost perfectly optimized for an influencer-based attention economy. She’s figured out how to make sure we pay attention to her. And pay attention we did.
So what did we think of “TLOAS,” and what did we think of the discourse around it? Is it badly written and hollow? Is it boring because it’s about being happy and in love? Is it full of half-baked, ripped-off songs? Is it mean-spirited, petty, and punching down at less famous women? Are there too many old memes in it? Is she a tradwife now? Is it a needless album, born of greed, without a single bop to be found? Is it a misunderstood instant classic?
We listened to the album a few (dozen) times, read a few (dozen) reviews and takes, and went through a few (dozen) changes of heart about the songs before recording this. And while we’re not music critics or Swifties, we did wind up with some strong feelings and opinions! In this episode, we discuss our favorite parts of the album, Taylor Swift’s ambitions and influencer-esque savvy, the cringe lyrics (you know which ones), the difficulty of reviewing a Taylor Swift album without reviewing Taylor as a person, the “WI$H LI$T” tradwife discourse, and so much more.
Hope you enjoy! xo
Amanda Petrusich, The New Yorker: “Why Does Taylor Swift Think She’s Cursed?”
Ira Madison III, “She’s Not Your Average Showgirl”
Maya Georgi, Rolling Stone: “Taylor Swift Conquers Her Biggest Stage Ever on ‘The Life of a Showgirl’”
Anna Graca, Pitchfork review
Tyler Foggatt, The New Yorker: “Do We Still Like Taylor Swift When She’s Happy?”
B.D. McClay, The Substack Post
Kelsey McKinney, Defector: “No Good Art Comes From Greed”
New York Times roundtable:“Taylor Swift Keeps Getting Bigger. Can the Music Keep Up?"
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
One of the most fascinating things about watching different editions of “Love Is Blind,” is tracking the regionally-specific cultural differences.
In Denver, the U.S. season currently airing, we have biohacking and tech-enabled wellness clubs used as foreplay. In France, we have unfiltered bluntness. Who knew it was possible to start a relationship by telling a person that you simply don’t like how they look, and end up as the Golden Couple of the season? Paris truly is the city of love.
In this episode, we break down our high-level thoughts on France’s inaugural “Love Is Blind” season, from the pods all the way to the weddings. (So, to state the obvious, we get a little less granular than we usually do.) We discuss the French-specific cultural norms, the incredible fashion (we’d like to raid your closets, Kim and Tatiana), the equal opportunity bad behavior among the men and women, and the couples we really, really hope are still together come reunion day. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The shippers can finally lay down their swords, because as we always knew they would, Team Bonrad has emerged victorious.
On Wednesday, the finale of hit teen romance show “The Summer I Turned Pretty” dropped. Fans got to watch Conrad show up in Paris and yearn for Belly all over the city. Their reunion culminates in a very steamy sex scene, a temporary freakout, and a rom-com-worthy chase-after-his-train reconciliation. Cut to an epilogue, where Belly and Conrad arrive at the Cousins beach house, just the two of them.
Meanwhile, our side characters also got their happy endings. Jeremiah connected with his former colleague Denise, Belly’s brother Steven and best friend Taylor are moving to California, and all of the parents seem to have reached a place of peace. Things are (mostly) neatly wrapped up — we do have a movie coming, so not *everything* could be clearly resolved — and the romance in the air of Cousins Beach remains.
And yet… there remain fundamental things about “The Summer I Turned Pretty” that we find a bit hard to swallow. In this episode, we discuss the underlying conservatism of TSITP, the wild Bonrad vs. Jelly shipping wars, the fandom’s allergy to delayed gratification, and why we loved Belly in Paris so much. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
As professional reality dating show viewers, we were feverish with excitement to watch Netflix’s new rom-com “The Wrong Paris” (brought to you by the director of Lindsay Lohan vehicles “Irish Wish” and “Falling for Christmas).
“The Wrong Paris” stars Miranda Cosgrove as Dawn, a small-town diner waitress and artist from Texas who is, of course, Not Like Other Girls. She doesn’t even watch the huge reality franchise “The Honey Pot,” a show similar to “The Bachelor” but with enormous cash prizes — and a love or money twist at the end. But when she needs money and a plane ticket to Paris for so she can enroll at a French art school, her normie sister convinces her to audition for the newest season, which conveniently happens to be filming in Paris. Dawn gets cast and boards the plane hoping only to pocket the $20k appearance fee paid to each cast member and get eliminated. Unfortunately, it turns out that the plane is heading to Paris, Texas — and the lead has no intention of eliminating her. Hey, he just loves the chase!
This is a rom-com about a woman who tries to scam a reality show and instead falls in love with a man who tries to hold her hostage until he can turn her ‘no’ into a ‘yes.” It’s a rom-com about chintzy metalwork art and high-school-level art criticism. And above all, it’s a rom-com about a reality dating show so poorly produced that it’s hard to imagine how the editors will even string together a season, given that most of the important narrative developments either happen off-screen or are interrupted by producers mid-filming because they’re TOO dramatic.
Along the way, we get some very light parody of “The Bachelor” and “Bachelor”-adjacent shows and a very topical plot twist.
In this episode, we recap the whole movie, try not to get too distracted by the obvious production missteps of the “Honey Pot” crew, and laugh a lot. Maybe this wasn’t “The Wrong Paris” for us, after all! Hope you enjoy. xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The Women sat at their iced-coffee-covered desks, staring into the vast beyond of their computer screens. They couldn’t help but wonder… what did they just watch for the better part of 12 hours, on and off for the last handful of months?
The answer is, of course, the final season of “And Just Like That…” The “Sex and the City” sequel has been polarizing from the jump, generating more discourse than minutes of airtime. And after just three cringey, painful, glorious seasons, it has come to an end.
We admittedly had gotten pretty behind on “AJLT,” due to our Big Summer of reality dating shows. But now that it’s September, we decided that it was time to dedicate the hours to this essential project, binge-watch the episodes we had missed, and dive headfirst into the conversation.
In this episode, we discuss what this season actually got right (quite a bit!), the Aidan of it all, the abysmal series finale, and whether hatred for the show is truly just bound up in hatred of middle-aged women. We hope you enjoy! Xo
“Were Carrie Bradshaw and Her Friends the Last Nice Rich People on TV?,” Ginia Bellafante, NYTimes
“In ‘And Just Like That …’ a Craven Era Took Its Revenge on Youth and Hope and Fun,” Jennifer Weiner, NYTimes
“my (needless) AJLT season 4 pitches,” Samantha Irby, bitches gotta eat!
“‘And Just Like That…’ Is Over Too Soon,” Wesley Morris & Taffy Brodesser-Akner, Cannonball with Wesley Morris podcast
“Misreading Carrie Bradshaw,” Jackson McHenry, Vulture
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The “Love Is Blind” season 2 reunion landed on Sunday afternoon, and it landed with the force and spectacle of a grand piano pushed out of a tenth-story window. The proverbial ink had barely dried on our glowing recap of last week’s finale — the 10/10 perfect couples, the happy surprise of Billy and Ashleigh — when all our starry visions of marital bliss were extinguished. Well, not all. (There are one or two decent men left in the United Kingdom.) This reunion brought us shocking update after unsurprising-but-still-somehow-shocking update, some Emma Willis tears, and a performance of “you’re a liar” in two-part harmony.
In this episode, we discuss all the couples’ relationship updates, berate ourselves for giving men the benefit of the doubt, speculate about stiff upper lips and missing chips, wonder about spleen-forward parenting, and give one last enemies-to-friends ranking.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The two-part “Love Is Blind UK” finale dropped this week, and despite the usual dull spots — wedding dress and suit shopping scenes that could have been a mood board, by-the-book stag and hen do activities, all the standard trimmings of a wedding day — we were rapt. This season ended as all the best seasons do: Some drama, some suspense, some swoony happy endings, and one woman walking away from marriage to a man who can’t quite see her as a full equal.
In this episode, we discuss the resurgence of strict gender roles and “being in our masculine/feminine” relationship frameworks, the slow-motion implosion of Bardha and Jed’s engagement, Billy’s doubts and Ashleigh’s heartbreaking determination to win him over, and the love stories that made our hearts skip a beat. We end with an enemies-to-friends ranking and rate our final four couples on whether they should stay together/date after the show. Hope you enjoy!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“Are You My First?”, a reality dating show that dropped on Hulu last week, was clearly designed to be provocative. Well before it premiered, it drew controversy for its choice of hosts: reality and podcast personality Kaitlyn Bristowe shares the honor with Colton Underwood, a public figure most famous for being a virgin when he starred on “The Bachelor” and second-most famous for allegedly stalking the winner of his season. The show itself, which we have now watched in full, never ceases reminding viewers that its castmembers are virgins, and their lack of experience is frequently played for awkward laughs. Their full humanity, indeed any part of their identities outside of not having had sex, is not explored in any meaningful depth. From beginning to end, everything from the eliminations (“Virgin Sacrifices”) to the contestants themselves (consistently identified as “virgins” in their chyrons) are chastity-branded. But the idea of what virginity actually represents — both as a heteronormative, patriarchal social construct and as a core part of the castmembers’ identities — is never challenged or even explored.
Perhaps it’s unfair to expect a trashy reality show to dismantle the patriarchy (though some girls can dream!). But we were also disappointed with the show’s sheer entertainment quotient, which was simply not high enough. Almost no relationships of any real interest develop, and we barely get to know the people in those relationships outside of learning exactly why each of them hasn’t had sex yet. The series is glued together with unfunny and stiff narration from the hosts (especially Underwood), apparently recorded using tin cans and a ball of string. By the finale, we could barely interest ourselves enough to watch.
But that’s not to say there isn’t plenty to discuss! In this episode, we break down the choice to cast Colton Underwood and review the performances of the hosts, offer some critiques of the format and production, dig into some of the standout characters and love triangles, and unpack how the show presents virginity and what it suggests about the cultural and political moment we’re in. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Last episode, we were wondering whether this season of “Love Is Blind UK” would be able to recapture the glory of the first. It all just seemed a little… dull. This week, we’re eating our words. We have besties! We have enemies! We have a genuinely riveting Pod Squad mixer!
In episodes 5-8, we watch the five engaged couples finish up their romantic vacation in Cyprus and head back to Manchester to move in together. They meet each other’s families, continue to build their physical and emotional connections, and grapple with the fallout of drama that occurs at a wider pod mixer. (Special shout out to Aanu for her “You’re a liiiiiiiiar” vocal stylings.)
Some couples hit the rocks this week. At the center of much of this drama are Katisha and Javen, who started off on slightly shaky terms after Katisha nearly picked someone else in the pods. But during this stretch of episodes it feels like Javen is just constantly looking for an out. Is that out Demola? Is it differing communication styles? Is it one of the other hot ladies in the Pod Squad? After some truly out-of-pocket behavior at the mixer, it was frankly a relief to see Megan level with her girl and allow Katisha to exit the relationship with her head held high on her own terms. Even more devastatingly, our Golden Couple-coded pair, Billy and Ashleigh, seem like they’re faltering during this stretch… all because Billy can’t handle six more months of Ashleigh working cabin crew.
But other couples we couldn’t quite get a read on in the pods started to soar! Kal & Sarover! Megan & Kieran! (Consider us officially swoony over these four.) We get into all of the drama and all of the romance in this week’s episode, and discuss how much all of our ratings and rankings have shifted around over the course of a week. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
If anyone tries to tell you that reality television isn’t full of culture, tell them to watch the first drop of “Love Is Blind UK” season 2. Not only does it provide an American audience with a crash course in a wide array of British accents and terminology, but viewers can also learn about the grift of “human design” — and perhaps most importantly, “splenic awareness.”
The latter is thanks to Patrick, a man who (spoiler alert!) does not find lasting love in the pods, but does provide us with running commentary on the significance of his spleen. For the uninitiated, a few nuggets of wisdom from Patrick: (1) The spleen is more potent than the gut. (2) The spleen is the center of all intuition. (3) Therefore, the spleen’s inherent wisdom at any given moment simply *must* be followed. Is this all a crock of shit? Yes! Does it mean that Patrick makes for excellent TV? Also yes!
During the first drop of “LIB UK” episodes, we meet our 30 UK singles, see six couples form in the pods, and watch five of those couples get engaged and jet off to a romantic honeymoon in Cyprus. The season starts a little bit slow, which left us wondering if the sophomore run will be able to recreate the magic of the first season. But some tantalizing threads left dangling at the end of episode four make us hopeful for the episodes yet to come.
In this episode, we discuss it all: the two major love triangles, our predictions for the couples, the disappointing lack of villainy, whether Clayton was following his spleen on “Perfect Match,” and, of course, our friends-enemies scale.
We hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“Love Island” and “Love Island: Beyond the Villa” may have wrapped their latest seasons, but if anything the drama has only gotten more explosive — and unsettling — off-camera.
JaNa Craig and Kenny Rodriguez, one of the “Love Island USA” season 6 runner-up couples, broke up abruptly at the end of last month, just hours after posting together at YouTuber David Dobrik’s birthday party. JaNa’s closest friends from the villa, Leah Kateb and Serena Page, quickly unfollowed him — and then, so did essentially everyone else associated with the show, from his male costars to Ariana Madix herself. Scandalous rumors swirled about what Kenny could have done to earn the ire of even his best bros. Cheating? Financial malfeasance? A secret child? But, as JaNa posted in a statement on her Instagram story last week, the truth was still more twisted.
Meanwhile, season 7 antiheroine Huda Mustafa has been seen stepping out with Netflix star Louis Russell (currently starring in “Perfect Match” season 3), and some notable unfollowings seemed to hint that “LIUSA” season 6 stars Leah, Serena, and JaNa might be upset by the relationship. Leah’s boyfriend from the show, Miguel Harichi, had a longstanding friendship with Louis, but has publicly distanced himself from the Netflix personality, as he and Leah have both hinted that they believe Louis is pursuing Huda for clout.
In this episode, we discuss how the JaNa and Kenny breakup unfolded and dig into the rumored reason for the breakup, based on public statements by JaNa and her friends. We also get into the perils of insincere men on reality dating shows, and how racism and misogynoir put Black women in particularly vulnerable positions when dating on TV. (In this conversation, we reference Taryn Finley’s excellent Refinery29 essay, “JaNa Craig’s Split Proves A Pattern & It’s Black Women Who Pay The Price." We also discuss the Huda and Louis relationship, the apparent rift it has caused among the “Love Island” and “Too Hot to Handle” crews, and the warped incentives of sudden fame and dating on TV.
We hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“The Hunting Wives” is one of those rare shows where nothing makes much sense, but it still somehow works. Thanks to her very middling husband, coastal liberal Sophie O’Neill (Brittany Snow) gets dropped into the gun-toting world of East Texas socialites, led by Queen Bee Margo Banks (Malin Åkerman). Longing glances are exchanged, handguns are casually purchased, dark secrets are uncovered, and a local teen girl ends up dead.
It’s an absurd, sudsy, romp through MAGA-land — with a healthy dose of murder and an even healthier dose of illicit sexual encounters. Before you can say “bless your heart,” Sophie — who is initially disgusted when she and her husband show up at his new boss’ NRA party — is buying a gun she doesn’t know how to load and blacking out at honky tonks with her new girlfriends and their teen sons/paramours.
As Judy Berman points out in Time, “The Hunting Wives” falls beautifully into the grand tradition of “wives” pop culture. Stories about single women are often stories about finding love. Stories about wives are stories about what happens after an alleged happily ever after is procured. And there’s pretty much always darkness and conflict lurking underneath the glittering surface of a group of (rich) women’s lives. Men are still there, but they’re no longer at the center.
Nothing about “The Hunting Wives” is subtle. Not the fashion (Margo looks like she could be going out for a night in Vegas during her husband’s political fundraisers); not the sex (see: pegging); not the political rhetoric (Margo’s local kingpin husband, played by Dermot Mulroney, toys with a gubernatorial run by making a speech about “personas malos” crossing the border); and certainly not the dialogue. (One character literally croaks out “you cunts” as she dies.)
It’s also a study in the allure of hypocrisy: Church leaders who preach about Godliness while doing blackmail. Women who express anti-abortion sentiment and then procure abortion care when they need it. A sheriff who is eager to solve a murder only when it can bolster his own career ambitions. Wives who perform traditional hetero-femininity publicly while engaging in queer relationships privately.
As Margo tells Sophie early in the season of her arrangement with Jed: “Open marriages are for liberals. We just keep it simple. I don’t sleep with other men, and when Jed and I see a girl we like, we go for it.”
In this episode we talk about the right-wing political backdrop of the show, the abundant plot holes, how hetero the whole thing feels despite the queerness, and what we’d like to see from a second season. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Titling your new Netflix rom-com series “Too Much” is the sort of move that comes off as either a provocation or an easy set-up. It’s as if co-creator Lena Dunham is inviting critics to assess whether her show and her heroine are, indeed, too much. And given the decade-plus of fevered discourse around her last semi-autobiographical TV series, “Girls,” it makes sense that Dunham would not only be prepared for outsized reactions, but ready to take them head-on. But ultimately, “Too Much” isn’t a defiant, confrontational show; it’s an intimate exploration of how falling in love can seem to heal us, but also expose how we’re broken.
The show opens with Jessica (the hilarious, if sometimes overly schticky, Meg Stalter) moving to London for a work project in hopes of getting over a devastating breakup with her live-in boyfriend, Zev (Michael Zegen). He has quickly moved on with a stunning knitwear influencer named Wendy (Emily Ratajkowski), and Jessica has become obsessed with watching Wendy’s social media videos, responding to them in emotional videos posted to her own private Instagram. But in London, the die-hard romantic Jessica, fueled by visions of meeting her own Mr. Darcy, immediately falls in love with Felix (Will Sharpe), a brooding indie musician. The show follows them as they fall in love, confront demons from their pasts, fight, break up, and find their way back to each other.
In short, this series has all the trappings of a classic romantic comedy, despite its fractured rom-com episode titles (“Nonsense and Sensibility,” “To Doubt a Boy”). Yet “Too Much” has the signature Dunham sharpness — crackling banter, precisely observed skewerings of modern archetypes, sweet moments punctured by humiliating or gross realities. Like “Girls,” “Too Much” puts the flaws of its characters under a spotlight, including those of its winsome lead. But it’s gentler, more forgiving, even a tad sappy at times. Perhaps, Dunham seems to say, these imperfect people, with their self-delusions and their petty cruelties, can still find ways to love and be loved.
In this episode, we talk about the legacy of “Girls” and the perils of continuing to make art after an unexpected debut classic, our favorite and least favorite things about “Too Much,” Jessica and Felix’s emotional journeys, Zev’s villain edit, and more. Hope you enjoy!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Pedro Pascal + Dakota Johnson + Chris Evans + love triangle + New York City + an exploration of modern dating should = pure joy. Unfortunately, the math behind Celine Song’s sophomore feature, “Materialists,” simply doesn’t add up.
You know things aren’t going great when you watch a movie and can’t stop mentally cataloguing each item of clothing the protagonist is wearing. That ruffled Doên dress? $398. The work bag that looks like a dupe of the Khaite one? $650. A floral Reformation dress? $278. Knee-high Paris Texas boots? $766. Sexy Simkhai top? $375. A cerulean Proenza cocktail dress? Originally $1190, but now on sale for $365.
Alas, the minute Dakota Johnson’s Lucy — an immaculately-dressed, 30-something star matchmaker living in a modest but beautiful Brooklyn Heights apartment — declares that she makes $80k/year (before taxes!!!), I knew we were doomed to do the mental tally. Song has said that including this specific number was an intentional choice; she wanted the audience to linger over the financial realities of the not-uber-wealthy. But in a movie thin on character development, it served more as a distraction.
“Materialists” follows Lucy (Dakota Johnson), a 30-something star matchmaker and self-described expert on the romantic marketplace who says she’s looking to marry rich. At the wedding of one of her former clients, she meets the groom’s brother, Harry (Pedro Pascal), a private equity multi-millionaire (billionaire?) who believes that love is about transaction and sees intrinsic value in Lucy. She also runs into her broke actor ex-boyfriend John (Chris Evans), the former love of her life who is now working as a cater waiter and living in an apartment where his roommates leave used condoms around their shared kitchen. Thus the movie sets up its central questions: Will Lucy choose Money or Love? And if being loved is about being viewed as valuable — a thesis that Lucy states plainly early in “Materialists” — where is that value derived and who gets to decide what it is?
The movie is at its sharpest when examining the cold realities of a dating marketplace — a marketplace where buyers are also commodities — devoid of human intimacy. The app-ification of courtship is laid bare in Lucy’s intake meetings with new potential clients. (Song herself previously worked as a matchmaker, and it shows.) A 48-year-old man expresses a desire to finally settle down with a mature woman, by which he means a 27-year-old. Another man tells Lucy that “39 is 40,” and then requests “nothing over a 20 BMI.” Lucy’s services are luxury goods, acquired by people of means in order to guarantee the acquisition of luxury spouses. But as Lucy tells one client later in the movie, “this is not a car or a house. We’re talking about people. People are people are people are people. They come as they are.”
But who are Lucy and Harry and John? They are less people, and more paper dolls, gesturing around at vague, potentially fascinating ideas. And even all the money in the world can’t buy substance.
“The Materialists Trailer Is A Liar,” Andrew Gruttadaro, The Ringer
“Materialists Is an Inert Misreading of Modern Romance,” Angelica Jade Bastién, Vulture
“How a Salary Figure Changes Everything in ‘Materialists,’” Alissa Wilkinson, NYTimes
“'materialists' is a romcom for the money diaries generation,” Viv Chen, The Molehill
“Rich Suitor/Poor Suitor,” Heather Schwedel, Slate
“Is Materialists Actually a Horror Movie?,” Jesse Hassenger, GQ
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Let’s talk reunions, y’all! We’re back from our summer vacations, rested and ready to reunite for all the reunion specials we missed during our OOO week: “The Ultimatum: Queer Love” and “Secret Lives of Mormon Wives.” Hosts Joanna Garcia Swisher and Nick Viall took their best swings at the Andy Cohen crown, with varying results, but each reunion offered at least a few juicy moments.
In “The Ultimatum: Queer Love,” there were more happy updates than usual. And we love to see our queens thriving! But the reunion drama was somewhat dampened by all the couples who showed up ready to protect their relationships. Only the single cast members came out throwing elbows. Ashley and Marita shared a particularly bruising exchange, while Marie seeped poorly suppressed rage throughout the special. In a surprise twist, Mels’s Brussels sprout recipe played a key role in the conflict. Joanna was present and warm as ever, but ineffectual, leaving many intriguing questions and follow-ups unasked. We get into all the updates from the couples and former couples, assess the hosting, and try to make sense of the hot-button topics that weren’t even broached. (Like… what do Magan and Dayna have on Joanna??)
Next, the “Secret Lives of Mormon Wives” reunion! The questions were sharper and the follow-ups were on point, but the absence of season villain Demi took the thrill out of most of the conversations. (She was, she alleges, unable to cancel a family vacation to Disney.) Instead, the women have to respond to clips from a pre-taped interview with Nick, in which Demi talks shit with the confidence of a woman who does not have to actually face her targets. Meanwhile, Jessi has a lot to say about how she can’t say anything at all regarding Marciano’s allegations that they had an affair after meeting on “Vanderpump Villa” (to learn more, we’ll have to watch season 3). But there are some explosive moments — notably, Jen and Zac producing an audio recording of Demi instructing Jen to positively spin Demi’s own rumored dalliance with Marciano during “VPV” — as well as some poignant ones. We get into it all in the second half of this episode.
Hope you enjoy! xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“The Ultimatum: Queer Love” finale had it all: Proposals! Confrontations! A dramatic breakup! This season was a true emotional rollercoaster, in all of the best ways.
We got to see some real growth from both couples — Pilar & Haley and Magan & Dayna faced potentially relationship-ending challenges during their trial marriages — as well as individuals — Ashley seems to find her voice and reckon with the potential incompatibilities that she and her longterm girlfriend Marita have. Other couples are resistant to untangling hard truths right up to the end. (Yes, we ARE talking about you, Mel and Marie.)
We taped this episode ahead because of our insane schedules, so this podcast will only include discussion of episodes 8 and 9 of “Queer Love” S2. A separate podcast about the (honestly quite juicy) reunion will be coming soon.
Hope you enjoy! Xo
Special thanks to Jonathan Behar for editing today’s episode.
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Just in time for the end of Pride Month, “The Ultimatum: Queer Love” has returned to our screens. And after watching the first seven episodes of season 2, we couldn’t help but wonder… why does the straight version even exist when “Queer Love” is so far superior?
The new season follows six couples who have reached a crossroads in their longterm relationship. One partner wants to get married, and the other has reservations. For some couples, the hesitancy has to do with familial rejection or disapproval; for others it’s a more run-of-the-mill uncertainty about fundamental compatibility. (Looking at you, Marita and Ashley!)
So, shepherded through the process by host Joanna Garcia Swisher (who remains an inexplicable choice for a show about queer love), the couples break up, date everyone else on the cast, and choose a new partner for a three-week trial marriage. And oh boy do these people take their trial marriages SERIOUSLY. Some become each other’s therapists/besties (Marita and Britney), and others fall into full-on new relationships (Haley and Magan, Mel and Dayna). After those three weeks are up, they return to their original partners and figure out if they still can (and want to!) make it work.
It’s transcendent reality television — a true window into the human experience, full of love, sex, betrayal and emotional messiness. We talk about everything from the first seven episodes we could fit into one taping, and we had an absolute blast doing it. Hope you enjoy! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
If one can say anything uplifting about season 2 of “The Valley,” it’s probably that the show is, at least, providing video documentation of Jax Taylor’s misdeeds — and his slimy attempts to throw blame for his horrific behavior on everyone around him, his ex-wife Brittany Cartwright in particular.
In this latest batch of episodes, Jax steps up his harassment of Britt. He continues to rage-text her, reaches out to their mutual friends and family to try to convince them he’s truly changed and needs Britt’s sympathy and care, watches her from the family home’s interior surveillance cameras, apparently fakes (or at least exaggerates) a medical emergency, dumps his disastrous financial problems on her, and continues to imply (under the guise of taking full accountability) that Britt is responsible for his bad behavior. After all, she should have held him accountable before! She should have left him! He wishes she had! Oh, if only someone had forced him to be less of a piece of shit!
Meanwhile, the side-plots continue to play out. Jesse continues to fixate on Michelle having cheated on him, and Michelle airs her own grievances in front of the group. (At least Jesse has the backing of their former relationship coach, now his solo coach, who seems particularly gifted at feeding into the aggrieved mindset of the recently divorced male.) Nia draws fire from her friends when she doesn’t openly trash her husband Danny for getting drunk at a wine-tasting in Santa Barbara. Jasmine realizes she may not be over Danny groping her and Melissa last Halloween. Defending Danny and Nia, Kristen spreads a rumor about Jason taking off his wedding ring at bars, which somehow leads to a blowup between Jason, Janet… and Jasmine.
In this episode, we catch up on these central plot points and try not to let Jax raise our blood pressure. Hope you enjoy! xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Carrie Bradshaw is swanning about in tulle in her massive Gramercy Park townhouse. Her boyfriend is in Virginia, her jewelry designer millennial neighbor is now living in her old uptown apartment, and her friends are busy fucking nuns and stalking elite college counselors.
Naturally, that means it’s time for her to sit down and write a novel. About women. Women who “toss and turn” due to their “insecurities,” and obsess over the past. But it’s not the past, it’s the present: May, 1846. Or is it 2012? When you’re talking about “And Just Like That…”, one can never be sure.
The show may be set in the year of our lord 2025, but the cultural discussions are straight out of the early 20-teens. Reality dating shows — did you know smart women can enjoy them? Hate-watching, baby! Everything happens on our phones now — even dating! Have you heard???
Not only does the cultural zeitgeist of “And Just Like That…” season 3 feel woefully dated, but our heroines are now ensconsed in such absurd levels of wealth that it feels as if there are no real stakes to… well… anything. As David Mack put it in a fantastic piece for Slate: “If SATC was once a revolutionary show about sex and dating, AJLT is now too often a series about money and the carefree lifestyle that wealth provides the leisure class. … In its third season, AJLT is more content than ever plodding along (albeit in Manolos) as little more than a pedestrian fantasy that’s lost most of the spunk and spark of the original series. Like its characters’ lives, AJLT is just… comfortable.”
And yet, there’s still so much to laugh about when discussing this show. And we don’t just mean Carrie’s historical romance novel! We had so much fun (and secondhand embarrassment) talking about that Aidan masturbation scene, Seema’s showdown with matchmaker Cheri Oteri, the character development we are actually *enjoying* from Miranda, and what we hope to get from Carrie and Charlotte as the season progresses. Hope you enjoy! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
What would Jesse Solomon do (if you were a hot model in his proximity)? Evidence from the lanky “Summer House” star, during his sophomore season on the show, suggests that he would shower you with flattery and over-the-top declarations of romantic feelings, press forward with a committed relationship, get his toe sucked during a 37-minute off-camera hang with two women, and all the while vent to your shared friend group about all the “red flags” you’ve displayed. And if you have a problem with any of it? Well, he was only joking. Baddies beware, because this was the fate of Lexi Wood, the latest ingenue on season 9 of the Bravo show.
We have watched model and Instagram star Lexi’s arrival — and the couple’s PDA-heavy, turbulent insta-relationship — at first with exhausted irritation, then undiluted annoyance, and ultimately fascination. Lexi’s baby-voiced flirtation and eagerness to jump into things with Jesse before she had solidified social connections with the rest of the house didn’t endear her to the audience. And Jesse, after a low-key first season, seemed transparently determined to make his mark with a splashy relationship. It all came off as a little too calculated and, simultaneously, a little too foolish, to get invested in. But the wreckage left by their short-lived relationship has, against our will, riveted us. We are ready to rubberneck at the flaming trail of destruction. Among the casualties: Ciara’s chill summer, Lexi’s friendships with the other summer house guests, and Jesse’s nice-guy halo.
In this episode, we discuss everything that unsettled us about Jesse’s courtship of Lexi and how he has handled the fallout of their relationship, as well as how Lexi approached her first season and her fling with Jesse. We also dig into Ciara’s reluctant role in the Jesse-Lexi drama (please leave this woman in peace!!). Plus, we discuss breast milk flavor profiles and Paige’s sparse revelations about the Craig breakup at the end of the finale. Hope you enjoy! xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
What is MomTok? A business? A friend group? A sisterhood? A vehicle for TV drama? A tool for dismantling the patriarchal forces undergirding the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? In season 2 of “The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives,” the ladies of MomTok are back — and they have very different answers to that big question.
For Demi and Whitney, MomTok is a buttoned-up business where cosplays friendship — or at least practices loyalty — which means that there’s no room for chaotic colleagues like Taylor Frankie Paul. For Taylor, Mayci, Mikayla, Layla, Jen and newcomer Miranda, it’s more of a group of friends who also happen to make very lucrative content together. For all of them, it’s a way to push back (in a limited and often personally convenient way) on the oppressive boundaries of their conservative upbringings.
If season 1 of SLOMW was an Intro to MomTok course, season 2 throws us right into an advanced seminar, full of carefully performed rituals of femininity (a Mormon bake-off!) and compulsory fertility (pregnancy roulette!). The women are excavating past traumas, wading into Hulu crossover drama, and having incredibly meta conversations about the nature of being on reality television.
In this podcast episode, we get into as much of the season’s drama as we can, including Taylor and Demi’s showdown, Zac’s attempts at redemption, and the final bombshell accusations that are thrown Jessi’s way. We also dig into some of the post-show drama. (Will MomTok survive this???)
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The technofuturists want it. The evangelicals want it. The creepy manosphere dudes want it. The current iteration of the American right wing may be an odd and sometimes contradictory coalition, but there’s at least one thing they all unite around: More babies.
President Trump has dubbed himself “the fertilization president,” while his vice president, J.D. Vance, notoriously has bemoaned “childless cat ladies” as a social ill and suggested that people with children should get more votes. Elon Musk has fathered at least 14 children as part of an ideologically driven quest to save civilization with his “legion” of offspring. The Trump White House has considered a number of proposals for boosting the birth rate, including a motherhood medal for women who have six or more children.
Meanwhile, pronatalist influencers like the noxious Simone and Malcolm Collins are flocking to the predominantly white, male, and conservative Natal Conference to advance the cause and draw attention to what they deem a population crisis.
What exactly is going on here? Why has the right suddenly become obsessed with birth rates, and what policies will they push to achieve their fertility goals? Why are these so-called pro-family advocates utterly uninterested in policies that would both improve the lives of parents and children and potentially raise birth rates, like universal free childcare? And how has the left responded to this renewed breeding obsession? After months of reading and raging about these questions, we decided we needed to talk it out. In this podcast, we try to follow all of these threads — and, to be transparent, we also vented a lot of sputtering fury.
Below, we’ve compiled a list of articles we read prior to this conversation, many of which are cited in the podcast. Gently poach your brain in a pronatalism soup, if you will! Sarah Jones’s essays for New York Mag are particularly illuminating on the historical context and dark undercurrents of the right wing’s fertility fever.
Hope you enjoy! xo
“America’s premier pronatalists on having ‘tons of kids’ to save the world: ‘There are going to be countries of old people starving to death,’” by Jenny Kleeman, The Guardian
“Pronatalism explained: Why tech titans like Elon Musk want to have tons of kids to save the world,” by Julia Black, Business Insider
“Meet the ‘elite’ couples breeding to save mankind,” by Io Dodds, The Telegraph
“The Women Who Think the World Needs More Babies,” by Emma Goldberg, The New York Times
“The Pro-Baby Coalition of the Far Right,” by Elizabeth Bruenig, The Atlantic
“They say they want Americans to have more babies. What's beneath the surface?” by Lisa Hagen, NPR
“What's behind the 'pronatalist' movement to boost the birth rate?” by Tonya Mosley, NPR’s Fresh Air
“White House Assesses Ways to Persuade Women to Have More Children,” by Caroline Kitchener, The New York Times
“So you want to increase your country’s birth rate? Experts say it’s tough,” by Vivian Hoang and Hannah Graberstein, PBS News
“A Nobel Prize winner decodes why people aren’t having kids,” by Heather Long, The Washington Post
“The rise of pronatalism: why Musk, Vance and the right want women to have more babies,” Carter Sherman, The Guardian
“There’s Nothing New About Pronatalism,” by Sarah Jones, New York Magazine
“Why the Left Should Embrace Pronatalism,” by Elizabeth Bruenig, The Atlantic
“Don’t Have Children,” by Kate Manne, More to Hate
“Pronatalism Isn’t a Solution, It’s a Problem,” by Sarah Jones, New York Magazine
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
We’re back with another chat about “The Valley,” one of the darkest and most compelling reality shows on TV. And our main takeaway from episodes 2-4? Ban the boys chat.
A whole lot happens during this stretch of episodes, all of which we get into on this week’s subscriber podcast.
Jax, still playing the victim even as he verbally assaults his soon-to-be ex-wife Brittany, heads off to a mental health treatment center. And once he’s there, does he put his head down and focus on getting the help he needs? Of course not! Instead he focuses on rage-texting Brittany around the clock.
Janet and and Zack seem to reach a detente, as do Janet and Kristen. And we learn one of the most endearing facts about Janet to date: She absolutely fucking loves Dave & Busters.
Jesse starts a rumor on an extremely rancid “boys chat” thread — truly anyone who would participate in a group chat started by Jax Taylor, straight to jail — that his soon-to-be ex-wife Michelle is a sex worker who is sleeping with a billionaire for $1500 a night. This is relayed to camera by Danny to Luke, and obviously it gets back to Michelle in the middle of Janet’s Dave & Busters birthday bash. No one in the group seems to give the rumor any credence, but it (understandably) deeply hurts Michelle.
We learn that a few months before filming Danny got blacked out and got deeply inappropriately handsy with Melissa, Jasmine’s girlfriend. (Yikes!)
The gang heads off to a weird vibes trip to Santa Barbara, spearheaded by Jesse and co-planned by Kristen. (A truly dark-sided alliance, these two.) It’s filled with races, New Age spiritual ceremonies, and, of course, man-baby meltdowns.
Let us know how you’re liking our coverage of “The Valley”! Are there other Bravo shows you’d like us to dip our toes into?
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
When “What Not To Wear,” a fashion makeover show starring stylists Clinton Kelly and Stacy London, first aired on TLC in 2003, the two of us were in the midst of our high school years — smack dab in the middle of style self-discovery and anxiety. If anyone yearned for clear-cut style guidelines, it was us.
Clint and Stacy were funny, beautiful, and cool; two fashion experts in their early 30s. They seemed genuinely invested in helping people dress better, but the show was… of the moment. “What Not To Wear” was a makeover show with a healthy dose of humiliation and fatphobia, baked into each episode’s very structure. The ambush! The 360-mirror! The snarky voiceover! And then there were the stringent rules that stuck with us for decades, like how a woman should never wear horizontal stripes, lest she appear wider than she really is. The aughts were an era of vigilant body policing — taut midriffs good, mom jeans bad — and fashion “rules” were just one way to enforce mass submission.
More than twenty years after its premiere, Clint and Stacy are back on our TV screens, with a new makeover show and a different message. The times have changed and so have they, and out of that seismic shift, “Wear Whatever The F You Want” was born. The new show is softer and the clothes are more playful. Each episode is about making fashion dreams come true, no matter what they are. A woman who grew up Amish wants to explore a Dolly Parton-inspired look. A trans man wants to find his authentic style after feeling like he had to let go of more feminine pieces after his transition. Clint and Stacy use their expertise to help each subject refine their personal style in a bespoke way. There aren’t really any rules, just a whole lot of joy. And the final looks absolutely crackle as a result.
We started thinking about the ways our own relationships with fashion and style have changed over the years. Like Clint and Stacy, we’ve let go of the rules of our adolescence and instead have found ways to experiment with texture, structure and shape. But how did that happen? What exactly changed? What was the moment that we have ourselves permission to play? And how have we settled into styles that truly feel like us now that we’re far into our 30s? We discuss it all during this episode.
Please take a moment to appreciate our personal fashion evolutions below:
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
After four seasons cutting a bloody trail across the United States and Europe, Joe Goldberg has come home. The fifth and final season of Netflix thriller “You” finds the bookish serial killer (played by Penn Badgley) back in New York, married to his latest love, and surrounded by every comfort money can buy. His wife Kate is a billionaire and the CEO of her late father’s megacorporation, which she is using her power to transform into a force for good. Her money has covered up his bloody history, restored his son Henry to their custody, and vaulted Joe into media hunk status: he’s the ultimate wife guy, a humble hottie who holds Kate’s purse at photoshoots.
But if there’s one thing we can count on, it’s that no measure of domestic bliss and financial stability can quell Joe’s murderous rampages. Before the first episode has even ended, Joe is itching to kill again. Inevitably, Joe finds himself with an inconvenient new romantic fixation, a new stash of bodies to hide, and a psychological coping mechanism — acceptance. In season 5, our killer has decided to fully embrace his passion for murder, which he reframes as a noble impulse for protecting those he loves.
With his new lover, Bronte, Joe explores the genre of dark romance, glamorizing the idea of a violent and abusive male hero whose brutality seduces and ultimately protects the heroine. But there are twists galore that complicate their love story, not to mention his marriage and the stability it provides.
In this episode, we recap Joe’s journey, discuss whether it stuck the landing, and unpack the season’s themes — the dark romance genre, twins and doppelgangers, true crime TikTok and the manosphere, class and power, and more. And with that, we bid a final farewell to “You.” Hope you enjoy! xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“The Valley” is ostensibly a show about the lives of a group of friends and frenemies in their mid-30s to mid-40s as they navigate babies, divorces, and messy social situations. However, what it’s actually about is the harrowing nature of legally tying yourself to a toxic, dangerous man!
The central force of the sophomore season of the Bravo show is the split of two couples who were overtly dysfunctional in season one: Jesse Lally and Michelle Saniei, and Jax Taylor and Brittany Cartwright. It’s the latter of these two couples (read: Jax) who really gives viewers a crash course in male rage, manipulation, and abusive dynamics. In the premiere, Brittany recounts a harrowing incident where Jax flipped a table into her knee after reading her private texts with another man while they were separated. (And had mutually agreed to see other people!!!!)
The whole thing is utterly horrifying; a small peek into the toxic behavior that Brittany has likely been suffering through for a decade. (It’s also no surprise that some of these behaviors would escalate during a period of time when she’s attempting to leave him.)
In this episode, we dig into “The Valley” season 2 premiere, including Jax’s alarming patterns of behavior, the continuation of the Kristen-Janet drama, and the pleasure Jesse takes in torturing Michelle. We also listened to a handful of podcast episodes that came out ahead of the premiere so you don’t have to! Hope you enjoy. Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Our favorite rich-people-being-shitty-in-paradise prestige scripted TV show, “The White Lotus” just wrapped up season 3, and we have to be honest: Much like Laurie (Carrie Coon), or Timothy Ratliff (Jason Isaacs), we didn’t have our best vacation ever.
Season 3 of Mike White’s dark comedy finds us at a White Lotus resort in Thailand, where we reconnect with Belinda (Natasha Rothwell), the betrayed and downtrodden wellness director from season 1. Belinda is here for an extended training program, so that she can bring home all the wellness techniques the Thai location has become famous for offering. But soon, Belinda runs into one of the resort’s neighbors: Tanya’s widower, Greg (Jon Gries), who has fled here under an assumed identity to enjoy his inheritance and avoid being investigated by the Italian authorities for taking out a hit on his late wife.
We also meet new White Lotus guests. There’s Rick Hatchett (Walton Goggins), a tormented and vengeful man whose gorgeous and spiritual young girlfriend Chelsea (Aimee Lou Wood) hopes to heal him with the power of her love. There’s Jaclyn Lemon (Michelle Monaghan), a TV star who has treated her two oldest girlfriends, Trump-voting mom Kate (Leslie Bibb) and New York attorney Laurie (Carrie Coon) to a luxurious getaway that is quickly spoiled with backbiting and tension. And, of course, there’s the Ratliff family: Timothy (Jason Isaacs), a successful businessman and scion of a wealthy North Carolina family, his lorazepam-addicted and materialistic wife Victoria (Parker Posey), and their three kids Saxon (Patrick Schwarzenegger), Piper (Sarah Catherine Hook), and Lochlan (Sam Nivola).
The staff we see dancing attendance on this miserable rich people include Belinda’s teacher Pornchai (Dom Hetrakul), the sweet security guard Gaitok (Tayme Thapthimthong), his crush Mook (Lalisa Manobal, better known as Lisa from Blackpink) who pushes him to show more cutthroat ambition, obsequious manager Fabian (Christian Friedel), meditation coach Amrita (Shalini Peiris) and sexy wellness butler Valentin (Arnas Fedaravicius).
“White Lotus” is famous for its sharp-edged social comedy, which helps ratchet up tensions that end up exploding into violence or catharsis in the final episode. But this season often just felt… aimless. Long shots of monkeys and crashing surf weren’t counterbalanced with enough freighted conversations and meaningful moments of characterization or even, God forbid, plot. Instead, it dragged on until a movie-length finale that tried to tie up too many disparate plot holes with resolutions that were both too heavily telegraphed and too abrupt.
Mike White defended himself on an episode of the official “White Lotus” podcast, saying, “There was complaining about how there’s no plot… part of me is just like bro, this is the vibe. I’m world-building. If you don’t want to go to bed with me then get out of my bed. I’m edging you! Enjoy the edging.” This seems like an apt description of earlier seasons. But, to be honest, this season often felt more like going to bed with someone can’t find your erogenous zones.
By the finale, the show was littered with Chekhov’s guns and obvious setups to obvious twists. We spent the almost 90-minute episode watching the guns go off, the characters spell out their motives and feelings, and the twists click into place.
And that’s not even getting into the gender politics of this season, which felt more heavy-handed than ever. But did we hate it all? Of course not! It’s “The White Lotus,” and Parker Posey was there! So we had a lot of conflicted thoughts to sort through alongside our critiques.
In this episode, we dug into the whole season — our frustrations with it, our favorite parts, our problems with how the show explores masculinity and its pitfalls, that Carrie Coon monologue on how time creates meaning — and what we hope season 4 might have in store for us.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
When the end of “Bravo” stars Paige DeSorbo and Craig Conover’s three-year long relationship became public in December, it seemed like everything was going to be handled amicably.
"I have so much love and respect for Craig. I think he is one of the best people I have ever met in my entire life," Paige said on her podcast, Giggly Squad. "I will remain the biggest fan of him and want the best for him and he truly will get the best because he is the best. But with that said, I think it was just the right decision for both of us moving forward in our lives and the direction in our lives that we didn’t force."
But shortly after, things started going downhill. Craig addressed the breakup on IG stories in a way that made it clear that he hadn’t precipitated it. And then the rumor mill went wild: Was there cheating involved? Had Paige moved on immediately with another man?
As fans became rabid for a villain, Paige and Craig’s casts — “Summer House” for the former, “Southern Charm” for the latter — lined up behind them, ready for PR battle.
Because both shows were airing in the aftermath of the split, Bravo was ready to capitalize on public interest. Season 10 of “Southern Charm” and Season 9 of “Summer House” have been littered with breakup easter eggs; freighted moments where the cracks of Paige and Craig’s not-yet-ended relationship are showing. And what we’ve ended up seeing is a breakup positioned amidst a culture war: On one side, Craig’s South Carolinian bros are ribbing him about how his girlfriend wears the pants in the relationship and isn’t ready to move to a farm and pop out a baby. On the other, Paige’s girls are calling out Craig’s “hater energy,” suggesting that perhaps he’s not secure enough to truly support a partner who is shining more than him.
In this episode, we dive into the incentive structures of public relationships, the fascinating way that this breakup has been positioned on and off Bravo, and the competing visions of femininity and masculinity that are presented on “Summer House” and “Southern Charm.” Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
The only people who anticipated the completion of “Cold Harbor” as eagerly as Jame Eagan and the Lumon Board were, well, the entire audience of Apple TV+ hit “Severance.” And we had been waiting a long, long time. Season 2 was famously delayed and delayed, arriving almost three full years after season 1, and the second season took a little while to hit its stride. The explosive finale finally dropped on Thursday, bringing us some (though not all) of the answers we were seeking about the experiments being done on Gemma, the purpose of the goats, and how the ill-fated love triangle between Mark, Helly, and Gemma might end. Though the final scenes seemed like a fitting ending for the series, never fear: Season 3 is in the works, and there are plenty of threads to pick up and potential storylines to pursue.
For now, however, we wanted to talk about what it all means, and how season 2 continued to build out a world that uncomfortably mirrors our own rapidly changing reality. Themes of alienated labor and exploitation remain the foundation, but the second season of the show had more to say about the fascistic valences of big tech, religious cults, and the patriarchal control of reproduction. (Sound familiar?) Motherhood — in particular the care work associated with motherhood — is another one of the bonds often severed or corrupted in the world of “Severance.” Lumon’s conception of parenthood is one that involves top-down control of fertility and reproduction; nurturing and mutual care are only threats to the regime. We also dig into the relationship between innies and their outies, a bond which in itself echoes not only pregnancy and parenthood, but another real-world avenue for reproduction of the self: personal branding. And, of course, we save a little time to appreciate Tramell Tillman absolutely rocking out to a marching band from Choreography and Merriment.
Hope you enjoy!
Reviews and essays we discuss:
James Poniewozik, NYT: “‘Severance’ Season 2 Will Blow Your Mind(s)”
Sara Petersen: “Severance Has Mommy Issues”
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
When Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’s new lifestyle show, “With Love, Meghan,” premiered on Netflix last week, the reactions were swift… and negative.
“‘With Love, Meghan’ Is a Montecito Ego Trip Not Worth Taking,” declared Variety. “Meghan Markle Pioneers New Frontiers in Unrelatability,” said Vulture. The Guardian called the show “toe-curlingly unlovable TV.” Audience reactions were largely even less charitable (and considerably more racist) than the critical ones.
These are big feelings elicited by a show that can best be described as placid ASMR; the kind of television programming perfect for half-watching at the nail salon or while you’re doing laundry. “With Love, Meghan” is full of color-coordinated platters, celebrity cameos, Montecito kitchen-core, wooden monologues, a few delicious-sounding simple recipes, and SO MANY FLOWER SPRINKLES. The content is a little boring, wholly inoffensive, and falls soundly in the grand tradition of domestic arts lifestyle content targeted towards women. So why the collective freakout instead of a collective yawn?
We had to dig through the discourse and sort out what it is about Meghan Markle Sussex that makes everyone lose their minds. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Claire is out sick, so the wonderful Kelsey McKinney joined me to recap the “Traitors” finale! Go order her book! Also: THIS EPISODE CONTAINS SPOILERS!
During this season of “The Traitors,” a 10+ year dedication to Bachelor Nation finally payed off. The people have discovered Gabby Windey — but us real ones (a.k.a. “Bachelor(ette)” fans — knew all along.
On Thursday night, the third season of “The Traitors” US edition had its season finale and reunion, and the former did not disappoint. (The latter was sweet and fun, but not so juicy.) We ended up with a final 6 that consisted of two gamer Traitors from different franchises, 1 former Bachelorette, 1 gay royal, 1 Zac Efron’s brother, and 1 Housewife. And our gal Gabby really shined. Her one-liners! Her catsuit! Her cool, calm and collected face-off with Danielle at the roundtable! 10/10, no notes.
In this episode we get into Carolyn and Danielle’s downfalls, Britney’s late Traitor recruitment, our ragtag team of Final Faithfuls, and one last Tom Sandoval gem. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Emma is officially a married woman! (Or, as she likes to think of herself, an appendage.) She and Adam tied the knot this weekend at Shun Lee West, a Chinese restaurant on the Upper West Side, in a Jewish ceremony that artfully mingled tradition with their own unique personalities and values. Emma looked like an old Hollywood film star. Their vows brought me to tears. And, fittingly for a woman whose ability to make and keep friends is the stuff of legend, her wedding felt like the best cocktail party you’ve ever attended: overflowing with good food and drinks, pulsing with laughter and dancing, and brimming with interesting people to befriend or catch up with.
In this episode, Emma answers as many of your questions about the wedding as we could squeeze in. We talk about the aesthetic vision, the vendors, the budget, the hair and makeup, the dresses, the food, the ceremony, the reception vibes, and more.
If our voices are a little croaky and exhausted, please bear with us: This is not the kind of party you recover from in just one night. Hope you enjoy this glimpse inside the details! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
There are few reality TV moments that truly break through amidst all the pop culture noise. But I think we can agree that Tom Sandoval holding one ear closed so he can sing backwards nursery rhymes — with vibrato — into a phone booth is one of them.
@peacockWell I got chills. #TheTraitorsUS is streaming now on Peacock. #Traitors #TomSandoval #SingingTiktok failed to load.Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser
This was a great stretch of “The Traitors” for Sandoval, who has mostly been bouncing around the castle annoying people, throwing out extremely incorrect theories, and steamrolling over women to get shields for himself. But in episodes 7 and 8, he shined. And that’s because he (a) like a broken clock twice a day, finally got something right, and (b) embraced his true calling as the Resident Buffoon.
In this episode, we get into Sandoval’s triumphs as well as Boston Rob’s downfall and some sad murders in this episode. Plus — our girl Gabby Windey continues to T-H-R-I-V-E!!! Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Halfway through the third season of “The Traitors” US, one thing has become clear: This game is in a shambles. The Traitors are demoralized and divided, unable to pursue any real strategy because they hate each other more than anyone else in the house. It’s unclear that many of the Faithfuls even really care that much about banishing Traitors anymore — and why should they, given that new ones would simply be recruited? Instead, people are either desperately deflecting votes from themselves or targeting players they simply don’t like very much. (Tom Sandoval, your days are numbered.) There’s chaos in the castle, but it’s hardly a testament to the prowess of the Traitors; it’s simply evidence of how little evidence and motivation the game provides for rooting them out.
Meanwhile, the gender war has continued — though, after a challenge in which the men hoard almost all eight shields for themselves, and a painful banishment that makes the women realize they’re being targeted, the gender divide has started to subside in the face of the general pandemonium.
So… why are we loving every minute? Are Alan Cumming’s glam Braveheart-core outfits enough? Or Gabby’s eyerolls and comic monologues? What about watching every last person in the castle’s patience with Tom Sandoval being shredded in real time? Okay, it’s all of it — plus, we just love mess. In this episode, we caught up on the key events of the last three installments of “The Traitors,” plus some general thoughts on the format, where the game is headed, and why Sandoval is still in the game despite being despised by everyone who meets him. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Last night, we were on the YouTube front lines — alongside 250k other people — to see what former “Bachelor” winner Rachael Kirkconnell had to say about her very fresh breakup. Because if there’s a woman who’s in need of a comfy couch, a matching sweat set, and some tea spilling, Alex Cooper is gonna rise to the occasion and offer all three on “Call Her Daddy.”
For those out of the loop on Bachelor Nation / influencer news, on January 16 former Bachelor Matt James posted a bizarre, prayer-filled post on Instagram announcing his split from Rachael, his girlfriend of four years. The pair met when Matt was the lead of “The Bachelor” in 2021, and weathered a racism scandal that led to the ousting of the show’s longtime host, Chris Harrison.
The caption of Matt’s breakup post — which was posted at 6 a.m. EST — read as follows:
“Father God, give Rachael and I strength to mend our broken hearts. Give us a peace about this decision to end our relationship that transcends worldly understanding. Shower our friends and family with kindness and love to comfort us. And remind us that our Joy comes from you, Lord 💔”
This, unsurprisingly, caused a feeding frenzy on social media. Was Matt’s account hacked? He had just been posting videos with Rachael in them! Why was Rachael being silent? What the fuck was going on? Little by little, information started trickling out. We learned from Rachael’s sister that the couple had only been broken up for three hours when Matt posted on Instagram, and we learned from DeuxMoi that they had just been vacationing together in Tokyo. But other than that, all we had was pure speculation. Enter Alex Cooper.
On Monday night, the “Call Her Daddy” sit-down premiered on YouTube. And it was both less salacious and more sad than perhaps people were expecting. We did not learn about any big revelations of infidelity, just about the more mundane signals that a relationship dynamic may not be a healthy one. (And about the fact that Rachael saw Matt’s breakup post JUST AS SHE BOARDED A 12-HOUR FLIGHT.) However, the hour and 40-minute interview was raw, honest and deeply relatable.
The two of us had big plans to cover “Traitors” this week, but instead we decided to bump that until next week so we could discuss this “Call Her Daddy” episode. We get into the details Rachael outlined of the breakup, how “The Bachelor” sets couples up to fail, what we’d like to hear from Matt, and why we think so many of us viscerally connected to Rachael’s post-breakup grief. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
With Donald Trump officially back in office, and a flood of abhorrent executive orders and public displays of fascism already grabbing our attention, we couldn’t focus on anything else this week. We decided to check back in — with each other and with Sami Sage (co-founder of Betches, host of The Morning Announcements and American Fever Dream, and author of Democracy in Retrograde) — to discuss how we’re filtering through the firehose of bad news, how to avoid expending energy on endless outrage consumption and anxiety wheel-spinning, and what is worth putting our energy toward.
In part, this has meant reevaluating how we approached Trump’s last administration, trying to learn from what was effective and what was self-indulgent. As individuals, we don’t want to use up all our mental space or political will on Instagram posting or fruitless doomscrolling; instead, we’re thinking about building in-person communities and targeting our involvement locally or towards narrow, winnable national debates.
But we’re also thinking about what role we play as writers and podcasters who, unlike in the last Trump administration, aren’t affiliated with a news organization. In this episode, we discuss our roots in feminist critique of “The Bachelor” franchise, how that has evolved along with our political context over the past decade, and the value of pop cultural commentary with a left-wing, feminist point of view.
We also touch on the inauguration itself, particularly Elon Musk’s unapologetic Nazi salute and the infuriating discourse that followed.
In this episode, we discuss all of this, along with the hope that we’re holding on to. We hope you’re finding ways to hope, and to help, as well. xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Ah to be young… and quirky… and have every boy and girl in your vicinity find themselves falling, a little or a lot, in love with you. This is the world of Kitty Song Covey, the heroine of Netflix’s “XOKitty,” a spinoff series of the TATBILB trilogy.
It’s often hard to stick the landing during the second season of a hit show, and “XOKitty” season 2 definitely wobbles. There are an unwieldy number of new central characters (Eunice! Mr. Moon! Stella! Praveena!), as well as the inexplicable disappearance of a few formerly central ones (was Yunji Kim simply unavailable to reprise her role as Principal Jina Lim?). As a result, some storyline are short-changed, like Queen Bee Yuri’s, while others seem to take over, like new girl Stella’s turn into arch-villainy.
However, “XOKitty” keeps its core charms: its K-drama-inspired flourishes, its casual queerness, its resistance to pigeonholing Kitty into having a clear “endgame” love interest, and its delicious sweetness. We discuss it all in this episode. Hope you enjoy! As Kitty would say… Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Once again, Alan Cumming and his collection of capes and tartans have assembled a band of merry C-list celebrities in a Highland castle, where they are participating in a lavishly produced parlor game of murder and betrayal: “The Traitors.” We became hooked in season 2, and season 3 brought in some of our dream cast members — Chrishell Stause, Gabby Windey, Dorinda Medley — alongside legendary contestants from strategy shows like “Survivor” and “Big Brother,” a motley crew of one-off stars from shows like “Summer House” and “The Biggest Loser,” and people who are one degree of separation from actual fame. But it also brought in a heavy dose of sexism, a palpable undercurrent of boys-rule-girls-drool, that we didn’t expect after watching season 2.
The show premiered this week with a three-episode drop, which gets us properly into the drama. We see the selection of our Traitors, the first two murders, and the first two banishments, and we get to know our new cast as well. “Bachelorette” Gabby, in between dropping A-plus quips in her talking head interviews, forms a hot-girl alliance with Nikki Garcia and Chrishell. The Housewives stick together, perhaps tot their detriment. Sam Asghari refuses to tell anyone whether Britney Spears, his ex-wife, watches Bravo, and everyone immediately loses interest in him. Wells Adams, softened from years of slinging margaritas on “Paradise,” immediately becomes a paranoid wreck. Not-famous brother Dylan Efron emerges as an unlikely detective. Tom Sandoval, shocking nobody, is uniquely terrible at reading people, while also coming off as a self-serving worm. And the gamers swagger around, flaunting their strategic bonafides and sizing each other up.
But the show is also, currently, sizing up as a battle of the sexes — a dynamic that falls into place mere minutes into the first challenge. The cast has to row a Viking ship across the loch, leaving behind two contestants at each of up to five pontoons containing money for the prize fund and fuel to complete the challenge. After the journey, they must return to shore and light a circle on fire; anyone within the circle gets a shield and is safe from murder. The men immediately, instinctively, seem to decide that the women must sacrifice themselves, since they are all inherently weaker than any of the men on board, and less able to complete the rowing challenge. The female contestants are instructed and pressure to leave the boat in favor of the stronger men. Once they leave, however, they’re also treated with suspicion — because only a Traitor would be willing to give up a shield. It’s a double bind that attaches almost entirely to the women, while the men ruthlessly protect their own survival (with few and notable exceptions).
Was this intentional game design? A symptom of society’s accelerating embrace of reactionary gender politics? Probably both! But this challenge wasn’t the only element of the game thus far that has structurally disadvantaged female contestants. We dug in to our thoughts on how gender has played into the season so far, as well as the Traitors’ strategy thus far, what each cast member is bringing to the table, and more. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Given the success of “Selling Sunset” and “Selling The O.C.,” it was only a matter of time before the franchise spun off all the way to New York City. Enter “Selling The City.”
The newest real estate mogul reality show centers on an all-women team of Douglas Elliman agents in New York City, lead by super-agent Eleanora Srugo. Regular readers of the New York Post might know her as a big Eric Adams booster, and viewers of “The Bachelor” may remember her as the realtor that Dale Moss allegedly hooked up with while he was with Clare Crawley. (She and Dale have both strongly denied that this happened.)
Eleanora and her associates — Jade Chan, Taylor Middleton, Jordyn Taylor Braff, Abigail Godfrey, and Gisselle Meneses-Núñez — are the consummate girl bosses. They’re selling. They’re dealing. They’re power lunching. They’re all about their business, and most of their closest social ties, at least as portrayed on the show, are related to that business. (The men on the show, Justin Tuinstra and Corcoran agent Steve Gold who was previously on “Million Dollar Listing,” largely take a backseat. Gold, because he takes on the role of naturally charismatic elder statesman, and Justin because he’s deeply uninteresting unless he’s getting into a fight or talking about how maybe he’ll have kids and a wife in Nashville someday on his 40th birthday. 🙄🙄🙄)
“Selling The City” is clearly still gaining its sea legs. It’s hard to tell exactly where the show’s emotional core lies, and the plot is not as propulsive as “Selling Sunset’s” was in those first few seasons. However, the show is at its most gripping when we are seeing the most stunning real estate that New York has to offer — so much more variety than in Los Angeles! — and when the women on the show are having surprisingly real and candid conversations about being in their 30s and 40s and figuring out how to make big life decisions about family planning, partnership and career. Taylor is navigating fertility treatments in the midst of a rocky marriage and addiction recovery. Eleanora is single but has frozen her eggs and is very open about her desire for partnership. Jordyn is going through a breakup and wonders if she should be pursuing fertility preservation as she enters her mid-30s.
These moments of relatable humanity give us hope that “Selling The City” can really hit its stride if it gets a second season. (Fingers crossed!) In this episode, we discuss what works about the show’s premiere episodes and what doesn’t, and we discuss how it stacks up with the other shows in the “Selling” franchise. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
“The Ultimatum: Marry Or Move On” is less of a reality dating show, and more of a cautionary tale for straight people. A messy, unhinged, gripping one.
For the uninitiated here’s the premise: There are six long-term couples. One person in each couple has issued an ultimatum — they need to get married, or break up. The couples split, find a “trial marriage partner” from the group to match up with and live with for three weeks, then switch back and have a trial marriage with their original partner. At the end, each couple must decide whether to get engaged, break up, or leave with someone else that they met during the experience.
Three seasons in, we know what to expect from this Netflix show. Toxic relationships, toxic men, and toxic advice from Nick and Vanessa Lachey. But this season gave us a new innovation: Two couples who ghost their trial partners, pack up and leave the show with nary a word.
In this episode, we talk about the whole season of “The Ultimatum,” some of the gossip that has come out about the cast since, and the reunion. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Thanks to Harry Huggins for editing this episode.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
This week, we discuss two of the great homemaking influencers: Ballerina Farm (an unassuming tradwife Instagram icon), and Martha Stewart (a ruthless perfectionist and corporate mogul). In the midst of their recent moments in the cultural conversation — thanks to some high-profile interviews and a Netflix documentary, respectively — we were struck by how much overlap there is between these two women’s brands, and what has changed and stayed the same since Stewart’s time on top.
Ballerina Farm’s Hannah Neeleman has been on a media tour. She’s been posing as a blonde milkmaid on the old frontier for the cover of MAGA women’s mag Evie, and meanwhile she’s been telling the New York Times and Glamour that she’s actually not a traditional woman but an ambitious and successful entrepreneur. In the Evie photos she’s a reactionary’s wet dream, a model of how the future could resemble an imagined past when men were men and women were subservient. In the pages of center-left mainstream outlets, she’s basically a girl boss.
Martha Stewart has never entirely lost cultural relevance since she gained it decades, but the recent Netflix documentary “Martha,” directed by R.J. Cutler, provided an opportunity to consider her her carefully crafted brand and the context in which she rose to unparalleled fame as a tastemaker. When we were growing up, “Martha Stewart” was synonymous with the kind of perfect housewife who would put your homemaking and hosting skills to shame. She was also the richest woman in the world. The Stewart who emerges in the documentary is not exactly surprising — for one thing, she’s just as harsh and unforgiving to her staff as has long been reported — but the documentary does an excellent job drawing out how the feminized space of homemaking instruction provided a fertile space for a brilliant and ambitious woman to grow a lucrative multimedia empire.
Neeleman and Stewart are both beautiful, tall blonde women who married in the midst of getting degrees at prestigious colleges, then went on to build careers by depicting household skills like baking, gardening, and floral arrangement as fulfilling and aspirational. The exact lifestyles they model are distinct: for Neeleman, a blissful mom of eight with a deliberately homespun aesthetic meant to convey laidback authenticity; for Stewart, an unenthusiastic mom of one who wore high-end business casual attire while turning out absolutely flawless pastries and tablescapes.
But what they have both peddled is a version of a fantasy many burned-out women, working hard all day only to come home and put in a second shift caring for a home and family by themselves, have longed for over the past half-century. This is the fantasy: You can have it all. The ideal home life, the enviable career — it’s all possible for you. You can be the perfect homemaker and the kickass boss. You just have to turn the home into your career.
The political valences of their brands could not be more different. It’s an ambivalence, and a yearning, that clearly crosses the partisan divide. But right now, the tradwives are ascendent; they’re controlling that audience. And, it’s pretty clear, that’s a big fucking problem.
We discuss all this — plus the insidious figure of the self-proclaimed career woman whose career entails encouraging other women to give up theirs — in this week’s episode. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Lindsay Lohan isn’t just a zany rom-com leading lady! She’s a (semi) serious rom-com leading lady.
After “Falling for Christmas” (extremely unhinged) and “Irish Wish” (extremely AI-generated), Lohan apparently wanted to work on a film that was slightly more grounded. Enter “Our Little Secret.”
“Our Little Secret” follows exes Avery (Lohan) and Logan (Ian Harding), as they find themselves in an awkward situation over the holidays, when 10 years after their acrimonious breakup, they discover that their new partners are siblings. Obviously, hijinks ensue! And our gal Lindsay is *made* for hijinks. (A particularly delightful scene sees her attempting to do a reading at her boyfriend’s family church while she is extremely high.)
Like “Hot Frosty,” the supporting cast of “Our Little Secret” is stacked. Kristen Chenoweth is a pitch-perfect as Lohan’s cutting, icy, potential future mother-in-law, and while Dan Bucatinsky, Tim Meadows and Judy Reyes all feel a bit underutilized, it is a pleasure to see them on our screens.
This movie is still, of course, a made-for-streaming rom-com, but it’s also closer to the type of film you might have once expected to see getting a theatrical release. The direction by Stephen Herek, whose past works include “Don’t Tell Mom The Babysitter’s Dead,” “The Mighty Ducks” and “Mr. Holland’s Opus,” is skilled, the performances mostly work, and there are enough laughs to see you through the hour and 40 minutes. Plus, Ian Harding is a guy you might actually have a crush on!
In this episode, we go beat by beat and discuss what we enjoyed about this movie, and what didn’t work quite as well. Plus, we get into the unhinged choices made in that extended 10-years-pass credits sequence. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Special thanks to Harry Huggins for editing this episode.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
We imagine the pitch for “Hot Frosty” was simple: Olaf from “Frozen,” but he fucks. This Netflix holiday rom-com is here to remind us that Christmas may take place during the cold season, but it can still be *hot*.
“Hot Frosty” follows widow-slash-diner owner Kathy (Lacey Chabert) as she accidentally brings a notably chiseled snowman (Dustin Milligan) to life with a magical red scarf. Is she his mother? His lover? The lines are blurry and the plot holes are plentiful, but “Hot Frosty” commits to the bit. It also boasts ACTUAL JOKES, a pretty stacked supporting cast (Craig Robinson! Joe Lo Truglia! Lauren Holly!), and an undercurrent of anti-carceral sentiment running throughout. In these dark times, honestly we’ll take it.
We had a lot of fun talking about this horny movie, and we hope you enjoy listening! We could all use a little bit of silliness in this moment. Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
We don’t have any answers, but we do have a lot of feelings. We tried to express them in a cogent way, but full warning that we maybe were only partially successful. Claire would also like all of you to know that she’s angry and doing punditry. Please feel free to ignore her (or both of us!) if that’s not where you’re at right now.
We love you all. We are so very grateful for this little community we’ve built together. Onward.
Thank you to Harry Huggins for editing this episode so we didn’t have to.
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Warning: This post and episode contain spoilers for the “Love Is Blind” season 7 reunion!
This “Love Is Blind” DC reunion had it all, if “it all” refers to every one of Nick and Vanessa Lachey’s well-documented inadequacies as hosts: corny dad jokes that Nick’s punch-up writer clearly prepared well in advance, missed lines of questioning and failures to follow up on important points, muddled back-and-forth disputes between the cast that dragged out for long minutes while the moderators mentally checked out, Vanessa claiming dubious familial relationships with the “Love Is Blind” babies, and, of course, a couple of the biggest villains of the season being let off the hook with barely a slap on the wrist apiece.
What the reunion episode didn’t have was even more infuriating — most notably, the truth about Tyler’s three kids. The reunion taped before his children’s mother went public with her side of the story, and so he doesn’t address or acknowledge her allegations that he conceived two of his children with her as part of a sexual relationship, not as a sperm donor, and that he was fully present as a dad in the lives of all three of her kids. Instead, he and Ashley come prepared to paint him as a generous but naive guy who was just trying to help a single mom and got a little too involved. Ashley may be the biggest disappointment of the episode, as she insists that she knows all about Tyler’s relationship with his kids and stands by him — indicating that she is supportive of his apparent decision to ghost his three young kids.
Meanwhile, Hannah touts her immense self-awareness and growth since the show while continuing to be glib and unbothered by the hurt she caused others — not just Nick, but her purported bestie Katie as well — and taking the first opportunity to turn things around on Nick and paint him as the true villain of their relationship. And though we can’t and won’t endorse a man going on this show and calling his partner “a grenade,” we can’t and won’t justify her cruel treatment of him throughout the show simply because he has also said unkind things.
There’s a lot more said and unsaid on this reunion, and we dig into as much as we can in this episode. Also inside: how Tim continues to unsettle us, Marissa’s unwise choice to burn her good will by taking on Nick’s golden retriever reputation, women as food with feelings, and all those unnecessary alumni updates. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Warning: This post and episode contain spoilers for the “Love Is Blind” season 7 finale!
The first 15 minutes of the “Love Is Blind” season 7 finale was riveting and wrenching. The following hour was largely boring, with sides of sweetness and dramatic irony. This is one of those finales that should have jumped straight into a reunion. (Not that we think the Lacheys are equipped to handle it.)
And yet! We still had a lot to say this 82-minute episode that could have been an email.
We get into Marissa and Ramses’ absolutely devastating breakup (WE HAVE BOTH BEEN MARISSA!!!), Tyler and Ashley’s marriage (well, mostly about everything that has come out since about Tyler), and our one gleaming beacon of hope: Taylor and Garrett. Plus, we do some finale friends and enemies rankings. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The psychologist John Gottman has posited that there are four horsemen that portended doom in a relationship: contempt, criticism, defensiveness and stonewalling. If this theory didn’t already exist, it could have been developed simply by watching this season of “Love Is Blind,” in which contempt and criticism have infected several of the relationships root and branch.
Any amateur shrink could look at the couples who emerged from a less-than-blissful Mexican honeymoon and identify that Alex and Tim, Stephen and Monica, and Hannah and Nick hated each other on a bone-deep level, and they all simply needed to break up. After Stephen and Monica’s dramatic split in last week’s episode drop, the other two toxic couples finally ended things. Tim and Hannah, true to form, executed their respective breakups in the most contemptuous manner possible.
Meanwhile, Tyler has committed to lying through his teeth to his fiancée Ashley about his three children, thus preserving their relationship (for now, at least). Ramses continues to expose his condom-averse fuckboy side, doing far too little to assure Marissa that he will stick by her when she’s not in peak sexual form. Garrett responds to a text from an ex, but maybe just to say that he’s engaged. Are these really the best bachelors the DMV has to offer?
In this episode, we discuss the two unnecessarily nasty dumpings, a conspicuously Leo-free pod mixer, Tyler’s ongoing lies and the many moments of dramatic irony they occasion, Garrett and Taylor’s biggest hurdle to date, and the creeping sense of doom surrounding Marissa and Ramses’s romance. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
At this point, it feels like it happens every season. You think you know who the villains are… and then more episodes come out and the TikToks start rolling in. Move on over, Leo. Stephen and Tyler (sob!) are ready to take your place.
In this week’s batch of “Love Is Blind” episodes, our couples finish out their time in Cabo and head back to our nation’s capital. Once they’re back in DC, we watch them move in together, see each other’s homes, and meet each other’s families. They also get their devices back. For some couples, like Garrett and Taylor, this means confronting the benign horrors of fish pics. For others, like Monica and Stephen, this means discovering that your partner has been sexting while drunk during a sleep test????
And then there’s Tyler and Ashley. The conversation that they have at the end of episode 9 seems confusing… until you head over to TikTok and watch @storytimewithrikki’s many videos about Tyler’s past, specifically his relationship to his three children. Then things become less confusing and more rage-inducing.
In this episode, we discuss the couples’ final days in Cabo, the meaty conversations between Rams and Marissa, all the Tyler tea (or at least the tea that had come out by the time we taped), and our new beacon of hope — Garrett and Taylor. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Our nation’s preeminent insta-marriage reality show has taken its talents to the capital for season seven! It’s “Love Is Blind,” DC edition, and this mammoth first drop (six episodes, some close to 75 minutes long) showcases that special DMV flavor. Cast members work at think tanks and ponder whether they would have spoken to each other if they’d met “on the Hill.” One recites a love poem that rhymes “spot [as in, pod] number four” with “my queen from Baltimore.” The armed forces boast heavy representation, including a dater who volunteered in the military defense of Ukraine. There are girlbosses and soft men who are deconstructing their toxic masculinity, and therefore many conversations about the equitable distribution of domestic labor. The season even features our very first art dealer, who has come to reality television to find a woman who wants him for more than his money but makes sure to disclose his financial resources to his prospects.
With almost seven hours of drama to discuss, we left so much on the cutting room floor in this recap. But we dug into as much as we could.
We try to understand each of the men we get to know: Stephen, the gentlest bundle of red flags we’ve ever seen; gregarious law student Marissa’s two eminently crushable love interests, Bodhan and Ramses; Tim, who loves to make decisions driven by spite; pod villain and art dealer Leo. Then there are the women: sweet aspiring trophy wife Brittany; bubbly Hannah, who seeks a hunky man who isn’t shallow; policy advisor Taylor, who speaks in STEM references; Ashley, who longs to have the solid marriage her mother never did.
Finally, this episode gets into the (extremely telling) first reveals and the honeymoon trip to Cabo, where it becomes clear that several of the women are already getting the ick.
Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
There are a lot of things to love about the new Netflix show “Nobody Wants This.” Unfortunately, its depiction of Jewish women isn’t one of them.
When news first broke that a rom-com show was in the works starring Adam Brody as a hot L.A. rabbi who falls for an agnostic, blonde sex/relationships podcaster played by Kristen Bell, we were ecstatic. We are rom-com devotees who have crushed on Seth Cohen and idolized Veronica Mars. We’re podcasters. And we are, respectively, a Jewish woman and a non-Jewish woman who is married to a Jew. If a TV show was crafted in a lab to appeal to our particular set of passions and lived experiences, it would be “Nobody Wants This.” And yet, after cruising through 10 eminently binge-able episodes, we were left simultaneously delighted by Brody and Bell’s crackling chemistry, and uneasy about the show’s rather vicious portrayal of Jewish women.
It’s clear that Erin Foster, who created “Nobody Wants This” based on her own love story with now-husband Simon Tikhman — he’s not a rabbi, but he is Jewish and Foster converted as a result — has a deep connection to and respect for Judaism. Some of the loveliest moments of the show are when Noah and Joanne connect over the meaning that Jewish traditions and culture can bring, like observing Shabbat or “wrestling with what God is or isn’t.” But much less care was put into crafting the Jewish women who surround Noah: his extractive mother Bina (Tovah Feldshuh), his mean sister-in-law Esther (Jackie Tohn), his manipulative ex-girlfriend Rebecca (Emily Arnook), and the gaggle of more peripheral friends (the WAGs) who only seem to talk about Aruba, breastfeeding and their ugly line of chokers.
The central question at the heart of “Nobody Wants This” is whether it is possible for a gentile who has never even heard the word “shalom” (unlikely for a native Angeleno, but I digress) to seriously be with a rabbi who is “all in” on his faith. It’s fertile ground upon which to set romantic obstacles, and it’s easy to root for Bell’s Joanne and Brody’s Noah to bridge their cultural gaps and make out. But the main obstacles we see during season 1 of “Nobody Wants This” come in the form of Jewish women, who are frothing at the mouth to defeat their ostensible mortal enemy: the “shiksa.”
There’s a long history of the “shiksa goddess” — the blonde, gentile woman that acts as irresistible lust object for Jewish men — in American pop culture; first uttered in the 1927 talkie “The Jazz Singer,” chased after in 1972’s “The Heartbreak Kid,” and crooned about in 2014’s movie-musical adaptation of “The Last Five Years.” The shiksas of “Nobody Wants This” — Bell’s Joanne and her sister Morgan (Justine Lupe) — represent freedom for the men they encounter. They are open and vibrant and funny and successful and flawed in ways that are compelling. They’re so beautiful that their mere presence can stun Jewish men into slack-jawed silence. (Yes, this actually happens. Twice.) It’s easy to see why Noah and his brother Sasha (Timothy Simons) would be drawn to Joanne and Morgan, especially because the women in their own community all seem to be cruel, controlling, irrational, manipulative, overbearing shrews. (A notable exception is the welcoming Rabbi Shira played by Leslie Grossman.)
Bina, Esther, Rebecca and the WAGs are more caricatures than human beings, and in totality perpetuate some of the most noxious stereotypes that exist about Jewish women. In a paper from the Jewish Women’s Archive, scholar Riv-Ellen Prell charts the evolution of the Jewish American Princess and Jewish Mother archetypes, both of which developed out of in-community anxieties which were subsequently filtered through a gendered lens, and which then proliferated in the wider culture.
Of the Jewish Mother, Prell writes:
“Rather than offered out of concern and responsibility, her caretaking served her own needs. She induced guilt. She gave in order to obligate. She loved because she wanted. She suffered in order to be compensated. Rather than sustaining, she destroyed.”
In the same paper, Prell describes the JAP:
“The JAP was portrayed as excessive in wants and desires… The JAP not only wanted, she withheld and denied, rendering her Jewish partner a slave. The culture’s attack on Jewish masculinity, the generalized middle class anxiety about the accessibility of their class to their children, and a consumer culture that narrowed its definitions of attractiveness and desirability conspired to create the JAP. She was so hateful that separating from her—even destroying her—promised liberation by self-erasure.”
Bina is the consummate Jewish Mother. She controls her passive husband, emasculates her sons, and whispers “you’ll never end up with my son” like a threat into Joanne’s ear. Even her dedication to keeping kosher is framed as a tool for familial manipulation rather than a genuine practice. (Joanne witnesses Bina housing prosciutto in the kitchen after excoriating her for bringing pork into the house.) The JAP haunts nearly every other Jewish woman character. Rebecca’s relationship ends because of her “excessive” desires. Esther effectively neuters Sasha. When Joanne is trying to win Esther and her crew of WAGs over, Morgan describes them as “angry women who haven’t had fun in over a decade.”
The Jewish women of “Nobody Wants This” exist only in opposition to Joanne and Morgan, and their paper-thin rendering takes a show that contains so much deliciousness, and turns it all a bit sour. As Esther Zuckerman put it: “You can see why Joanne would want to be married to a Jewish man; you can see why she’s not sure about wanting to become a Jewish woman.”
Journalist Elizabeth Karpen recently asked Foster directly about the genesis of her show’s Jewish women characters on “Nobody Wants This.” Her answer was as illuminating as it is disappointing: “It wasn’t really something I was thinking about too much,” she said.
Unfortunately, it shows. Here’s hoping that the show can course correct for season 2, because everybody wants more Rabbi Noah.
In this week’s subscriber podcast, we get into the joys and failures of “Nobody Wants This,” our eternal crushes on Adam Brody, the show’s shared cultural DNA with “Keeping The Faith,” and more. Hope you enjoy! Xo
“Nobody Wants This’ Review: Kristen Bell and Adam Brody Share Crackling Chemistry in Netflix’s Frustratingly Uneven Rom-Com,” Daniel Fienberg, The Hollywood Reporter
“Nobody Wants This Mean-Spirited Depiction of Jewish Women in Nobody Wants This,”Esther Zuckerman, TIME
“Jewish Gender Stereotypes in the United States,” Riv-Ellen Prell, Jewish Women’s Archive
“Netflix’s ‘Nobody Wants This’ Brings Up the Age-Old Question: Is the Word ‘Shiksa’ Offensive?,” Lior Zaltzman, Kveller
“‘Nobody Wants This’ Creator Erin Foster Wasn’t Thinking ‘Too Much’ About the Show’s Depiction of Jewish Women,” Elizabeth Karpen, Hey Alma
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
After four years and four seasons of television, Emily Cooper has finally been in Paris for an entire year. That’s right: despite seasonal hopscotch, some misleading pregnancy timelines, and a general sense among the show’s audience, characters, and seemingly even writers that our plucky young marketing phenom has been in Paris forever, it’s really only been about 12 months in “Emily in Paris” time. June has happened roughly 14 times, and Christmas once. Gabriel has had his own restaurant for about three months and can’t believe that he wasn’t awarded a Michelin star within weeks of opening (honestly, what’s the point of it all?). Camille was pregnant for between 8 and 27 weeks. People are beginning to ask questions that the show just can’t answer.
But “Emily in Paris” is not, in any meaningful sense, a show about characters or narratives that take place over the course of specific timelines. It’s about outfits, vibes, meet cutes, breakups, and most importantly, pitch meetings in which Emily saves her colleagues’ butts by coming up with the perfect marketing concept on the fly. It’s also, secondarily, about how sexy men look with their hair pushed back and the travails of growing out bangs.
So we simply couldn’t miss season 4 (the “Emily in Rome?” season), nor the opportunity to discuss all the absurd and silly parts of the show, which are piled together in a disconnected, chaotic heap. Its odd charm only serves to make its manifold flaws more infuriating, and yet, of course, we’re hooked. When Emily learns a full sentence of French, we need to be the first to know. On this episode, we discuss all of the above, especially the show’s tendency to shuffle characters on- and offstage as needed without any consideration for their possible emotional journeys during the intervening time. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
The minute the beat drops on Sam Smith and Kim Petras’ “Unholy” during the opening scenes for Hulu’s “The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives,” you know you’re gonna be in for a god damn ride. The camera is trained on social media star Taylor Frankie Paul, a mother of two in her late 20s who is all hair extensions and highlights. She’s also the closest thing this series has to a protagonist. A producer asks a question to set the scene: “So tell us how a couple of Mormon moms, getting together, making TikToks, suddenly turns into this crazy swinging sex scandal?”
Mommy don’t know daddy’s getting hot / at the body shop / doing something unholy…
We then see eight beautiful women in matching pale blue coats, holding hands outside of the Mormon Temple in Provo, Utah. These are the women of MomTok, a content collective of Mormon and formerly Mormon moms who make a living for themselves and their families off of social media influencing and content creation.
If you watch “Secret Lives” seeking tea on the “soft swinging” scandal that blew up online in 2022, you’ll be sorely disappointed. We get a quick primer on the fact that Paul and her ex-husband split after engaging in sexual swapping with other couples in their Very Online friend group, but that’s about it. Every other member of the show’s cast vehemently denies being involved, and soon the swinging scandal recedes into the background altogether. We came for a show about a Mormon sex scandal, and got a show about MomTok’s Whitney Leavitt leaving the group chat. And yet… we’re hooked?
The ties that truly bind these women together are less a sense of shared faith — tensions between the more and less pious make up a large chunk of the show’s drama — and more a shared sense of business opportunity. The MomTokers are colleagues, but also friends, and the social dynamics of those blurry relationships play out in fascinating ways.
They’re also all armed with the sense that their choreographed videos might be a way to challenge the deeply-ingrained, patriarchal culture of the religious community they grew up in. Half of the main cast was married and divorced before 30, and most had children when they were still children or young adults themselves. “We were raised to be these housewives for the men, serving their every desire,” Paul says in the premiere. But now… they’re the breadwinners. One woman, 24-year-old Jen Affleck, financially supports her whole family, but still seems to be responsible for doing the vast majority of child care, cleaning her shared home, and coddling her extremely blonde husband’s very fragile ego.
In episode 7, Demi Engemann directly calls out the ill effects of purity culture and and early marriage within the Mormon community: “It’s kind of a theme with our church…and kind of what the problem is,” she says. “Everyone is getting married before their brains even develop.” (Nailed it.)
In this episode, we discuss Paul’s tricky role as the show’s emotional center, saints and sinners, Whitney’s villain edit vs. the real villain (Zac), Demi’s feminist soapbox, Jessi’s company branding, and whether MomTok “can even survive this.” Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Last season of “Selling Sunset” saw Chrishell Stause victorious, the undisputed queen of the Oppenheim Group and, more importantly, of the reality show about it. In season 8, her power can go unstated, but it’s felt; she and her clique run the school (complimentary). But as their stars are rising, and other agents jockey for similar clout, the narratives on the show seem to be driven less and less by real estate affairs and more and more by reality TV production affairs: Who set up what on-camera conversation, and for what purpose? Who said what about whom during an Instagram Live or in a social media conversation about the show? If a show depicts the personal lives of its stars — their marriages, family lives, romances — is everything pertaining to their personal lives fair game, or are some things too sacred or too sensitive to be used as TV fodder?
Coming into this season, we already knew that Chelsea Lazkani, a standout agent whose reality star quality was evident from her first moment on the show, had separated from her husband and filed for divorce this spring. What we didn’t know was that not only would the divorce be addressed in the season, the show apparently had a heavy hand in the end of Chelsea’s marriage to Jeff Lazkani. Her nemesis, fellow agent Bre Tiesi, not only revealed Jeff’s infidelities to her but participated in making them an on-camera storyline, thrusting the rupture of Chelsea’s marriage into the spotlight.
Meanwhile, Chrishell has continued to feud with human ick Nicole, who has spent a season struggling to properly apologize for thanking a fan who wrote a homophobic Instagram comment about Chrishell. Chelsea has been at odds with Mary, the long-time office matriarch, after two major slights: Mary’s claim that Chelsea is a pot-stirrer (she is, and she’s fabulous at it), and Mary telling Jason and Brett that the skort Chelsea wore to a broker’s open was too short to be professional (too short? on this TV show?). A glamorous and competent but bland new agent, Alanna, has joined the cast, where she is almost too adeptly staying out of the conflict swirling around her. And Jason, mourning the loss of his and Mary’s dog Niko, consoles himself in the most relatable possible way: buying a $275k muscle car. Good thing he’s hustling to earn that retail therapy by acquiring pet listings and overpricing them by 50-100 percent.
We discuss all this and more in this episode, plus the constant relatable pratfalls of our stiletto-shod corporate camp goddesses and how long-running workplace reality shows like “Selling Sunset” inevitably morph into shows about celebrities who work together on making a TV show. Hope you enjoy! xo
Spoiler Alert: This podcast and post contain spoilers for the “Love Is Blind UK” reunion.
The “Love Is Blind UK” reunion show dropped Monday, and we were ready. While we were eager for updates on all of our troubled but mostly lovable duos, there was one from whom we expected to hear nothing noteworthy: Sabrina and Steven Smith, the standard-issue golden couple of the season. In each six of the U.S. seasons of the franchise, the most glowingly edited, rock-solid couple was still married at the time of the reunion, and the Smiths seemed like a textbook case. They seemed to focus in on each other quickly, had a warm and open communication style with each other, and shared a steady confidence in their bond. They both easily said “I do” at the altar. And as the cameras went up on the reunion stage a year later, they were sitting, tight-faced and miserable, on opposite sides of hosts Emma and Matt Willis. From the first moment of the reunion, it was clear there was much to discuss.
The wonderful Gibson Johns, host of the pop culture podcast “Gabbing With Gib,” joined me for a debrief on this shocking reunion, which brought both devastation (we were rooting for you, Steven!!!) and joy. Because many of the surprises in this reunion were delightful: cute updates from our remaining couples, self-possessed and sharp performances from (most of) the ladies, and some extremely frank news about family planning. We broke down each couple’s segment, plus the odd choice to produce the special as if it were a video recording of a local awards gala. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Spoiler Alert: This podcast and post contain spoilers for the final drop of “Love Is Blind UK” episodes.
Turns out that Claire is a goddamn “Love Is Blind UK” oracle, because *almost* all of her wedding-related predictions from last week came true. She sees the future, and we must give credit where credit is due.
And yet, even if the outcomes were foreseen, the finale episodes of LIB UK’s inaugural season were gripping nonetheless. We got some beautiful love stories and some difficult breakups, and unlike some recent seasons of the American “Love Is Blind,” we weren’t left with a vaguely sick feeling in our stomachs after watching it all go down. (Truly incredible that even when you put together a cast of fairly well-adjusted, thoughtful adults, drama just happens! Guess that’s kind of the thing about breakups and families. They’re hard and interesting and particular, even without much visible prodding on the part of production.)
In this episode, we discuss the stag and hen dos, the most beautiful wedding venue we’ve ever seen on a “Love Is Blind” show, and, of course, who got married and who got jilted at the altar. Thank god we’re getting a reunion soon, because we are absolutely DYING to know what has gone down since filming. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
Spoiler Alert: This podcast and post contain spoilers for the second batch of “Love Is Blind UK” episodes.
The certified hotties of the inaugural season of “Love Is Blind UK” are officially out of the honeymoon phase. Literally.
Our six (!!!) couples leave Corfu and head back to London in this batch of episodes, where they move into some immaculately-designed riverfront apartments (seriously, we would like to move in!), meet each other’s family and friends, and begin to discover the cracks in their romantic relationships.
But because this cast is slightly older than what we’re used to seeing on the U.S. franchise, the conflicts that come up feel particularly resonant and interesting. Maria and Tom clash over gender roles, Jasmine’s mother grills Bobby within an inch of his life, Cat is alternately cold and a ball of insecurity and Freddie wants a prenup, Benaiah and Nicole have to deal with Sam’s lingering presence, and none of the men can handle themselves when model-esque Sharlotte walks into a bar. (On the other hand, Sabrina and Steven seem practically perfect, and Ollie and Demi are mostly basking in the relief of leaving the pressure-cooker of couples mixers in Corfu.)
In this episode, we talk through the highlights of these FIVE episodes, call out our stand-out friends and enemies, and Claire gives her predictions for who will get married and who will split. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
SPOILER ALERT: THIS PODCAST AND POST CONTAIN SPOILERS FOR THE FIRST BATCH OF “LOVE IS BLIND UK” EPISODES.
They’ve got the pods. They’ve got the golden goblets. They’ve got a Nick-and-Vanessa-Lachey-esque married couple with English accents (Emma and Matt Willis, to be specific). And they’ve got a host of singles from across the U.K., mostly in their late twenties to thirties, who are ready to bare their hearts through a luminous opaque glass wall in hopes of finding a spouse. “Love Is Blind UK” is here, and it’s got all the romance and drama we expect from the series with an extra dash of winning British slang and cultural references.
The first batch of episodes introduced us to a batch of (mostly Instagram-hot) men and women who have felt stymied by their dating options and are ready to take a big swing to find love. And while recent seasons of “Love Is Blind” have either faltered or intentionally deviated from the usual formula, “Love Is Blind UK” seems to be hitting its marks neatly: Six couples get engaged, and five of them head to a luxurious honeymoon in Corfu, Greece. There’s a lovable golden couple who seem to be going from strength to strength, and some likable couples to root for, but more than one of the remaining pairs is showing a few cracks that might lead to trouble down the line. There’s an Unlikable Male Lead, a bevy of women we’d like to get margaritas with, and a couple love triangles that clearly have more juice in them even after the proposals.
In this episode, we discuss the vibes of the UK edition of “Love Is Blind” and of the couples emerging this season, we discuss the omnipresence of absent fathers and weight loss in the cast’s backstories, we speculate about which couples will founder on the rocks (and why), and we pick our top enemy and friend from the first batch of episodes. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
It feels like we’ve been preparing for this one for years. We’ve talked about nap dresses and mom bodies. We’ve talked about the fear of losing your selfhood in motherhood. We’ve talked about egg-freezing and IVF. We’ve talked about the way that parenthood and non-parenthood are treated on both the left and the right. And now it’s time for all of these threads to merge together into a mega-discourse, thanks to Ballerina Farm’s Hannah Neeleman and Vice Presidential candidate JD Vance.
A preternaturally beautiful, homesteading momfluencer and an alt-right weirdo with the face of a socially-awkward 14-year-old (and an unsettling obsession with punishing childfree women) may seem like odd cultural bedfellows. But, as Claire put it, if Ballerina Farm is the trad honey trap who makes the pro-natalist lifestyle look romantic and joyful, JD Vance is the trad boot heel of the state who aspires to grind down upon all the childfree women in America until they’re barefoot and pregnant in their egg aprons.
For anyone who hasn’t been rapturously following the debate about Ballerina Farm and/or the pile-up of evidence that JD Vance is disturbingly preoccupied with policing the emptiness of America’s wombs, let’s back up and give some context. On July 20, The Times of London published a sharp profile of Hannah Neeleman, the woman behind the Ballerina Farm mega-brand, and her husband, JetBlue scion Daniel Neeleman. The piece included some observations about the couple’s relationship — like when Daniel drops the fact, seemingly unprompted, that his wife sometimes collapses into bed for a week from exhaustion — that led some readers to wonder if Hannah was more a victim of the culture she’s steeped in than a villainous propagandist with complete agency. (The reality is probably a bit of both.)
Around the same time, reporters were digging into Vance’s past interviews — something that tends to happen when you’re selected as the Vice Presidential candidate to a man you once thought might be “America’s Hitler.” And these reporters began to notice a theme: JD Vance fucking hates people who don’t have children, especially women. In 2021, he told Tucker Carlson that the country was being run “by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they have made, so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too.” Other clips of him making similar comments have since re-emerged, including one interview where he says not having children makes people “more sociopathic and our whole country a little less mentally stable,” and another where he calls childfree people (specifically millennial journalists without kids!) “sad, lonely [and] pathetic,” and urges people to “go to war” against their “ideology.” He has even put these views into several deranged policy ideas: (1) Instituting a tax penalty for people without kids, and (2) giving extra votes to parents. In the wake of mass criticism, Vance has essentially doubled down, grasping at straws to claim that the Democrats are an “anti-family” political party.
And this is where the Ballerina Farm brand and Vance’s ideology converge: a future where mothers are hollowly “exalted” by men, without being offered concrete support for the very real labor that mothering entails; a future where birth control and abortion care and no-fault divorce are societal ills; a future where everything is beautiful and white on Instagram and ugly underneath the surface.
In this episode, we discuss our reactions to Ballerina Farm and the “childless cat ladies” trope, and wonder how we can harness the anger we feel and channel it productively in this political moment. Hope you enjoy! Xo
“Meet the queen of the ‘trad wives’ (and her eight children),” Megan Agnew, Times of London
“My day with the trad wife queen and what it taught me,” Megan Agnew, Times of London
“Let Ballerina Farm Live,” Stephanie McNeal, Glamour
“JD Vance went viral for ‘cat lady’ comments. The centuries-old trope has a long tail,” Rachel Treisman, NPR
“Vance argued for higher tax rate on childless Americans in 2021 interview,” Will Steakin and Katherine Faulders, ABC News
“Trump Is ‘Weird,’ Vance Is ‘Creepy.’ Finally, the Democrats Start Name-Calling,” Jessica Bennett, NYTimes
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free
“Love Island USA” did its big one this season. (Like so much of “Love Island” lingo… if you know you know. Soul Ties is craaaaaazy!)
I was a self-enforced “Love Island” ascetic. I avoided the show at all costs, didn’t want to understand how it worked, and didn’t even want to be tempted to watch it. I mean, there are just SO MANY EPISODES each season! How could I possibly keep up? Turns out… I can. I followed Ariana Madix straight from the bowels of “Vanderpump Rules” over to Peacock and into a new reality cult.
And apparently I wasn’t the only one, because this season absolutely blew up. The ratings doubled between seasons 5 and 6, it became one of the most-streamed shows of the summer, and the memes are all over Twitter, Instagram and TikTok. (Rob’s overalls! Kaylor’s “fuuuuuuuckahhh Aaron”! Basically everything that Leah says! PPG!)
I was curious what was behind the show becoming such a mainstream phenomenon now, six seasons in. So I brought on “Love Island” aficianado and the author of the superb Nightcap newsletter, Laura Bassett to school me on the show’s history, and analyze Leah and Rob’s star power, Serena and Kordell’s rom-com arc, and what made season 6 so special. Hope you enjoy!
Note: We recorded this episode last Wednesday, so some of the post-show updates we discuss may have evolved!
If you’ve also joined the Love Island cult, here’s some more media to consume:
“Going Deeper With Kaylor Martin,” The Viall Files
“Love Island’s Perfect Storm,” Brian Moylan for Vulture
Call Her Daddy tell-all episodes with Rob Rausch and Leah Kateb
“How to Make Two Reality Stars Fall in Love? Cue a Tropical Beach,” Calum Marsh for NYTimes
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“The Bear,” everyone’s favorite drama-with-just-enough-jokes-to-get-awards-nominations-as-a-comedy, which follows a tortured-genius chef who heads back to Chicago to take over his brother’s Italian beef sandwich shop, has released its third season. And because the season arrived in one bingeable drop, we started to hear the critical response well before we found time to finish it ourselves. And the critical response seemed unfavorable! “A bad show in especially annoying ways,” wrote Jack Hamilton at Slate. “Not The Bear at its best,” wrote Rebecca Nicholson in the Guardian. “Frustrating to watch,” wrote Sophie Gilbert in The Atlantic. Some reviewers defended the new season, however. At The Hollywood Reporter, Daniel Fienberg argued that “most of the things this season that have sparked an absence of joy are intentional.”
One thing, however, doesn’t seem to be up for debate: whether it’s intentional or not, this season is tough to watch. That was certainly our experience! Some of the episodes (including the very first one) are simply half-hour montages. We spend more time in Carmy’s head, seeing repetitive trauma flashbacks, than we do seeing any of his development in the current timeline. The Faks are multiplying, even as their comic verbal jousting becomes more disconnected from the overall bleakness of the show. Chef de cuisine and creative partner Sydney is spinning her wheels; sous-chef Tina and pastry chef Marcus have receded to the margins, despite a lovely episode dipping into the backstory of how Tina ended up at the Beef. Yes, Carmy’s sister Natalie has her baby — and a cathartic conversation with their self-involved and emotionally reactive mother — but major developments are thin on the ground, despite 10 full episodes to explore these characters. We end on a particularly irritating cliffhanger, with only a hint about whether a much-anticipated review of the new fine-dining restaurant will be a rave or a pan. We’ll have to wait for next season for any developments that showrunners Christopher Storer and Joanna Calo have been seeding to actually bear fruit.
In this podcast, we discuss what happened (and didn’t) this season, the critical backlash, our own initial reactions to season 3, how the repetitiveness and stagnation of the season might serve a purpose in its artistic project, and where “The Bear” could go from here. And despite how this may sound, we had a lot of fun with this one! We hope you enjoy. xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Having a newsletter and podcast where you lay snapshots of your life bare is a funny thing. We share snippets of our lives with each other and with you, our dear community. And though the relationship is technically one-sided, we feel the embrace of love and encouragement from our readers and listeners every time we offer up a piece of ourselves.
Two Fridays ago, on June 28, I (Emma) got engaged to Adam, my partner of 5+ years! It was the kind of proposal that felt true to our relationship — it wasn’t too fussy or too cliche or too earnest — and we got to bask in the joy right afterwards with some of our closest family and friends. Honestly, it was a perfect night, full of love and adrenaline rushes and disposable cameras and giant white bows. (No I didn’t know I was getting engaged, and yes I did show up to the proposal in a white dress! My friend Liv did some very smart scams to get me into it. More on that in our podcast discussion.)
It only felt right that, after cultivating a relationship for almost a decade with so many of you, I share my thoughts and feelings and proposal story on this platform. Claire even resisted calling me to discuss the details so that her reactions would be authentic on the pod, because my gal is JUST THAT DEDICATED to the craft! Also, she has two adorable children who keep her very busy on weekends.
In this episode, we get into the details of the engagement story, as well as digging into some bigger topics like our feelings on traditional wedding rituals, wedding planning, how marriage as an institution collides with our personal politics and more. Hope you enjoy! We are so grateful to have you all here on this wild ride with us. Xo
P.S. Let us know if there’s any wedding/marriage content you all would enjoy seeing over the next year!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Watching Netflix’s new Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders docuseries, “America’s Sweethearts,” is like diving under the water to check out what a swan’s feet are doing as she glides elegantly across a glassy pond. The frantic but hidden exertion underneath, all in service of creating an apparently effortless movement forward, becomes suddenly, jarringly visible once you peer under the surface of the water. That’s the ultimate challenge of meeting the traditional high-feminine ideal: The work, no matter how demanding, must expand to include the work of making itself invisible. A Dallas Cowboys cheerleader is an elite athlete, a brand ambassador, a pageant-ready beauty, a sex symbol and an ever-ready helping hand. She works tirelessly and accepts the meager pay as an honor. She also makes it all look easy. It’s part of the job.
As non-cheerleaders and American football heretics, we were both seduced into an unfamiliar world by this series, which goes deep into the 2023 season of the DCC from audition tapes to the post-playoffs banquet. In the process, it exposes the tension between the seamless conformity and perfection expected of the cheerleaders, and the herculean physical exertions, mental discipline, and authoritarian leadership that are necessary to produce them.
Showing how much is asked of these women, of course, only deepens their allure. We fell in love with so many of the cheerleaders — legacy veteran Victoria, whose tragedy is caring too much; effervescent and God-fearing rookie Reece; seasoned leader Kelcey, who is back for her last season before retirement. We wept with incredible performers like Anisha, an orthodontist who practices her moves between patients, and Ari, who moved to Dallas to train all year after getting cut in 2022, when they narrowly miss making the final squad. Their artistry and athleticism is enrapturing; their pursuit of excellence is inspiring.
And yet it also left us troubled. “America’s Sweethearts” shows what an immense toll this work takes on the women, whose bodies are shredded by the physical demands of the job and who are under relentless pressure to perform emotional labor and care work in the role — and who are making, when all is said and done, very little money. It also shows the blasé attitude of the Dallas Cowboys organization, which is making plenty of money from the cheerleaders, toward this inequity. (Charlotte Jones, the daughter of Jerry Jones and the EVP and chief brand officer of the Cowboys, appears in the series pointing out that the women don’t have many other opportunities to dance at a high level, apparently justifying their low wages.)
In this episode, we dug into the labor exploitation of it all, focusing on the devaluation of women’s work and the expectation that women will demonstrate their virtue through a willingness to donate time and effort. We also discuss the rigid beauty standards and casual objectification faced by the cheerleaders, and the upholding of a very specific feminine ideal through this brand. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Reading the comments on The Cut’s Instagram page is not for the faint of heart. Things tend to get weird and heated and even more weird, but sometimes they also get interesting, like they did after writer Shannon Keating wrote an essay about her confused ambivalence about having children.
The piece ran with the eye-catching headline “Should I Be A Mom, or Should I Stay A ‘Brat’”? (‘Brat’ is a reference to Charli XCX’s latest album, on which she has a song that contemplates motherhood.) After The Cut promoted this essay Instagram, people began to pop off almost immediately. The rather innocuous essay spawned a whole lot of diametrically opposed anger. Women with children expressed anger at the idea that women couldn’t be moms and brats (they can!), while women without children expressed anger at the idea that not being a mom means you’re inevitably a brat (you aren’t!). One commenter railed against the idea that “having kids is the only way to feel like you have a purpose in life, while another disputed the idea that “you have a baby and suddenly morph into an ultra conservative MOM with no other personality but MOM.” (Others just wanted everyone to stop talking about moms and brats and parenting and ambivalence altogether. Lol.)
A quick perusal of these comments made one thing clear: Women of child-bearing age are feeling a whole lot of defensiveness about their choices surrounding having children — regardless of what those choices are. What was behind this?
And then we read “What Are Children For?: On Ambivalence and Choice” by Anastasia Berg and Rachel Wiseman, a new book that examines just that. Berg and Wiseman examine the rising sense of child-having ambivalence many middle and upper-class Gen X, millennial and Gen Z women report feeling. They come at these questions from a philosophical and literary point of view, positioning this widespread ambivalence within the dual rise of the anti-abortion/pro-forced birth tradwife contingent on the right and nihilistic, anti-natalist attitudes on the left. (As pro-choice feminists, Berg and Wiseman are most interested in interrogating how we discuss these topics on the left, rather than lingering on the well-worn and obvious critiques of how motherhood is weaponized on the right.)
This idea made the chaotic comments section make sense; the way that women seemed to be responding both to the pressure to have children in order to justify their worth as women and the idea that being a mother is an inherently selfish and irresponsible decision that does not deserve collective support. Both feelings, in short, are awful, and neither serve us. And, of course, we are all more than one thing; our identities should not have to hinge on Mother or Not. Maybe we can all be party-loving brats sometimes.
In this Rich Text episode, we get into our own knee-jerk defensiveness on these topics, our reactions to the book, whether the left has been talking about parenthood in the wrong ways, and the enduring power of FOMO. Hope you enjoy! Xo
“What Are Children For?: On Ambivalence and Choice” by Anastasia Berg and Rachel Wiseman
“How Liberals Talk About Children,” Jay Caspian Kang, The New Yorker
“Should I Be a Mom, or Should I Stay a ‘Brat’?,” Shannon Keating, The Cut
Ann Friedman’s return from maternity leave, The Ann Friedman Weekly
Time to Say Goodbye podcast interview with Anastasia Berg, Rachel Wiseman, Jay Kang and Tyler Austin Harper
“How to Choose, or Not Choose, Motherhood,” Claire’s HuffPost essay, which we reference in the episode!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Dearest gentle readers, the end of Polin season is upon us at last, bringing with it relief from weepy eyes and gasping breaths. Colin and Penelope’s love story climaxes in several senses during these final four episodes: with a declaration of love, with a long-awaited sex scene featuring a mirror, with his discovery of Penelope’s nom de plume, and with his eventual acceptance of her full self. Oh, and they get married. (Details, details.)
But alongside the story of their friendship and love growing deeper and more complete, this season is telling another story: the story of how an intrepid gossip girlboss gaslights and gatekeeps her way to the top. This season — rarely with subtlety — has been paying special attention to how the relatively powerless women of the ton can wield power and find a voice, and Penelope is their grande dame, the woman who has most transcended her circumstances. An overlooked wallflower from an unimportant family, she has built a fortune by wrapping the ton around her gossipy little finger. Other women in her orbit — Cressida, Lady Featherington, Eloise, even Francesca — can only dream of amassing such clout, and this season also explores how these other women, often in unsympathetic ways, struggle against the strictures of their positions. Penelope, like her mother and Cressida, has not always used her power kindly. Still, female empowerment: we love it!
We discuss all this, plus how the queen coopts the subversive power of gossip and turns Lady Whistledown into an arm of the state media, the show’s welcome explorations of queerness in Benedict and Francesca, and the inimitable Featherington ladies. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Bravo shows tend to be their most interesting and most depressing when we’re watching something dissolve, whether that’s a longterm relationship or the remaining space between reality TV cast members and their audience.
“The Valley,” “Summer House” and “Vanderpump Rules” all ended their seasons with something fundamental shattering. On “Summer House” it was Lindsay Hubbard and Carl Radke’s engagement. On “The Valley,” it was the marriages of Michelle and Jesse Lally, and Jax Taylor and Brittany Cartwright. (Hopefully the latter sticks.) And on “Vanderpump Rules,” the fourth wall was shattered after Ariana Madix decided to walk away from an on-camera conversation with her ex, Tom Sandoval.
There is always an element of voyeurism when it comes to reality television — that’s in fact kind of its fundamental draw — but all of these finales (and for VPR, the three-part reunion) provided an even greater peek behind the curtain. Watching these people, who we have come to know (in a parasocial way) for years, navigate the boundaries of acceptable behavior provides a way for us to negotiate our own boundaries and norms. As Danielle J. Lindemann put it in her book “True Story,” “part of what tantalizes us about these freak shows is that the freaks are ourselves…The experience of watching these shows, like looking in any mirror, is interactive. We see ourselves, and then we groom ourselves accordingly.”
In this Bravo check-in we discuss the Ariana vs. Lala discussion during the VPR reunion, why Brittany may have “woken up” to Jax’s terrible behavior in this moment, the weaponization of parenthood we saw across several shows, and the calculations both Carl and Lindsay made during their breakup. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The great rom-com stars make it look easy. Meg Ryan, Julia Roberts, Drew Barrymore: When they fall in love on-screen, their charm pulls us in and the transparency of their emotions enables us to feel every moment of yearning and every thrill just as their characters do. But a rom-com lead can also, we recently discovered, turn in such a limp performance that it makes the sheer difficulty of being a rom-com lead obvious. Sydney Sweeney is a good actress, and she was surely trying to put in a rousing performance as the female lead ofthe recent film “Anyone But You.” It just doesn’t work.
A lot of things don’t work about this movie, which nonetheless has become a runaway hit. Basic elements of the plot don’t quite hang together; the characters, even the two leads, are thinner than tissue paper; the movie is lit and staged like an ad for a hotel chain; several scenes, including a crucial one revolving around a giant decorative wrench, approach (presumably unintentional) self-parody. A woman confuses a giant tarantula for a mole on someone’s butt. A man uses a marine search and rescue organization as a taxi service. Sydney Sweeney and Glen Powell are semi-nude or wholly nude throughout much of the movie, as if to distract us from the finer workings of the plot with their tempting physiques.
But if this movie, flawed as it is, helps us bring back the mid-budget, wide-release romantic comedy, it will all have been worthwhile. Even Shakespeare, whose perfect rom-com “Much Ado About Nothing” was shamelessly pillaged for this bland, low-energy adaptation, would surely agree.
In our recap, we discuss Sydney Sweeney’s damp dishrag of a performance, her character’s vast wardrobe of white and beige separates, the profusion of plot holes and absurd details, the missing motivations and character details the leads should have been blessed with, and much more. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Dearest gentle reader…
In the words of our dear gossip-monger Lady Whistledown, “Diamonds are not the only gems that sparkle.” On this season of “Bridgerton,” we are given an emerald, in the form of a no-longer-citrus-clad Penelope Featherington. The former wallflower is in full bloom, catching the eyes of both naturalist Lord Debling and her old friend Colin Bridgerton, newly returned from his travels around the continent.
Will these former friends become something more? And how will Lady Whistledown’s true identity complicate the whole affair? These are the main questions hovering over the third season of Netflix’s hit period rom-dramedy.
There’s a lot to love about “Bridgerton” season three: the friends-to-lovers trope, the escalating tension between Penelope and her former bestie Eloise (in some ways the true beating heart of the show), a relaunch for Francesca Bridgerton, the comic relief provided by the Featherington sisters, and some really hot sex scenes.
But not everything sparkles so brightly. The dialogue is (at times) wooden, the balls feel repetitive, and there are several storylines that seem more designed to fill space than further any real character development. (Also… why do Cressida Cowper’s costumes make her look like she arrived straight from The Capitol?)
In this Rich Text episode, we get into our full review of the season, including our thoughts on the central love story, the significance of Pen and Eloise’s friendship, potential future queer love stories for the Bridgertons, and more. We hope you enjoy!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“Selling the O.C.” has always distinguished itself from its older, cooler sister “Selling Sunset” by being slightly worse in almost every respect: the fashion, the characters, the politics, the drama. In season 3, that continues. The “Love Island”-inspired, Shein-designed outfits, the flatly unpleasant people, the thinly veiled bigotries, and the warmed-over storylines make for an uninspiring season. Still worse, the biggest central stories now seem irrelevant, given how many key characters have left the show since this season filmed.
But “Selling the O.C.” does offer one thing “Selling Sunset” does not: sheer villain volume. Everyone who has briefly won our sympathy on this show immediately loses it (except perhaps Brandi, who has effectively sidelined herself from the drama this go-around). The most likable characters onscreen often turn out to have the most heinous politics, and even the more sympathetic figures often have pretty unpleasant vibes themselves. There’s not a Chrishell in this bunch, folks. It’s mean girls and asshole bros all the way down.
In this episode, we discuss the alarmingly flammable-looking fashion; the abysmal race, class and gender politics; the Alex Hall-Tyler Stanaland will-they-won’t-they flirtation that just won’t end; and the gay panic that appears to have blown up the cast. We hope you enjoy!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Are we in the golden age of friend-group Bravo shows? After doing a major binge of established shows “Summer House,” “Vanderpump Rules,” and new addition “The Valley,” we think that answer is a resounding yes. So naturally, we had to get Gibson Johns of Gibsonoma back on the Rich Text pod to do a little state of the Bravo union.
All three of the aforementioned shows track the semi-glitzy, semi-depressing, utterly entertaining lives of 20, 30 and 40-somethings in Los Angeles and New York City. (“Summer House: Martha’s Vineyard” and “Southern Charm” do something similar in Massachusetts and Charleston.) And when you watch them all in quick succession, some themes emerge: men in perpetual arrested development, the dissolution of longterm romantic partnerships, and a meta-commentary on what living your early adult life on television does to the shape it ultimately takes.
“Vanderpump Rules” has a post-Scandoval hangover, but is muddling its way through this season before the cast gets a well-deserved pause in filming. And “Summer House” is having what is possibly its best season ever, mining not just the slow collapse of Lindsay Hubbard and Carl Radke’s engagement, but conflict between married couple Kyle Cooke and Amanda Batula, and a budding romance between Ciara Miller and newcomer West. (West, a 28-year-old, blonde, recently-laid-off journalist, is a truly unlikely new Bravo heartthrob.)
And then there’s “The Valley.”
We have to admit that when “The Valley” was first announced, we didn’t have high hopes. It was framed as a “VPR” spinoff that followed “a group of close friends as they trade bottle service in West Hollywood for baby bottles in the Valley all while they navigate bustling businesses, rocky relationships and feisty friendships.” But… did anyone really want Jax Taylor back on their screens?
And yet, seven episodes in, we are hooked. (Brian Moylan even wrote a whole mea culpa over on Vulture.) Kristen Doute is spreading chaos, a very pregnant newbie Janet is planting little gossip seeds all over Valley Village, and Jesse Lally is a bad enough partner that his bad vibes rival even Jax’s. What more could the dark corners of our reality-TV-loving hearts desire?
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Taylor Swift’s 11th original studio album, “The Tortured Poets Department,” was released last week into a world feverishly gripped by anticipation for a Taylor Swift album. Some were primed to adore her latest work, which Swifties broadly expected to be a thorough excavation of her relationship with her ex-partner of six years, actor Joe Alwyn; others were primed to mock and flame it. We, two rather casual Swift fans, were drawn in by the sheer intensity of the gathering discourse — not to mention our own anticipation of another album. And after almost a week of listening and relistening to the album, following the critical reactions to it, and stewing in the public debates raging about it, we decided we were ready to wade in.
But not without help! For this conversation, we’re joined by writer, critic, and Taylor Swift scholar B.D. McClay, (BDM ),who has written some of our favorite pieces of Swiftian criticism. You can find her work at outlets like The New Yorker, The Baffler, and Commonweal, as well as on her Substack, Notebook, which we highly recommend. Her Substack piece on “TTPD” is excellent, and helped us clarify our own reactions to the album:
There’s no doubt that “TTPD” is a huge amount of music to sift through — and that’s before accounting for the lore, the Easter eggs, the references, and how the entire work plays with and against her ubiquitous public presence and well established brand. At the moment this album came out, after months of being on top of the world, selling out massive shows for her international Eras tour and holding a nation rapt with her public romance with Super-Bowl-winning tight end Travis Kelce, Swift was overexposed and hovering at the precipice of an almost inevitable backlash. Then she announced “The Tortured Poets Department” by working it into a Grammy’s acceptance speech, a move widely perceived as crassly commercial. The name of the album and the promotional materials around it (including an odd library installation in Los Angeles featuring Spotify-branded, faux-aged papers with misspelled lyrics draped over typewriters) fed into a narrative that the album would be cringe, a long-form dark academia TikTok full of adolescent pretension. There was so much discourse about this album before it even dropped.
When it did drop, the reactions were far from uniformly laudatory. Many critics have noted that the album is overly long, unedited, a bit shapeless perhaps. The lyrics can veer into the goofy and embarrassing. The musical motifs seem to echo her recent past albums. There’s merit to a lot of the critiques. And yet… we found a great deal to love on the album as well. And the longer we sit with it, the more we relisten, the more we find irresistible hooks hidden away in the back halves of songs, glimpses of dry humor, and moments of profoundly lovely lyricism.
In this conversation, we tried to cover as much ground as we could in just a couple of hours, discussing our favorite songs, what we think about the angry and vulnerable Taylor who appears on this album, what stories and themes she’s exploring in it, whether it’s fair to read her newer works as emotionally stunted songs about boys and bullies, and why she keeps flooding us with so much new music.
“Taylor Swift Still Isn’t Your Friend,” B.D. McClay’s 2023 Slate essay about the controversy surrounding Taylor’s relationship with Matty Healy
“Taylor Swift Derangement Syndrome with B.D. McClay,” Know Your Enemy pod
"Taylor Swift's 'Tortured Poets' is written in blood," Ann Powers, NPR
“Come for the Torture, Stay for the Poetry: This Might Be Taylor Swift’s Most Personal Album Yet,” Rob Sheffield, Rolling Stone
"Taylor Swift's Tortured Poetry," Amanda Petrusich, The New Yorker
"The Tortured Poets Department / Anthology" review, Olivia Horne, Pitchfork
“The Performative Poets Department,” Craig Jenkins, Vulture
“The Real Reason Taylor Swift Dresses Like That,” Cathy Horyn, NYMag
“Is ‘The Tortured Poets Department’ Taylor Swift’s Most Controversial Album Ever?,” Every Single Album pod, The Ringer
“Taylor Swift seems sick of being everyone’s best friend,” Constance Grady, Vox
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
It was sometime last year that it started to feel like Big Conversations about marriage and divorce were *everywhere.*
David Brooks was lecturing young people to “obsess less about your career and to think a lot more about marriage” because marriage rates have been falling. Emily Gould was contemplating leaving her husband and then not over on The Cut. High-profile writers like Lyz Lenz, Leslie Jamison and Maggie Smith were all releasing memoir (or memoir-adjacent) books about their respective divorces. And then… there were the trad wives. The trad wives, who it felt like were following us around TikTok and Instagram, homesteading and baking in dresses and posting about the failures of feminism.
Even on reality television, it feels like there’s been a distinct uptick in storylines involving the dissolution of longterm relationships. On Bravo we’ve been watching a spate of splits and their aftermaths unfold: Ariana and Sandoval, Tom and Katie (VPR), Jax and Brittany, Michelle and Jesse (The Valley), Lindsay and Carl (Summer House).
As we dive headfirst into wedding season, marriage — and the end of it — is on the brain. And after our last episode about Grazie Sophia Christie’s viral essay in The Cut urging college-aged women to marry older and richer stat, we realized we had a whole lot more to say on the subject.
For this episode, we looked at some of the major research that has come out in the last year about marriage and its correlation to self-reported happiness. Claire read Lenz’s divorce-as-liberation polemic, “This American Ex-Wife,” and Emma watched way too many lectures by Brad Wilcox, author of “Get Married: Why Americans Must Defy the Elites, Forge Strong Families, and Save Civilization.” (Yes, his book title does indeed sound extremely fascist-coded.) We brought our own lived experiences as a married person and a not-married-but-partnered person into the conversation.
And we asked ourselves a bunch of questions: How should we be thinking about marriage and divorce? Is it okay to want marriage? Is divorce the only logical answer to marriage’s gender inequities? What sorts of policies could transform the boundaries of these conversations altogether? And what would a world look like with marriage as an option rather than a central organizing principal?
Hope you enjoy our winding conversation. Xo
“Take A Wife… Please!,” Olga Khazan, The Atlantic
“Is (Heterosexual) Marriage A Diet?,” Virginia Sole-Smith, Burnt Toast by Virginia Sole-Smith
“Should I Leave My Husband? The Lure Of Divorce,” Emily Gould, The Cut
“To Be Happy, Marriage Matters More Than Career,” David Brooks, New York Times
“The All-Or-Nothing Marriage,” Eli J. Finkel, New York Times
“Blue Marriage And The Terror Of Divorce,” Anne Helen Petersen, Culture Study
“Splinters: Another Kind Of Love Story,” Leslie Jamison
“This American Ex-Wife,” Lyz Lenz
“What’s So Great About Marriage?,” Plain English with Derek Thompson
“The Deep Conflict Between Our Work and Parenting Ideals,” The Ezra Klein Show
“What Relationships Would You Want, If You Believed They Were Possible?,” The Ezra Klein Show
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Last week, New York Magazine’s The Cut published an all-time banger of a hate read — which is saying something, considering the run they’ve been on recently (from the “$50k in a shoebox” piece to the “tried to leave my husband and then realized I was just having a breakdown” piece). Grazie Sophia Christie’s floridly written and smugly framed essay, “The Case for Marrying an Older Man,” argues, with all the wisdom and certainty earned through 27 years on earth and 4 years of marriage, that leveraging youth and beauty to marry an older man is a cheat code for women, who are otherwise condemned to years of miserable labor alongside insufficient same-age partners. In her case, as she contends, it seems like a lucky jackpot: her husband, a handsome French count just 10 years older than her, is wealthy and came into the relationship mid-career, with a thrice-weekly housecleaner and polished manners. Basically, she’s figured out that marrying a rich man can come with some material benefits.
It’s little wonder this opus, despite its unoriginal thesis, ignited an old-school Twitter discourse cycle. Feminism is in a time of struggle and retrenchment, while women jaded by its failures have begun to succumb to the nostalgic appeal of traditional gender roles. Trad wifery is on the rise. Hot girls are craving a soft life and romanticizing everything. For all its faults, Christie’s essay has its finger firmly on the pulse.
So we decided to talk through what the piece argues explicitly and what it signals implicitly, what feelings it brought up in us, what it signals about the state of women’s progress, and what a feminist movement should offer as an alternative to everyone giving up and trying to marry the richest men we can. And like the original essay, our conversation ended up being far less about age gaps than it was about class, gender politics, and the costs of tying women’s worth to their youth… while they have it. We also referenced a couple fellow Substackers’ thought-provoking responses to the essay: B.D. McClay’s “Here’s the deal” and Kelly Johnson’s “On being a woman in America.” Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
One of the first things you notice about “Irish Wish,” the latest output of Lindsay Lohan’s deal with Netflix, is just how… saturated the colors are. The pink accents in her plaid knee-length dress look a little too pink. The green grass of the Irish countryside is a little too green. The blue of the water is a little too blue. Are we in Ireland at all, you start to wonder? Is that real clothing? Are those real human beings? Is this all a simulation? And why in god’s name is Ayesha Curry there?
For the uninitiated, “Irish Wish” stars Lohan as book editor Maddie (you know she’s bookish and romantically awkward because she wears glasses!!!!), who has been harboring a secret crush on her star client, Paul Kennedy (Alexander Vlahos). Well, it’s a secret from her besties, Emma (Elizabeth Tan) and Heather (Ayesha Curry), not from her mom, Jane Seymour, who clearly only agreed to film for one day and did not want to be in the vicinity of the rest of the cast, so she mostly appears on FaceTime. At the red carpet (!!!!), paparazzi-stalked (!!!!) book launch (!!!!) for Paul’s latest novel, he connects with Emma over their shared interest in false lashes, and a few short months later, Maddie is being whisked off to Ireland for their wedding, all the while wishing that she was marrying Paul Kennedy. Luckily, a mystical fairy Catholic saint lady appears and grants Maddie’s wish. Suddenly she’s in an alternate reality, about to get married to a man who would wear a PLAID SUIT TO HIS OWN WEDDING. But there’s also the “cheeky English guy” (Ed Speleers) she met at the airport…. Hijinks ensue!
We needed reinforcements to properly unpack why this movie shook us to our cores and also made us laugh so very much. Luckily, Nora McInerny of She Tried and Terrible, Thanks for Asking was game to talk it all through. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
UPDATE: On the afternoon of March 22, Princess Catherine announced that she is undergoing treatment for cancer. Our thoughts are with her and her family, and we wish her a swift recovery. This discussion primarily focuses on what the public reactions to her stepping back from public life say about the culture / the role of the royal family.
Nearly three months after the last official appearance of Catherine, the Princess of Wales, and following approximately 17 waves of fevered speculation about the cause of her unusually long absence from the public eye, we decided it was time to dedicate an episode to KateGate. Where is Kate? Why has the U.K.’s future queen and preeminent momfluencer — a woman who thrice appeared for photos in heels, a blowout and full makeup mere hours after giving birth — disappeared from view for months at a time? And what does it mean that so many of the public, including American non-royal-watchers like ourselves, have gotten swept into the furor of conspiracy theorizing that has filled the void of her reliable presence?
Sara Petersen of In Pursuit of Clean Countertops joined us to recap the timeline of events since this PR mess first began brewing, to discuss a few of the major theories behind her absence, and — most importantly — to unpack the seductiveness of this particular path down the rabbit hole.
We examine Kate’s role as a momfluencer and a stalwart of the royal family, both of which center around being continuously available for public viewing. We also get into the shaky reputation of the English royal family at this historical moment, and how the well-documented horrific experiences of Princess Diana and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, with marrying into the royal family have shaped our expectations for what scandals must be brewing behind the scenes. And we consider how this particular conspiracy has thrived in a post-truth media climate, in which AI-generated and Photoshopped images make it difficult to trust any visual evidence — and how this plays into our own anxieties about our fundamental replaceability. We hope you enjoy! xo
Ellie Hall’s thorough timeline and analysis: “It’s getting weirder: BuzzFeed News’ former royals reporter on Kate Middleton, Palace PR, and distrust in the media”
Sara Petersen’s “Kate as the ultimate momfluencer” essay
Charlie Warzel’s analysis of how Kate Middleton conspiracy theories are thriving in a post-truth, AI-fueled media landscape: “Kate Middleton and the End of Shared Reality”
Elizabeth Holmes’s measured Substack coverage of Kate’s health situation and the swirl of conspiracy theories in response to it
Fran Hoepfner’s takedown of the Kate-as-imaginary-revolutionary theories: “Wherever She Is, Kate Middleton Isn’t on Our Side”
Anna Russell’s New Yorker essay on the cultural forces at play in the explosion of conspiracy theories: “The Kate Middleton Conspiracy-Theory Swirl”
Kathryn VanArendonk’s look at the many failures of Kensington Palace’s press team: “The Royals Are So Bad at This”
Madison Malone Kircher’s NYT interview with Heidi Agan, a professional Kate Middleton impersonator who has gone on the record to deny being the woman seen at the Windsor Farm Shop: “This Is Not Princess Catherine”
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
It only took six seasons of “Love Is Blind” for Netflix and Kinetic to get Nick and Vanessa Lachey some real media training. At long last, our fair hosts seem to have discovered the power of a follow-up question! (They did seem to basically forget to ask about the majority of Jimmy and Chelsea’s relationship, but… baby steps.)
This year’s reunion had some real production value behind it, was (blessedly) not live, and the Lacheys held some cast members’ feet to the fire — namely Jeramey, Sarah Ann and Trevor. Guess there’s a first time for everything! We also got some (incomplete) clarity on where the broken-up couples stand with each other today, who has regrets, and who did a very campy JCPenney portrait shoot (Amy and Johnny, obvi).
We would have liked to see more from Chelsea and Jimmy, specifically space for Chelsea to reflect on what she may have learned not to do in a relationship from this experience, but all in all, it was a pretty solid reunion episode.
We also did a little (by little we mean more than 40-minute-long) check-in about the conclusion of “The Traitors” season 2. (Skip to 1:32:55 if you just want the “Traitors” discussion!)
We got into Pilot Pete’s fall, the gameplay of our last two traitors, the rom-com-ish final moments of the season, and all the people still holding grudges. (We see you, MJ and Phaedra!) Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
SPOILER ALERT: This post contains some spoilers for the finale of season 6 of “Love Is Blind.”
The Charlotte-based “Love Is Blind” season that started out so promisingly is looking pretty diminished by the finale — at least when you’re counting couples. Season 6 ended up being as short on weddings as season 5, and similarly gave us more mess than romance.
But the finale was no less rich of an episode because of the smaller number of weddings, opening with a scorched-earth fight between Chelsea and Jimmy and reaching a crescendo with a wedding that was more about the riveting intergenerational drama of Clay’s family than it was about the couple. In this pod, we examine almost every frame of the Chelsea/Jimmy throwdown and each conversation Clay and his mother have with and about Clay’s father. Also, Amy and Johnny’s wedding, which is more of a palate cleanser than part of the action. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Just when we thought things had reached peak insanity on season 6 of “Love Is Blind,” receipts pointing to some questionable off-screen behavior of cast members started popping up all over TikTok.
Full disclosure! We taped our recap of episodes 10 and 11 last week, but then the gossip started pouring out: about Jeramey’s previous engagement, about the serious girlfriend Trevor allegedly had DURING FILMING, about the cast of “Perfect Match” 2, about what really went down between Laura and Jeramey during filming… and we knew that we simply had to hop back on and address it all. So bear with us this week — up top we get into all of the news and rumors that been floating around, and then we get into the meat of this week’s drop.
After watching episodes 10 and 11, we continue to be #TeamLaura, we continue to be deeply concerned about Jimmy and Chelsea’s toxicity (though we did love this sweet IG post and Chelsea’s comment on it), we continue to root for Johnny and Amy, and we continue to feel many mixed emotions about AD and Clay because AD deserves the absolute world and is the undisputed heroine of this season.
But honestly? Mostly we really just feel bad for Jeramey’s mom. Being the mother of grown son fuckboys sounds tough. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
On this week’s pod, we recap episodes 7-9 of “Love Is Blind” season 6, which has begun to take some unexpected twists after a strong opening. Though the first drop of “Love Is Blind” episodes ended in a grim place, with at least two of the five engaged pairs collapsing into conflict within hours of attending their first social function together, their honeymoon in Punta Cana ends with all five couples officially intact. But things are looking precarious as we push past the season’s midpoint this week. By the end of episode 9, a couple has called the whole thing off (and not the couple we expected last week), and almost all of them seem to be on unsteady ground.
Back in Charlotte, the couples begin to examine each other’s homes (Jeramey’s is so far on the sterile side of pristine that it even spooks neat freak Laura) and meet each other’s friends and families. The couples try to coordinate their schedules now that they’re back at work — in Clay’s case, now that he’s back to having a job and a handful of businesses. Johnny and Amy consider getting him a vasectomy for a couple years so they can have anxiety-free sex. Chelsea is rapidly devoured by her insecurities, while Jimmy struggles to become more effusive toward her quickly enough to save their relationship. Jeramey and Laura spend their time with her family showing off their romantic dynamic of tensely needling each other under the guise of banter. Kenneth is joyously reunited with his phone.
In short, a lot of things go wrong in a short amount of time — though we’re still hoping our angels Johnny and Amy figure out that vasectomies are not something you’re supposed to plan to reverse. In this episode, we try to litigate some of these big conflicts; wrap our heads around the most abrupt, low-key breakups in “Love Is Blind” history; and revisit our enemies-to-friends list. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Season 6 of Netflix’s “Love Is Blind” dropped its first six episodes on Valentine’s Day, and (obviously) we binged them all. The verdict? So far, so good.
After an absolutely disastrous season 5, which left multiple lawsuits in its wake, and two couples fully erased from the season, we were wary heading into season 6. But six episodes in, LIB’s Charlotte, North Carolina season is off to a strong start. We spend significantly more time in the pods this season, which lets us really get to know our main players. After 10 days in the pods, FIVE couples get engaged and are subsequently shipped off to the Dominican Republic to figure out if they hate each other IRL or not.
In this first drop of episodes, some themes begin to emerge. There is a distinct ~trad-vibe~ to this season — almost all of the couples seem to highly prize traditional gender roles. (Johnny and Amy seem to be our singular exception.) They talk about their desire to “submit” and “lead,” and they invoke biblical language like “lust” and “lay together.” The women all perform extreme femininity in the pods, while the men look like they just rolled out of bed to mosy on down to the golf course. And one woman, Sarah Ann, gets into her thoughts on abortion: “If two people lay down consensually and have sex, you should take responsibility for your actions,” she says, as if human children should be wielded as punishments. “The option should definitely be there, but I don’t think it should be used as a form of birth control.” (America!)
All this is to say… there’s a lot to unpack. In this week’s Rich Text pod, we dive in head first. We discuss how we think these couples will fare in the real world, the sweet and supportive friendship moments we saw in the pods, and how men will literally go on reality television instead of going to therapy. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Ever since one-time Bachelor — and famed “Kissing Bandit” — Arie Luyendyk, Jr. appeared on the first season of the Peacock reality series “The Traitors,” the show has been on our radar. We heard about it on social media and from friends; we heard that Arie showed a different side of himself in the strategy competition setting, and that the show itself was wildly entertaining.
Nevertheless, we resisted.
We are not competition reality fans, but relationship reality fans. We watch dating shows by the bushel and dabble in narrative shows rooted in the power struggles within friend groups. “The Traitors,” a classic competition game show, was uninspiring to our romantic souls.
This season, another former Bachelor, Pete Weber (aka Pilot Pete), joined the cast, but we stood strong. For about five episodes, at which point our friend informed us that Pete was in the midst of executing a dazzling strategic gambit. Now this, we had to see.
So this week on the pod, we discuss the first six episodes of season two of “The Traitors.” Hosted by Alan Cumming and his Scottish sparklecore wardrobe — a seemingly endless array of kilts in bold colors, structural sleeves, and rhinestone-studded ensembles — “The Traitors” takes 22 reality show contestants, athletes, and a former member of the English Parliament, and throws them into a gussied-up game of Mafia. Every day, they awake in their rambling Scottish castle to find that the small group of Traitors chosen from within their ranks have killed one of the Faithful overnight. Then they work together to complete a convoluted challenge in order to win money for the prize pot. The day ends with a round table deliberation to choose one player to banish — the goal, of course, being to banish all the Traitors.
It’s an ornately produced show in many ways: the sets, Cumming’s costumes, the prop-heavy challenges (in one they have to build and fire a giant catapult). In others, it’s stripped down. Murders are almost always done simply through the sending of an anonymous letter — there’s no trail of evidence for the Faithful to use to find the perpetrators. Instead, they have to rely on vibes. This tends to highlight people’s biases and vulnerabilities, their preconceptions about what normal behavior is, and how gender roles manifest in the game.
We discuss all this, along with Pete’s bold strategic move, the gameplay of the Traitors thus far, and the divide between gamers and relationship show veterans within the castle. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“What is the penis to me? What is its nature?” Jacqueline Novak asks early in her show, “Get On Your Knees.” After some consideration she concludes that the penis is tender, responsive, and has “the soul of an artist.”
Like the organ it explores, “Get On Your Knees” has a tenderness at its center, wrapped in a package of genital humor.
It is a show that exists in the liminal space between comedy special, one-woman play, and long-form essay. It’s brilliant. It’s hilarious. And it’s about… the blowjob. What started as the germ of an idea in the form of a piece she wrote for a creative writing course as a student at Georgetown University in the early aughts ultimately became a 2019 New York Times Critic’s Pick, a 2020 Drama Desk Award nominee, and now, a 2024 Netflix special.
After watching about 10 minutes of the 90-minute Netflix special, which dropped Jan. 23, will surprise no one to learn that Novak studied creative writing in college, in addition to doing improv alongside a young John Mulaney. She has a self-described “poetic” sensibility, and “Get On Your Knees” (GOYK) actually grew out of a piece of nonfiction creative writing she had done years prior.
Natasha Lyonne, who directed the TV special, wasn’t exaggerating when she told the LA Times that she believed GOYK was “a framework for an explosion of genius.”
In this episode, we not only dig into some of the big themes of Novak’s special — and why it hits so perfectly for two anxious, wordy women like ourselves. We also revisit our own storied histories with the blowjob. What kind of blowjob-related folklore did we receive from other girls? Were we as motivated as Novak says she was as a teen to learn the craft?
We talk about it all. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Just when you thought “The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City” would never be able to top the moment when federal agents tried to arrest Jen Shah during filming, the season 4 finale raised the bar to the heavens, delivering a finale as shocking and suspenseful as a scripted thriller.
In the final episode, a classic Real Housewives girls’ trip dinner turns into a “Knives Out”-style showdown as the matriarch of the show, Heather Gay, dropped a stunning revelation: a member of their friend group had previously run an anonymous gossip Instagram account that targeted the women of “RHOSLC” with vicious rumors.
Still reeling from the dramatic conclusion to this season, we asked Bravo expert and fellow Substacker Gibson Johns of Gibsonoma to join the pod this week to help us understand how this finale came together, where it stands in the Real Housewives franchise canon, and what is likely to happen next. Together, we walk through the essential threads of season 4 that led to this mindblowing conclusion, discuss some of the standout moments and characters from the season, ponder the implications of this unusual scandal for the franchise, and break down some of the literary and cinematic tropes this episode (and season as a whole) are playing with. Hope you enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Content warning: We will be discussing infertility and IVF during this episode. If those topics are sensitive for you right now, we totally understand. Feel free to skip this week’s episode. Take care of yourselves, first and foremost.
When Sami Jacobson decided to start trying to have a baby, she was 33, and, anxieties assuaged by a doctor friend, she figured, “it’ll just happen.” But then… it didn’t.
Now, at 37, she and her husband are in the middle of one of the least-discussed fertility interventions — something that New York Magazine termed “the last fertility taboo” back in April: egg donor-assisted IVF.
According to the CDC, about 12 percent of all IVF cycles in the U.S. involve donor eggs. For the uninitiated, this means that eggs are retrieved from the donor (the same process as egg freezing) and fertilized with sperm to create embryos, which are then transferred to the expectant parent or gestational carrier’s uterus. It seems inevitable that these fertility interventions will only continue to increase in popularity, as technology improves and as women continue to have fewer children later in life. And yet, it’s not a subject you hear widely discussed — even as the topics of fertility and IVF have become commonplace on social media.
When Sami and her husband Mike were first advised that this was a route they may need to go in order to start a family, Sami looked around for stories like hers. And though they existed, they were few and far between. She barely had any friends who had required any kind of IVF, let alone donor-assisted.
“This shift was incredibly hard for me to metabolize,” Sami told us, “and it was the first time I felt this, like, sense of being kind of broken.”
Something core to the mission of this newsletter is creating a community where women’s lived experiences are taken seriously. In that spirit, we wanted to dig into Sami’s personal experience — the practical steps she’s had to take, the emotional journey she’s been on, and the ethical considerations she and her husband have had to grapple with. We also wanted to zoom out and talk about what the relative silence surrounding donor-assisted IVF is all about, especially when it comes to cisgender women in heterosexual relationships.
It was a deeply emotional conversation, but also a joyful one. Biggest thanks to Sami for having such a vulnerable, honest, complex discussion with us. And thanks in advance to this community for creating a safe space for her to do so. Hope you enjoy listening to this episode. Xo
“Biohacked: Family Secrets” podcast
“The Last Fertility Taboo” by Rina Raphael, The Cut
The landmark University of Cambridge study we reference
“Building Your Family” podcast
“Let's Talk About Egg Donation: Real Stories from Real People,”by Marna Gatlin and Carole Lieberwilkins Mft
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
This week, we finally got around to discussing the movie everyone has been talking about: “May December,” a film “loosely inspired” by the Mary Kay Letourneau-Vili case. Directed by Todd Haynes and written by Samy Burch and Alex Mechanik, it stars Natalie Portman as Elizabeth Berry, an actress researching her role playing Gracie Atherton, a woman who became a tabloid celebrity in the ‘90s after being caught statutorily raping a 13-year-old boy who worked for her at a pet store. It’s now over 20 years later; Gracie (Julianne Moore) and the boy in question, Joe Yoo (Charles Melton), are married and soon will be sending their youngest children off to college. Elizabeth spends time with the family and gets to know their social circle in hopes of bringing something true to her performance as Gracie — a genuine insight into her psyche or the trauma that created her. Instead, boundaries get blurred, shaking the foundations of Gracie and Joe’s family.
On the podcast, we get into the gender and racial politics of the film and of how the Letourneau story was portrayed in the media at the time. We also discuss the movie’s melodramatic flourishes and daring mixture of winking humor and lurid psychodrama, the subtleties of Melton’s and Portman’s performances, and how the movie implicates the audience and artists who remain fascinated by these sensational stories.
After we recorded, a Hollywood Reporter interview with Vili Fualaau dropped in which he lashed out at “May December,” saying he is “offended by the entire project.” He also said, “If they had reached out to me, we could have worked together on a masterpiece. Instead, they chose to do a ripoff of my original story.” We did not have a chance to discuss this new turn in the public conversation around the movie, but it reframes two important elements of the movie that we did discuss: one, the way the movie examines how Joe has been repeatedly exploited — by his now-wife, then by the media, and now by Elizabeth, as she tries to mine him for details and experiences — and two, the movie’s fundamental critique of artists who try to collaborate with real-life subjects in order to evoke something true about a tabloid story like this one. Through the former lens, Fualaau’s reaction makes the movie seem like a failure on its own terms; through the latter, it’s clear that the filmmakers would never have considered “collaborating” with a real-life subject. In fact, the movie is largely about how artistically pointless and even harmful this approach would be.
Perhaps “May December” did exploit Fualaau’s story, despite all the tinkering with the superficial details of the story. Even with different names and locations, different numbers of children, different jobs, it’s undeniable that the movie lifts headlines and tabloid spreads, even an entire exchange from an interview with the couple. But the fictionalization also doesn’t seem like a fig leaf to give them some plausible deniability that it’s a biopic. Instead, the filmmakers clearly wish to make a movie that isn’t really about Fualaau and Letourneau, but about certain ideas that are provoked by considering a case like theirs. That doesn’t mean it can’t cause pain to the original victim — pain that is very valid. That pain also doesn’t mean that it was the obligation of the filmmakers was to put him in a collaborative position; they had their own, very distinct artistic project in mind.
Ultimately, as with the original movie, the whole affair leaves us feeling uncomfortable and implicated. Where does our thirst for the sensational details of a tabloid scandal ever lead us, except deeper into complicity?
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
FBoy? F, Hi. Again!
After being unceremoniously axed by MAX in 2022, our favorite, innovative reality dating show has made a moderately triumphant comeback. “FBoy Island,” a show from the creative brain of former “Bachelor” EP Elan Gale, just wrapped up its third season on The CW, and boy do we have thoughts.
First, there’s the good. We’ve been “FBoy Island” devotees since its first season in 2021. Instead of prioritizing constructed drama, “FBoy Island” prioritizes comedy and narrative. Comedian Nikki Glaser is back as the host (thank god!), and this season remained full of cheeky moments — moments that make you feel like the cast is all in on the joke, rather than the butt of it.
Season 3 also gives us a new archetype of the leading lady in Katie Thurston, the former Bachelorette who never seemed to quite fit into the typical box occupied by reality dating show stars. (And we mean that in the very best of ways.) Most women who are cast on “FBoy Island” are unknowns in the reality TV world with a lengthy history of dating FBoys. Katie is the exact opposite: already famous, and very much into Nice Guys. No man is too corny for our gal Katie. It was a delight to watch a lead take such a different path this season, and fun to see Katie come back to reality TV decidedly more relaxed and self-assured.
And yet… some of the magic was definitely lost as the show moved from a cable streaming service over to a network. We lost some of the racier jokes, the format got more streamlined, and most tragically, we stopped following the men once they got eliminated. Instead of an FBoy rehabilitation program in Limbro, we got… nothing. The arcs of those eliminated characters just ended. In short, it felt more like any other episodic reality dating show, whereas before it felt like watching one long carefully crafted movie that encompassed a whole world.
At the end of the day, we’d rather have a slightly neutered “FBoy Island” than no “FBoy Island” at all, but we’ll always miss the magic of those first two glorious seasons.
We get into all of this and more during this week’s episode. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Give a gift subscriptionIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The holidays are here at last, and one thing Netflix guarantees us during this magical time is a Christmas-themed chick flick starring one to three early aughts icons. The plot? Thin as a single snowflake. The message? Don’t stop believin’ (in Santa).
“Best. Christmas. Ever!” wraps this whole package up in a shiny bow: Brandy Norwood, Heather Graham, and Jason Biggs star alongside Matt Cedeño in a flimsily plotted and produced movie about the importance of holiday family newsletters. Brandy (she needs no other name) plays Jackie, a glamorous and successful entrepreneur and mom whose annual Christmas letter broadcasts her family’s eye-popping accomplishments to all “friends, family, and fellow Earth dwellers.” Heather Graham plays her old friend Charlotte, who is persistently disappointed in her own career, kids, husband, and lifestyle — and who finds the annual reminders of her erstwhile buddy’s success infuriating. Somehow, Charlotte and her family wind up on Jackie’s doorstep just a few days before Christmas, hijinks ensue, and lessons about Christmas and friendship are learned. The plot twists get weirder and more upsetting as the movie winds toward its surprisingly bizarre conclusion. Brandy and Graham appear to be acting in entirely different kinds of projects, “acting” being a fairly generous term.
We discuss every absurd detail in this week’s pod. Hope this helps you get in the holiday mood! xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Over the four months that Claire was on maternity leave, a whole lot happened, both in our lives, and in the greater cultural sphere. So we figured it would be a good opportunity to catch up,
An entire, absolutely deranged season of “Love Is Blind” aired! Charity Lawson found love with Dotun Olubeko on “The Bachelorette,” and “The Golden Bachelor” premiered! (Claire is still recovering from the tragedy of not being able to share every last one of her feelings about Lydia and Milton, Uche, and J.P.’s emotional support flag.)
On a more personal note, Claire had a whole baby! A super cute one! And she experienced all the attendant joys and stressors that accompany that big life change. Emma spent these last few months keeping our business running, and have a lot of fun experimenting with the content we produce on this platform.
In this episode, we discuss all of these things. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
This week on the pod — Claire’s first official week back from maternity leave! — we dig into the latest season of the Netflix show about the Oppenheim Group, a luxury L.A. real estate brokerage where maternity leave is grounds for removal.
Back in the fantasia of Calacatta marble countertops and glass pocket doors that is the Los Angeles luxury real estate market, our gals are still clacking around sporting 6-inch heels and physics-defying underboob, convincing sickeningly wealthy people to invest their money in mansions they don’t need. Chrishell is blissfully solidifying her relationship with Aussie rockstar G-Flip; Mary and Romain are hoping for a baby; Jason is hoping to keep dating 20-somethings who don’t want kids yet and don’t mind that he’s still hopelessly in love with Chrishell; Brett is hoping Jason can figure out a way to renovate an office space without going $500k over budget; all of the agents are quaking with fear at the new mansion tax set to go into effect in Los Angeles.
There’s drama, of course — mostly the gang is trying to resolve a handful of feuds still lingering from last season. Bre and Chelsea are, inconceivably, still absorbed in a mutual standoff over some blandly critical comments that Chelsea made early last season about Bre’s partner Nick Cannon, whose hobby is having babies with various women. Chrishell and Nicole’s mutual loathing is exacerbated to a truly astonishing degree by another fairly bland comment (that Chrishell’s bestie Emma is a “social climber”). As Mary checks out, Amanza tries rather ineptly to play peacemaker. Jason and Brett respond to a severe slowing of the high-end real estate market in the city by opening a much larger office on Sunset, complete with a $1.5 million renovation.
We dug into as much of this action-packed season and reunion as we could cram into a taping. Plus, we discussed Chrishell’s unstoppable rise to complete “Selling Sunset” supremacy; the depthless perfidy of the Oppenheim twins; and the much-vilified mansion tax, which was enacted to fund programs for ameliorating homelessness in L.A. Hope you enjoy!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
There is a particular pleasure in listening to other people give relationship advice. This is why I keep podcasts “Where Should We Begin? with Esther Perel” and “Dear Shandy,” — shout out to our brilliant friends Sharleen Joynt and Andy Levine! — in my regular listening rotation, and can’t get enough of reading Heather Havrilesky’s Ask Polly and Alexandra Hayes Robinson’s Hello Hayes columns.
It’s delicious to hear people discuss sticky, subjective situations — ones that so many of us find ourselves in and out of throughout our lives.
A few months back, when Claire had just started maternity leave, I asked our Instagram audience what sort of things they’d be interested in hearing me discuss with guest hosts, and a bunch of people expressed interest in a conversation about love, sex and dating in your 30s. Since we’re deep into “Golden Bachelor” and “Bachelor In Paradise” over on Love To See It, I was itching to podcast about something other than reality TV.
And I couldn’t think of a better person to have this conversation with than Kate Hutchison, my friend of more than a decade — we’ve seen each other through YEARS of bad dating and then some good dating — who is also the author of the Cusk Brooklyn newsletter here on Substack. We talked about the joys of being single, the difference between dating in your 20s and 30s, what it looks like to ponder your desire for marriage and kids, and more.
As always, take any “advice” we give here as coming from our own lived experiences, not as prescriptive in any way. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
As a girl in the late ‘90s and early aughts, few figures loomed larger than Britney Spears.
She was IT. Her blonde waves, her sugary sweet voice, her sexy-but-virginal winking public image, she represented an ideal I knew I was supposed to strive for and also knew I’d fail to achieve. I choreographed dances to “…Baby One More Time” in my best friend’s room, tying our shirts up in knots in a paltry simulacrum of the sexy schoolgirl outfits Spears and her dancers wear in the music video. I resented her and I revered her all at once.
And then, over the years… she morphed into something else: a cautionary tale. Her very public mental health struggles (and that infamous head-shaving incident) made her a prime target for public ridicule and dismissal.
We all know now that neither version of Spears — the ideal or the cautionary tale — were accurate portrayals of who she really was or is today. As Spears herself acknowledges in her new memoir, “The Woman In Me,” which came out last week, she didn’t know how to play the fame game — at least not well — and she was torn apart in the media (and by those closest to her) as a result.
By the time she was put under conservatorship — a legal designation which kept her working without any control over her life, her money, or her body — she was such an object of pity that it barely occurred to any of us to question it.
“If they’d let me live my life, I know I would’ve followed my heart and come out of this the right way and worked it out,” Spears writes in her memoir. “Thirteen years went by with me feeling like a shadow of myself. I think back now on my father and his associates having control over my body and my money for that long and it makes me feel sick.”
“The Woman In Me,” written by Spears alongside journalist Sam Lansky, and narrated by Academy Award-winning actress Michelle Williams, is illuminating, heart-wrenching and also feels thin on details at times. Spears’ pain is apparent throughout, and though she does her best to find lessons in her experiences, it’s clear that she’s still in the muck. It’s a tall order to find meaning and make sense of it all, when she was only released from her conservatorship in 2021. Regardless, it’s a book worth reading.
In this podcast, author Alison Greenberg joins me to discuss our overall feelings about “The Woman In Me,” its themes, what we want for Spears in the future, and the lingering questions this memoir leaves us to contemplate. Hope you enjoy!
**Also, it’s worth watching the 2003 Diane Sawyer interview Spears speaks about in her book. I’m struck by how poised she is throughout the whole thing — funny, honest, restrained, eloquent, emotional. Here it is in full:
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Houston, we had a problem. We continued to have problems. The problems spun out far beyond our TVs — like this lawsuit — and now the problems have ended. That’s right, baby, “Love Is Blind” season 5 has come to a whimpering end.
We got two weddings, one double “I Do,” and a shockingly calm and mature reunion episode. (Raise your virtual hand if you were SO relieved that Vanessa didn’t pressure anyone to have a baby.)
It also became abundantly clear who the real hero of the season was: Milton, our resident 24-year-old who loves metamorphic rocks and also Lydia. Our BFF for life.
Laura and I dug into the finale and reunion episodes in this recap, and gave our final friends/enemies assessments. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Season of 5 of “Love Is Blind” continues to be an absolute mess, top to bottom.
Episode 8 was full of hard-to-litigate conflicts (Johnie and Izzy, Uche and Lydia, Johnie and Stacy, Uche and Miriam…), and then episode 9 was like emotional whiplash as we prepare for the two — only two! — weddings we will see in the finale.
We also saw our final two couples — Izzy and Stacy, Milton and Lydia — face some substantive conflict. Milton and Lydia clash over their divergent approaches to conflict and confrontation, while Izzy and Stacy confront financial differences, and the question of when and how certain disclosures should be made ahead of a marriage.
But honestly, what’s going on outside of the episodes is almost more interesting than what we’re seeing in them. And we get into *some* of those rumors and reports in this week’s recap.
As always, take these TikTok reports with a GIANT! GRAIN! OF! SALT! These are rumors, and have not been reported.
For those who are interested, on Oct. 3, TikTok user @StorytimeWithRikkii posted a video with some ~tea~ about the four couples that allegedly got engaged but that we didn’t see. She specifically discussed Renee and Carter, who apparently not only got engaged, but filmed the full experience — and were cut from the show in post. And here is a follow-up video that same TikToker posted after we taped this week’s recap.
Whatever the reason was behind their storyline being cut, it shows just how dysfunctional the casting of this season was. I hope we get some more substantive reporting on the behind-the-scenes of this season to give us more clarity on how things ended up being so messy.
For now, I hope you enjoy our recap of episodes 8 and 9, and I’ll leave you with this incredible meme that Renee posted on her Instagram:
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
This season of “Love Is Blind” is less about rooting for any of the couples, and more about watching with fascination as relationships fall apart and — maybe — come back together. And this week, the couple that did NOT defy the odds, is horny-for-Americana J.P. and sweet kindergarten teacher Taylor.
After forcing his partner to endure three days of painful awkwardness, in which he answered every question with one word, J.P. revealed to Taylor that the root of their issues was… HER MAKEUP. Yes… her makeup. Because how dare a woman who is filming an internationally broadcast television show put on false eyelashes for her big engagement reveal? The horror!
Luckily, Taylor seemed just as appalled by this as those of us watching, and she decided things between them simply needed to end. Good for you, Tay. No one deserves a life with a semi-sentient American flag.
(I also read — unfortunately after taping this episode — that there were apparently other couples that got engaged that they chose not to follow???? Was this cast truly such a bunch of duds that they just didn’t bother??? I have so many follow-up questions for everyone involved in this production.)
Other dramas discussed in this recap of episodes 5-7: Izzy’s lingering hatred for Johnie, Johnie’s rekindling with Chris, Uche’s in-person meetup with Aaliyah, Uche’s confrontation with Lydia, and all the shower sex scenes we were forced to endure.
Hope you enjoy! Xo
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Substack!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
My main reaction to the first four episodes of “Love Is Blind” season 5? OY.
There are certain conventions of “Love Is Blind,” as there are with every dating show, that we’ve grown to understand and, in a sense, feel comforted by. There will be a Golden Couple who emerges as a sure thing from episode one. There will be at least one major love triangle. By the end of the first drop of episodes, the couples will be engaged, if not already off to Mexico. And — perhaps most significantly — four or five couples WILL get engaged. (And usually more that they don’t follow, which we won’t find out about until the season is airing.)
This season, the rules are out the window. By the end of the fourth episode, we’re still waiting on at least one reveal, one major player has left the show altogether, only three couples are engaged, and there are zero Golden Couples in sight. And in a stunning first, we learn that two cast members DATED EACH OTHER BEFORE!!! (Side note: How has this not happened already?)
One thing that hasn’t changed? “Love Is Blind” providing ample opportunity for me to find new low-stakes, one-sided enemies. Yes, I’m looking at you, Uche.
My dear friend — and brilliant reporter, editor and cultural commentator — Laura Bassett gamely joined me to recap these first four eps. We discuss the messy Chris-Johnie-Izzy-Stacy love square, that Lydia revelation (!!), and all of the unnecessary B-roll of food that was conveniently included after several former cast members claimed they weren’t fed. Hope you enjoy!
Share Rich TextIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
In my humble opinion, few things feel as good as a promising, burgeoning friendship.
As inept as I’ve historically been at finding great men to date, I excel at making new friends. We all have our strengths, and that’s one of mine. Friendships have been the building blocks of my adulthood. I reached 36 as an unmarried, childfree woman with a solid career and a full life. For the last decade and a half, friends have been my companions, my confidantes, my pro bono therapists and my life partners.
The current state of American friendship is a mixed bag. Years of pandemic isolation made people really start to consider the role that friendships play — or fail to play — in their lives. Social circles contracted, loneliness abounded. As the world opened up, we all tried to recalibrate. Should we let friendships that had fallen by the wayside stay there? Should we take it personally if some people didn’t seem that interested in reconnecting with us? How should we be making new friends, now that we were so out of practice — and so many of us were now working from home? If we felt meh about a once-vibrant friendship, should we be telling that friend that it was over for good?
Confusion about protocol combined with a newly-raised consciousness about just how important close social ties are, bred the proliferation of friendship advice. Though well-intentioned, much of this advice feels like a word salad of therapeutic language and a corporate email. On TikTok, “how to break up with a friend” guides abound, including one that went viral where a therapist advises telling a friend that you’ve “treasured our season of friendship,” but you simply “don’t have the capacity to invest in our friendship any longer.”
What this all says to me is that people are yearning for community and connection, and grasping for clear ways to find it. And that’s why I was so excited to sit down with my friend Kelsey McKinney, a brilliant writer and the host of “Normal Gossip,” to have a free-flowing conversation about adult friendship: How to make friends, what it looks like to maintain healthy long-term friendships through different seasons of life, and whether “friendship breakups” should even be a thing.
Hope you enjoy! Xo
“Stop Firing Your Friends,” Olga Khazan, The Atlantic, 2023
“Shine Theory: Why Powerful Women Make The Greatest Friends,” Ann Friedman, The Cut, 2013
“What Adults Forget About Friendship,” Rhaina Cohen, The Atlantic, 2023
“How Many Friends Do You Really Need?,” Catherine Pearson, NYTimes, 2022
“How To Find Your People,” Lane Moore, Vox, 2023
“Men Have No Friends, And Women Bear The Burden,” Melanie Hamlett, Harper’s Bazaar, 2019
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Editor’s Note: The audio quality on this episode is worse than normal because we had to use our backup Zoom recording. Apologies for this! Emma is running an operation of one while Claire is on leave.
Is “Love Is Blind” season 4 the most functional cast in LIB history? After watching the three-part “After The Altar” special which dropped on September 1, I think the answer is yes.
Often a reality dating show reunion special is filled with anxiety and despair. But coming right on the heels of Charity Lawson’s feel-good season finale and “After The Final Rose” special, “After The Altar” 4 delivered more evidence that love is real and less emotional trauma. (Is this because Kinetic’s questionable production practices have been in the news lately? I guess we’ll never know.)
In “After The Altar,” we check in with our couples a year after filming: marrieds Brett and Tiffany, Zack and Bliss, Chelsea and Kwame, as well as unmarried couple Jackie and Josh. All of them seem to be thriving, settling into the satisfying, comforting contours of a relationship where you actually know the other person. (A real contrast to what these people are thrust into during the initial show.)
Pretty much everyone in the cast showed up to filming properly chastened for their wrongs, and ready to make nice. Irina apologizes to Amber. Micah apologizes to Chelsea. Marshall and Jackie apologize to each other. Even Paul and Micah handle their on-and-off situationship with grace and maturity. No wonder they had to bring in minor characters like Paul’s mom and, most notably, Monica, to actually get some drama going.
We learn that Pod Squad member Monica got engaged to Josh during the show’s initial run. However, the relationship quickly fell apart and they were cut from filming (something that happens to one or two engaged couples every season post-pods). Monica posted about her unaired relationship, and this does NOT sit well with Josh — and by extension, Jackie who is a #standbyyourman girlie.
Several accusations of clout-chasing later, Monica might have emerged as the real winner of this mini-series. After all, it’s great to see happy couples, but we’re watching for the absurd, low-stakes conflict. Hope you enjoy the episode! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Refer a friendGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
While I was watching episode 8 of “And Just Like That’s” second season, I texted Claire an important question: Do I have Stockholm Syndrome, or has this show become significantly more watchable?
After a much-needed nearly two-hour breakdown of the back half of the SATC spinoff’s sophomore season with Claire herself (!!!), my conclusion is that the answer is both.
There were some real delights in episodes 7-11: Miranda going back to work and wearing the most beautiful ombre coat I have ever seen in my god damn life, Charlotte going back to work and getting blackout drunk with her chic colleagues (incredible commitment to physical comedy from Kristin Davis), Miranda having a classic SATC-style doomed meet-cute with an audiobook narrator played by “Younger’s” Miriam Shor, Carrie reconnecting with one of her all-time great loves, Aidan Shaw, an anticlimactic Samantha Jones cameo that somehow still reminded us how much we miss that character and Kim Cattrall’s distinctive embodiment of her. For the first time since the beginning of AJLT season 1, I felt like I was watching characters that seemed to resemble the people I knew them to be in the original series.
But, of course, this is “And Just Like That,” which is to say that it’s a show that fundamentally has no fucking clue what it’s about or what it’s trying to say. It zips through storylines in 30 seconds. It has so many main characters that even though I enjoy most of them, none of them feel truly fleshed out. There’s some absolutely baffling uneasiness with talking about abortion. And for some inexplicable reason, Aidan believes that adulthood only begins at 20.
Claire popped back in from mat leave to recap this stretch of AJLT with me, which is a real gift to us all. Hope you enjoy our conversation about this zany show we love to criticize, but also will watch every episode ever made. Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Refer a friendGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
I have a love-hate relationship with “The Summer I Turned Pretty,” Jenny Han’s 2009-2011 trilogy turned Prime Video hit show. There were so many things I adored about the first season: the idyllic setting of (fake) Cousins Beach, the adult friendship between Belly’s mother, Laurel, and her college bestie Susannah Fisher, the Taylor Swift-heavy soundtrack.
But, as Claire and I discussed last year, there are things about the central love triangle between Belly and Susannah’s two sons, Conrad and Jeremiah — two boys who may as well be Belly’s family members — that make it kind of a bummer if you think too hard about it. The show (and the young actors inhabiting these characters) sell these connections well, and yet, I’m never quite sure how to feel about it all.
I expressed these mixed emotions to my friend, author Alison Greenberg, during one of our impromptu late-night phone calls (side note: how cool is it that as an adult you can just stay up talking at odd hours to your friend and no one can stop you?), and she offered a framework for understanding “The Summer I Turned Pretty” that softened me to it. She argued that TSITP should be considered among the ranks of late ‘90s / early aughts WB channel teen soap classics: “Dawson’s Creek,” “Felicity,” “Popular,” “One Tree Hill,” “Young Americans” etc.
These shows gave teenagers of a certain (millennial) generation an outlet for seeing the Giant Emotions we felt bursting out of us expressed in a compelling package. If Joey Potter could be angsty as fuck, so could we. If Felicity Porter could upend her life to chase a cute boy to New York City, unbelievably embarrass herself, and end up on a journey of self-discovery anyway, then our small moments of humiliation really weren’t so bad.
When I think of TSITP as 2023’s “Dawson’s Creek,” the terrible decisions these kids make feel more reasonable; the overwrought emotions more palatable. And then I can just let myself slip into Team Belly mode, and wonder along with her who she should end up with.
In this episode of Rich Text, Alison joins me to break down TSITP season 2, #TeamJeremiah vs. #TeamConrad, and where we hope the show goes (and doesn’t go) in season 3. Hope you enjoy! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Refer a friendGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“Red, White & Royal Blue” is the streaming summer rom-com I’ve been craving. A sexy prince! A sexy First Son! Sexy chemistry! It’s all very sexy and very hopeful and very full of the kind of political wish fulfillment that feels oh so good as we stare ahead at our next presidential election cycle. I wouldn’t call this movie a Great Film but I would call it a whole lot of fun if you can let go and just enjoy the ride.
Based off of NYTimes bestselling author Casey McQuiston’s debut novel of the same name, “Red, White & Royal Blue” follows the enemies-to-lovers romance of Alex Claremont-Diaz (Taylor Zakhar Perez), son of the United States’ first female president (Uma Thurman, doing her best Texan accent), and Prince Henry (Nicholas Galitzine), the British royal family’s “spare.”
When the movie begins, these two hate each other. Henry is buttoned up, controlled, and duty bound. Alex is reckless, impulsive, and idealistic. After they get into an altercation at Henry’s brother’s royal wedding, they end up under a pile of multi-multi-multi-tier cake, and on the cover of every tabloid on either side of the pond. In an effort to divert a diplomatic disaster, the two are pushed together by their respective governments, and as they get to know each other, a friendship forms and then blossoms into something much more romantic.
It’s certainly a significantly pared down version of McQuiston’s original story, and the harder edges and complex subplots have been sanded down to focus on the swoony love at the movie’s center. And yet there are things about “Red, White & Royal Blue” that feel like a triumph. Put simply, it’s a rom-com about queer men that operates under the same comforting tropes and cliches that so many straight rom-coms do. (If you’re concerned that a romantic comedy feels “predictable” you’re missing the point of the genre.) It also doesn’t shy away from depicting gay sex, as both hot and tender — though it’s R-rating feels unearned — and Perez and Galatzine have the chemistry to effectively sell the central relationship to viewers. (Of course not everything worked. I still have so many questions about the jilted journalist / ex-lover of Alex’s that becomes the movie’s de facto villain, a character created for the movie.)
My wonderful friend Justin Adams (@justintakesthebach) joined me for this episode, to discuss the highs and lows of this delectable summer rom-com — and President Uma Thurman. Hope you enjoy! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Refer a friendGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
I may not have been an OG fan of “The Real Housewives of New York City,” but I was a dedicated one. I watched Countess Luann incessantly discuss her cabaret show, I knew all about the fish room and the lower level, and I couldn’t wait to watch the boat ride from hell.
And yet, in 2021, deep in pandemic-land, I found myself dreading watching RHONY. The once vibrant show’s 13th season was… a total bummer. After a formal investigation was launched into allegations of racism made by the show’s first Black housewife Eboni K. Williams and a staffer against RHONY lifer Ramona Singer, the network decided to scrap the season 13 reunion altogether and then to clean house.
It was a risk, and many Bravo fans wondered if it would pay off. Could the magic of RHONY be realized again? It turns out, for me at least, the answer is yes.
The show’s new era, which began on July 16, feels fresh, fun and filled with the absolutely petty kinds of drama I crave from my housewives. (Catch! Cheese plates! Debatably ugly lingerie!) New cast members Brynn Whitfield, Erin Lichy, Sai De Silva, Jenna Lyons, Jessel Taank, Ubah Hassan represent a different vision of what it means to be aspirational in New York City than their Upper East Side counterparts did. And while I loved to hate watch Ramona Singer, it was time for a change. (Plus, I’ve been utterly obsessed with Lyons since her J. Crew days.)
Author and journalist Jessica Goodman, who interviewed the new cast for Cosmopolitan, joined me to discuss the delights of a revamped RHONY. Hope you enjoy! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The first thing I noticed when I stepped into a Brooklyn movie theater at 4:30 p.m. on a Thursday, the day before “Barbie” opened nationwide, was the palpable buzz of anticipation.
Before the Greta Gerwig’s “Barbie” even began, you could sense the hunger of the audience; the sense that we had been waiting for something just like this. When the lights came up about two hours later — after watching Stereotypical Barbie (Margot Robbie) leave Barbie Land for the Real World, discover the horrors of patriarchy, and the beauties of being a human woman, rather than an idea or an object — I was surrounded by a diverse group of people in varying shades of pink, with wide smiles and wet eyes.
As we were walking out of the theater, a man dressed in varying shades of pale pink turned to his friend and said matter-of-factly: “I didn’t realize how much that movie would fuck me up.” Same, dude. Same. A movie that starts with Helen Mirren opining about the history of baby dolls and ends with gynecology? Ideal!
And then it hit me: this is the ecstasy of feeling seen. The unfettered joy of a big, splashy, cultural moment that unapologetically speaks to you.
Growing up in the ‘90s, my relationship with Barbie was a fraught one. Barbie (full name Barbara Millicent Roberts) first hit shelves in 1959, joined two years later by her ultimate accessory, Ken. So by the time I discovered her, it just seemed like playing with and idolizing and eventually hating Barbie was a fact of girlhood.
She was everywhere, wrapped in plastic and fantastic 😉. She had so many jobs and so many high heels. She was beautiful and adult and aspirational, and also a site for cultural critique; a battlefield on which larger gender battles were fought. She represented oppressive beauty standards, weight anxiety, and the continued power of light skin and sleek blonde hair. As I began a decades-long (maybe life long?) During my brief tomboy phase, I sold all my Barbies at our neighborhood yard sale and bought a bike with the proceeds. Except one, who I dubbed Space Barbie. She got to stay.
All of this is to say that I wouldn’t have assumed that a movie about Barbie would leave me feeling so much, so deeply.
And yet it did! Maybe it’s the beauty of participating in a true Cultural Event, or maybe it’s that this doll loomed so large in my own girlhood, or maybe it’s because I adore Ryan Gosling, or maybe it’s because Michael Cera’s portrayal of tender masculinity in Allan tugged at my heartstrings, or maybe it’s because the movie is so unashamed about participating in campy femininity, or maybe it’s because a lot of terrible shit has happened in this country in the last decade and it just felt fucking great to laugh and weep and wear bright pink.
Though “Barbie” centers the experiences of women and girls, it’s also a film that is deeply interested in masculinity. We learn early on that being a Ken is a frustrating, isolating experience. Kens needs the Barbies attention in order to have any self-worth or identity, I and when it isn’t freely offered 100 percent of the time, they resort to force and control. But even domination doesn’t feel all that good. Stealing Barbie’s dream house and turning it into a Mojo Dojo Casa House filled with horse decor doesn’t fix the fundamental emptiness and disconnection that so many of the Kens seem to feel. The Kens are in conflict with each other more often than they are bonding. And though there’s just one Allan — allegedly BFF to Ken — none of them ever really talk to him. “Barbie” wants us all to remember that patriarchy hurts men too.
Of course, “Barbie” isn’t a radical feminist treatise. It still centers whiteness, and its interests still lie in the gender binary. Plus, it’s a studio film, produced by Mattel. One can only assume that Gerwig was given a relatively long creative leash because executives knew that they would be able to sell the shit out of an ungodly number of different Barbie products in the film’s wake. More people in seats means more people buying not just Barbie dolls, but Barbie suitcases, Barbie jewelry, Barbie living room sets, Barbie pool floats, Barbie candles, Barbie Crocs, Barbie scrunchies, Barbie roller skates, Barbie toothpaste, and Barbie bacon cheeseburgers. (Yes, for real.)
As with all complex cultural products, that somehow both challenge and reify the worst of the world we live in, I am thinking about “Barbie” as a catalyst for dialogue and self-reflection. The movie’s Feminism 101 and $100 million dollar marketing budget are worthy of discussion, as are its dissections of the performance of manhood, and the contradicting demands of womanhood.
We all see different things in “Barbie”: Susan Faludi saw the aftermath of Dobbs, Allison P. Davis saw Greta Gerwig’s own professional history, Jessica DeFino saw craven merchandising. I see pieces of all of these things, and I’m sure I’ll see more when I see the movie for a second time, maybe even a third. But no matter what you see, and how it changes over time, it’s worth taking “Barbie” and its place in the film canon seriously.
To begin unpacking all that “Barbie” is, and what it isn’t, I enlisted my friend Liz Plank, a brilliant writer, podcaster, newsletter-er and filmmaker. We discussed what we loved about “Barbie,” as well as the film’s inherent limitations. And we asked ourselves, what do our mixed up feelings about Barbie say about us and the world we live in? Hope you enjoy! Xo
Refer a friend“For The Love Of Ken,” Liz Plank, Airplane Mode with Liz Plank
“I Saw ‘Barbie’ With Susan Faludi, And She Has A Theory About It,” Jessica Bennett, NYTimes
“The Dark Side of Barbie: Crime, Racial Issues and Rampant Sexism,” Abby Monteil, Rolling Stone
“What Is Greta Gerwig Trying To Tell Us?,” Allison P. Davis, NYMag
“The Hunger Fed By Taylor Swift and Barbie,” Michelle Goldberg, NYTimes
“Barbie Has Cellulite (But You Don’t Have To),” Jessica DeFino, The Unpublishable
“Greta Gerwig’s ‘Barbie’ Dream Job,” Willa Paskin, New York Times Magazine
“Why Barbie Must Be Punished,” Leslie Jamison, New Yorker
Give a gift subscriptionIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
We’re back to recap the second batch of episodes of “And Just Like That,” a show that we love to watch and also love to obsessively critique. And boy did a lot happen in episodes 3-6.
We got breakups, breakdowns, a Gloria Steinem cameo, an odd amount of petty crime, a particularly creepy scenario which involved a MILF list and grown-ass women checking out a teenage boy (no thank you!), and Carrie’s literal run-in with a very sexy Mr. Mariska Hargitay (yes please!).
We sped through at least three different seasons within four episodes. One minute, Charlotte and Harry are sending their kids off to camp over summer vacation, and the next there’s a literal bomb cyclone blizzard potentially preventing Carrie and Lisa from going to their respective book and film events. (Carrie is doing a book reading at a convention unaffectionately dubbed WidowCon, at the Sheraton. Lisa Todd-Wexley is being honored at MoMA, natch.)
By the end of episode 6, our gals seem ready to move on to some new chapters. Miranda and Steve’s not-quite-divorced stasis comes to a head, and we got the tee-up for the event that has been teased since months before the season even premiered: the inevitable return of Aidan Shaw.
The show remains a complete grab bag, both in terms of tone and character development. AJLT still doesn’t seem to know what it’s trying to say or accomplish. But at least we’re having more fun with Carrie & Co. along the way.
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“The Bear” season 2 deserved better than what it got. After a highly acclaimed and buzzy first season (which just snagged 13 Emmy nominations), the FX culinary comedy/drama released its whole second season on Hulu in one drop. Instead of savoring one new episode a week — and having a whole day or more of discourse about standout episodes, like the celeb-studded anxiety attack “Fishes” or the meditative Copenhagen capsule episode “Honeydew” — we blew through all ten of them in just a week.
So we decided not to get carried past “The Bear” too quickly. This week, we circled back a whole three weeks in the cultural conversation to dive into the second season of this show — a season that slowed down the pace and opened up its scope as the plucky staff of The Original Beef retrain and rebuild toward an eventual reopening as a fine dining establishment called, of course, The Bear. This season takes Tina and Ebra to culinary school to brush up on their technical skills, while Richie and Marcus stage at Michelin-starred restaurants to find purpose and creative inspiration. Syd has become the glue of the restaurant, with her single-minded determination to earn a Michelin star keeping the whole team on track. Carmy falls in love, losing his own single-minded focus on work for the first time. This season gives space to each member of the ensemble as they venture out of the chaos of the kitchen and take on new challenges.
In this conversation, we discuss where this season takes each of the characters, what genres the show is playing with, how it depicts trauma and family dysfunction (and how it depicts healing), the heated shipping wars that broke out over Carmy-Sydney and Carmy-Claire, and the unexpected but resonant parallels between “The Bear” and “Ted Lasso.” Hope you enjoy! xo
This is part two of our two-part Q&A about motherhood and non-motherhood. You can listen to part one here.
CW: In this podcast, we discuss pregnancy and having children, and our own personal experiences with those topics. We know these are difficult topics for many people. If you’re struggling with infertility, or have suffered miscarriage, or have lost children, we know that questions around pregnancy and “choosing” to have children can be particularly painful. If this is the case for you, this may be a good episode to skip.
So much about diving headfirst into Big Adult Life Decisions is about embracing the unknown. And few things require more leaping into the unknown than becoming a parent — the first time or the third time or not at all.
The unanswerable questions are literally endless: How will your body react to pregnancy, should you want to and be able to (both big ifs) become pregnant in the first place? What will labor be like? Will your child be healthy? How will your body recover from childbirth? Will you still feel like yourself, and if not, for how long? What will your ambition look like? How will your friendships change, whether or not you have kids? How will you balance work and parenting? If you never have children, what will your older years look like? If you want children and are single, how should you preserve your fertility? If you aren’t sure if you want to have kids, how do you broach those conversations while dating? What will the world look like in 50 years if you choose to bring new humans into it?
In this episode, we dive into more of the thoughtful, thought-provoking, difficult-to-answer questions we got from you, our community. We discuss things like financial readiness, maintaining friendships across parent/non-parent lines, and how to maintain your sense of self if you decide to have children. We also try our hand at giving some advice: on egg freezing, on dating while grappling with whether you want kids, and on feeling like being a “baby maker” is somehow “unfeminist.” Like in our first installment, we come to few hard and fast conclusions, but like so many things, the beauty is in the discussion.
Hope you enjoy this candid conversation! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
CW: In this podcast, we discuss pregnancy and having children, and our own personal experiences with those topics. We know these are difficult topics for many people. If you’re struggling with infertility, or have suffered miscarriage, or have lost children, we know that questions around pregnancy and “choosing” to have children can be particularly painful. If this is the case for you, this may be a good episode to skip.
A couple of months ago, we asked our wonderful listeners for questions and suggested topics for a discussion on motherhood/non-motherhood — and received a deluge of outstanding submissions. This week, we finally got around to answering some of them! In this episode, we focused on questions about deciding whether, when, and how to prepare for having kids; choosing not to be a parent; the experience of pregnancy and childbirth; and the logistics of having kids while working and living in the city.
Many of these questions are profoundly personal, and really have no “right” or universal answer. We tried to balance speaking honestly about our own experiences and feelings with trying to circle some broader takeaways, despite the fact that everyone’s experiences and feelings on these topics are unique and can’t be distilled into simple rules. Doing these episodes on the motherhood question have been nothing if not a challenge to examine where our own emotions and beliefs about having kids took root — the values we grew up with, the examples we were shown, our own personality quirks, the lucky and unlucky breaks we’ve gotten along the way — and to reflect on how we really decide what to do with our lives.
We hope you enjoy, and stay tuned — we’ll have more coming soon, with questions about money, working motherhood, how having/not having kids can affect friendships and your relationship with yourself, and advice!
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
And just like that… we’re back in the saddle with Carrie & Co.
Carrie is experiencing the instability of the podcasting industry, Miranda is in Los Angeles with Che (yes, Che Diaz is still around), Charlotte is grappling with her role as a mom now that her children are bonafide emo teens, and Samantha is still absent (but going to make a one-scene appearance!) Our new leads are finding their footing: Nya is estranged from her musician husband after telling him she doesn’t want to have a baby, Che is filming their ill-fated pilot, Lisa is trying to do it all and have it all, and Seema is being utterly fabulous at practically all times.
Also… they’re all going to the Met Gala for some reason. And boning to Elton John’s “Tiny Dancer” (except for Nya), in an opening montage so gratuitous one has to assume that it was written as an explicit answer to critics’ concerns that season 1 was oddly sexless for a “Sex And The City” show.
In short, season two of AJLT is both totally deranged and also enjoyable — though its first two episodes, which dropped on June 22, are among the weakest of the seven that were shared with press.
In this episode, we dig into the insanity of those first two episodes — Anna Wintour obviously has to approve Met Gala +1s!!!!! — and also look ahead at what this season of AJLT might promise. Because despite our critiques, of which there are many, there are delights to look forward to: The return of Carrie’s former Vogue editor Enid Frick (Candice Bergen), a Gloria Steinem cameo, some attempts at humanizing Che, and — finally! blessedly! — some sex that’s bad and embarrassing and comedic and brief. The kind of sex that drove much of what made SATC such a fun and special romp each and every episode.
AJLT will never be SATC. It simply can’t be. Too much time has passed, the world has changed too much, the show remains too Samantha-less, and the writers still don’t seem to know what they are trying to say about these women in this stage of their lives. It’s all over the place — “mesmerizing in that wobbliness,” as Vulture’s Jackson McHenry put it. But for those of us who loved the original, there are glimmers of hope in this second season amongst the boatloads of cringe.
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
After Emma’s meticulous crash course in “Vanderpump Rules” and, more specifically, the Scandoval, we were both feeling prepped and ready as hell to watch a finale and three entire reunion episodes about the wild on- and off-screen events of the past season. The finale kicks off with Ariana and Sandoval’s raw on-camera confrontation about his affair — featuring Tom’s weak excuses and Ariana’s entire range of emotional reactions, from cold judgment to incandescent rage — and the ride doesn’t slow down until the closing moments of the reunion, in which Raquel sniffles as she admits that she and Sandoval have continued to lie about the extent and timeline of the affair.
The finale, we agree, is art; the reunion got a bit bloated with shrieked recriminations and dramatic stomp-offs by DJ James Kennedy, leaving us with three hours of TV that verge on ritualistic public shaming. In this episode, we sift through the new revelations, try to make sense of Sandoval and Raquel’s often bizarre emotional reactions to the reckoning they’re facing, and attempt to parse the difference between accountability and mob justice. Hope you enjoy! xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
We are GOING ON (mini) TOUR! If you live in the Philly, Boston or New York City areas, come hang out with us and see Love To See It LIVE! We’ll be recapping an iconic — and hilarious — vintage episode of “The Bachelorette” with some very special guests: “Normal Gossip” host Kelsey McKinney, BIP alum Jill Chin and comedian Arden Myrin. Get your tickets here.
This week, we took a quick break from weighty topics — like major life decisions and very important reality TV drama — to watch the latest teen rom-com offering from the Jenny Han cinematic universe: “XO, Kitty.” The Netflix series centers around the bubbly kid sister of “To All The Boys” heroine Lara Jean, and this time Kitty (Anna Cathcart) is sorta grownup and ready for her own perfect love story.
As the series begins, Kitty is headed off to Korea to spend her junior year of high school at the Korean Independent School of Seoul. She’s hoping to connect with her late mom (who spent her own junior year as a student there) and her long-distance boyfriend Dae (who is a current K.I.S.S. student). Best case: she gets both a new understanding of a mother she barely remembers and her elusive first kiss with Dae.
Instead, everything immediately goes wrong — Dae is in a (possibly fake) relationship with a gorgeous heiress, she’s been assigned to a boys’ dorm room, and she stumbles upon her mom’s best friend from K.I.S.S. but the woman won’t even acknowledge their relationship. Soon she’s caught up in an unexpected maze of love triangles and squares, and she’s neglecting her schoolwork while trying to unravel a mystery about a secret baby born while her mom was in Korea.
“XO, Kitty” is an unabashedly silly show in many ways; the plot turns are implausible and powered largely by truckloads of unlikely coincidences, and Kitty’s emotional range (which ranges from somewhat disappointed to irrepressibly perky) rarely seems to match the truly soap-operatic rollercoaster the series takes her on. It draws liberally from the K-drama genre, and revels in every campy twist. But the stories it has to tell about connecting with a lost loved one, and about the beauty and impermanence of young love, felt true enough to really hit home. By the end, we were right back in the rich hormonal and emotional stew of our own teenage years.
We talked about all of this, plus Kitty’s queer storyline — the first for a lead in a Jenny Han show — in this week’s episode. Hope you enjoy! XO, us.
If you liked this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
We are GOING ON (mini) TOUR! If you live in the Philly, Boston or New York City areas, come hang out with us and see Love To See It LIVE! We’ll be recapping an iconic — and hilarious — vintage episode of “The Bachelorette” with some very special guests: “Normal Gossip” host Kelsey McKinney, BIP alum Jill Chin and comedian Arden Myrin. Get your tickets here.
Content Warning: In today’s podcast, we will be discussing pregnancy and having children, and our own personal experiences with deciding whether to grow our families. We know these are difficult topics for many people. If you’re struggling with infertility, or have suffered miscarriage, or have lost children, we know that the question of “choosing” to have children can be particularly painful. If this is the case for you, this may be a good episode to skip.
It’s been nearly two years since we’ve had a conversation about motherhood on this podcast. Now felt like a good time to bring this loose series back. Claire is pregnant with her second child. Emma is watching so many people around her experience the joys and pains of parenthood for the first time, and is still confused about how she feels about having those experiences herself.
So consider this episode a casual check-in, one in which we try to be honest and raw about a topic that is so thorny for so many people. This conversation is far from the totality of our thoughts and feelings and fears and hopes, but it is a start.
We are working our way through all of the excellent questions and topics that listeners suggested when we said we were thinking of doing more motherhood/non-motherhood episodes. We plan to dig deeper into topics like the money question in future episodes. And we also are hoping to have guests — friends and experts who have lived experiences that we don’t.
Hope you enjoy. Xo
Check out our previous conversations on motherhood & non-motherhood below:
Bridging The Motherhood Divide (Ep. 1)
Mom Fashion & The Nap Dress (Ep. 2)
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The big headline about season 6 of “Selling Sunset,” the real estate docusoap set amidst multi-million-dollar mansions in Los Angeles, was the departure of the long-time series villain, Christine Quinn. After five seasons of antagonizing doe-eyed heroine Chrishell Stause and systematically burning bridges with the rest of the Oppenheim Group — many of whom had been her friends for years — Quinn was finally pushed out. This left a gaping hole in the “Selling Sunset” lineup, and a big question: who would fill her antagonistic shoes?
In season 6, the show tosses in two new Quinn-esque agents to stir up drama. Between them, veteran O Group agent Nicole Young and newbie Bre Tiesi provide enough unwarranted friction with other agents (mostly Nicole) and panache (entirely Bre) to capably fill in the narrative void. Bre, previously better known as Johnny Manziel’s ex-wife and mother of Nick Cannon’s son Legendary, waltzes in with a Rolodex of billionaire and celeb clients; she also gamely beefs with Chelsea Lazkani over their realtor bona fides and Chelsea’s unsolicited opinions about her open relationship with Cannon. Nicole, a long-time member of the business and friend group, sets her sights on Chrishell’s good-girl image and is surprisingly successful at tarnishing it.
But in our eyes, season 6 marks the coming-out of another, greater villain — perhaps the stealth Big Bad of “Selling Sunset” as a whole. Yes, we’re thinking of Jason Oppenheim: twin, short king, cofounder, boss. After spending the first few seasons as mostly a background player, and then breaking out as a romantic lead through his season-long relationship with Chrishell, Jason has returned with a hot new girlfriend and an IDGAF attitude, leaving a trail of emotional and financial wreckage in his wake. His history of seriously dating women at the brokerage comes back to haunt him, but instead of handling it, he dumps it on his loyal bestie and lieutenant Mary and fucks off to Europe; while he’s on vacation, he also expects Mary to handle managing the brokerage, her own usual workload, and his personal condo-flipping project, leaving the poor woman a burnt-out husk. By the end of the season, we realized that Jason was really at the root of most of the really toxic drama at the Oppenheim Group, and he mostly gets to sit back and watch the women deal with the fallout.
In our latest episode of the pod, we discussed all of this, as well as Heather’s pregnancy persona, empanada entrepreneur Emma’s ability to slip in and out of drama, and Chrishell’s heel turn, and the Nick Cannon of it all. Hope you enjoy! xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Note: Because of all of the clips and photos, if you’re receiving this in your inbox, you will have to click “view entire message” at the bottom of the email to see the full post!
For “Vanderpump Rules” fans, “Scandoval” was the culmination of a years-long commitment to the dramatic ups and downs of a group of Los Angeles strivers. For everyone else, it was a chance to ask… Who the hell are Tom Sandoval and Ariana Madix, and why are they the subject of an explainer in the New York Times?
Here on Rich Text, we were a house divided. Emma has been vigilantly watching “Vanderpump” since a few seasons in, and Claire has never seen a single episode. And yet, her interest was still piqued. How could it not be? Scandoval was a reality TV scandal that somehow managed to penetrate into the mainstream consciousness. So we decided it was time for Claire — and all of you — to be brought into the twisty world of “Vanderpump Rules.” So for two full hours, along with video clips and photographs, Emma explained the Scandoval to Claire.
What is Vanderpump Rules?
“Vanderpump Rules” (VPR) premiered in January 2013, as a spin-off of “The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.” The show, in its inception, followed a group of 20 and 30-something strivers who worked at RHOBH cast member Lisa Vanderpump’s restaurants in West Hollywood — primarily, SUR, which stands for Sexy Unique Restaurant. The show is currently airing its 10th season.
At its core, the show has always been about relationship dynamics, and specifically cheating. There are only a handful of cast members who haven’t been involved in public cheating scandals, but none of the previous cheating scandals can hold a candle to Scandoval.
The Short Summary
VPR original cast member Tom Sandoval cheated on Ariana Madix, his girlfriend of nine years, by having a secret seven-month affair with their co-star (and one of Madix’s besties) Raquel Leviss. This news first broke on March 3, 2023, and the ensuing fervor was coined “Scandoval.”
For those who aren’t initiated into VPR world — don’t worry, you soon will be — here’s the Scandoval in “Friends” terms: It’s like if Chandler cheated on Monica with Rachel, and Joey knew.
But what makes this scandal such a big deal is all of the historical context; the DECADE of footage fans have of Sandoval, and what that footage tells us about his patterns of (shitty) behavior.
Whether you’re a “Vanderpump” stan or newbie, we hope you’ll enjoy this episode! Below are all of the clips and photos referenced in the podcast. Xo
Clip 1: Tom Sandoval confesses to Stassi that he made out with Ariana in Vegas (watch on Bravo’s website)
Clip 2: Scheana brings up the “Miami Girl” rumor to Sandoval
Clip 3: “Miami Girl” comes to L.A. to meet with Kristen and confront Sandoval
Clip 4: James Kennedy proposes to Raquel with “Rachella”
Photo 1: Sandoval and Raquel at Coachella 2022
Photo 2: Scheana, Katie and Kristen show up to support Ariana
Clip 5: Scheana’s Elle Woods moment
Photo 3: Raquel talks to TMZ outside a Valley Village nail salon
Clip 6: A Tom Sandoval post-breakup mash-up (The Howie Mandel interview vs. Season 2 reunion)
Clip 7: Sandoval denies anything has happened between him and Raquel to a producer
Clip 8: Raquel sleeps over at Sandoval’s when Ariana is out of town
Clip 9: The “Vanderpump Rules” season 10 finale trailer
Photo 4: Ariana is spotted with a new man, Daniel Wai, at Coachella 2023
Photo 5: Lala, Lisa Vanderpump and Ariana attend the White House Correspondents Dinner
Clip 10: Roy Wood Jr. roasts Tucker Carlson and Tom Sandoval at the White House Correspondents Dinner
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
This is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter about cultural obsessions from your Internet BFFs Emma and Claire. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
Twenty years ago, Hilary Duff cemented her status as a Disney Channel icon by starring in the first-ever Disney series movie spin-off released in theaters: “The Lizzie McGuire Movie.” As in the show, Duff played the perpetually lip-glossed, glossy-haired middle-school outcast, Lizzie McGuire, who manages to get bullied by being nicer and conventionally hotter than anyone you went to junior high with. The concept of the movie: Lizzie heads to Rome for a post-graduation class trip, only to catch the eye of an Italian teen heartthrob named Paolo and get swept into impersonating his ex-partner, Isabella, at a music video awards show. It’s millennial tween girl wish-fulfillment to the max, from Lizzie’s effortlessly stick-straight blonde hair and pinstriped flared low-rise jeans to her sudden ascension into pop stardom. And it should not be surprising that, as adult viewers, we found this classic tween flick to be rife with plot holes, bad accent work, and glib references to no-carb diets. How did we ever make it through middle school in the early aughts? This movie only offers more questions.
Subscribe nowBut while “Lizzie McGuire” didn’t exactly inspire us with its artistry, there’s just something about a nostalgic rewatch of a movie that brought you joy as an adolescent — or even one that captures a time when you were young and corny enough to enjoy bad movies about middle-schoolers meeting cute guys in European cities. If you haven’t been listening to our “Bachelor” off-season pods on “Love to See It,” we’ve been rewatching teen romances that shaped our own youthful beliefs about love, ambition, feminism and finding ourselves: “Love and Basketball,” “10 Things I Hate About You,” “Easy A,” and many more to come. And honestly? Most of them actually do hold up.
Here on Rich Text, we’re doing it with a twist: instead of Very Important Teen Rom-Coms, we’re recapping a Very Bad Tween (Rom?) Com. Joining us for this rewatch was the wonderful Laura Hankin, our old friend and author of “The Daydreams” (out tomorrow!), a novel about four friends who starred on a Disney-esque teen show in the early aughts — and whose lives spun off in wildly different directions after a live episode went catastrophically awry and brought down the entire series. Now adults, the four cast members are brought back together for a reunion show, where old wounds are reopened, old secrets come to light, and old hopes are rekindled. It’s truly the satisfying version of rewatching “Lizzie McGuire” as a grown-up, with all the heady 2000s nostalgia plus the added depth of adult perspective.
So please, check out Laura’s delightful book, dig into our teen rom-com rewatch miniseries over at LTSI, and enjoy this tween rom-com rewatch — as a special treat, we’ve made it free!
And stay tuned, because we’ve got a lot of great pods coming this month for paid subscribers, including a pre-VPR finale Scandoval explainer, a “Selling Sunset” season 6 recap, and a “Yellowjackets” season 2 discussion!
Subscribe nowIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Spoiler warning: The “Love Is Blind” season 4 reunion will be discussed in this post and in great detail in the podcast! You’ve been warned!
Also, we attempted to be as up to date as possible on all of the tea trickling out post-reunion, but of course we had to take time to edit this episode, and in the intervening hours, Jackie released this apology on Instagram for the “disparaging remarks” she made about Marshall. (The word “homophobic” was not used.)
Hell hath no fury like a Netflix audience scorned by a “live” television event.
After heavily — heavily! — promoting the “Love Is Blind” season 4 *LIVE* finale, millions tried to access the live feed at 8pm EST on Sunday night and were met with… an error message. It was a reload, stare at a purple title card (first “It’s almost time! The live event will start soon,” and later, “There’s an issue with the livestream. Hang tight! We’re trying to fix it as soon as possible.”), watch it load again, get another error message, do the whole thing again, kind of night. This went on for more than an hour before just a segment of Netflix users were able to access the live feed.
When people finally got access to the reunion — either like us, in the middle of the livestream, or at 12pm PST the following day — it was… underwhelming. The cast members all seemed extremely anxious, made even worse by the fact that they had evidently been sitting around on stage for more than an hour in full hair and makeup, unable to get this show on the road. Jackie and Josh weren’t there, because of safety concerns, allegedly, though this went completely unexplained. Marshall had to speak in monologue to no one in order to rebut Jackie’s pre-taped criticisms. Our shining romantic heroes Brett and Tiffany barely spoke. Zack tried to chaotically defend Paul from Micah’s rather tepid criticisms, and Vanessa kept cutting everyone off. Plus, the baby pressure! The weird, creepy, I’m-gonna-invade-your-uterus-at-any-moment baby pressure! As TV writer/producer Francesca Ramsey pointed out on TikTok, the mark of a good host isn’t just someone who knows how to talk, but someone who knows how to listen.
We did learn that all three married couples are still together. (Hooray! We love love!) But this entire reunion truly could have been an email.
And yet… we did talk about it for two hours, including hopping back on to discuss Jackie chaotically posting “receipts” left and right. Hope you enjoy! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Spoiler warning: The “Love Is Blind” season 4 finale will be discussed in this post and in great detail in the podcast. There will be spoilers! Be prepared!
When Alanis memorably sang, “It’s like raaayyy-ee-aaainnnn on your wedding day,” she was trying to illustrate the concept of irony. She was mistaken, of course. Rain on your wedding day is not ironic; as Tiffany’s friend points out during a mid-downpour ceremony, it simply means good luck. And the good luck, this sodden Seattle wedding day, belonged to all of us “Love Is Blind” nerds, who were about to view the most shocking and joyous finale this show has delivered yet.
At every turn, we were caught wrong-footed — surprised by the yeses and the nos, surprised by the hidden tensions revealed and surprised by our own watering eyes when a couple said “I do.” Everything we thought we knew about this show (well, almost everything) had to be reevaluated. Were we wrong about most of these couples all along??
We’re not sure which moment left us most slack-jawed (Kwame’s decision? Micah’s decision to punt the first response to Paul? Paul’s post-ceremony words? Zack and Bliss’s final choice?), but it was hard not to finish the finale feeling like both the show and, perhaps, some of the cast themselves were withholding a lot of important information about these relationships. And yet it was still a surprisingly moving finale, with at least two weddings that left us verklempt in a good way.
In this recap, we discuss every twist and turn of this wedding day episode, what we missed about these couples all season and what we love about (some of) them, and who we think should stay together — plus, our updated enemies-to-friends ranking. Our live reunion recap will be coming next week, so stay tuned!
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
It’s a big week for “Love Is Blind.” At this point in the season, things always start to either really come together or totally fall apart. And in episodes 9-11 of season 4, we got both.
On one end of the should-they-get-married spectrum is Brett and Tiffany, who continue to be THE Golden Couple of the season. It’s hard to say enough good things about these two. Their friends all seem like people we’d actually like to hang out with, they are communicative and open and thoughtful and loving towards each other. They both compromise, and know how to support each other. In this batch of episodes. Tiff buckles emotionally under the pressure of a looming televised wedding. But instead of taking her feelings as an attack on him or on their relationship, Brett recognizes that his partner is suffering and instead does his best to lift her up. (And prints some very beautiful portraits that he took of her. I mean…. SWOON!)
A couple who is faring much less well (and showing far less emotional maturity, which I guess is what an extra decade of life/dating experience will get you!) are Marshall and Jackie. These two seemed ill-matched fairly soon after they left the pods, and it all comes to a head this week when Jackie fails to show up for her wedding dress fitting, because she’s on a freaking date with freaking Josh. Poor Marshall didn’t even get a text. A rough as hell ending for these two, but also probably for the best.
This week, we dive into the third drop of season 4, which takes us right up to the big wedding days! We discuss the shaky ground Chelsea and Kwame seem to be on, why we can’t seem to get a proper read on Paul, Zack and Bliss’ respective family meetings, and deliver our final pre-wedding predictions, ratings and friend/enemy rankings. Hope you enjoy! Xo
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The pods and sunny Mexico are in the rearview mirror, so it’s time for our four surviving couples to move into Seattle townhouses and start hashing out chore wheels. This is where the rubber meets the road. It’s the first opportunity the couples have to see if they can stand each other not just through a wall or at a lavish resort, but while managing the quotidian annoyances of delayed dish-washing, incompatible budgets, divergent life plans, and mismatched aesthetics. Brett drips water on the bathroom floor after showering; Paul keeps a sheathed Bowie knife on every flat surface in his home; Chelsea has never met a pink appliance she doesn’t immediately buy; Jackie is prone to long and intractable bad moods; Kwame doesn’t want to leave Portland even though his job is fully remote and Chelsea’s is very much not.
And that’s not all! For the first time ever, a “Love Is Blind” participant is setting his sights on a full switcheroo. After Zack and Irina’s engagement ended so catastrophically that even the two of them couldn’t help but laugh, Zack headed back to Seattle to meet up with his also-ran, Bliss. And it wasn’t just a friendly catchup! Instead, it seems the two sweet nerdlings felt chemistry in that bar and grill, and they’re soon dating in earnest. We’ve seen engagements crash and burn before… but going back for a chance with the runner-up? It’s fresh, it’s new, it’s (dare we say) rather Jason Mesnick. (What is it about the men in the Seattle area?)
This week, we dive into the three new episodes, try to figure out what the fuck is Irina’s deal, try to figure out what the fuck is Micah’s actual BFF Shelby’s deal, assess everyone’s families and home decor style, try to figure out what the fuck Kwame actually wants, and update our verdicts on who should get married and who are our greatest friends and enemies. Hope you enjoy!
If you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give a gift subscriptionGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
NOTE: When we started recapping this week, we thought it was a 4-episode drop, and then we realized it was actually a 5-episode drop! So we recap all 5 episodes in this podcast, but we recapped the last episode in a separate taping. (Also, be warned: This made the recap pod way longer than anticipated.) Thanks for bearing with us and sorry for any confusion. Xo
“Is love… really blind?”
This is the question that Netflix and The Lacheys purport to be answering each season on “Love Is Blind.” And even though the obvious truth is that the answer is no — perhaps out eternal enemy Shake was indeed right about this one thing — we are still thrilled to watch a new Pod Squad try to fall in love through a wall in just 10 days. It’s only been a few months since the last After The Altar special, and yet Netflix knows that we will be injecting any and all of their reality romance content directly into our veins.
Season 4 takes us to the Pacific Northwest, where we meet 30 singles eager to fast-track their way to a husband or wife… and maybe get left at the altar in another month. (But that’s an issue for another episode drop!!) In this first batch of episodes, we get a sense of who our core cast is going to be, who our golden couple is — there’s one every season — and which love triangles/quadrangles/chains are going to cause the most drama later on. (Lookin’ at you, Micah and Kwame!) Let’s just say the vibe is *very* different from that of our Dallas crew.
One disappointment, however, is the lack of body diversity. This is something that fans of “Love Is Blind,” and other dating shows like “The Bachelor,” have been advocating for for years. It felt like maybe LIB was starting to get the memo after they cast Alexa Alfia, who went on to be one half of LIB 3’s golden couple. Cut to season 4 and… every single cast member appears to be straight-sized.
But for every step back, LIB takes a step forward. This season’s innovations? A female romantic lead over the age of 35 (we are already obsessed with you, Tiffany!), and our first ever switcheroo engagement. Cannot wait to see if Zack’s bid for Bliss is successful.
In this week’s episode, we discuss the first five episodes, as well as our “Should They Get Married?” ratings, and our enemies-to-friends scale. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Give a gift subscriptionIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
In the final moments of “Sex/Life” season one, desperate Connecticut housewife and former New York sex-haver Billie (Sarah Shahi) is finally ready to act on years of yearning and months of journaling about the one that got away. She’s been trying to make things work with her handsome, loving, and loaded husband Cooper, and to put dreams of her handsome, loving, and loaded ex-boyfriend Brad in the past. But as the final episode comes to a close, the elevator doors to Brad’s penthouse open. Billie emerges, clad in a girlish puffed-sleeve floral dress. “Now fuck me,” she demands.
Season two of “Sex/Life” brings us back to that exact moment, when it seems Brad and Billie will finally re-consummate their passion and initiate an actual affair. But “Sex/Life” is not a show about cheating, or anything as taboo or titillating as adultery. It’s more of a show about serial monogamy, and extremely hot skinny people in committed relationships having mind-blowing missionary sex while bathed in fuchsia light.
And so season two takes Billie on a journey out of the depths of monogamy and into its shallows; she separates from her husband, immediately meets another handsome man who immediately becomes her boyfriend, occasionally works on her Columbia psych dissertation (it’s about how girls just wanna have fun), and allegedly spends half the week in Connecticut with her children. We also follow along as her embittered ex, Cooper, develops a sex and alcohol addiction that blows up mildly compromises his finance career. Meanwhile, her bestie Sasha has become a Goop girlboss and an icon of single-by-choice feminist girlies — and has once again fallen for her college boyfriend. Brad, Billie’s music executive ex, has met a model named Gigi and is finally really to settle down… maybe. In just six episodes, the season hurtles toward its fairytale ending at breakneck speed, cramming entire seasons’ worth of unhinged plot twists into single, underbaked episodes.
“Sex/Life” is a show about people who are rich, beautiful, and having abundant satisfying sex. They have charming children they love, careers they’re passionate about. And somehow, their lives seem absolutely miserable. Their lavish homes somehow appear bleak onscreen; their forlorn children are entrusted to nannies who appear to be unfamiliar with the concept of a day off. The best thing that ever happens to these people is a night at a fancy restaurant or party, sampling fine vintages while wearing sequins. Even all the sex, as in season one, is somehow both graphic and bland. The season is packed with slow-mo, blue- and pink-lit montages of the various couples banging in various standard positions (missionary, cowgirl), all of which left us vaguely bored.
In this episode, we sort through all the absurd storylines that make up this season, analyze the quality of the sex scenes closely (some might say a little too closely), and examine the show’s attempt to present a bland vision of monogamous marriage to one’s first love as daring, edgy, and revolutionary — even, dare they say, feminist. Also we literally cannot stop laughing. We hope you enjoy this episode half as much as we enjoyed making it. xo
Give a gift subscriptionIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Warning: This podcast contains many, many spoilers for “You” season 4, part 2. It also contains discussion of events in the show that pertain to suicide.
ANOTHER WARNING: DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU HAVE NOT WATCHED “YOU” SEASON 4.
We have been holding onto the knowledge of The Big Twist from “You” season 4 for weeks now. Praise the Netflix gods, now we can finally talk about it.
When part 1 of season 4 wrapped up, we had just learned that Rhys Montrose — Joe/Jonathan’s buddy, the likely future mayor of London, the One Good Man among a group of vapid, selfish, rich assholes — was the Eat The Rich Killer. Except… Rhys Montrose, or at least the Rhys we (and Joe) have come to know, doesn’t actually exist.
It turns out that Joe has channeled his obsession with the real Rhys into a full-on delusional state, in which all of Joe’s worst parts are expressed through a separate character, “Rhys.” Does Rhys Montrose exist? Yes. Does he know Joe/Jonathan? Absolutely not.
Now we know what kind of story we’re dealing with. It’s not just an ordinary whodunnit. It’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Imaginary “Rhys” makes this explicit in a speech to Joe: “You poured all that darkness you hated into a vessel you admired because you knew that the endgame was facing yourself, didn’t you? There you go, all the worst bits in a package you don’t mind having a pint with.”
And that is always what “You” has been about — Joe’s commitment to running from himself and to contorting the narrative to paint himself as the perpetual hero, no matter how many bodies end up lying dead in his wake. Season 4 brings us all into this delusion alongside Joe, and then wrenches us right out of it, and demands we look Joe (and ourselves) in the face.
Nothing about this season was subtle — like, did we really need the dungeon key lodged into a literal copy of “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde”? — but it added up to a raucous ride, and a really fun conversation. In this episode, we discuss the varying literary genres that the “You” writers played with this season (whodunnit! romance! fairytale!), the usefulness of the detective-as-killer trope, and where we think the show will, and should, go from here. Hope you enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscriptionIf you liked reading this, click the ❤️ button on this post so more people can discover it on Patreon!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Ahhh, Paris. The City of Lights, the City of Love, the City of American Women Starved For Romance. In the American cultural imagination, the French capital has long been idealized as the most romantic, chic, charming destination in the world — the perfect place, as “The Bachelor” might put it, to fall in love.
On the heels of “Emily in Paris,” which (fittingly) made the concept of mingling a Parisian setting with American love stories all the more marketable, two reality dating programs recently dropped on streaming channels. On Roku, Reese Witherspoon and Zoë Saldana brought us “Meet Me in Paris,” a soi-disant “reality rom-com” about three unlucky-in-love women who spend 10 whirlwind days in the city, living out a semi-scripted pursuit for love. Hulu’s “Love Trip: Paris” is a more traditional reality show featuring four Francophiles who move into a Parisian apartment building to seek love with French suitors.
The two concepts are fairly different, and the results are predictably different as well: “Meet Me in Paris” is high-concept but low-impact, taking a big swing with its unusual conceit while glossing over bland casting and underbaked love connections with punchy movie-style montages and staged vignettes. “Love Trip: Paris” gives us standard reality dating fare, heavily seasoned with tropes about the hot-blooded, jealous French lovers and their culture clash with the easy-come-easy-go Americans, but the cast is undeniably more charismatic and the relationships less contrived.
But there’s one thing both share, at least so far (“Love Trip: Paris” had only aired four episodes as of our taping), and that’s a conviction that Paris was made for American women to fall in love in the most picturesque way possible. Everything that Carrie Bradshaw’s disastrous Paris move at the end of “Sex and the City” deconstructed about the City of Love has been reconstructed by Emily Cooper and wholeheartedly embraced by these reality shows; it’s not a city like any other, full of inconveniences and disappointments and people with their own problems and plenty of heartache. It’s a Technicolor backdrop, a romance theme park where American women can finally live their best lives and find a hot suitor ready to risk it all for their love on every street corner.
In this episode, we discuss the shared Parisian fantasy of these two streaming reality romance projects, weigh their relative strengths and weaknesses, and give a certain French suitor (ahem Mirko) a piece of our goddamned minds. Hope you enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscription“Your Place Or Mine” has all the markers of a great romantic comedy: The friends to lovers trope! A script from “27 Dresses” screenwriter / “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” showrunner Aline Brosh McKenna! Reese Witherspoon and Ashton Kutcher, both of whom have aged like fine wine! A wild cast of supporting characters played by legends like Tig Notaro, Zoë Chao, Vella Lovell, Rachel Bloom, Shiri Appleby, Steve Zahn, and Jesse Williams!
And yet. It just… doesn’t work.
The best romantic comedies are fundamentally stories about personal growth that end in a successful romantic pairing. Look at “When Harry Met Sally” or “You’ve Got Mail” or Witherspoon’s best rom-com, “Sweet Home Alabama.” All of these movies deliver a clear narrative arc in which the leads learn fundamental truths about themselves that allow them to finally be ready for a loving relationship with the other. “Your Place Or Mine” merely gestures at such growth, telling us that it’s happening — somewhere! off-screen! — rather than showing it to us.
Witherspoon’s tightly-wound, “Saran wrap” mom (or Munchausen-by-proxy mom, depending on your interpretation of her anxieties about her child’s seemingly unlimited allergies) Debbie and Kutcher’s novelist-turned-soulless-corporate-consultant Peter, who you know is living an unfulfilled life because he organizes his books by color, barely register as human beings. They are more like archetypes, brought into the realm of humanity only because they are played by skilled actors who can deliver a passable performance even when they’re phoning it in.
That’s not to say that “Your Place Or Mine” doesn’t have any moments of delight. There’s the star-studded cast and some well-delivered jokes, mostly by Tig Notaro. But ultimately, “Your Place Or Mine” is a film best watched while folding your laundry.
On this week’s podcast, we tried to unpack why we felt so “meh” about what we hoped would be a movie that we’d rewatch again and again and again. Hope you enjoy! Xo
Give a gift subscriptionWe’re trying something a little bit different this week! We are introducing a free preview of our paid subscriber podcasts, so that our free subscribers can get a taste of what we on the Rich Text podcast. And because we want to make sure that *everyone* gets our weekly recommendations, we are moving that part of our newsletter into its very own entry, dropping Wednesdays. Let us know what you think of this new format!
Last season of the Netflix thriller “You” ended in an almost absurdly climactic way: Joe Goldberg, the main character and arch-villain of the series, killed his murderous wife Love Quinn, burned down their house, faked his own death, and left his baby son with a couple who would make better guardians. He then took off to Paris to find his new love object, Marienne, who had fled there with her daughter to escape him.
Season 4 finds us in an unexpected place: London. Joe has found his way to a new city, a new identity (Jonathan Moore), a new gig (American literature professor), and a new role in the drama. Joe, for three seasons, has been a serial killer and an irredeemable stalker; however much he may live in denial of his own nature, he has never strayed far from the role of Big Bad. But almost as soon as his story in London commences, Joe wakes up one morning to find that his colleague, Malcolm, has been knifed to death and left on his kitchen counter. In a panic, he disposes of the body — only to learn, from encrypted disappearing texts from an anonymous figure, that he did not kill Malcolm in a blackout fugue. He is being framed. Joe the villain has become Joe the victim, and, very quickly, Joe the detective, as he frantically tries to uncover the real killer.
That’s right. The first half of season four (the second half drops next month) is, as Joe himself realizes with a lit-snob groan, a whodunnit. His new milieu and social circle, a crew of sociopathically self-involved blue-bloods, are straight from an Agatha Christie novel, albeit a century later. And Joe himself is both the victim of a framing and the unlikely gumshoe. Ever the reader, he turns to reading Christie books himself to try to figure out how to untangle a mystery like a pro.
But this leaves the “You” viewer with all kinds of questions: Is the show really turning Joe into a victim, after three seasons of insisting on his villainy? Is Joe really someone who can be redeemed through a season of heroic efforts to protect some old-money elites from a serial killer? And what is the purpose — aside from keeping things fresh and entertaining, which, fair enough — of giving the season such an overt and kitschy genre conceit? What does it mean to take a dangerous man who always manages to maintain his own delusions of victimhood… and make him the victim of a cold-blooded murderer’s conspiracy?
With five episodes left to go, there are many possible answers to those questions — or perhaps the questions themselves will be invalidated by end-of-season developments. But we couldn’t resist hopping on the mic to dissect the first half of season one. We discuss its class satire and its meta-commentary on eat-the-rich entertainment, the murder-mystery conceit, and Joe as possible victim. Hope you enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscriptionOur Dallas “Love Is Blind” crew has officially returned to the small screen. And with them they brought some drama, some laughs, some true clubwear-at-brunch *lewks*, and a lingering question: When the hell was this thing filmed?
Here are a few things we knew:
Bartise said on Instagram that he had filmed three shows — “LIB,” “Perfect Match” and “After The Altar” before any of them aired.
They repeatedly reference it being a year since the weddings on “After The Altar,” and we know that filming wrapped on the original show in June 2021.
It appears to be summer as SK is on his first summer break after 1 year of graduate school.
The reunion was, according to production, filmed during a similar time period — “early autumn” 2022.
In both the reunion and the After The Altar special, Cole and Zanab indicate that they haven’t spoken since their wedding.
This may seem silly — who really cares? — but the lack of timeline made it hard to place the events of “After The Altar” in context. For example, how much time passed between SK *re-proposing* (!!!!!) to Raven and the cheating allegations that ultimately led to the end of their relationship? (See: The aforementioned NEW ENEMY in the headline of this post.) Did the proposal happen before or after the reunion was filmed? Did Zay and Cole have a conversation at Alexa’s 28th birthday party and make nice before going at each other during the reunion? It’s all a bit confusing.
After recording our whole recap and debating the timeline, we finally got an answer confirmed, which made it all make sense: “After The Altar” was filmed up to AND shortly after the reunion. Mystery solved! Hallelujah!
On this week’s pod we discuss more than the timeline (we promise!!). We get into the thriving marriage of the Lemieuxs, Matt and Colleen’s living situation, Bartise’s fuckery (especially when it comes to Nancy), SK and Raven’s disappointing end, and how absolutely mismatched Cole and Zanab always were. Enjoy! Xo
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been reading…
I’ve started reading the galleys (early reader copies) of two of my lovely friends’ forthcoming novels: Laura Hankin’s “The Daydreams” and Alison Rose Greenberg’s “Maybe Once, Maybe Twice.” 10/10 recommend pre-ordering both of these absolute gems. -Emma
“The Daydreams” is so good!!!! Can’t wait for everyone to get to read it.
So, my recommendations in last week’s newsletter were a bit of a cry for help, and hopefully also marked the rock bottom of my winter depression! This week I saw a glint of daylight amid the clouds, so I decided to make the most of it and expend the energy to do things that actually make me happier. I made pancakes with the toddler, folded the laundry mountain that had been accumulating for weeks, got work done on schedule, and finished reading Katy Simpson Smith’s “The Weeds” instead of staring at my phone during every free moment. I’d been having trouble getting into the book, with its fragmented, dual-narrator structure and its frequent botanical digressions, but once I made time to surrender to its flow, the momentum soon carried me. It’s out in April. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
The first two episodes of the new season of the investigative “Smoke Screen” podcast. This season, “Smoke Screen: Deadly Cure” investigates the story of former missionary Mark Grenon and his three sons, all of whom were indicted in 2021 for selling toxic bleach (dubbed Miracle Mineral Solution) as a fraudulent cure for everything from Covid-19 to malaria to autism. -Em ma
Despite shaking off my doldrums a bit, I have not gotten my podcast mojo back — lately, anything that goes in my ears seems to bounce off my brain, and I keep turning off shows after realizing I haven’t absorbed a single word. A positive listening experience from this week: On Saturday, I put on Camera Obscura while I made dinner with the toddler, and it turns out he’s finally old enough to hear “grown-up music” without having an entire meltdown and demanding to put on “The Wheels on the Bus.” -Claire
We’ve been watching…
I craved a comfort watch this week, so I went back to one of my all-time favorites: “The First Wives Club.” This 1996 gem has it all: Diane Keaton! Bette Midler! Goldie Hawn! Maggie Smith! Sarah Jessica Parker! Stockard Channing! ‘90s New York City! A revenge plot! Female friendship! A Gloria Steinem cameo! Just perfection. -Emma
We finally saw a movie! Our evening free time keeps shrinking (the child has decided his bedtime is 8:30 and we have been unsuccessful in nudging it back) and movies, meanwhile, seem to be getting longer? What happened to a tight 90 minutes? So we rarely even try these days. But finally we set aside two whole nights to watch “Tár,” which turned out to be much trippier and more intriguing than the discourse had made it sound. Although, yes, obviously it is concerned with “cancel culture” and the tension between pure aestheticism and moral judgment. Definitely worth two nights of my life! -Claire
We’ve been buying…
Well, it happened again. The new Hill House drop got me. I am absolutely obsessed with two of their new silhouettes: the Adeline dress, which is a perfect tenty mini (so comfy! so cute!), and the Matilda, which can be easily dressed down for a city dinner or dressed up for a wedding. (And yes I have actually already tried both of these on because I went to the Rockefeller Center store.) -Emma
We all know I’m also a Hill House girlie, but my order hasn’t arrived yet so I’m not making any recommendations as of this moment. Instead, a little life update: We finally just replaced our mostly-white quilt, after six years, innumerable pee splatters (from the baby) and poop smears (from our somewhat incontinent but snuggle-happy cat), and countless (surprisingly successful) washes. The final straw? Our son had an explosive nosebleed all over our bed. We actually did get the blood out, but I had already made up my mind; we deserved a new bedspread. I ordered this pick-stitch striped quilt, which was on sale at the time (sadly no longer) and matching shams. On the pro side, it’s heavy and sturdy and not literally dissolving from hundreds of scalding-hot washes; on the con side, it doesn’t fit in our small washing machine, so I have to figure out how to make sure the cat never touches it. -Claire
Share Rich TextWhen a dating reality show called “MILF Manor” was announced not long ago, the reaction was immediate and unanimous: Wasn’t that a fake show on “30 Rock”? It does seem like a desperate TV exec, over a decade after the “MILF Island” episode of “30 Rock,” cribbed the concept of a reality show about hot moms for their own pitch.
But in practice, “MILF Manor” is somehow more tawdry than its fictional predecessor. “MILF Island” (tagline: "25 super-hot moms, 50 eighth grade boys, no rules”) seemed more akin to “Survivor” than a dating show. The bikini-clad moms competed in challenges, and the boys voted them off the island. “MILF Manor,” on the other hand, seems more akin to the scene-setting portion of a YouPorn clip than a dating show.
The eight hot moms who arrive at the Mexican villa, ready to date some younger men, quickly realize that the dating pool is made up of their own sons — one of them as young as 20. And while some attempts at romance are made, the show (at least the first two episodes) revolves more around forcing mother-son pairs into uncomfortably sexual situations: sharing rooms, touching their son’s bodies while blindfolded, and disclosing sexually graphic secrets. It’s the wink-wink-nudge-nudge it’s not really incest but isn’t it so taboo? formula that has produced an ever-growing wave of fauxcest porn featuring stepsiblings and stepparents. As Naomi Fry put it in her essay “The Mother Lovers of' ‘MILF Manor,’” the show is “haunted by the spectre of incest.”
It’s a striking contrast to another recent dating show about older women, “Back in the Groove,” which took “How Stella Got Her Groove Back” as its inspiration (down to the occasional presence of Taye Diggs as a host). “Back in the Groove” features three women in their early 40s, each looking for a fresh start after a season of struggle, who will be dating from a pool of 24 younger men. Though there’s a similar twist — one mom’s son turns out to be among the suitors — their relationship is treated respectfully rather than pruriently. And, more broadly, the show allows its three leads to be complete people with varied and complex desires, rather than setting them up for mockery and humiliation.
In this episode, we discuss the two shows — especially “MILF Manor” — and what it means that we need special, niche dating shows about older women dating younger men, plus the incursion of porn trends into reality TV and the freak-show-to-prestige-show reality TV spectrum. Enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextWe’ve been watching…
Comfy rewatches. I’ve spent the last couple of months in a bit of a depressive slump, which has reached its nadir in the past two weeks. Winter, which I used to love, is a bitch to get through now that I’m so careful about indoor socializing. The weather has been gray. I’ve been working through some old griefs that have resurfaced lately. Everything is fundamentally fine, but the zest has been lacking from life — and even from TV. Yes, I’ve been struggling to enjoy TV shows. That’s how you know you’re in a funk.
The best I’ve been able to do is fall back on an old favorite, “Lovesick,” which I’ve been watching in the evenings. If you’ve never seen it, it’s a delightful little show about a group of friends in Glasgow navigating love and friendship; the spine of the show is that one friend, Dylan, has contracted chlamydia and needs to contact all of his former sex partners to notify them. Despite this premise, it is, at its heart, a romcom. -Claire
I started Rian Johnson’s new Columbo-style procedural show, “Poker Face,” which stars Natasha Lyonne as a human lie detector who is on the run and solves a new case every week. I have only watched the pilot, but it was fantastic, and the case-of-the-week format allows for Johnson to get some really high-quality guest stars (Dascha Polanco! Benjamin Bratt! Adrien Brody!). -Emma
We’ve been reading…
Honestly, I’m having a bout of winter exhaustion which is impacting my ability to pay attention while I’m reading. Maybe it’s the fact that the sun has barely been out for the last two weeks, and thus I'm feeling antsy and a little low. So starting new books has been a bit of a slog. I have however been finding comfort in Heather Havrilesky’s Ask Polly columns, which feel like a salve on the days that feel the most hopeless. -Emma
Clearly we’re both in a deep pit of the winter doldrums. I look back on my carefree summer self as if she were a completely different person, someone who could process multiple complex sentences in a row without needing a nap. Anyway! Articles have been my salvation this week, perhaps the emotional highlight of which was the opportunity to leave my apartment to go to the cardiologist. After my appointment, I sat in a nearby diner, ate a stack of pancakes, and read Molly Fischer’s delicately cutting New Yorker profile of former New York Times Book Review editor and current opinion columnist Pamela Paul. Paul held a hugely influential position in the publishing world at the time when I covered books regularly, and her new role as an opinion writer (a terrible opinion writer) has been, um, retrospectively illuminating. So is the New Yorker profile. Then Paul put out a column revisiting, inexplicably, the “American Dirt” kerfuffle from several years ago, which inspired an immensely satisfying response from Max Read. Nothing like a little book world drama to make you feel alive again. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
The latest episode of “If Books Could Kill,” about the ‘90s runaway bestseller, “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus.” Extremely unsurprisingly, this bible of gender essentialism was written by a misogynist grifter! I honestly only knew the broad strokes of this book — I absolutely first heard about it via “Clueless” — so this deep dive was both fascinating and disturbing. -Emma
That episode is one of the few things that actually made me laugh this week! Thank you to Michael and Peter for your service. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
It’s incredible that I have reached 35 and yet I am still discovering so many new ways in which I have been doing my makeup wrong for years. I recently went down a rabbithole of makeup tutorial TikToks which led me to refresh my makeup. (Plus, a bunch of my most-loved products were fully running out.) I picked up the Dibs Beauty Desert Island Duo in shade 2, Charlotte Tilbury Lip Liner in Pillow Talk, my tried and true Make Up For Ever HD Foundation, and Make Up For Ever Ultra Matte HD loose setting powder which comes with a very cute little powder puff to apply it. -Emma
Emma, that’s because they keep coming up with new ways to do makeup! I promise you, it’s not your fault.
I have been trying to gently get back into exercise with a weekly yoga class, but all of my sports bras either have gaping cups or make me feel like my ribs are being cracked. Why is it so hard to find a sports bra for someone with essentially no boobs but a ribcage more than 28 inches around? I finally decided to invest in the Alo Yoga Wild Thing bra, which came highly recommended for my body type (flat), and it’s a winner — both comfortable and cute. And with just one yoga class a week, I only need to be able to afford one sports bra, right? -Claire
Let’s just be up front: we are by no means royal obsessives or enthusiasts. But we do live online, and the online chatter about Prince Harry and his buzzy new memoir “Spare,” which sold 1.5 million copies on its first day of publication, has been *loud.* The more we thought about it, the more it seemed like the Windsor family’s cultural resonance was worth discussing.
Like so many middle/elder millennials, any feelings of connection we do have to the Royal Family, originate with Princess Diana: the people’s princess, the woman who spent time in New York City’s AIDS wards, the mother of princes William and Harry, the tragic figure who died in a car crash in 1997 at the age of 36. (And for those of us who were children in 1997, a coveted purple bear Beanie Baby.)
After Diana’s death, her teenage sons became international media spectacles, becoming the targets of the same paparazzi who hounded their mother.
Even from across the pond, we knew that Will and Harry were H-O-T — especially William, with his floppy blonde hair and piercing blue eyes. So it’s not totally surprising that at least some Americans would sustain an interest in where the princes’ romantic lives ended up.
In the wake of Harry and wife Meghan Markle’s very contentious and public split with the monarchy — and retreat to Santa Barbara, California — we have gotten a veritable overload of royal headlines. This culminated with a Netflix documentary about Meghan and Harry, and then the release of “Spare.”
On this week’s pod, we get into all the juiciest revelations from “Spare,” why the monarchy is a human rights violation, and which royal sounds like the worst. Enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been reading…
Naomi Fry on new TLC reality show “MILF Manor” for the New Yorker. She explores what it says about the culture that there is now “a May-December dating show haunted by the spectre of incest.” A perfect essay, no notes. -Emma
“The Weeds,” a forthcoming novel by Katy Simpson Smith, which interweaves the stories of two botanists, over a hundred years apart, scouring the Roman Colosseum for every species of flora it contains. Both women are humble researchers working for established male scholars, and both are heartbroken, seeking solace in their rote, painstaking work. Taking the structure of a botanical encyclopedia, the narrative advances slowly, through emotional vignettes that begin to tile together and overlap, and it definitely requires some intentional focus to get into — but as a bonus, you will be inspired to Google Image search all kinds of obscure plant species. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
Season 3 of the “Queen of the Con” pod, because I cannot get enough of scam stories. This season focuses on Danielle Miller, a self-proclaimed con artist who cut her teeth in some of New York City’s most elite institutions. -Emma
About a million years late, I have started listening to “Who? Weekly”! I think I resisted out of stubbornness (who among us hasn’t randomly decided to really stick it to the man by not consuming a piece of media we’d clearly love?), but I wanted to get into a new pod for the first time in a while, so I gave it a shot. It’s obviously deliciously funny and already keeping me more informed about all the randomly famous people out there. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
Screeners of Netflix’s forthcoming crossover mega reality dating show, “Perfect Match,” and let me tell you… from what I’ve seen I am HOOKED. We’ll be covering this one over on bonus episodes of “Love To See It,” and I am very excited to discuss the larger Netflix reality universe. -Emma
Screeners of the the upcoming season of “You,” which has kept me feverishly guessing in a way I didn’t think the show could still manage in season 4. There’s some genre experimentation, some absolutely bonkers twists — I can’t wait to have an in-depth discussion of it. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
Well, I did end up buying the Vince Camuto boots I wrote about last week, in the root beer suede, and they are FAB. Also got a new NEST reed diffuser for my living room, and it’s been so lovely to walk into my apartment every day and know it will smell good. -Emma
Dry shampoo from Rabbit Brush, which is applied with a brush instead of an aerosol spray and made from clay, clove, and black walnut hull. It’s very crunchy and “toxin-free,” but it also works really well, at least where I need it most: the bangs. Most dry shampoos leave mine just as stringy and limp as before I applied it, and this stuff actually makes them look soft and full again. Bonus (to me): it smells like cinnamon and clove. -Claire
Share Rich TextIn three seasons and less than a year in the life of Emily Cooper, our plucky Chicago girlboss’s Parisian adventures in love and marketing have somehow gone from infuriatingly absurd to deflatingly dull. Season three revolves around endless workplace furniture-moving that ultimately leaves our core Savoir team almost exactly where they began; on the romantic front, Emily, Mindy, and Sylvie all find themselves locked in deeply forgettable love triangles. After two vibrantly chaotic seasons about the misadventures of an American girl with all the depth of an Instagram photo but an unparalleled ability to inspire instant loathing, this season found the show treading water.
So what happened? Mostly, it’s the original sins of the show coming home to roost: a protagonist written with minimal emotional depth, and played with even less by a lead actress who struggles to display chemistry with any romantic interest; the show’s fixation on work and Emily’s workaholism, which set the stage for endless networking conversations and mind-numbing meetings; the absence of real stakes from any relationship except, perhaps, Camille and Gabriel. These flaws often added to the hilarity of the first two seasons, but by season three, they’ve settled into tedious ruts. It’s time for Emily to show some growth, or at least take a first step in that direction by experiencing an emotion more profound than mild regret.
In this episode, we offer our unfiltered takes on Emily’s funky blazers, basic-ass marketing pitches, and inability to have a conversation without turning it into a business meeting. Enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been reading…
“Spare,” by Prince Harry — not because of personal choice or interest, per se, but because of professional obligations. Lots of purple prose and scenery description, lots of sly jabs at Prince William. Stay tuned for more reactions! -Claire
Lol. SAME. Willy! Pa! The todger! Can’t wait to discuss. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“The Circle” season 5: the all-singles season, baby! Absolutely delighted at this twist on the “Circle” formula, which amps up the sexting quotient to a significant degree. Eggplant emoji, peach emoji, eyes emoji, send message! -Claire
A screener of the upcoming Reese Witherspoon/Ashton Kutcher Netflix rom-com, “Your Place Or Mine,” which I *cannot wait* for it to come out next month so I can talk about it with people. It is such a treat to see some stars with big star power (and production power) really taking the rom-com seriously again. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Aubrey Gordon on the Burnt Toast by Virginia Sole-Smith podcast. I love Aubrey’s work and Virginia’s work, so to hear them in conversation is just brilliant. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Even though I’ve been treating my nails like garbage lately (biting them, not oiling them or caring for them in any way), I got optimistic and bought some more Color Camp press-ons in the winter wool design. Love a neutral nail with a little bejeweled detail! Maybe I’ll even be inspired enough to apply them soon, despite the winter doldrums I’ve been idling in. -Claire
A soft, ultra-flattering, knit maxi dress from Abercrombie — currently 20% off! They were sadly sold out of my size in petites, so I went for the regular length. Also contemplating these embellished Vince Camuto knee-high boots, which have a rare wide-enough-calf for my legs and are absolutely gorgeous and also half off. -Emma
Share Rich Text“The White Lotus” is one of those shows that sticks with you.
Mike White’s masterful series, which follows a new group of wealthy Americans (and locals) each season as they travel to a different White Lotus hotel, wrapped its second season in mid-December, but we’ve both been thinking about it ever since. So by popular demand, we finally got our act together to podcast about it.
White loves a Big Juicy Theme, and this season it was sex, specifically of the transactional variety. As Jen Chaney put it in her Vulture review, “Season one established that practically every relationship is transactional, and season two goes a step further by suggesting that satisfaction can only be achieved when one understands that essential truth.”
In this week’s episode, we get into the power of transactional sex, what it takes to sustain a longterm sexual partnership, Tanya’s dramatic exit, and the most gorgeous (Valentina’s suits, Daphne’s dresses, and all of Harper’s wardrobe) and chaotic (cough, Portia, cough) fashion moments. Hope you enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been watching…
The new all-singles season of “The Circle.” I took a break on this Netflix reality show for the last few seasons, but I came back to it in the new year and I find this season totally delightful. They made every player on this season play as a single, and it really creates some great and cringe-worthy opportunities for text-based flirting / mayhem. -Emma
“I Hate Suzie Too,” a British show starring Billie Pieper as a somewhat washed-up actor — still working, but seemingly with her glory days in the rearview mirror — who is about to score a huge new role when hackers obtain sexual photos of her and leak them. Her marriage and career immediately veer into freefall as she desperately tries to manage the fallout. It can be a bit woozy to watch, with camera and sound effects layered onto panicky moments to induce the same wobbly, unsteady feelings in the audience, so I’m taking it in smaller doses. Pieper is outstanding as Suzie, a highly strung ball of energy forever trying to find the right balance between gregarious fun and self-destructive intensity. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
Jana Casale’s novel, “How To Fall Out Of Love Madly.” It follows three women in their early 30s, all struggling to navigate romantic relationships and the failures of the men they have put their trust in, but all in different ways. The writing is fun and the perspectives are sharp. The perfect book to get me back into the swing of reading novels. -Emma
P.G. Wodehouse’s “The Inimitable Jeeves”! Wodehouse and Agatha Christie were my gateway-to-adulthood authors, the writers of non-children’s books who eased my transition to grownup literature. When we were at my family’s home for Christmas, I spied a whole shelf of their books on my childhood bookcase, and idly found myself rereading some of them. It’s absolutely corking stuff, as Bertie might say; Wodehouse is a shining example of a writer who knows his groove and has found ingenious ways to reuse and refresh the same story template and tropes to equally hilarious effect each time. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
The four-part “Shameless” series on the inner circle of NXIVM, hosted by Vanessa Grigoriadis, who does a lot of reflecting on the reporting she did on NXIVM back in 2017 after the first explosive NYTimes story was published. I just cannot seem to get enough cult content in my life. -Emma
So much nostalgic music. We were profoundly blessed that our toddler chilled out with his iPad and a bunch of Disney movies for the better part of our 12-hour drives to and from Indiana, which allowed me to put in my earbuds, eat candy, and zone out to all the corniest emo shit I used to love in high school: Jack’s Mannequin, Dashboard Confessional, The Starting Line. Jimmy Eat World still slaps, and so do sour gummy worms. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
A high-waisted faux leather skirt designed by an influencer whose style content I genuinely love. I have been trying to focus my clothing purchases on versatile pieces that can be worn with multiple other pieces I already own and this fits the bill. -Emma
I can’t believe I’ve become this person, but: the Dyson Supersonic hairdryer. Winter has made my hair so limp and sad, and nothing was helping, so when I saw a rare post-Christmas discount on the fuschia dryer at Best Buy, I bought a hairdryer that cost about three times as much as I ever believed I’d spend on a grooming appliance.
And it was worth it. I’m so sorry to report this. I wish it weren’t true. For years I’ve used a pro Babyliss dryer with a diffuser for my wavy-curly hair, and I chose to believe that a pricier dryer would not be meaningfully better. But the results were always pretty frizzy, as the excess airflow from the diffuser whipped my flyaways around my head like gale-force winds, and the heat damage to my hair added up. With the Dyson diffuser (on low heat and speed), I get dry, bouncy, almost glossy curls in 25 minutes — even better than the results I get from air-drying on a beautiful summer day. A thousand apologies for this recommendation. (I’ve since read that the cheaper Shark knockoff is also a curly girl favorite.) -Claire
Share Rich TextThe idea of love as the perfect Christmas gift from Santa – whisked down the chimney and tucked underneath a fragrant, be-tinseled Scotch pine, “all my own in a big red bow” as Britney Spears memorably envisioned – is at the heart of most holiday romantic comedies. And yet, we’d argue, most don’t go far enough in bringing Britney’s vision to life. What sort of man actually can be produced from Santa’s big toy sack and given to you as a holiday gift, flawless and utterly devoted to you? Well, one who pretty much wasn’t real to begin with, and was merely summoned into being to ensure a happy holiday for one lucky woman.
And “The Spirit of Christmas” goes there, summoning a soulmate for one hardened Boston lawyer (Jen Lilley) from the realm of ghosts.
Much like “White Lotus,” “The Spirit of Christmas” is hard to pin down on the genre front. Is it a romantic comedy? A romantic… drama? A murder mystery? A ghost story? A costume drama? Honestly, all of the above. It ticks more genre boxes than any made-for-TV flick has any right to attempt.
For Emma, this is an old favorite. For Claire, it was always a tough sell – for one, the concept sounded like sheer chaos, not the neat and tidy romcom she typically sought out, and also, ghost romances are annoying. But we finally came together for a “Spirit of Christmas” viewing and discussion this holiday season, and soon the film had minted a new fan. It’s not that it handles the chaos by executing everything it attempts well – the costumed flashbacks, set in the Prohibition era, are only slightly less brutal to watch than a high school play – but rather that it plunges into everything with gusto and a pretty charming cast. It’s never boring, rarely completely incompetent, and always utterly off-the-wall.
In this episode, we recap “The Spirit of Christmas,” rate it out of 10 doors mysteriously swinging open, and revel in the most romantic haunting ever committed to the Lifetime Channel.
This is our last podcast of 2022! We will be back with more pods in January. Happy holidays, everyone!
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been reading…
This New York Times report on how pricey daycare chains have figured out how to make big money from providing childcare, while undermining political efforts to subsidize costs for parents. It’s bleak reading, a look inside the process by which something that should be a public good (like libraries or the post office, or at least the subway) has been not only privatized, but kept private for the benefit of for-profit companies and their investors, to the detriment of the people who most need the services they offer. -Claire
Amy Kaufman’s recent L.A. Times investigation into 15-year-old YouTuber’s media empire and the abuses her mother allegedly committed against the other minor YouTube talent who worked with her in her “squad.” This investigation raises a lot of interesting and important questions about the burgeoning social media celebrity industry, and specifically “kidfluencers,” who have operated in a gray area of child labor laws for years. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
In my free moments lately, I’ve been catching up on season 2 of “Abbot Elementary,” which is just such a delightful, perfect network comedy.
Greg and I have also, belatedly, started the newest season of “The Crown,” and are so far a bit perturbed at how well Prince Philip, Prince Charles, and Prince Andrew (three of the worst British men) are coming off. A kind of astonishing number of “isn’t Prince Philip terribly wise?” B-plots this season. Odd! -Claire
“Something From Tiffany’s,” a charming, well-executed modern holiday rom com directed by Daryl Wein, which recently was released on Prime. It stars Zoey Deutch as a (Jewish!) bakery owner named Rachel Meyer and Kendrick Sampson as handsome writer Ethan. After Rachel’s boyfriend is hit by a taxi exiting Tiffany’s and helped by Ethan, who has just purchased an engagement ring at the store, the two end up accidentally switching gift bags. Hijinks ensue, romantic connections are made, the holiday season is bright and merry. This is the best new movie in this genre I have seen in quite awhile and I am so grateful to my dear friend Alison for bringing its existence to my attention. Absolutely recommend. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
The “Beanie Babies” episode of “You’re Wrong About” with Jamie Loftus, which was bountiful with weird nuggets about the truly strange and unpleasant man behind Beanie Babies, Ty Warner, and also informed me that I was the only kid who, like, played with her Beanie Babies. (I had maybe three of them, and I thought they were so cuddly and fun. I have always lacked the entrepreneurship gene, and occasionally — very occasionally — it saves me from bad investment ideas.) -Claire
The latest episode (#50) of “Heavyweight,” about a man named Nick, grief, music, and the bonds that tie even the most unlikely of friends together. Jonathan Goldstein is just so very good at what he does. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Leggings and sweaters, as cozy season is here to stay. After several weeks of feeling that none of my sweaters were truly snuggly enough, I just impulsively bought this enormous Everlane cloud turtleneck. For years I’ve gone for lightly cropped sweaters, but I’m honestly tired of trying to make them work with wide-leg jeans for everyday wear: it’s time for leggings and long, blanket-like sweaters. -Claire
I have never been a statement earrings person, in large part because they are heavy and my ears are very sensitive. But my friend Liv turned me on to Hair Candy by Han’s rainbow (shaped) earrings, and I am officially obsessed. Just bought them in Cobalt Black and Champagne, and can’t wait to use these accessories to dress up otherwise casual outfits. -Emma
Share Rich TextWhy is it so hard to make a decent holiday rom-com that centers Jews?
That is the topic we are exploring on this week’s podcast as we dive into the absolute student-film-esque mayhem of Hulu’s “Menorah In The Middle.” This Hanukkah romantic comedy follows Sarah (Lucy DeVito, daughter of Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman), as she returns to her hometown of Sol Viejo, California for Hanukkah with her goyishe supervillain boyfriend Chad (inexplicably played by Chilean-American actor Cristián de la Fuente). Her parents’ adorable local bakery is struggling, her cute neighbor Ben (Jonah Platt) is hanging around, and oh, did we mention the intermittent troubadour singing? And the Sarah Silverman cameo?
We were hoping “Menorah In The Middle” would be wacky in a fun and highly watchable way. Unfortunately… it was more of a total mess. Virtually none of the characters act remotely like actual human beings, and the wackiness is more distracting than delightful.
But we still appreciate what the movie was trying to do: create a “holiday time” (i.e. Christmastime) movie that centered Jews as full human beings with their own cultural identity. Hallmark and Lifetime have both tried in the last few years to integrate Jews into their Christmas movie content, with mixed results. It’s hard to do well, in large part because the way we as secular Americans think about “the holidays” is, at its core, centered around Christianity.
And yet, some of the most iconic American Christmas cultural content was created by Jews. Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer? A Jewish creation. Jewish composers and songwriters also brought us “Rockin’ Around The Christmas Tree,” “Holly Jolly Christmas,” “Let It Snow,” “It’s The Most Wonderful Time of the Year,” and “White Christmas.” (Composer Irving Berlin wrote all of the music for the film “Holiday Inn,” and “White Christmas” was such a breakout that a whole movie was crafted around it.) More recently, Rob Reiner and Nora Ephron, both Jewish, created iconic holiday-centric rom-coms like “When Harry Met Sally,” “Sleepless In Seattle,” and “You’ve Got Mail.”
The point is that Jews have long brought their Jewishness — themes of community, of otherness, of isolation and the ways in which that isolation can be solved by forming new connections — to the entertainment we associate with the holiday season. That’s why we want more (and better!) than “Menorah In The Middle.”
In this episode, we go through all of “Menorah In The Middle’s” completely unhinged details, as well as the bigger themes it brings up. And we rate it out of 10 flaky pieces of rugelach. Hope you enjoy!
Stay tuned: Next week we will be watching and recapping “The Spirit of Christmas,” Emma’s absolute favorite made-for-TV Christmas rom-com.
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been reading…
We’ve been recording so much in preparation for taking a holiday break that my reading has seriously been lacking. I have however found time to read all of the chatter about Something Navy founder Arielle Charnas and the (somewhat unexciting) Business Insider piece that recently published about her seemingly failing business. Even when I’m exhausted, I love some gossip. -Emma
Like Emma said, it’s been a weirdly hectic month. Holiday movies don’t take exhaustive notes on themselves, as I had imagined! So I am another week closer to self-inflicted illiteracy. I did read some coverage of the dreadful “Twitter Files” threads from the hacks Elon Musk hired to comb through his own company’s internal documents, and Eric Levitz’s New York Mag piece was clarifying and appropriately withering. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
I finally started Netflix’s “Wednesday” after my friend Laura Bassett described it to me as “perfect.” I’m about halfway through and I can attest that it is a very good time. Jenna Ortega is a god damn delight as Wednesday Addams, and I love that Christina Ricci (our OG Wednesday) has a supporting role. It’s creepy and funny and has some of that great teen romance I love. Plus… a murder mystery. What could be more fun? -Emma
I’ve been deep in screener-land (did you know “You” returns to Netflix in February? And “Emily in Paris” in just a couple weeks? *eyes emoji*) whenever I’m not plowing through holiday movies, and boy, is it a festive mixture. I’ve also now reached the point of “Sister Wives” hysteria where I pore through sneak peeks of each episode for signs that Janelle will leave Kody come Sunday. I just want Kody’s dream of being a polygamist patriarch to finally be crushed! -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
The latest season of “Articles of Interest,” which is focused on the history and cultural impact of Ivy style, the forefather of preppy. Avery Trufelman does a fascinating deep dive on the origins and iterations of this style, taking listeners from the docks of New York City to 1960s Japan. She deftly argues that Ivy style, once the uniform of elite male college students at Princeton, has become so ubiquitous that today we simply see these pieces as basics that transcend trend. If you like clothes and history, this pod is absolutely worth a listen. -Emma
I saw that the “If Books Could Kill” pod had launched a Patreon for paywalled episodes about Substacks, so I obviously hit “subscribe” so fast I almost broke a nail. The first episode, about Bari Weiss’s Substack, was a delightfully illuminating conversation about a pundit I had almost managed to forget about, until her abysmal installment of the Twitter Files dropped. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
My favorite wintertime candle, the Apotheke Charcoal candle, which is currently on sale at J.Crew. Trust me, it makes your home smell HEAVENLY. Also, I bought a refill of my favorite concealer, the Ilia True Skin Serum concealer, which I absolutely love for covering up minor blemishes and brightening my under eyes. -Emma
My son celebrates his birthday, Hanukkah, AND Christmas every December, so allow me to recommend the Melissa and Doug tabletop easel, which has made him a very happy almost-three-year-old. I also just replenished the whole family’s winter socks with a shipment from Bombas, and they really do live up to the hype. -Claire
Share Rich TextOur wonderful friend Esmé Weijun Wang, a brilliant writer and teacher, is offering a webinar for writers on December 17 that will help you reflect on 2022 and get ready for 2023 (something we all desperately need right now) and we’re spreading the word! Here’s info about the event:
What’s the difference between stepping into 2023 with a confident, step-by-step, and flexible plan for how to approach your writing life… and spending the new year tangled up in worries about your limitations and tied up in The State of the World Today?
I’m Esmé Weijun Wang and I’m teaching a webinar next month called Looking Back & Intention-Setting for 2023: A Workshop for Writers, and the best thing about it is that it untangles the knots of your weird and wild 2022—and smooths out the confusion about approaching 2023—in one actionable, clearly defined get-together with me and other writers with limitations like you. (Because it’s heart-healing to spend time with other people who understand what it’s like to be overly aware of your body and/or mind.)
You’ll be answering questions about the last year, defining your limitations, and making clear your goals for 2023 so that you can approach the new year with a step-by-step plan that can adjust to flares of illness, unexpected health crises, and… well, the situations that happen in life that make you set up an autoresponder that says, “Due to this thing that I wasn’t expecting, I’m being much slower about emails right now.” And you’ll feel more certain and confident about the year to come, while being sure to look back at exactly what happened in 2022. Because it was a lot!
Whether you’re a successful working writer or someone who wants to write more than you currently do, you’ll reflect and plan for 2022 in a way that hits goals that make sense for your life—and feels as good as a cozy, beautifully knitted shawl.
This workshop taught by Esmé will be at 11 AM PT, December 17, 2022. Learn more, and sign up, right here (https://bit.ly/writers2023).
Bio: Esmé Weijun Wang is a novelist and essayist. She is the author of the New York Times-bestselling essay collection, The Collected Schizophrenias (2019), and a debut novel, The Border of Paradise. She was named by Granta as one of the “Best of Young American Novelists” on its decennial list in 2017 and won the Whiting Award in 2018. Born in the Midwest to Taiwanese parents, she is the founder of The Unexpected Shape™ Writing Academy for ambitious writers living with limitations. She can be found at esmewang.com.
Another week, another Netflix holiday movie with two dead moms, a daughter who desperately longs for her hot dad to find her a new mom, a privileged princess who learns to be domestic stepmother goddess material… and a former teen idol playing a starring role.
In “Falling for Christmas,” Lindsay Lohan swept us off our feet, reminding us why she was a star to begin with. In “Christmas With You,” ex-heartthrob Freddie Prinze Jr. steps into the crimson glow of the Netflix spotlight. And it’s… fine. It’s really fine. But he’s not really the star. Instead, it’s Aimee Garcia, playing the glamorous (but lonely) pop icon Angelina Costa, who grabs the eye whenever she’s onscreen.
Angelina, a J.Lo-esque diva who hasn’t had a hit — or much inspiration — in a few years, is stunned when her label director Barry insists that she produce a Christmas single in a matter of days. At a creative standstill and humiliated by her rapid fall from grace at the label, Angelina decides she needs to connect with her fans. So she and her manager spontaneously visit a young fan, Christina, who made a video tribute to Angelina and her own late mother. And, believe it or not, they get snowed in! Forced to spend the night with Christina and her adorable music teacher father Miguel (Freddie Prinze Jr.), she quickly connects with Miguel over songwriting and asks him to collaborate on her Christmas track. And maybe… fall in love? Only her PR fauxmance with a hot telenovela star and the demands of her fast-paced entertainment career could possibly stand in the way!
In this episode, we recap every beat of this holiday flick, assess Freddie Prinze Jr.’s hot dad energy (final ruling: let him be dapper before the big gala scene! you’re leaving way too much dapperness on the shelf here!), review Angelina’s music, contemplate how hard it would be to write a pop hit ourselves, and rate the movie out of 10 original holiday bops. Hope you enjoy!
Stay tuned: Next week we will be watching and recapping the Hulu flick “Menorah in the Middle.”
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been reading…
It has been a truly fallow period in my reading life. I have to admit the thing I’ve spent the most time reading lately is the Sister Wives subreddit, because Kody (the most prominent polygamist follower of the Curly Girl Method) is such a consummate reality TV villain this season that I have succumbed to the troubling urge to read endless threads of people ripping him a new one. Also, the holidays are not a calm time when you have a toddler who was born in December and who celebrates both Hanukkah AND Christmas. Please send me enough focus to read literally five pages of a book this week. -Claire
I just started my bud Kase Wickman’s new book about the history and cultural impact of “Bring It On,” and it is truly so much fun! The title gives you a hint at the upbeat, cheeky and sharp tone of the book: “Bring It On: The Complete Story of the Cheerleading Movie That Changed, Like, Everything (No, Seriously).” -Emma
We’ve been watching…
Now that the election is (mostly) over, my husband and I are occasionally able to squeeze in some TV over dinner. We’ve been alternating “White Lotus” and “Fleishman Is In Trouble,” one of which I feel has grown almost alarmingly lurid (and very impressed with its own freshman-seminar-level insights on gender) and the other of which I find weirdly boring, and yet both of which I absolutely love devouring with a sleeve of cookies. -Claire
It will come as a surprise likely to no one that my boyfriend and I are also watching these same two shows. I am thoroughly enjoying both. I also watched Hallmark’s “Ghosts of Christmas Always,” at the suggestion of Davita in our Substack subscriber chat. It was, as she said it would be, “bewilderingly delightful.” -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Crooked City: The Emerald Triangle,” a podcast by a journalist who began investigating after he heard that his high school friend was the main suspect in a brutal murder. The crime took place in a stretch of rural Northern California where massive amounts of marijuana are produced, and the victim and suspects were all involved in the as-yet illegal industry. It’s packed with true crime pod tropes — the purple descriptions, folksy needle drops, even wishful references to being like Hunter S. Thompson — but I have found myself sucked in despite it. -Claire
The “If Books Could Kill” episode about Neil Strauss’ The Game, the book that permanently made “neg” a part of our mainstream vernacular. I continue to love Peter and Michael’s wry observations, and though I would not have immediately thought of The Game as a classic airport book, the more I thought about it, the more it made sense. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
The Black Friday sales really did me in… so many purchases, and now so many returns of things that didn’t work. But two pant-set purchases (formal and bedroom casual) made the cut: The posy navy pant and buttondown set from Hill House, and these patterned waffle-knit PJs from Madewell. (Per reviews, I sized up one, and I’m glad I did.) It’s pants season, and I’m ready to have all my limbs covered and cozy. -Claire
I too have been in a frenzy of sorting through deliveries and inevitable returns from my Black Friday blackout. But I did buy two beauty tools that I feel very excited about and will *not* be returning. First, the Shark FlexStyle has truly changed my life. If you haven’t heard about this magical hair tool, it is essentially just the Shark version of the Dyson Airwrap, except instead of $600, it’s between $250 and $280, depending on how many attachments you need. I went with the pick 3 option and got the paddle brush, round brush and curling attachments and holy shit this thing works so well! My hair takes forever to dry and curl, and doesn’t hold a curl well, and this product solves for both of those issues. Of course there’s still a bit of a learning curve involved, and it’s not a 5-minute process, but it dries my hair way faster than other hair dryers and allows me to add some really salon-worthy waves if I want to without using any product.
My second rec for the week is the Solawave. My skin is super reactive, and I have long struggled with adult cystic acne, especially around my periods, so I am always up to try anything that might help me calm that shit down. I got the red light therapy wand which is supposed to target minor wrinkles, fine lines, dark circles, blemishes, and dark spots, and the Bye Acne tool which lets you target small areas on your face where you get frequent breakouts. I have only been using them for about a week, and skin stuff is so hard to review because everyone’s skin is different / I am not an expert, but I do think it’s made a difference. I’ve seen my cystic bumps recede more quickly, and I have also just enjoyed adding something quick and relaxing to my skincare routine. -Emma
Share Rich TextThe Lohanaissance has arrived and it feels so good.
For the two of us, Lindsay Lohan was synonymous with the best parts of girlhood when we were growing up. Her bright red hair and visible freckles were icons in their own right. She was there with us navigating sibling relationships (“The Parent Trap”), parental relationships (“Freaky Friday”), and friendships (“Mean Girls”). We grew up alongside Lindsay, and then watched as the media delighted in her fall from grace, her struggles with addiction, her difficult transition from child star to whatever comes next.
But now it’s 2022, and a lot has changed for the women of the “Bimbo Summit.” Britney is free, Paris is bringing awareness to abuses in the “troubled teen industry,” and Lindsay is back on our screens, charming as ever. And we are *extremely* here for it.
“Falling For Christmas” is a delicious candy cane of a movie. It’s the first of Lindsay Lohan’s multi-film deal with Netflix. Lindsay plays spoiled hotel heiress Sierra Belmont, who gets into a ski accident after an engagement shoot with her influencer boyfriend goes very wrong, and wakes up with amnesia. A down-on-his-luck local lodge owner, Jake, takes her in and (duh!) sparks fly as Sierra learns to appreciate the less luxurious things in life.
Is it formulaic? For sure. Full of completely absurd plot holes and details? Absolutely. Is it a whole lot of fun, thanks in large part to Lindsay? Also yes. We had so much fun watching “Falling For Christmas” and discussing it, and we hope you enjoy our chat just as much. Xo
Programming note: We will be taking the week off for Thanksgiving, so no episode next week! We will be back in two weeks.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
Jessica Valenti’s terrifying and essential newsletter, Abortion, Every Day by Jessica Valenti. So much is going on in this country that it can be easy to just tune it out for our own self-preservation. Jessica's newsletter tells us not to do that, to stare at the ugliness right in the face, and then figure out what the hell to do about it. -Emma
In what marks a real low point for my reading trajectory, I can’t remember reading anything this week. I must have, right? I’ll read when cold and flue season is over. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
Finally started season two of “White Lotus.” (It is one of the few shows that my boyfriend will happily watch with me, so I like to save it for us to enjoy together.) Sometimes the sophomore season of a buzzy show disappoints. But so far, this season slaps. Some of the themes (like the class divide) remain, but it feels like this season is diving deeper into gender and sexuality. I’m especially loving Meghann Fahy (shout out to my “Bold Type” stans!) and Aubrey Plaza as Daphne and Harper, respectively. Anyone else feel like one of them is going to murder someone? -Emma
“Turning Red,” the 2022 animated movie about Mei Lee, a Chinese-Canadian 13-year-old who has spent her life as the perfect daughter and student — until she starts transforming into a red panda whenever she she feels a strong emotion. The strong aughts energy (it’s 2002 and Mei is a boy band stan) really brings me back to my own adolescence, and it’s a sweet, heartfelt exploration of growing up and exploring your independence. Also, the toddler is home sick again so I’ve watched it around seven times, conservatively. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
I’ve been really enjoying the first two episodes of the “Infamous” podcast, about Girls Gone Wild and its predatory founder, Joe Francis. Hosted by journalist Vanessa Grigoriadis, who covered Francis in the early aughts, it’s fascinating. -Emma
Nothing new this week, but I do have all the boy band songs from “Turning Red” seared into my brain now. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
Yes, it is the one time a year when all of Hill House goes on a 30% off sale, and yes of course I did purchase this tartan Tatiana skirt and this navy Sylvie sweater dress as a result. (Also… I’ve been *swooning* over their new party platforms.) -Emma
Ugh, yeah, I got the whole family matching PJs, which I guess means I’m now the Instamommy I never dreamed of becoming. I promise not to hire a photographer to take pictures of us having a pillow fight in them. -Claire
Share Rich Text“Love Is Blind” came to a crashing conclusion on Wednesday, with a dramatic finale and a still-more dramatic reunion. Some people said no, some people said yes; some couples showed up to the reunion looking relaxed and happy while others showed up with more of a “blink twice if you need help” vibe. Accusations were made about clementines and lies. Deleted footage was aired out. The Cole and Zanab storyline, in particular, has polarized the audience, with each garnering floods of passionate defenders and haters. We’re passionately in favor of everyone going to therapy after this, especially Cole and Zanab. (And Colleen. Love you, girl.)
It was the most dramatic “Love Is Blind” yet, which is saying something after a season that featured ultimate reality show villain Shake. We’re conflicted about what that means for the show: the more compelling it is, the more it leans into conflict that demoralizes real people, and leads to their real demonization. With “Love Is Blind” ascendant in the space, its major players are reaping the social platform boosts, but also the overwhelming hate and harassment, that “Bachelor” franchise contestants long have.
There was a lot to digest, and so this recap is objectively our most unwieldy pod yet — we almost released it in two more wieldy parts, but ultimately decided we couldn’t wait with our reunion takes. It’s a long pod, but we enjoyed every minute of taping it, and we hope you enjoy our hot takes, slightly petty jokes, and lively debates. Happy “LIB” finale week! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
I started “Buying Beverly Hills,” which is sort of like “Selling Sunset” except about The Agency. The Agency is another LA-headquartered luxury real estate firm founded by Mauricio Umansky, best known as Kyle Richards’ husband from RHOBH. You really just love to see rich reality stars out here building their empire. I can already tell I’m going to binge all of it. -Emma
Netflix’s latest cult/scam documentary, “Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste.” It tracks the rise and fall of the self-anointed sexual healer Nicole Daedone and her company OneTaste, which promised people better living through better sex. The organization offered workshops, classes, and gatherings centered around what Daedone called “stroking” or "OMing” (short for orgasmic meditation) — essentially a standardized, ritualistic approach to stimulating a woman’s clitoris. The company, and the charismatic Daedone, attracted a fervent community, media buzz, and floods of investment dollars. But beneath the girl-power, sex-positive gloss, OneTaste was, according to some ex-followers, turning into a sexually coercive space that, despite its focus on the female orgasm, actually urged women to cater to men’s sexual desires — even violent and nonconsensual ones.
It was a disturbing watch, with some fair if not entirely groundbreaking points about how female leadership doesn’t necessarily prevent toxic power dynamics and sexual exploitation within an organization. It also contains a fair amount of sexually explicit material drawn from footage of OneTaste events, which prompted a lawsuit from some former members. It was compelling, and I hope that the victims who told their stories in the documentary felt that it properly honored their stories, but at times it did feel ethically questionable that film itself made lurid use of the same sexually titillating experiences that it purported to critique. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
My reading has really fallen off this week. There was simply too much “Love is Blind” and too much election anxiety. I have however, been unable to stop thinking about this The Cut piece I read recently, “Could Thin Be In Again?” Michelle Santiago Cortés explores the resurgence of an online culture most millennial women are probably painfully aware of: the fetishization of extreme thinness and extreme weight loss. I found it to be a deeply stressful and depressing read, but also a deeply important one. I kept asking myself, how do we stop this shit from wreaking havoc on us all…. again? -Emma
Who has time to read a book these days? Not me, I’m afraid! Once again I’m resorting to reading about books instead. Last week I recommended Brandon Taylor’s great essay on “character vapor,” and this week, an essay from the excellent writer Lincoln Michel digging into what Taylor called “trite physicality” a bit more deeply. The clichéd physical details they discuss — Taylor often, hilariously, bemoans characters “toeing off their shoes”; I also loathe the needless outfit descriptions Michel mentions — are one of my great pet peeves in fiction, and Michel has some great points about why this may happen. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
“If Books Could Kill,” a fab new pod from our former colleague Michael Hobbes, who also co-hosts “Maintenance Phase.” In this new show, which only has one episode out so far, but I devoured it, Michael and his co-host, Peter Shamshiri, dissect the pop science “airport books” that topped bestsellers lists and proliferated some pretty fucking terrible ideas in the process! First up? “Freakonomics.” -Emma
I also immediately listened to the first episode of “If Books Could Kill”!! In addition to Michael’s resumé, I wanted to note that Peter Shamshiri is one of the cohosts of the lacerating Supreme Court pod “5-4,” making this a kind of dream collab of two of my favorite podcasters. Not to mention a dream topic: overhyped nonfiction. I never read “Freakonomics,” despite the best efforts of my high school econ teacher. But its cultural impact was so profound that I found I was familiar with a lot of the concepts it peddled, in which Michael and Peter delightfully poke holes. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
I made two fun and frivolous purchases recently: A Fenty Beauty Gloss Bomb lip gloss in Fenty Glow (it’s Sephora sale time and I had seen this gloss recommended all over the internet!), and this silk corset top from Abercrombie, which is a great dupe for a more pricey Reformation one. -Emma
My brother-in-law’s wedding is approaching, so obviously a tiny H&M suit for our toddler to wear in some family photos! I also snagged a navy tulle Ellie secondhand to wear to the wedding, and I can’t wait to wear it with some burgundy heels and a bold lip. (I will NEVER participate in the dark-liner-shiny-gloss lip trend.) -Claire
Share Rich TextIt’s the (not quite) end of the road for the couples of “Love Is Blind” season 3.
Episodes 8, 9 and 10 follow our five couples through the last 10 days leading up to their weddings. It’s always fascinating to watch how the Love Is Blind relationships often find an equilibrium at this point. The couples have been together for a month. They know what they love about their partners and what annoys the crap out of them. They know how to push each other’s buttons, and they have been confronted by the opinions of their closest friends and family members.
For some, it seems like this final stretch provides the chance to exhale and just enjoy. Bartise and Nancy turn a corner (though we suspect that doesn’t mean anything for their longevity as a couple), and SK and Raven have some of their easiest and most romantic moments. Alexa and Brennon continue to be the epitome of stability, while Cole and Zanab and Colleen and Matt seem to be the most overtly conflicted about whether to move forward with a marriage.
A lot of action is packed into this penultimate batch of episodes: We get some forced romantic outings (permanent bracelets! love locks!) and last-chance dates, as well as some pre-wedding rituals. They all go wedding clothes shopping, have group bachelor and bachelorette parties, and, of course, we get to see SK and Raven’s wedding, and half of Bartise and Nancy’s. As always, we had a *lot* to say about it all.
It’s hard to watch some of these couples struggle with what seems like fundamental incompatibilities; the type of things that are simply impossible to know about a person when you are just having deep conversations through the pod walls. Yes, an emotional connection is important to the health of a longterm relationship, but so are so many other things. Will your partner’s family members embrace you? Do you have opposite communication styles when in conflict? Does your partner insist on shooting a Nerf gun while chicken is cooking in hot oil on the stovetop?
We explore all of these questions (and much more) on this week’s LIB3 recap. Hope you enjoy! Xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
My new thing apparently is reading half of a book and then putting it down for a month and then going back to it? So finally into the latter half of Sloane Crosley’s Cult Classic, and I continue to REALLY enjoy it. Love me some magical realism in New York City. -Emma
I am stalled out right now. The pace of Bachelor in Paradise and Love Is Blind, plus Tell Me Lies, two toddler sick days last week, and a Halloween half-day for a daycare parade and trick-or-treating have left me perpetually scrambling. In lieu of reading any books, I read Brandon Taylor’s latest essay for Sweater Weather, “Against Character Vapor,” which examines how contemporary and modernist fiction engage (or don’t) with characters’ physical forms. Though I like a lot of the novels he critiques, it’s a compelling read, puts words to some writing tics that irritate me as well, and maybe even persuaded me a little bit. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
In honor of Halloween, I watched “The Craft” all the way through for the first time in… decades? The perfect ‘90s aesthetics! The grunge soundtrack! A perfect, dark, twisty, witchy rewatch. -Emma
The premiere of “White Lotus,” season 2 (Italian edition)! Jennifer Coolidge is back as Tanya, an unfulfilled heiress, now rather unhappily married to Greg, her fling from season 1; Aubrey Plaza and Meghann Fahy are also here as the wildly dissimilar wives of two old college friends, one of whom is now a tech billionaire. I’m obsessed with the casting, and I only hope the rest of the season is as fun as the first episode. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
Friend of the pod (and IRL friend) Jacqueline Trumbull’s raw, honest, compassionate episode of “A Little Help For Our Friends” about her decision to end her engagement. It takes a lot of maturity and bravery to be so open about such a difficult and personal decision, and it was a beautiful listen. -Emma
I have been catching up on some more politically geared podcasts in my queue, and with the midterms rapidly approaching (and in some cases, already taking place!), it’s a stark reminder of how much is at stake in this election, and how likely it is that Republicans will make consequential gains. I’ve been listening to Supreme Court pod “Five Four” on the independent state legislature theory, a once-fringe legal theory conservatives are diligently working to leverage in order to overturn future elections, and “Know Your Enemy” on the crucial importance of winning political battles at the state level to preserve democracy across the country. Abortion is on the ballot; trans lives are on the ballot; democracy is on the ballot. Please vote! -Claire
We’ve been buying…
Shoes! I caved and decided to get back into Uggs after seeing my boyfriend’s sister wearing a particularly cute pair, the Neumel Suede Platform booties. They are so cozy and give you some height, which as a short lady, I very much appreciate. I also have been on a search for a not-wildly-expensive pair of lug sole loafers, and I finally bit the bullet and ordered these Massimo Dutti ones. (I love that they have a gold accent, a nice dupe for the Gucci ones.) They’re gorgeous, and although they’re a little wide for my narrow feet, a simple shoe insert did the trick. Can’t wait to rock them with some visible white socks. -Emma
Some new fall gels from Color Camp! I kind of love the warm, orangey browns that are everywhere this fall, so I’m obsessed with my new caramel nails, but also this crochet-inspired design.
I was (full disclosure) having some issues with my gel press-ons for a bit this summer: I’d remove them to find that I had green under one or two of my nails. This is apparently a kind of fungal infection (ahhhh!), and though it was painless and went away once I left my nails bare, it was obviously disgusting and bad. No one seemed to be talking about this!! No warnings, nothing!! But I did some research and made some changes (dry prep instead of soaking nails before pushing back my cuticles, using nail dehydrator before applying, getting a good nail glue with a brush applicator for even glue coverage) and haven’t had a problem since. If you’re still reading this and want to try at-home gel press-ons, bear in mind that ANY water trapped under a fake nail for a couple weeks can lead to infections. Dehydrate those nails! -Claire
Share Rich TextHappy Halloween, beloveds! Gather round the campfire, because we sure have a spooky story for you: a tale of a sweet, naive college freshman who stumbles into an entanglement with the wrong man. A man with a dark past and a penchant for seduction. A man so addicted to fucking around, he’s driving his life straight into a ditch.
In short, we both ripped through Hulu’s sordid series “Tell Me Lies,” based on the 2018 novel by Carola Lovering, which wrapped up this week with a shocking finale that already has us clamoring for a second season. As a TV show, it’s far from perfect; as a period piece set in 2007 (our own college days!) it sadly leaves much to be desired. As a creepy, steamy binge, it fits the bill, as long as you don’t worry too much about the details.
The series follows Lucy (Grace Van Patten), a freshman at an upstate NY liberal arts college in 2007, who falls hard and fast for Stephen (Jackson White), a junior with “bad boy” oozing from his pores. Stephen pursues Lucy diligently, but he also withholds commitment and seems to be hiding things from her, which only makes her work harder to keep him interested. Meanwhile, her roommate Macy dies in a tragic car accident before classes even begin, and it soon emerges that some people on campus know more about the circumstances of her death than it initially seemed. Is Stephen a wounded but worthy soul, or a fuckboy beyond redemption? Will their relationship bring out Lucy’s best, or drag her down to the depths?
On this episode, we discuss the aesthetic of 2007 (side parts and flat-irons, dark eyeliner and tunics) and what appears to be the show’s choice not to embrace it. We also unpack the show’s exploration of emotional abuse both in families and between romantic partners, and its lurid depiction of the evils of hook-up culture. We hope you enjoy, and remember: stay safe out there. Fuckboys are everywhere.
P.S. Remember to vote!! Look up your early voting polling place and get out there. Even scarier than an FBoy is a racist, xenophobic, misogynist nutjob running your state and local government.
Share Rich TextToto, we’re not in Malibu anymore!
That’s right y’all, it’s time for our 5 (moderately) happy, newly-engaged couples to head back to Dallas, move into their show-appointed neutrally-decorated apartments, and commence the grueling labor of coupledom.
This week’s batch of episodes was so meaty that we found it difficult to discuss them in a concise and coherent manner. Some scenes felt like they needed entire podcast episodes, like the knotty conversation that Bartise and Nancy have about abortion rights, or the massive blow-up fight that Matt and Colleen have and then quickly try to paper over. Plus, predictably, both Bartise and Cole continued to act a fool after realizing that the other women they had pursued in the pods, were in fact, also hot.
Luckily for our cold dead hearts, which have been beaten down even further by this season of Bachelor In Paradise, we also got some sweetness in these episodes. Alexa and Brennon continue their reign as the golden couple, even as their differences become more pronounced, and SK and Raven’s slow burn has turned into a moderately hot flame.
Who are our top 3 enemies? Who rose up the ranks in our should-they-get-married ratings? Listen and enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
After a break, I went back to Gabrielle Zevin’s “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow” and read the last two-thirds of it on one rainy Sunday afternoon. I couldn’t put it down, and I spent the last 100-ish pages weeping. It’s so very beautiful. Don’t let the gaming premise turn you off, this is a must-read. -Emma
I’m still reading “Nevada” by Imogen Binnie, though I’ve been on something of an enforced break. Max has had a bad cold, so not only was our weekend more chaotic than usual (postnasal drip does not put toddlers in a good mood any more than it does adults, and they can’t use decongestants) but he missed a couple days of daycare. My fun reading is the first thing to drop off the agenda, but I’m hoping to get back to it soon!
I also read Lila Shapiro on the lawsuit Moira Donegan is facing over the Shitty Media Men list, which disturbingly appears poised to go to trial. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
Taylor Swift’s “Midnights.” Duh. I’ve been especially obsessed with the 3am tracks, specifically in “Could’ve Would’ve Should’ve,” her musical excoriation of John Mayer, who she dated at 19 when he was 32. “Give me my back my girlhood / It was mine first.” Devastating. -Emma
We’ve all been listening to “Midnights,” which for some reason has emerged as the Taylor album I am least likely to skip tracks on. Maybe I’m just becoming more patient in my old age and letting her quieter tracks have a chance to creep up on me, or maybe I love the blend of indie rock influences and synthy pop — somehow I even enjoy the cringe tracks like “Vigilante Shit.” (It’s because I, like Taylor, am cringe.) -Claire
We’ve been watching…
Honestly haven’t had time to watch anything this week other than BIP, Love Is Blind and a little bit of Tell Me Lies. Pretty cool that I got to do all of that for work. -Emma
The upside of Max’s cold is that we’ve all had a chance to get into “Encanto.” The first couple times we tried it, he found it pretty overstimulating, but now he is obsessed. And so am I. He gets to watch chunks of it while he does his many inhaler sessions, or when he’s too miserable to play with toys, and I think I enjoy it as much as he does. The plot holes are starting to get to me a bit (why does Tia Pepa affect the weather easily enough to summon a whole hurricane on her wedding day, but in the actual movie we only see tiny little clouds directly over her? Mostly I have a lot of questions about Tia Pepa) but it’s just so fun and packed with earworms. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
It will come to absolutely no one’s surprise that I indulged in a little Hill House holiday-wear. I love this soft blackwatch tartan pattern, and got the Louisa dress and the Evelyn, both perfect for taking a fall stroll / grabbing a meal out / podcasting from your bedroom. All the versatility I need for my current lifestyle. (LOL.) -Emma
Ugh, same. I wear my tartan Ellies around the house constantly in the winter, so it was easy to convince myself that I needed more. I got a Caroline, and it’s like being swaddled in a soft, light blanket. For those who need to look nice outside of their homes, perhaps at parties or even a fashion-forward office, I recommend the mod Araminta — I’ve never felt more beautiful in a statement sleeve or a shift dress. (I never need to dress up, so mine is going back, but not without a pang!)
I also saw that Rifle Paper Co. was having a sale on 2023 planners, so I went ahead and got the 2023 version of my current planner, which I love. The promotion appears to be over, but a few individual planners are still discounted. I’m more an organizational aspirant than a rigorous organizer, but this planner has just the right balance of calendar space, general note-taking space, and to-do list space for my fairly basic needs. -Claire
Share Rich TextWe love a pod love pod here at Rich Text, so we were ready as hell for season 3 of “Love Is Blind” to kick off this week and we’re already back on our bullshit (making pods about pods).
Season 3: Dallas edition, which is dropping just a month after the season 2 “Love Is Blind: After the Altar” special and associated divorce announcements proved the Chicago experiment a bust, hopes to restore our faith in blind speed dating. Can Vanessa Lachey and her statement sleeves (and, less importantly, her husband Nick) help these lonely hearts find love sight unseen?
The first four episodes introduce us to our main daters (e.g. the ones who end up getting engaged and participating in the rest of the show), follow a few love triangle clusters, and see our newly betrothed couples head off to Malibu for a luxury getaway.
At this stage, season 3 might be the least dramatic season yet, with no apparent second-choice engagements, love triangles that linger past the pod stage, or interpersonal drama. That doesn’t mean people don’t find ways to act foolish (doing a loud set of jumping jacks while a potential fiancé shares a painful family story, for example) or say gross things (“I’m gonna pump a couple kids in you,” FOR EXAMPLE), but the season feels a bit gentler and more mature.
One thing was a particularly refreshing change after a season 2 fraught with fatphobia, negative body talk, and weight loss backstories: not only are the contestants presented as less fixated on thinness, we actually see a plus-size woman, Alexa Alfia, who embraces her own body and its beauty and who has a blissful love story in the pods.
If you’ve watched already or if you just want to hear the breakdown, here’s our full recap. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“Nevada,” by Imogen Binnie. I’ve been listening to the Missing Pages podcast Emma mentioned a few newsletters ago, and while it hasn’t necessarily been my favorite podcast ever (for one thing, I’m already pretty familiar with all the big literary scandals and mysteries from covering the book world for half a decade and writing innumerable listicles about the industry), I enjoyed Binnie’s interview on an episode about J.T. Leroy. It got me curious about Binnie’s own cult classic, which was recently reissued by FSG. The novel follows Maria, an almost-30 trans woman who has a miserable job at a Very Famous Indie Bookstore in New York, a rapidly imploding relationship with a long-term girlfriend she used to love, and a brewing internal crisis over her inability to connect with her own feelings and needs. It’s provocative, scathing, and deeply jaded — Maria is even bored with her own traumas and vulnerable places. It’s often uncomfortable reading, in the best possible way. -Claire
Jamelle Bouie’s NYTimes op-ed, “Jim Crow Should Have Made One Thing Clear,” about lessons we all need to take on board from our own nation’s history as we head closer and closer towards terrifying authoritarianism. The whole column is a must read, but this paragraph stopped me in my tracks:
As we look to a November in which a number of vocal election deniers are poised to win powerful positions in key swing states, I think that the great degree to which authoritarianism is tied up in the American experience — and the extent to which we’ve been trained not to see it, in accordance with our national myths and sense of exceptionalism — makes it difficult for many Americans to really believe that democracy as we know it could be in serious danger. In other words, too many Americans still think it can’t happen here, when the truth is that it already has and may well again.
Please please please make sure you are registered to vote, and get yourself and your communities to the polls in November. Our lives and our democracy depends on it. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
I finished “Partner Track” this week. It was a treasure trove of memes for me, given that the villain has exactly the same name as my brother (who is not villainous at all) and the script is littered with gems like “I just want to punch Dan Fallon in his smug, pretentious face,” so I had to see it through. But genuinely, to me, “Partner Track” is an “Emily in Paris”-level binge: so much is going badly (the acting, the writing, the corny plot twists, the often clunky if well-meaning treatment of social justice issues) that it’s impossible to look away. Honestly, get me another season of “Partner Track” to watch alongside Emily’s Parisian adventures — but also, maybe some more actually good shows with quirky female leads. -Claire
The first episode of the new season of “The Vow.” Did this NXIVM docu-series need a season 2? Probably not. Does it lack interrogation of things like the money that went in and out of the self-help cult? Yes. Will I still be watching it all? Also a yes. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Normal Gossip,” because I always save the new episodes to have as a little treat later and then forget I have them stashed away. This week my absent-mindedness paid off because I got to binge, like, six episodes of “Normal Gossip” and I was LIVING, my friends. Boy band fandom gossip! Family Secret Santa gossip! Gay kickball league gossip! This week I was just swimming around in it, letting it sink into my pores. The Telephone Game episode, a time-lapse compilation of the weekly guests playing an extended game of telephone with an anonymized piece of gossip, was perhaps my favorite, just because it is SO INSTRUCTIVE about not just the fact that gossip DOES get twisted with each retelling, but how and why those changes happen. -Claire
The first episode of a new pod series about the rise and fall of pop famous church Hillsong. “Hillsong: A Megachurch Shattered” is an investigative seven-part series which is a companion piece to a discovery+ docu-series. So far, it’s gripping. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
The Emilia velvet rose platform heels from the recent Antonio Melani X Nicola Bathie Dillard’s drop. I am planning to wear a certain lilac tulle dress to an upcoming wedding, and they seemed to call for some striking platform heels. I went with the cabernet color to darken my look up for fall, and I love them. However, I am slightly terrified of falling over and/or injuring myself?? Women who wear high high heels are so brave. -Claire
These brown leather knee-high Vince Camuto boots. They have been having a major fall sale, so I got them at a discount and I am so excited to enter my flowy dress / tall boots era! As someone with ~shapely~ calves I thought I simply couldn’t wear knee-high and over-the-knee boots, but it turns out that some brands (like Vince Camuto!) make a ton of their taller boots in wide-calf sizes too. #Bless. -Emma
Share Rich TextIf you are a geriatric or middle-aged millennial woman who loved Scholastic book fairs, you probably have core memories of “Catherine Called Birdy.” The 1994 historical fiction Y.A. novel by Karen Cushman was certainly formative for both of us.
The book follows spirited 14-year-old Birdy, the daughter of a country knight in 1290 England. Her father has decided that it is time to marry her off to the highest bidder, and the novel takes us into Birdy’s diary as she quietly and overtly rages against the gender-based strictures of her time. It is a story that feels both incredibly of the moment that it was published, and simultaneously a timeless tale of transition from girlhood into young adulthood.
On Oct. 7, Lena Dunham’s adaptation of the beloved novel, which stars Bella Ramsey, Billie Piper, Andrew Scott and Joe Alwyn (aka Mr. Taylor Swift), hit Amazon Prime. On this week’s subscribers pod, we dive into the film and the ways in which it stays true to the book and has been updated, with mixed results, as well as why the magic of the story endures, even for readers like us, who are now the age of Birdy’s mother rather than the protagonist herself.
Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
Sloane Crosley’s latest novel, “Cult Classic.” This book is like Emma catnip: a woman in her late 30s, satire about dating culture, and New York City. I love it so much. -Emma
This strangely lovely New Yorker story by Ted Geltner about the real, terrifying car crash that inspired a classic short story. Every turn of the article is unexpected. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
More “Heavyweights.” This week’s episode is a beautiful story about estranged family relationships, the beauty of strangers, and healing generational trauma. -Emma
I finally got into “Missing Pages,” the literary scandal pod Emma recommended a few weeks ago, and it’s already inspired me to buy at least one book. That’s the kind of podcast I can get behind: a podcast that reminds me to shop support my local independent bookstore. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
“Love Is Blind” screeners, which is great because I love having more men I don’t know as low-grade nemeses. Get ready for some wild Friends to Enemies ratings in the weeks to come. -Emma
Netflix’s “Partner Track,” which is pretty terrible, and screeners of “Love Is Blind” season 3, which are exactly what they ought to be. Stay tuned for pods! The season starts dropping soon. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
A classic black belt with a bit of embellishment. I have been trying to buy more neutral pieces lately that can be worn with each other for years to come. In that vein, I purchased this & Other Stories black belt with a gold heart buckle — a much more affordable version of this Saint Laurent one. I’ve already worn it cinched at the waist over dresses and with trousers, and it’s perfect. -Emma
A long quilted liner jacket from Everlane for the cold, wet fall park days we’ve been having. Somehow I never bothered to get myself a really warm, capacious, practical transition jacket, so for the last few springs and falls I’ve resorted to piling on layers of sweaters and light jackets for cold, damp playground days. I read that this jacket runs big, so I sized down one size, and it’s still perfectly oversized and cozy. Also, the weather is now suddenly warm again. But I have no regrets. -Claire
Share Rich TextWe’re back with more answers to more questions! Last week, we published a free episode with our responses to some of the wonderful questions you all sent us about work and work-adjacent topics. Today, in our usual subscribers-only episode, we’re answering some of the more personal and personal-adjacent questions.
How do you make friends in your thirties? How do you stay friends when some of you are having kids, and some of you aren’t? What does feminist parenting look like when you have a son? How did we know our partners were “the ones”? And honestly, how can we continue to wear pants and feel stylish as 30-somethings? We discuss all this and more.
Thank you all so much for asking us so many delightful questions! We hope to do this again sometime. As we continue to figure out what this newsletter/podcast is and should be, we’re always trying to figure out the best mix of TV/movie coverage, cultural trend discussions, and personal conversations about our lifestyles, so let us know in the comments or our inbox what you’d like to see more frequently.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
Still working on “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow,” because I read at a snail’s pace when I’m not on vacation. Too much TV to consume for the pods! -Emma
“I Never Promised You a Rose Garden,” the 1964 Joanne Greenberg novel I mentioned previously, which I finished over the last week. It fulfilled all the promises of Esmé Weijun Wang’s glowing foreword; I found myself constantly wanting to underline and annotate it because its observations about human experience are so sharp and well-formulated. The book follows a teenage girl battling schizophrenia through years of grueling treatments and psychoanalysis at a mental institution, emerging to a hard-fought recovery toward the end, and it is a deeply specific, revelatory book about those experiences. And like any very good, deeply specific book about a certain experience, it captures certain universal feelings all the more vividly. I highly recommend it. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
The new season of “Sister Wives,” after our fave Aubrey Gordon recommended it. True to her review, this season, which shows the slow dissolution of the polygamist Brown family, is a fascinating anthropological document, which explores relationship power dynamics, patriarchy, collective parenting and divorce. -Emma
In addition to the new season of “Sister Wives” (during which I have been reveling in everyone finally turning on Kody), “Reboot,” Hulu’s charming new show about a popular early aughts multi-camera sitcom that gets rebooted by an up-and-coming, edgy filmmaker (Rachel Bloom), who turns out to be harboring a very personal reason to reimagine the comfort-food TV staple as a more complex, daring show. The cast is exceptional (Keegan-Michael Key, Judy Greer, the list goes on), and I’m honestly just glad that we’re finally reckoning with Hollywood’s reboot addiction through the most vital medium of our time: streaming TV comedy. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
The new season of Gimlet’s Heavyweight podcast. Host Jonathan Goldstein is just so smart and thoughtful, and manages to find the most beautiful and intimate stories to tell. Also, his voice is soothing AF. -Emma
Good Cult, a podcast about the personal development cult Lifespring (not yet mentioned in the podcast but an unfun fact: Ginni Thomas was in the group as a young woman and became an anti-cult activist after leaving… until, you know, she got into QAnon). Reported and hosted by River Donaghey, a journalist who grew up in a sort of unlicensed branch of Lifespring. His parents met in an offbrand version of the famous Lifespring organization called Wings and raised him attending its seminars — the podcast touches on his own family’s experiences and delves into the backstory of Lifespring, its leader, and the string of deaths and other disturbing outcomes linked to the intense, confrontational seminars the group offered. Need I say more? -Claire
We’ve been buying…
The most perfect slouchy trousers from Reformation. (I sized up for extra slouchiness, and got the pants in Stone Stripe, but they come in a bunch of colors and petites!) These are the pants that can do it all: go to the office, out for a nice dinner, or paired with chunky sneakers for a daytime fall stroll. -Emma
My Hill House fall order finally arrived, and I’m loving the botanical green crepe Ellie for fall — I do find it hard to layer cotton dresses for the colder months because of how the skirts cling to my tights. (Wait, is this why people wear slips? I’m going to look into this.) Also the Grandpa cardigan in navy. I know it’s pretty boxy for some people, but somehow I find it to be slouchy perfection, and I vastly prefer the pearl buttons to the usual gem-encrusted buttons they use. -Claire
Share Rich TextThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter about cultural obsessions from your Internet BFFs Emma and Claire. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Part 2 of this series will be released for paid subscribers on Monday. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
We asked you, our beloved audience, for questions a few days ago thinking that *maybe* we’d get enough to cobble together one podcast episode. But, as always, our community went above and beyond.
We got so many thoughtful, interesting, probing questions that we decided to break this Q&A into two episodes: One public episode (this one!!) released today, on work and career, podcasting, our favorite books, The Bachelor and other culture. The second part will go out on Monday for paying subscribers only, and will get a bit more personal, as we dig into questions about love and marriage, parenting, 30-something style, and friendship.
Thank you for your questions, and we hope you enjoy!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Planning a family reunion can be stressful, because there are so many ways it can go wrong. Someone gets too drunk. Someone gossips loudly about something they shouldn’t. A few key family members simply opt out altogether which gives everyone even more to gossip about! You know the kind of family we’re talking about… the one where everyone dates everyone else, and then some of them get engaged sight unseen, and then eventually all of them break up?
That kind of family. A reality television family.
That’s right, babies, we’re talking about the cast of the second season of Netflix’s ~experimental~ dating show, “Love Is Blind.” And because any family reunion is bound to be full of chaos, that’s exactly what the second 3-episode “After The Altar” special delivered.
In some ways, the whole thing was kind of a bummer. After all, weeks before the special dropped, both married couples — Iyanna and Jarrette, and Nick and Danielle — announced in quick succession that they would be divorcing. “After The Altar” provides some insight into why Iyanna and Jarrette may not have been fundamentally compatible, but Nick and Danielle’s split remains a mystery. We also see the ways in which on-screen conflicts and the audience reaction to season 2 can work to create festering resentment, which we see play out between Sal and Mallory (and Sal’s extremely-hot-theater-kid-energy new gf!), as well as Natalie and Shayne.
But it’s not all cringey sadness. There is always something comforting about checking in with characters (humans?) who you have grown to feel an affinity to. And we get some heartening updates from Deeps and Kyle… the semi-convincing will-they-or-won’t-they couple.
Either way, we knew what the task was for this viewing. We ranked these characters during the season, so we simply had a duty to check in with our feelings. Some people held steady in our BFF rankings, and others precipitously dropped. Plus, we have a new minor nemesis. Hope you enjoy the episode! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
I am officially obsessed with “Bad Sisters,” the new Apple TV series from Sharon Horgan (of “Catastrophe” brilliance). It’s an adaptation of a Swedish show about five sisters and their nightmare of a brother-in-law. After watching their sister become diminished in an emotionally abusive relationship — and after he enacts his own unique brand of torture upon each of his four sisters-in-law — the sisters decide to take matters into their own hands. Like John Tucker and Earl… John Paul has to die. The show is dark and comedic and full of raw insights on what it looks like to be a woman backed into a corner. -Emma
Season 2 of “Rutherford Falls,” the Peacock comedy about a Native museum curator (Jana Schmieding) who is passionate about preserving her people’s cultural heritage — but whose best friend (Ed Helms) happens to be a clueless scion of the white family that colonized the land generations ago. In season 1, their friendship, and the balance of power in the town, was turned upside-down after a podcaster comes to town and unearths secrets about the history between the town and the (fictional) Minishonka nation. Schmieding is fantastic as Reagan, the self-deprecating but ambitious curator, and it’s wonderful to see a fat, Native woman not only in a starring role, but at the center of an extremely charming love triangle. I didn’t realize it had been picked back up for a second season, but it’s a delightful, easy watch — “Parks and Rec” energy — and I’m glad to have it back in the rotation. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
Finally started Gabrielle Zevin’s “Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow,” and it turns out that the debut novel about two friends who meet as children and go on to become video game designers is just as good as everyone says it is. (Also… the gaming elements should not deter anyone who, like me, has zero interest in gaming.) -Emma
Friend of the pod Esmé Weijun Wang wrote the foreword to a new Penguin Classics edition of Joanne Greenberg’s “I Never Promised You a Rose Garden,” so I had to get it. The title was familiar, but I never knew anything else about the book until I heard about it from Esmé, and it’s absolutely fascinating. An autobiographical novel about a teenage girl, Deborah Blau, who is sent to a mental institution by her desperate parents, the book takes us deep into Deborah’s inner world of Yr, the fantasy realm she first retreated into and then felt trapped within. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
The Mindy Kaling episode of Meghan Markle’s new Spotify podcast, “Archetypes.” She speaks openly about being an unmarried woman in her 40s, professional success, and more. It’s a really beautiful episode, and I have to shout out my BFF (and our OG Here To Make Friends producer!!!) Katelyn Bogucki who is the Executive Producer on the project. I recommend listening with a glass of wine and a good cry. -Emma
I’m just on my usual rotation this week! I think I might be running out of room in my listening schedule for new shows… -Claire
We’ve been buying…
I mean… is it any surprise? There was a new Hill House drop for the beginning of fall, and I snagged a few pieces I am super excited about, including this cozy Grandpa Cardigan in cream (the pearl buttons!!), this wrap skirt in pink (I have this in another pattern/fabric and I really love it), and this “Nap Top,” which I hope will be a good, slightly elevated layering piece, in the artists’ edition print. -Emma
A safety hair-cutting razor and Jayne Matthews’ DIY shag classes! Remember that early part of the pandemic, when everything was locked down and people were getting really into cutting their own hair and baking their own bread? I was a bit busy doing my own childcare and working at my own job and cooking my own meals and breastfeeding my own baby, so I just watched enviously on Instagram as people learned, from the hairstylist whose famous retro shags inspired my 2019 bangs revival, how to cut their own hair. And now, bitches, it’s my time. I watched, I hyperventilated, I awkwardly used a straight razor to “carve petals” into my hair. It is definitely edging closer and closer to mullet territory (because I CAN’T STOP) but I love how capable I feel and how proud (on good hair days at least) of what I have made. -Claire
Share Rich TextAs Netflix has turned its hand to mass-producing romantic comedies, there have been some truly delightful successes — movies that capture the sweetness, humor, brightness and sizzle of a ‘90s or ‘00s classic (“Always Be My Maybe,” “Set It Up,” and “Wedding Season” are among our favorites). But many of the platform’s romcoms are aiming more for the Hallmark Channel audience than the cinematic release one, and of those, the movies tend to fall into two categories: oddly melancholy, and intensely zany. It’s “A California Christmas” (mopey, muted colors, plot points revolve around someone dying of cancer) or “Love Hard” (pratfall-heavy, bright colors, plot points revolve around a kiwi allergy making someone’s face look puffy).
This week, entirely by accident, we ended up watching one of each. We chose to pair “Love in the Villa” with “That’s Amor” because they both featured sad American women healing from rejection by exploring a new culture and finding love with hot European men. As it turned out, “Love in the Villa” is the epitome of a zany romcom, with over-the-top comic escapades that should have ended with mutual restraining orders rather than true love, and “That’s Amor” is such a sadrom it’s almost mumblecore.
But the movies share a great deal of DNA: lonely, unlikable heroines who don’t know much about life outside their particular corners of the U.S., handsome heroes who spar with them and then fall in love with them, lessons in appreciating foreign cuisines, and, of course, everyone’s exes showing up to ruin things right when it seemed like true love was about to blossom.
On this episode, we recap every unsettling beat of “Love in the Villa,” followed by “That’s Amor.” We unpack the movies’ romcom tropes, analyze their romantic leads, and discuss the most jawdroppingly awful moments in each (no spoilers, but they involve potential police brutality and bad graphic design, respectively). Uncork a nice Barolo, slice your Spanish tortilla, and enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextWe’ve been reading…
Romcoms! I read and loved Elissa Sussman’s “Funny You Should Ask” after seeing Emma recommended it, and then tried Mia Sosa’s “The Wedding Crasher” and “The Worst Best Man,” which are the ultimate candy fluff reading (with some steamy scenes as the cherry on top). I also took a little break from my “Persuasion” reread to plow through “The Rabbit Hutch,” and now I’m savoring the last few chapters of Anne Elliot’s dramatic journey to find love — which, by the way, pair perfectly with the slight nip of fall we’ve had in the air lately. -Claire
I finally discovered the brilliance of Elin Hilderbrand’s Nantucket books? (I know, I know… I’m VERY late to the party.) I read “The Perfect Couple,” and then went right into “The Hotel Nantucket,” and wow do I love the breezy fun of these perfect summer novels. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Frozen”! Y’all, it happened! I’ve spent my adulthood saying I would watch each hot new kids movie with my own children, and my toddler is now old enough to sit and watch an entire movie. We resorted to this a couple times over the course of an end-of-summer daycare break that extended from the Wednesday before to the Tuesday after Labor Day (a week during which, funnily enough, we still had to work). I never caught a whole sitting, but finally I have managed to piece together what happens in “Frozen.” And not to be, like, so controversial but also so brave, but there are only two good songs in it? I was led to expect more. “Let It Go” does slap though — even more so with your two-year-old trying to sing along. -Claire
My boyfriend and I have gotten really into “Delhi Crime,” a Netflix India series in a mix of Hindi and English, which follows the Delhi police department’s attempts to solve inspired-by-real-life cases. Each season follows a different major case, and the show wisely does not idealize the police detectives at its center, and even dives headfirst into the ways policing can easily become a corrupting force. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
The 1986 season of Slate’s history podcast One Year, which recently kicked off. Each episode takes on one event from that year, but it’s a smart mix of the most well-remembered events and the ones that have totally dropped out of the collective consciousness. This season has featured episodes about two things I had never really heard of: then-Pistons star Isiah Thomas’s quixotic “No Crime Day” campaign in Detroit, and a misbegotten TV special in which Geraldo Rivera promised to show audiences the hidden vault of Al Capone live on air. It also tells the story of the Challenger explosion through the eyes of the finalists who competed with Christa McAuliffe to be the first teacher in space, a perspective that made a more familiar story completely new (and still utterly horrifying). -Claire
Podglomerate’s new investigative podcast about literary scandals, Missing Pages! Hosted by literary critic Bethanne Patrick, Missing Pages re-explores stories about the publishing industry that you probably remember seeing headlines about, but may not recall all of the details. With the benefit of time, Patrick revisits scandals such as Caroline Calloway’s rise and fall, Kaavya Viswanathan’s alleged plagiarism, and the larger implications of Dan Mallory’s lies. It’s fascinating stuff, and very well-reported. Highly recommend. (Claire note: WHAT HOW HAVE I NOT HEARD OF THIS?? NEED!) -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Jeans. The glorious season of floaty dresses is coming to an end, and that means I’m re-entering the hell of finding a pair of jeans that I actually want to wear all day, every day. (Tights just aren’t a satisfying daily wfh option, given that I live with a cat who sheds white hair and refuses to let me trim her claws.) I tried a couple pairs of washed black jeans from Madewell, which has been driving me crazy with inconsistent sizing and fit for the past couple of years but will occasionally serve me up the perfect pant, and hit the jackpot with the curvy perfect vintage jean in lunar wash. (Sadly, the amazing promo discount I got seems to be over.) I’ve tried this same cut in a different wash that didn’t fit in the waist properly, but these? Perfect. Just hoping I can find an equally good everyday jean in a classic blue before spring comes again! -Claire
Skincare products! A handful of my very sweet friends gifted me a fancy facial for my birthday, which I went to this week. I hadn’t had anyone properly evaluate my skin in awhile, and I ended up buying a few of the products my esthetician recommended, including the Biologique Recherche Lotion P50 1970, which so many people swear by. It’s an exfoliating toner which also hydrates, and so far I am loving it. It’s a little pricey, but you only need to use a few drops at a time so I think it will end up lasting me a long time. I also had been looking for a cleanser which my sensitive, breakout-prone skin didn’t react poorly to, so I grabbed a bottle of the iS Clinical Cleansing Complex as well. -Emma
Share Rich Text“Selling the O.C.” almost has it all. It has the Oppenheim twins. Brittany Snow’s hot husband. Double-digit listings with infinity pools. Acres of cleavage sheathed in bandage dresses.
But it does lack a few key things — a protagonist, for example. Deliriously fun fashion. Any overt mention of the MAGA energy dripping from several of its main cast members. A clear and compelling narrative arc behind the chaotic and superficial drama that drives the season.
Naturally, as soon as we could get our grubby little hands on the first season of Netflix’s “Selling the O.C.,” baby sister to reality soap smash “Selling Sunset,” we watched every episode. And yes, there was some joy to be found in there, in ogling the garish, soulless modern palaces being flogged by the O Group and trying to unspool the threads of conflict behind each confrontation.
But so much of the show was lackluster compared to its big sister. The cast is mostly quite bland and, frankly, unlikable; it was actually surprising to realize how appealing many of the “Selling Sunset” agents actually are, despite the constant drama. Mary, Chrishell, Amanza, Maya, and even Heather look grounded and pleasant compared to their counterparts in Newport Beach, who are constantly in a competition to be more two-faced and nasty than their colleagues. The drama that ensues seems ginned up and shallow, perhaps in part because it is such a new office — most of these agents barely know each other. And yet the show didn’t manage to capture what conflict did happen onscreen; there’s always vague, poorly explained off-screen beef that translates into confusing, unsatisfying fights.
We discuss how the show’s characters and storylines disappointed us, as well as the show’s fashion (sexy conservative, á la Fox News host), real estate aesthetic (inside of a cruise ship) and much more in this week’s episode. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
I’m nearing the end of Tess Gunty’s “The Rabbit Hutch,” which, as it unfolds, is digging more into some familiar sociopolitical questions: The #MeToo era and exploitative sexual relationships; life under the shadow of Trump; late capitalism and the distortions created by massive wealth and fame; and the void that once was, or could be, filled by religious faith and community. Two of her characters, in particular — the ethereal, anguished teenager Blandine Watkins and the troubled grown son of a famous TV star — give voice to aching screeds about the brokenness of the lives they’ve been given. Her pain involves loneliness, heartbreak; his also involves Morgellons disease, a controversial syndrome in which those afflicted claim to find fibers emerging from their skin. With increasing urgency, they try to find a religious, or at least quasi-religious, meaning to transmute their suffering into transcendence. This may sound plodding, but it’s actually a page-turner! -Claire
I have been ripping through some perfect beach reads during my vacay. I finished “The Arc,” which I loved, and then moved onto Elisa Sussman’s “Funny You Should Ask,” Jean Meltzer’s “The Matzah Ball,” and Lizzy Dent’s “The Setup.” Rom-coms in novel form? Inject them right into my veins. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
I just started Nathan Fielder’s new show, “The Rehearsal,” and I think I need a full week to recover from the first episode. Fielder is the creator and star of “Nathan For You,” a comedy reality show in which he would use his very slight business expertise to dream up unhinged strategies for struggling businesses. In “The Rehearsal,” he spends each episode guiding an ordinary person through an elaborate rehearsal process for a task they’ve been dreading; episode one featured a man who wanted to come clean to his bar trivia friends about his lack of a graduate degree after years of misleading them. The show builds an exact replica of the space in which the event will take place on a giant soundstage and casts actors to play anyone else who might be present. Fielder drills the guest star over and over again, intentionally introducing interruptions and unpleasant reactions so that there’s an effective script in place should that actually happen on the day in question. It’s social anxiety made manifest, an attempt to ward off one’s worst fears by making them concrete. I cried at the end of the first episode. That’s a recommendation, I think! -Claire
Honestly… nothing? Taking a little bit of a break from TV while I’m traveling. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Nothing new lately! -Claire
The “Scarsdale Diet Murder” episode of Maintenance Phase, featuring Sarah Marshall! I love this perfect Maintenance Phase / You’re Wrong About crossover event. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
The Tradlands Paloma pants in black! I love these pants, and am excited to transition them into fall — so imagine my excitement when they were marked down in the end-of-season sale! Now I’m just trying to resist getting them in olive as well. -Claire
Do hotel rooms count? I’ve been traveling these couple weeks, and just had the most wonderful stay at Waya Narbonne, on the Mediterranean coast of France. An absolutely sweet Dutch couple runs this low-key but elegant “domaine,” and it was a complete delight to stay there. Also… I did get an emerald gingham nap dress because I have an illness and the simple pattern is divine. -Emma
Share Rich TextNothing scratches that romcom itch for us better than a slightly absurd but well-executed comedy about two hotties who are just pretending to date… or are they? And while “Marry Me” fell completely flat, and “I Want You Back” was delightful but sizzle-free, Netflix has a new movie that truly delivers on the promise of a fake relationship romance: “Wedding Season.”
The premise, in brief: microfinancier Asha and startup guy Ravi are set up by their pushy parents, who long for each of their children to finally marry. To avoid matchmaking pressure during a summer of weddings, they agree to pretend that they’re an item… only to slowly fall for each other. There are yearning eyes, misunderstandings, secrets that come out at the most inopportune times, and above all, a happy ending.
What is it that makes Fake Dating the ideal romcom trope of our time? Why do we crave it? There are obvious advantages to the construction: It requires the leads to spend a lot of time onscreen together, enabling plenty of flirtation and doe-eyed wistful looks. It seamlessly transitions from a way to enforce togetherness between people with no other reason to hang out into a psychological barrier to starting a real romantic relationship (e.g. “we already agreed this is just pretend”). It’s also perfectly ludicrous, the kind of thing that pretty much never happens in real life and yet constantly happens in this specific genre. Like a superhero leaping over a skyscraper with a single bound, it assures us that the humdrum disappointments of every day life won’t be holding us back in this fictional escape.
But maybe it’s also a trope well-suited to a time when courtship seems more confusing than ever before and the process of dating to find a relationship is Sisyphean and baffling — swiping endlessly on the apps, going on promising first dates that go nowhere, getting ghosted, getting funneled into situationships. The Fake Relationship echoes another form of courtship, one that “Wedding Season” also considers: arranged marriage. Asha’s parents had one, and in a heart-to-heart late in the movie, Asha’s mother admits that she was heartbroken to be married to a man who wasn’t her choice. At first, she says, she pretended to love him. But then she realized it had become real. Asha’s mother wanted her daughters to choose their loves, but in the end, Asha also finds love by, at first, pretending to love someone. Overburdened by freedom, we have to imagine ourselves into romantic prisons in order to find our way to a person worth choosing freely.
In this episode, we talk about those parallels, break down all the absurd plot details, and revel in our favorite swoony details. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“The Rabbit Hutch” by Tess Gunty, a buzzy debut novel poised to meet a moment when the Catholic aesthetic and the slow decline of a capitalism-ravaged country are in the zeitgeist. It unfolds over a week in the fictional Indiana city of Vacca Vale, which is decades into a long decline after the bankruptcy and closure of the automobile company that made the town prosperous. Our heroine Blandine Watkins, an eccentric teenager obsessed with female Catholic mystics, has been spat out by the foster care system and left to cope with the end of an emotionally consuming affair with her high school theater director. The alienated, abandoned characters inhabit an alienated, abandoned city. Everyone is seeking an escape.
I actually picked up this book because of a personal connection: Gunty’s mom was my (wonderful) art teacher, and her brother was my elementary school classmate. The book is deeply informed by the pervasive Catholicism and post-Studebaker travails of our shared hometown, South Bend, and it’s fascinating to see how she grapples with them in her work. Also noted: a fair amount of jabs at the plans to revitalize Vacca Vale as a tech industry hub (*cough* Mayor Pete). Putting aside my indisputable hometown bias, “The Rabbit Hutch” sometimes strains a bit harder for showy prose than it needs to, but it’s an ambitious, imaginative, compelling meditation on the search for meaning in the wake of despoliation and decline. -Claire
I’m still making my way through “The Arc” (I am not on vacation, so I’m reading at a much slower clip) and I’m still really enjoying it. Excited to see if this thoroughly modern/app-dating-centric romantic novel sticks the landing. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
The upcoming Netflix reality show “Dated & Related,” which sounds more incestuous than it is. A modern mash-up of family-matchmaking cable reality shows like “Parental Control” and the new generation of villa-based, IG-model-populated, teeny-bikini-clad dating competitions like “Love Island,” this show features sibling pairs who are challenged to wingman and wingwoman (wingperson?) each other to true love. We’ve often advocated for more reality daters to come in paired with preexisting BFFs or confidants, and so it’s interesting to see this play out in the ensemble format! While it actually seems to help tamp down drama (hardly a reality TV producer’s goal), the relationships between the siblings (both same and mixed-gender duos, all pursuing hetero relationships) are genuinely sweet to watch. Please let me know if I should make Emma watch this for a pod! I’m ready!! -Claire
“Look Both Ways,” Netflix’s updated, much more rosy spin on “Sliding Doors,” starring Lili Reinhart as a young woman graduating college. In one life path, she has a one-night stand with her friend and gets pregnant. In the other, she doesn’t. It isn’t anything revelatory, but it’s a sweet movie and Reinhart shines. The lack of exploration of abortion as a viable option to an unplanned pregnancy feels really weird given where we are post-Roe, but otherwise it’s a lovely watch. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
I’ve been in catchup mode lately. For a while, I wasn’t in the mood to listen to “Know Your Enemy,” Matt Sitman and Sam Adler-Bell’s podcast on the intellectuals of the right, and I’m getting back in the groove with their most recent episodes on the terrifying Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters and the historian Christopher Lasch and his cooptation by the new right.
Also, my favorite short-lived indie band of the aughts, Voxtrot, is reuniting for a small tour and putting out some new songs, so I’ve been reconnecting a bit with my angsty 20-year-old self. -Claire
The Kardashians episode of our bud Amanda Montell’s podcast “Sounds Like A Cult.” I love a sharp, smart conversation about traditionally low-brow fare, and this really delivers. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
This swingy prairie-girl minidress in the Madewell pre-fall sale. I essentially quit above-the-knee dresses cold turkey after my toddler was born, but now that he is a nimble walker and I’m rarely called on to bend all the way over in public anymore, I hear the siren song of the short skirt again — especially with the approach of fall and cozy tights. -Claire
This versatile black midi skirt from Pixie Market that a fashion influencer I follow who specializes in showing you how to remix classic pieces in your wardrobe #influenced me to buy. (I know, I know, I’m weak.) At least it was on sale? -Emma
Share Rich TextTrue Jane-heads know that “Persuasion,” though not one of her flashiest, best-known works, is nevertheless among her finest. Like “Pride and Prejudice,” it takes as its subject the question of how minds and judgments are changed through new information or perspective. But where Lizzy Bennet is a young, bold, headstrong woman who has never made a mistake worth losing sleep over before, Anne Elliot has lived through the first blush of her youth and has had the opportunity to live with regrets about how she made up her mind during those innocent years. She comes to the events of the novel with a great deal of hard-earned perspective on how decisions are made, and the terrible consequences of making the wrong one.
Anne Elliot was, as a 19-year-old girl, desperately in love with an ambitious but hard-up naval captain, Frederick Wentworth. Her loving, conservative-minded godmother, Lady Russell, convinced her that a marriage to Captain Wentworth would be an unwise one for both parties, and so she ended their engagement. He was deeply wounded, and she was heartbroken — and over the course of the following eight years, she came to feel that her pain and loss were far greater than any advantage they’d gained from separating. She has spent almost a decade grieving for the loss of her love, physically withering, losing her beauty, and becoming a spinster.
But Anne is not just a sad, bitter woman. She has grace for her younger self and for her godmother; she does not conclude that receptivity to persuasion is inherently bad. She only develops her finely tuned understanding of the human heart. She is surrounded by ridiculous, vain people (her immediate family), and she has both the discernment to see their flaws and the loving heart to persuade herself of their best qualities. She values them despite their inability to properly value her. Perhaps her greatest gift is the ability to put herself in the right state of mind to meet everyone, no matter how silly or selfish, at exactly where they are, to expect little enough not to be disappointed or hurt, and to appreciate what good she can take from their company.
This is not the Anne Elliot that Dakota Johnson gives us in “Persuasion” (2022). The Anne Elliot of the movie is a recklessly beautiful mess, intelligent and ruthlessly critical but prone to social faux pas and thoughtless insults. She papers over her sadness with self-loathing and bottles of red wine consumed alone in her room. Oddly, everyone else in the movie still reacts to her as though she’s the restrained, cultivated Anne of the book. One can’t overstate how much she is Fleabag, all lack of impulse control and caustic remarks to the camera; but while Fleabag is recognized as a bit of a narcissistic nightmare by her associates, Anne is perceived as saintly. This does not add up! It just doesn’t.
The rest of the cast of characters have been punched up, by which we mean “flattened into paper dolls.” Her vain family members are now akin to clinical sociopaths; her good-natured but silly and selfish sisters-in-law, the Musgroves, are now “beautiful people in every way.” Instead of a textured world of imperfect humans for Anne to navigate with shrewd generosity, Anne is now the only textured, imperfect human helplessly adrift among a sea of saints and villains.
And then there is the endless list of anachronisms (“A London 5 is a Bath 10”), think-piecey dialogue (“marriage is transactional for women!”) and incongruous details (faded, romantically disregarded Anne is always wearing lipstick and looking like the most eye-catching woman in any room).
There are delightful performances (Richard Grant as Sir Walter Eliot and Henry Golding as his smug heir are particularly fun), luscious visuals, and some pleasures to take from this movie. But mostly it’s a bit infuriating. The story has been followed faithfully and yet hollowed out; the characters have been reimagined into modern archetypes that no longer make sense for the play they’re enacting.
We discuss all this and more in this week’s episode. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“The Bear,” the Hulu drama series that spawned a million posts about how sexy Jeremy Allen White’s arms look emerging from a plain white tee. If you haven’t watched it yet, I do recommend it so far. It’s an unexpectedly palatable blend of gritty family drama, comic yelling matches in broad Chicago accents, workplace intrigue, Jeremy Allen White’s undeniable sex appeal, and vibey cooking montages set to tootling jazz. -Claire
“Indian Matchmaking” season 2! Matchmaker Seema Taparia is back again to match couples in both India and the United States. It’s a sweet and easy watch, and some familiar faces from season 1 pop back in. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
“Persuasion,” fittingly enough. Also, Kelsey McKinney’s fantastic essay over at Defector about Sydney Sweeney, nepotism babies, and how the executive class have found more and more effective ways of capturing all the wealth created by people who actually make things. -Claire
“The Arc,” a slightly dystopian, satirical romantic novel by Tory Henwood Hoen about a 35-year-old woman in New York City who is so exhausted by dating that she pays $40,000 to a bespoke service called, of course, The Arc, to find her perfect match. It has the tone of Leigh Stein’s “Self Care,” but the romance of an Emily Henry or Jasmine Guillory novel. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
The finale of “Fed Up,” which came WAY too soon! I need approximately 150 more episodes please. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Merit Beauty’s Signature Lip in Millennial, a classic pink. I was a bit skeptical of this lipstick when it came out, but I finally bought it in Cabo (a warm red) and found that it wasn’t as greasy as I’d feared, it applies smoothly, and it looks and feels great to wear all day (as someone who tends to get dry lips from most lip colors).
Also, I saw someone style a really cute outfit on Instagram (I know, I know) around a sheer long-sleeve top, so I bought a sheer long-sleeve top. It’s not exactly long-sleeve weather right now, but I am obsessed with it as a top layer over a cute bralette and as a bottom layer for my dresses in the fall. -Claire
I needed some comfy heels for an upcoming wedding that is largely taking place on grass. I found these Sam Edelman platform sandals which match everything and can easily take me from summer to fall. The best part is — they’re on sale at both Saks Fifth Avenue and Shopbop!
I also grabbed this cropped t-shirt bralette from Aerie in both True Black and Blue Lion. It works for going out if you pair it under a blazer with some high-waisted pants, or working out. I recommend sizing up at least one size. -Emma
Share Rich TextWhere all else falter, “FBoy Island” delivers. Season 2 started strong, with three impeccably cast leads — all of them charming, beautiful, and completely up to the task of handling male shenanigans — sorting through an outrageous cast of peacocking fboys and soft-spoken nice guys. The last two episodes, from the Mansplain to the final decision night, stuck the landing.
They stuck the landing so well that it’s hard not to wonder how much producers shaped the narrative we see. Without spoiling the season (though we will do so enthusiastically in the actual episode, so be warned), both seasons offered different but entirely satisfying final twists; taking the show as a whole, there’s a palpable narrative arc. It’s so tight, so adept at giving us a new shock, a new but similarly cathartic climax, that it almost feels scripted. Then again, much can probably be accomplished with excellent casting, sharp editing, and a strong concept. Suffice it to say that by the end of the finale, our heart rates were more elevated that watching it technically counted as a cardio workout. In our opinions.
In this episode, we recap the final two episodes, getting more into the nitty-gritty than in our previous discussion of the first eight. We examine the appeal of the Mansplain, scrutinize the depth of Tamaris’s connection with Niko, close-read the final dates, try to unpack the chaos that was the decision ceremony, and speculate wildly about how much producer control went into creating such a perfect season. And, above all, we’re just grateful for the content. A show that makes us feel good after we finish watching? That’s something we can get behind.
Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
God, hardly anything. I’m exhausted! So much TV to watch! But I’ve managed to read a few chapters of Jane Austen’s “Persuasion,” in preparation for another Rich Text we’ve already taped. It had been some years since I reread it, and it’s still absolute perfection: the classically cutting Austen narration, the veins of melancholy and regret, the faded wallflower given the chance to be a romantic heroine once more, the oceans of repressed yearning. -Claire
After my impressive beach reading streak, I’m back to just watching a lot of TV for work. But I did absolutely love this Allison P. Davis piece on 10 years of Tinder. Anyone who has used the apps will find something to relate to. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
So, I also watched “Persuasion” (2022) this week! Keen readers may be picking up on what our next Rich Text pod will be about. No spoilers, save to say that it is truly an assemblage of brain-melting decisions that left me absolutely reeling. -Claire
I really enjoyed “Wedding Season,” another Netflix rom com about two singles who, under pressure from their parents to just get married already, pretend to date to get through a long wedding season. Does it have some plot holes? Sure. Is it delightful? Also yes. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Celebrity Memoir Book Club,” one of the two celebrity memoir book club podcasts that I adore, is my current binge of choice. It’s been in my rotation for a while, but lately I have been plowing through the back catalog. Claire and Ashley discuss the books I truly do want to know about without reading (“#Girlboss,” “Girl Wash Your Face,” “The Girl With the Lower Back Tattoo”) and I giggle freely throughout. At this point in my brain-deadening summer, it’s the medicine I need. -Claire
I too have been obsessed with this podcast! The Danielle Bernstein episode truly broke my brain! I’ve also continued to love “Fed Up.” (Maybe I just really enjoy consuming stories about respectable white lady legal grifters from Long Island?) -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Belts! For some reason I had a spasm of wishing to have a belt styling option with all my summer dresses. I rarely wear belts, and I’m never satisfied with the ones I purchase. This time, in hopes of an effortlessly summery look, I went with raffia, in spite of my fears that it may be a more, idk, Lilly Pulitzer vibe than I’m going for. So far, though, I think I like it? I got this stretch raffia belt from Anthropologie (in natural), and it’s very stretchy, comfortable, and great for a casual cinch. -Claire
I snagged these chic J. Crew slides in white on big sale and I am OBSESSED. As a short girl, I always feel like my outfit doesn’t look quite put together if I’m in flats, but I have finally come around to the idea that fancier slides are simply the answer. I also bought this Abercrombie poplin puff sleeve shirt dress in two colors (also on sale!). It’s breezy, easy and can transition from summer to early fall nicely. -Emma
Share Rich TextAh, to be washed up once more on the shores of “FBoy Island”: what a perfect summer escape. The frothy tropical dating show, hosted by Nikki Glaser and dreamed up by former “Bachelor” producer Elan Gale, whisks us away to a mysterious, sun-drenched island populated by three women looking for love, 13 fuckboys in need of reform, and 13 nice guys (self-proclaimed).
We recapped season 1 for Love to See It last summer, and it sparked so much joy. Season 2 brings new twists, new heights of comic fantasy, and a few familiar faces (some more welcome than others). Our three new leads are savvy, spunky, and more than up to the challenge of going toe-to-toe with a houseful of smooth talkers, and the fboys are more convincing than ever.
The TikTok-like interstitial videos have been toned down, but otherwise the show’s concept feels heightened. The three women are more outré in their styling and more choreographed in their movements (at times they very much resemble a girl group taking the stage). Nikki commits even harder to her riffs. The show leans into its concept, expertly producing every set-piece for maximum comic impact and weird factor. Episode one opens with the contestants prying themselves out of the sand like beached zombies stumbling toward the promise of hot babes and a party called “Bro-chella.”
On this week’s episode, we discuss the eight episodes that have dropped on HBO Max thus far; the central characters and relationships that have emerged; the show’s special blend of fantasy, reality, and absurdity; what it means to depict fboys as capable of reform rather than inherently bad; and whether nice guys can make for good reality TV.
Hope you enjoy! Watch out for our recap of the final two episodes, coming soon. xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
Friend of the pod Phoebe Robinson’s new Freeform show, “Everything Is Trash”! The show is a classic, easy-watching sitcom, and Phoebe, an incredibly charming lead, plays a podcaster who makes a living talking about her messy dating life — which causes a few problems for her older brother, who is trying to launch his political career. Listen, a podcaster has to give her audience what they crave. -Claire
I truly binge-watched FX on Hulu’s “The Bear” after a week of seeing other people’s horny “yes chef” tweets. By the end, I not only understood them, but was weeping at this brilliant, intimate, frenetic, stressful, beautiful bite-sized season of TV. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
“Coventry” by Rachel Cusk, which is apparently my vacation book. I got through a few more essays during our week in the Finger Lakes with my side of the family, during the occasional down moments between hiking, swimming, and berry-picking. (I had no idea that having a child would lead me to say, with a completely straight face, things like “we have to be up by 7 or we’ll miss the waterfall hike,” but apparently toddlers want to do things on vacation other than watch you finish your TBR pile.) -Claire
I spent my birthday weekend at the beach, where I get my best reading done. I breezed through Alison B. Hart’s “The Work Wife,” a fast-paced novel set over the course of one significant day, told alternately from the perspectives of a major Hollywood producer’s first wife, second wife, and executive assistant (the titular work wife). After that, I moved onto friend of the pod Hannah Orenstein’s breezy and delightful modern romance novel, “Meant To Be Mine.” Very much recommend both! - Emma
We’ve been listening to…
The soundtrack of “Moana,” now a road trip standby. -Claire
“Fed Up,” Wondery’s new podcast about the Emily Gellis / F-Factor founder Tanya Zuckerbrot influencer dust-up. I followed this story casually while it was unfolding, but there was apparently a whole lot more to it. Cannot wait for more episodes to drop. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
The Anise Nightdress from Salter House, a Brooklyn shop that sells romantic nightgowns straight out of a period film: floaty cotton, whimsical embroidery, broderie anglaise and delicate pintucks. They’re designed by shop owner Sandeep Salter, a former archivist and bibliographer who previously opened Goods for the Study with bookstore owner Sarah McNally, and I am totally obsessed with her whole aesthetic. And, of course, I am obsessed with wafting around my truck-sticker-strewn apartment like a reclusive Victorian poet. -Claire
I’ve been making purchases in vacation mode. I’m taking a big Europe trip for the first time since 2018 in a few weeks, and because luggage keeps getting lost (thanks to massive understaffing on airlines), I’m trying to find the most largest, most efficient carry-on luggage I can. I decided to try Roam’s large carry-on, because it’s beautiful, customizable AND practical (and they’re having a sample sale!).
I was also on the hunt for some comfy, chic, multi-purpose walking shoes that could take me from day to night. I settled on these Arizona Chunky platform Birkenstocks, with a bouncy, ridged low platform bottom in white, and classic black suede straps with black buckles. Chic and super comfortable! I have been breaking them in all over Brooklyn and am obsessed. -Emma
Share Rich TextOpinions vary, but personally, we believe there’s room for a lot more high-concept fantasy in reality dating. More eerie entrances, more mystical moments, more —let’s just go with it — smoke machines. Why can’t a reality series inject a bit more “Brigadoon” into our “Bachelor”?
This is what we crave, and it’s what “The One That Got Away” delivers. Since leaving “The Bachelor,” producer Elan Gale has been trying his hand at more experimental dating shows (see: “FBoy Island,” also gloriously back this summer), and his newest is a 10-episode series on Prime with a time-travel twist. Six singles await missed romantic connections from their past, who arrive through a magical portal (some rocks surrounded by purple uplighting and smoke machines) for another chance at love. There are Confirmation class buddies, high school classmates, exes and friends’ exes — even current best friends — and they’re all ready to shoot their shot with one of the leads.
The concept is absurd and absurdly fun, and it leads the show into some interesting directions. Some aspects are, frankly, pretty troubling! For one thing, the implications of bringing back people from someone’s past for them to date again are simply different for women than for men. While the men are mostly brought peers, friends, and old hook-ups to date, the women are often faced with people they have never really had a connection with and share little in common with. The women then face pressure to give a real chance to whichever random men who showed up expecting a date, even if they feel uncomfortable with the romantic attentions of those men. One woman is sent a man who had a crush on her when she was just 18 and he was almost 30; another is sent a man she’s never spoken to who follows her on Instagram. Like…. yikes!
But the leads do have a fair amount of power within the show; they alone decide when their love interests are sent away, and while they decide, up to two of their possible connections live in a house together with all the other portal arrivals. The non-leads, dealing with a fair amount of emotional anxiety about their fate, quickly bond with each other and become vital supports, but their new friends can disappear at a moment’s notice, without even saying goodbye, if the leads choose to send them away. The dichotomy between the two groups — leads and arrivals — is stark, and creates a class hierarchy so notable that it is openly commented on by the arrivals and bubbles to the surface in at least one dramatic confrontation.
We dug into all this, plus our favorite love story of the season and all the spiciest drama, in this week’s episode. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
Seasons 2 of “The Flight Attendant” and “Only Murders in the Building” have been keeping me and Greg occupied on our rare free nights. -Claire
I breezed right through the first season of Hulu’s “Maggie,” a moderately charming romantic comedy of errors about a psychic who begins seeing visions of her own romantic future. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
Elain Hsieh Chou’s madcap satirical novel, “Disorientation,” which follows a miserably directionless PhD student as she undergoes a disillusionment with her course of study that leads her to a political awakening. Ingrid Yang is a Taiwanese-American graduate student in the East Asian Studies department of Barnes University, a fusty New England college not far from where she grew up. She’s studying a Chinese-American poet, Xiao-Wen Chou, but has little interest in his work, let alone any idea what to say about him in her dissertation; at every step, her course of study has been nudged along by (mostly white) advisors who promised her job security and acclaim if she chose the right research subject. It’s a sedate place to start, but the novel soon turns into an academic mystery, an investigative caper, and a raucous send-up of American academia. As Ingrid herself — someone who always longed to fit in — begins to see the white supremacy that permeates the university hierarchy and how seeking its acceptance has left her alienated from herself, she takes the reader with her on a consciousness-raising journey. (And stay tuned for the Jordan Peterson-esque turn taken by one of her professors.)
Also, I have been feeling complicated things about the new Dakota Johnson “Persuasion” adaptation (mainly despair mixed with an unwilling fascination), and I absolutely adored Brandon Taylor’s newsletter on the movie. In it, he really digs into what makes Jane Austen’s novels tick — especially her more melancholy later novels, which include “Persuasion” — and what makes an adaptation of them successful (that is, understanding what the novel itself is actually about, rather than getting distracted by the most superficially appealing plot points). On the novel: “Where some Austen novels chronicle the bright, flashing episodes of youth, Persuasion follows a young woman who has to go on living after those episodes have concluded prematurely.” YES. I was almost crying by the end of this essay, which made me want to reread the book instead. Highly recommended: Jane Austen’s “Persuasion.” -Claire
I too was obsessed with Brandon Taylor’s “Persuasion” essay. (Honestly, his newsletter always makes me think and emote and become very jealous of his immense talent!!!)
I felt the same way about Jia Tolentino’s gorgeous, affecting New Yorker essay about the sacredness of abortion care. “Even within the course of the same pregnancy, a person and the fetus she carries can shift between the roles of lover and beloved, host and parasite, vessel and divinity, victim and murderer; each body is capable of extinguishing the other, although one cannot survive alone,” she writes. “There is no human relationship more complex, more morally unstable than this.” -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Call me a narcissist but I DID listen to our appearance on “Sounds Like a Cult,” which is currently doing a “Cult Girl Summer” run of bonus episodes. We talked about the cult of dating apps, and even remembering the two years that I tried to date on OkCupid was difficult, but we all felt much better by the end. -Claire
The Top Hits of 1997 playlist on Spotify in preparation for the Backstreet Boys concert I went to over the weekend with my friends Liv and Alison. Speaking of which, the show was fantastic! It was nostalgic and full of pure, unadulterated joy. Also — A.J. is now the hottest and most talented one? -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Megababe natural deodorant! I have been wearing some kind of antiperspirant deodorant since adolescence, and recently I became fed up with two things: My pits still get wet and stinky by the end of the day, and the chemicals in the deodorant make me more likely to get yellow armpit stains in light-colored shirts. While searching for a replacement, either highly chemical or highly natural, I learned that basically every deodorant gives a significant amount of people an armpit rash, and they WILL leave close-up photos of this in the Target reviews section. However, the reviews for Megababe’s Smoothie Deo, a fruit-enzyme-powered natural deodorant, were pretty good. I got it, I’ve worn it for a couple days, and it seems to work better than my previous Dove antiperspirant deodorant. As of now, I’m a convert, but stay tuned for any future rashes. -Claire
I hadn’t checked out J. Crew much since it’s Jenna Lyons days, but a recent newsletter from my friend Mattie Kahn about how the brand had gotten good again, made me curious. They were having a giant sale, so though I usually resist buying final sale items, because I am a big returner, I took a risk and bought a handful of elevated basics I thought would probably work — and I was NOT disappointed. My absolute favorites include this lightweight linen beach button-up (in the perfect shade of blue), these silky drapey white cargo-style trousers, a very practical cropped tank, these extra chic cat eye sunglasses in tortoise, and these waterproof cross-strap EVA sandals which feel like walking on clouds. -Emma
Share Rich TextQuick reminder: We’re having a virtual live show with Moment House on Sunday, July 10! We’ll be recapping the premiere episode of Kaitlyn and Britt’s (briefly) two-Bachelorette season. Plus, there will be exclusive merch, and we’ll be using the tipping function on Moment House to raise money for The Brigid Alliance, a fantastic organization that provides people with the money and support they need to travel for abortion care. Get tickets here.
After “To All the Boys I Loved Before” stole our hearts (and about 50 full hours of each of our short lives on this Earth), it was a foregone conclusion that we would watch the next Jenny Han Y.A. romance adaptation — and the next, and the next. We watched the rest of the TATBILB trilogy (though with less rapture), and now we’re watching “The Summer I Turned Pretty” — the Prime series adaptation of Han’s Summer Trilogy, which came out before her “To All the Boys” books.
Like “To All the Boys,” the new series tells the story of a high school girl who has long nursed a crush on an unattainable childhood friend — but who suddenly blossoms and is soon pursued by not one, but several hot boys.
Isabella “Belly” Conklin (Lola Tung) has spent every summer of her life at the vacation home of her mother’s best friend Susannah Fisher. The two families’ fathers visit here and there, but mostly it’s the two moms and their four children: Belly and her brother Steven, and Conrad and Jeremiah Fisher. Belly has always had a crush on Conrad, but he’s never seen her that way — until she showed up this summer with boobs. Yes, Belly is pretty now, and Conrad is taking notice.
However, so are other boys — like Cam, a sweet boy she met at a middle-school Latin convention and who dreams of being a marine biologist. Oh, and Jeremiah, who she’s always seen as more of a best friend. Meanwhile, Susannah has invited Belly to make her debut at the country club this summer, and so Belly spends her vacation learning the waltz, attending teas, and dealing with a love pyramid.
Though the love triangle is almost absurdly dramatic (what’s worse than dating the son of your closest family friend? Dating both of them within the space of a week, maybe), it’s perhaps the least compelling part of the show. Susannah and Belly’s mom, Laurel, are also working through their own problems — Susannah has a troubling secret, and Laurel, recently divorced from the kids’ dad, is struggling to write her next novel and get back out there — while trying to keep their tight friendship of many years on track. Conrad has become inexplicably withdrawn. Steven begins dating a gorgeous, wealthy rising fashion influencer, but his insecurities about his middle-class background present an obstacle. It’s truly an ensemble show, which may be what saves it from the relatively lackluster central romance.
In this episode, we discuss the tipping point between identifying with teenagers and their mothers, the soothing and yet infuriating coastal grandmother/Nancy Meyers aesthetic (with its lavish wealth; enviable, impossibly clean kitchens; and the hidden labor of making them so continually homey and luxuriant), the desire to both inhabit and critique these aspirational enclaves of white wealth, and the joys and perils of young love. Plus, Claire gets candid about life as a woman who never got boobs pretty. Mix up a big pitcher of pomegranate margaritas á la Marfa, lounge by your immense marble kitchen island, and enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
I binged my way through Amazon’s new bonkers reality dating show (also by producer Elan Gale who created FBoy Island and was an exec on The Bachelor), “The One That Got Away.” Singles are brought to a ~magical location~ to date people from their pasts. I didn’t find it quite as fun as “FBoy Island,” but it certainly scratched the itch for new mindless content, which frankly I needed this week. -Emma
Season 2 of Hulu’s “Only Murders in the Building,” the increasingly meta murder-mystery comedy. I have to admit, my memory is so leaky that I might have to go back and rewatch season 1, because I have forgotten an embarrassing amount of plot, and it’s heavy on plot twists and callbacks. (It’s so into callbacks it will call out callbacks.) When season 2 opens, Mabel (Selena Gomez) — and, it begins to seem, all three of the amateur true crime podcasters, including Charles (Steve Martin) and Oliver (Martin Short) — is under suspicion of murdering the board president of the building, who admittedly was trying to get the three of them evicted. Plus: Amy Schumer moves in (playing a very broad version of herself) and a titillating plot emerges involving a stolen piece of erotic art that might reveal a secret part of Charles’s past. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
This excellent (and depressing and timely) essay in TIME by Taylor Harris (and edited by my friend Lori Fradkin!), aptly titled: “America Insists It Is Great. It Should Work on Being Decent.” -Emma
Elif Batuman’s “Either/Or,” which I’m now about half-way through. Our tortured heroine, Selin, is deep in mourning over the end of her first love — an unconsummated but in some sense romantic relationship with an older Hungarian student, Ivan. Now an English major, she’s reading and reading and reading, and much of the book consists of her emotional altercations with classic literature. Provoked by her reading, she wrestles with her relationship with her mother (who she both adores possessively and feels suffocated by the love of); with Ivan (who she sees in every rake, seducer, and male author who depicts a contemptible female love object in his work); and with herself and her own writerly ambitions (she is bored and infuriated by self-indulgent memoir-esque fiction like “In Search of Lost Time,” but she also recognizes that it’s the only kind of fiction she herself wants to write).
It makes me laugh, and, like Selin herself reading this kind of navel-gazing fiction, it sometimes makes me annoyed, but it really captures the process of coming of age in a way few novels do — the raw and somehow shameful emotion, the sea of internal contradictions, the struggle to reconcile the self you want to be with the one you’ve been given to work with, the many attempts to compare and contrast yourself against others to pin down what that self is and what makes it special. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
“Smoke Screen: Puppy Kingpin,” a podcast from Neon Hum, and hosted by Alex Schuman, about the puppy mill industry, and the great — fraudulent! — lengths that invested parties will go to make money while covering up the origins of their product — in this case, PUPPIES — from buyers. The series specifically hones in on Jolyn Noethe, a puppy broker and businesswoman from Iowa who is accused of spearheading a nationwide puppy laundering (yes, like money laundering) scheme. It’s a fascinating deep dive into an industry I knew very little about. -Emma
Nothing new this week; daycare closures always cut into my podcast listening, and this past week we had two (2) Covid shutdowns in my son’s class — one from Saturday-Wednesday, and one from Friday afternoon-Tuesday. (That 1.5 days of daycare were really cherished, but I’m still behind on all my pods). -Claire
We’ve been buying…
So I first tried Neutrogena’s Hydro Boost water-based gel moisturizer because they sponsored our other pod, Love To See It. But I genuinely loved the product so much that I finished it and have now purchased a refill. It’s not oily! It soaks into the skin without leaving a weird film! And it’s affordable! Highly recommend. -Emma
This week I’ve mostly been making returns. I hate online shopping for its waste — all the shipping to my place and shipping back — but it’s been a long year and a half of trying to figure out what I like wearing now that I am in my mid-thirties and spend a LOT of time at the playground and almost none at happy hour, and it involves a lot of ordering stuff and then returning it so that I don’t drown in debt and unworn clothes. So this week, I shipped a bunch of my “not for me” purchases. I also saw a mom wearing her hair clipped up in an open gold claw clip, so I bought one, obviously. I found this Kitsch open shape gold claw clip, which seems sturdy and is definitely beautiful. -Claire
Share Rich TextContent warning: In this podcast, we discuss some very difficult topics — notably, suicide/suicidal ideation, sexual assault and child sexual abuse. Please listen with care.
On Friday, the Supreme Court released its opinion on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In it, the court overturned Roe v. Wade, denying the existence of a constitutional right to an abortion. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, was substantially unchanged from the draft opinion leaked last month, so there was little surprise as to the outcome and the reasoning. But this time, it’s real. Across the country, state trigger laws went into effect to outlaw abortion in all or most cases, and pre-Roe laws criminalizing the procedure became relevant once again. Many clinics were forced to immediately stop providing abortions, sending distraught patients home from the waiting room mere minutes before their scheduled appointments.
This is not what we talked about on the podcast this week. We had already put the episode to bed when the opinion came down, and we both spent Friday in a haze. (In Emma’s case, the haze included writing an important and clear-eyed essay for MSNBC about whether an abortion ban violates the religious practice of Jewish people.)
But this episode ended up being, unintentionally, rather apt. Last week, we watched the Netflix docuseries “Keep Sweet: Pray & Obey,” about the FLDS (an extreme Mormon sect) and the depravities inflicted by its current leader, Warren Jeffs. We also watched “The Deep End,” a Hulu docuseries about the controversial spiritual guru Teal Swan and the dramas of her devoted inner circle. And the control and physical violation of women — and the reaction against that control and violation — are, respectively, central to those two groups.
The FLDS — especially under Warren Jeffs, a particularly cruel and power-hungry leader, but also more generally — treats women and children as forms of wealth for high-status men. To be awarded more wives is to reach a higher status in heaven; to have more children is to have more to offer the community in free, unregulated labor and in wives to offer other men. Women and girls in the FLDS were married off young — increasingly, under Warren, long before they reached legal age — and were expected to bear as many children as possible.
Teal Swan, a YouTube-popular spiritual influencer, is diametrically opposed to the FLDS in most ways. She proclaims to be an all-knowing, supreme female leader, and she espouses women’s freedom and equality; she’s also been public about having suffered serious sexual abuse at the hands of a family friend, and in her work, she looks to heal the trauma left behind by this kind of abuse. Her schtick tends toward the girlboss, in true millennial form, and she masterfully deploys feminist rhetoric to deflect criticism of her methods (which include practices that could implant false memories of trauma in the minds of her followers).
In this episode, we discuss the appeal of dangerous spiritual groups like these, the horrors of Warren Jeffs’ FLDS, the insidious girl-power faux therapy of Teal Swan, and the anxieties about gender roles and hierarchies that emerge in each.
Thank you for listening!
And a quick reminder: we’re having a live show with Moment House on Sunday, July 10! We’ll be recapping the premiere episode of Kaitlyn and Britt’s (briefly) two-Bachelorette season. Plus, we’ll be using the tipping function on Moment House to raise money for The Brigid Alliance, a fantastic organization that provides people with the money and support they need to travel for abortion care.
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“The Summer I Turned Pretty” on Prime, based on the first book in author Jenny Han’s first trilogy, which she wrote before “To All The Boys I Loved Before.” It is sweet and sad and joyous, and a beautiful meditation on both coming of age and the longevity of female friendships. -Emma
Oh, me too! Coincidence or… pod incoming? -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
I binged my way through both seasons of the “Snapped” podcast by Lucy Taylor, which I discovered by way of the “A Little Bit Culty” pod. The first season is about her personal (hellish) experience with elite Greek life, and the second season compellingly builds a wider case for the fact that sororities remain, essentially, white supremacist cultic structures. Highly recommend. -Emma
I relistened to “The Gateway,” Gizmodo’s podcast on Teal Swan, hosted and reported by Jennings Brown, before taping this episode. Then I got curious about his new podcast, “Revelations,” in which he infiltrates the Fellowship of Friends cult. The group’s founder, Robert Burton, teaches that God is expressed and sought through classical beauty, including opera, the Western literary canon, and fine wine. Being in the FOF sounds like an unusually luxurious experience for a cult. Orchestral performances and elegant dinners served by tuxedoed waitstaff are a quotidian part of life in the community. Also, allegedly, a horrifying pattern of sexual predation on male followers. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
I’ve been re-reading some books for a project that’s in its early stages, including “Big Friendship,” “Bachelor Nation” and “Trick Mirror.” -Emma
I just started the sequel to Elif Batuman’s “The Idiot,” after an indulgent reread of her 2017 novel. “Either/Or” picks up right where “Either/Or” left off, but there’s a definite shift in attitude toward the enigmatic love interest Ivan — and a new bent in our heroine Selin’s intellectual/romantic proclivities. Rather than trying to understand love through linguistics, she’s taken up an English major, and with it, an interest in the mistreated and malcontent women of the literary canon. So, a book written for 20-year-old me! What a gift. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
My absolute favorite swimwear brand, Marysia, is having a big sale on their Resort 2022 line. Their stuff is pricey, but so flattering. (I am obsessed with scalloping, their high-waisted bikinis, and all of their gorgeous, non-granny-feeling one pieces!) I never shop their line full price because I simply can’t afford it, so I jump on it when theses suits go on sale. I grabbed the Chesapeake bikini top and bottom, as well as the East River top in fern and the matching bottoms. (I was also tempted by this gorgeous Garden Maillot.) -Emma
So many iced coffees, even though I have a coffeemaker at home. Ah, summer!
Plus: breezy long summer shorts from Tradlands. (I sized down for a slightly less billowy look, but both ways are mom schlub perfection to me.) -Claire
Share Rich TextThis week we come to you with two summer romance offerings: a must-watch movie and a we-watched-it-so-you-don’t-have-to movie.
Hulu’s “Fire Island,” written by and starring Joel Kim Booster, is a groundbreaking, thoughtful, funny, and tender modernization of “Pride and Prejudice” set in Fire Island Pines, a legendary gay resort town. Centering on the friendship between two gay Asian-American men, Noah (Booster) and Howie (Bowen Yang) and the romances that they each fall into during their week in paradise, the movie also skewers the social hierarchies, racism, and classism of the gay party scene with Austenian flair.
Netflix’s “A Perfect Pairing,” starring “Sex/Life” bad boy and Claire’s least favorite male sex symbol Adam Demos, is also a film with romantic themes and a kiss at the end. Set on an Australian sheep station owned and operated by a female billionaire, the movie follows a plucky young wine agent’s quest to land the billionaire’s new winery as a client — falling in love with the station’s stoic, abs-having boss cocky in the process. It’s a movie about girlbosses, girlbosses supporting girlbosses, rocking the perfect fuschia lip while spreading hundreds of pounds of sheep manure, and chiseled men with Secrets.
“A Perfect Pairing” might technically pass the Bechdel test — because two women talk about wine acquisitions and getting promotions — but we assure you, Alison Bechdel would tell you to watch “Fire Island,” and so do we.
In this episode, we swish “A Perfect Pairing” around in our mouth and tease out the subtle flavors of Hallmark tropes, flat chemistry, farfetched plot devices, and notes of colonialism. We then dive into the limpid waters of “Fire Island,” getting a little nitpicky (in a fun way?!) about whether it follows the beats of Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice” a bit too closely, close-reading the two romances that unfold, and discussing the movie’s unsparing critique of the bigotry and exclusion that can be found in the gay social scene.
A couple reviews referenced in the pod, for further reading:
“Fire Island Is a Curiously Reluctant Romantic Comedy” — Alison Willmore, Vulture
“The Bittersweet Silliness of Hulu’s ‘Fire Island’” — Spencer Kornhaber, The Atlantic
If you enjoy this episode, consider pairing it (as it were) with our June project over at Love to See It: Summer Lovin’, a miniseries of recaps/discussions of classic summer romances. This week we absolutely geeked out over “Dirty Dancing” with Alison Greenberg, and next week we’ll be discussing “Grease” with THE Ali Barthwell.
But this — this is our special reserve: peach and mineral. (IYKYK.) Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
Season 2 of “Girls5eva,” the totally daffy, “30 Rock”-lite Peacock show about a one-hit-wonder aughts girl group who decide to stage a comeback 20 years after their one hit. This season, the group — composed of earnest songwriter Dawn (Sara Bareilles), diva Wickie (Renée Elise Goldsberry), Christian bimbette Summer (Busy Philipps), and group-tomboy-turned-lesbian-dentist Gloria (Paula Pell) — goes into Album Mode, navigating a music industry that looks fairly different from what they encountered around the turn of the millennium. It’s extremely light but, in the “30 Rock” tradition, can be counted on to go for as many jokes as possible in the space of a scene. -Claire
Season 2 of “Hacks,” which just wrapped its second season. 8 episodes is too few episodes of this HBO Max gem. I continue to be obsessed with Jean Smart and Hannah Einbender’s crackling comedian chemistry. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
“The Idiot,” still (who has time to finish a book these days? Send tips). -Claire
Somehow still reading “Book Lovers,” because I too seem to have lost all ability to pay attention to one thing for more than 20 minutes at a time. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Endlessly catching up on all my faves, of course — Normal Gossip is mid-season 2 (a gift) — but I have also recently dipped back into Poog, Kate Berlant and Jacqueline Novak’s wellness podcast, which sets the mood for me as effectively as music. It’s a red lipstick, a silk robe, a stack of obscure books piled next to a velvet armchair, a romance that I can only associate with lazy summer days. The latest episode features both a rambling conversation about the disappointments of boutique hotels and a critique of the tone of voice one falls into when listing consumer complaints. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
A stretchy crinkle bikini from the English company YouSwim! This summer I realized I just couldn’t bear the idea of a constricting bathing suit — I just wanted something basic, flattering, and able to absorb some size fluctuations. I got the Poise High Waist Two-Piece in Ink, and it is the platonic ideal of a bikini, in my opinion. I have also been ogling these made-to-order crinkle suits from Canadian brand Loope; the color-blocking options are perfection. -Claire
The Skims Fits Everybody Bandeau in both black and neon pink. I was in need of a summertime non-underwire bra to wear under nap dresses and other loose sundresses. These feel good quality, keep the girls in, and don’t break the bank. -Emma
Share Rich Text“Normal People” was the first Sally Rooney streaming series to enrapture the viewing public, with Paul Mescal and Daisy Edgar-Jones bringing sensitive jock Connell and snooty social outcast Marianne to life onscreen. But “Conversations With Friends” is the original Rooney, the debut novel that launched the Irish writer to such massive fame and acclaim that her public persona now primarily revolves around her discomfort with being so famous and acclaimed. This spring, the team that adapted “Normal People” for Hulu worked backwards to adapt her first novel, also for Hulu.
Whereas “Normal People” is a fairly straightforward romance, “Conversations With Friends” takes on a more complex relationship: a foursome made up of Frances and Bobbi, two university students/ex-girlfriends/best friends/creative partners; and Melissa and Nick, a 36-year-old successful writer and her 32-year-old husband, an actor. The two dyads become entangled when Melissa (Jemima Kirke) sees Frances (Alison Oliver) and Bobbi (Sasha Lane) performing spoken word together and initiates a friendship. She and Bobbi, the gregarious sides of their respective couples, are drawn together; Frances and Nick (Joe Alwyn) find solace with each other and soon embark on an affair. Frances, whose perspective the audience takes throughout, tries to sort through her feelings for Nick and Bobbi, and even Melissa, while each relationship affects the group dynamic and sends other relationships twirling in different directions.
In this episode, we have a friendly conversation about this adaptation, the performances of Mr. Taylor Swift and Jessa from “Girls” (so sorry, guys) as well as their younger costars, and what the book/show have to say about ethical and unethical non-monogamy, marriage, generational conflict, and power. Hope you enjoy!
ShareWe’ve been reading…
Finally finished “The Candy House,” which did absolutely stick the landing, and have moved onto some lighter summer fare, by way of Emily Henry’s “Book Lovers.” I am loving the way that this novel plays with the Hallmark/Lifetime movie tropes about sad career women and small town hunks. It’s a delight! -Emma
I wanted to read Elif Batuman’s “Either/Or,” and then realized I couldn’t remember “The Idiot” (like, at all? This book came out in 2017. Help). So I’m rereading “The Idiot,” and maybe it’s that I no longer feel suffocated by the cloud of rhapsodic buzz that hovered over its initial release, but it’s so much funnier and more absorbing than I remembered. It’s a bit like Sally Rooney in the polished remoteness of its prose, but nerdier, denser, and more packed with dry-as-the-Sahara wit. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
Maintenance Phase’s incredibly informative episode on calories. As someone who has spent years trying to develop a better relationship with my body and food, as well as challenge my own internalized fatphobia, I find Maintenance Phase to be an incredible resource, but this episode in particular was so helpful in challenging ideas we tend to assume as nutritional ~truths~ — like the simple maxim “calories in, calories out.” I have sent this episode to at least 3 friends because it’s so good. -Emma
Not to recommend another Michael Hobbes joint, but he guested on Kaitlyn Burns and Oliver Ash-Kleine’s podcast, “Cancel Me, Daddy,” to talk about the Amber Heard-Johnny Depp trial. In it, he talks about his initial disinclination to pay attention to the trial (relatable) and his realization that because so many left/liberal commentators and journalists felt exactly the same, right-wing commentators and TikTok stans were able to control the public narrative. I will cop to having ignored the trial myself, and to having had my vague opinions influenced by the balance of what people seemed to be thinking at first; in a society that is not only incredibly misogynistic but in the midst of an active backlash to feminist activism, that is a recipe for having your brain poisoned by the right.
Speaking of brain-poisoning on the right, I also really appreciated a crossover ep from two of my favorite pods: the hosts of Five Four appeared on Know Your Enemy this week to talk through the legal history and implications of the impending Supreme Court decision overturning Roe. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
Besides binging all 12 episodes of “Conversations With Friends” in succession, I’ve also been watching “Under The Banner of Heaven,” the FX show based on John Krakauer’s 2003 nonfiction book of the same name. It follows the history of Mormonism intercut with some very disturbing true crime, and explores the perils of religious extremism. Plus, Andrew Garfield and “Normal People’s” Daisy Edgar-Jones. -Emma
Greg and I have started the latest season of “Breeders,” Martin Freeman’s FX dark comedy about a London-dwelling couple who are struggling with the travails of parenting. Both of their children are adolescents by this season, and Freeman’s character, a dad with serious anger issues, has nearly destroyed his relationship with his teenage son through his bouts of rage. It’s still funny, but often pretty sobering; like “Workin’ Moms,” it started out as a charmingly unsentimental comedy about loving parents who have rougher edges than the idealized sitcom mom or dad, but evolved into a sometimes bleak look at how those rough edges — especially an uncontrolled temper — can have more profound consequences than scandalizing pearl-clutching moms at playgroup. Anyway, lots of therapy for me, just in case! -Claire
We’ve been buying…
I mean… I went a little crazy during the Nap Dress Summer Hill House drop. (Is it an illness? Yes! Obviously!) Some of the pieces I’m most excited about (all still in stock!) are this sweet pink lace Ellie, the Ophelia dress in Rose poplin, the Alexa top (loving both patterns in this one and its adjustable neckline), the Lucia dress in cotton voile, and for extra funsies/sun protection, this Rose Sun Hat. Can’t wait to wear some of these this summer as I pretend to be a fancy lady of leisure. -Emma
It probably goes without saying that I also have a new summer nap dress or two headed my way (the lilac stripe linen Ellie will probably be the more practical choice but I couldn’t resist trying on the pink roses Ellie too). But I also decided that I have reached the wide linen trousers stage of my life, and to start the transition, I ordered these Tradlands trousers in sienna. They are so soft, can be worn the way I like (very high-waisted), and look great with a basic tank. (They’re an ethical brand, aka pricey, but I do have a referral link for a lil discount!) -Claire -Claire
Share Rich TextWe’re in the midst of a streaming content bubble. Everything is being optioned; every week, three or four shows drop into the flooded TV landscape that boast giant budgets and star Matt Damon or Jessica Biel. Streaming series are being made out of books that haven’t even come out yet and TV shows that came out less than 20 years ago. Any news story that garnered a moderate amount of national attention — even decades ago — is at risk of being turned into a prestige drama.
And it just so happens that many of the big stories of the last five years involve startups that rocketed to multibillion-dollar valuations only to collapse under the weight of unsustainable growth, executive misconduct and mismanagement, and/or fraud.
This spring saw the release of three major TV shows that depict the rises and falls of three such companies and their troubled founder/CEO leaders: “Super Pumped: The Battle for Uber” (Showtime), “WeCrashed” (Apple TV+), and “The Dropout” (Hulu). Call it a micro-genre! Summer of scams plus billions of dollars in venture capital!
The shows vary significantly in quality — if you’re only going to watch one, we recommend choosing “The Dropout,” Liz Meriwether’s deft take on Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos — but they necessarily share many similarities. They feature a central antihero, whose motives and psyche must be grappled with; a host of VCs and board members who serve first as allies and then as antagonists to the antihero; a mass of lower-level employees whose exploitation is mostly rendered in broad strokes; and a final reckoning in which the founder finally loses control over the company they view as part of their own identity.
Along with tapping into streaming and TV companies’ unquenchable appetite for bankable IP, these stories tap into something specific in the audience: a potent blend of schadenfreude, the human thirst for crime and punishment, and politically thwarted but powerful rage against the excesses of capitalism. We want to see the tech titans pay for their misdeeds; we enjoy seeing them brought low. (Even if “low” just means going elsewhere, with billions of dollars to soften the blow.) CEOs aren’t our heroes anymore; no one wants to watch a show unironically called “Girlboss.” We want to watch them humiliated.
On this episode, we talk about the cultural moment that created this mini-genre, the tropes and archetypes that construct it, and the three shows that exemplify it. We dissect the bland oddity that is “Super Pumped,” a show that seems to have been creatively driven by which specific cultural products the creators thought would be fun to have in it (Pearl Jam, Quentin Tarantino, video games); revel in the perhaps-too-fun “WeCrashed” and Anne Hathaway’s gripping performance as WeWork first lady Rebekah Neumann; and finally we fangirl a bit over “The Dropout” and that Lil Wayne office dance scene that haunts our nightmares.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
Jessica Goodman’s new Y.A. thriller, “The Counselors,” which is finally out next week! Set at an idyllic summer camp serving the children of New York’s elite, it’s the perfect blend of summery escapism — you can practically taste the melting ice cream sandwiches and hear the yells of campers splashing in the lake — and suspenseful.
I’ve also been reading “Elsewhere,” by Alex Schaitkin, a dreamily unsettling novel set in a secluded town with its own peaceful way of life, and an inexplicable secret: Every now and then, one of the mothers in the town simply disappears. It’s an absorbing meditation on how women enter the state of motherhood and become both more intensely surveilled than ever and also, somehow, more invisible than before. (It will be out in June.) -Claire
Speaking of tech-fueled dystopias, I am still reading Jennifer Egan’s “The Candy House.” My ability to read quickly has been somewhat deadened by the pandemic, but the creative structure of this novel has gripped me. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Workin’ Moms” is back with season 6, and you know I’m back to watching ambitious Kate and mean-tempered Anne, along with their old mommy-group cohort, try to juggle parenthood, marriage, and work. As ever, the parenting part seems weirdly simple, or at least quiet — how do they get their toddlers to spend so little time shrieking “The Wheels on the Bus” over and over? And demanding that their mommy sit in a specific spot on the floor and sing along with them while playing with a truck in a specific way? — and they play pretty fast and loose with the publication timeline of books in this season. But it’s still reliably funny, and it ended on a TOTAL CLIFFHANGER so now I need season 7 immediately. Very rude to end sitcom seasons on cliffhangers! Uncool, guys! -Claire
I… have been binging “Bling Empire,” Netflix’s reality series about Asian billionaires and billionaire spawn (some millionaires, too) living in Los Angeles? It’s like candy for your brain. Not nutritious at all, but a fun rush. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Season 2 of “Normal Gossip” has begun (hell yeah), and I’ve got two songs on repeat: Dagny’s “Love You Like That” and Hayley Kiyoko’s “For the Girls.” If you’re not sure why, please get yourself a box of tissues, watch this, and then watch this. -Claire
For reasons that should be obvious, I too have been listening to Hayley Kiyoko’s “For The Girls,” as well as making my way through her back catalogue. I’ve also been on a kick of listening to songs that evoke the emotional drama of my teen years — which mostly means a whole lot of whiny alt-rock, like “Paper Heart” by the All-American Rejects and late ‘90s Green Day. lol. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
I got #influenced into buying the East Fork mug, from the cult-followed Asheville, NC pottery company. We have a whole shelf of mugs, and only a couple I actually like using — our Love to See It mug, obviously, and a random Urban Outfitters mug with an “A” on it because they were out of “C” mugs. I like to be able to put all four fingers into the handle; I like a little heft. If you’re like me… yeah, the East Fork mug lived up to the Instagram hype. The handle is pleasingly thick and capacious, and the whole vessel has a pleasing weight. The glaze (I chose the Eggshell shade) is beautiful and silky to the touch. -Claire
I’ve been putting the finishing touches on my new in-home work area since I moved. I have a lot of books, and also like to hold onto certain magazines that I’ve collected over the years. I was looking for a beautiful, space-saving way to display them, and I finally found it in these (super affordable!) FRIADE wall racks. I used these wooden racks with faux leather straps for magazines by my desk, and this one (I’m a sucker for rattan!) as a small-space-efficient bedside “table” of sorts, where I can put whatever book I’m reading and my eye masks. -Emma
Share Rich TextTan France. An indoor water feature. A sculptural swoop of scarlet sleeve. A fake montage of all the ladies arriving. Amanza undergoing 3 hours of glam squad work for a 90-second proof-of-life FaceTime appearance. Chrishell blushing joyfully over a special someone named G Flip. The Oppenheim twins weeping while continuing to hold their faces nearly immobile.
The “Selling Sunset” season 5 reunion had it all — except for the presence of Christine Quinn, the show’s long-running villain, who has apparently ghosted the show and its audience.
This week, we came back together to discuss some of the biggest revelations and pettiest debates of the reunion. We belatedly litigate the question of whether Christine actually bribed Emma’s client to switch agents, dig into the fraught gender dynamics of Jason’s and Chrishell’s respective decisions around having children and the liberatory potential of queer family structures, and come to a final conclusion on whether Emma’s Emma-panadas are really… empanadas. (No.)
Enjoy! xo
Share Rich TextAfter five too-brief seasons of “Selling Sunset,” it was finally time for us to tackle the realtor reality soap — and finally time for me (Claire) to take a crash course in learning to tell 5-7 almost identical long-legged blondes apart from each other. (It’s a steep learning curve, but I can now reliably tell the difference between Emma and Christine, based on minute differences in lip plumpness.)
Like this season’s newcomer, agent Chelsea Lazkani, I plunged sans context into the cesspool of entrenched grievances that is the Oppenheim Group and merrily began to choose allies and enemies. Then I went back and viewed the four previous seasons, watching in enthralled horror as Christine’s friendships blossomed and wilted in an almost comically consistent pattern. Each season of the show is a fascinating document, constructed of lip fillers, couture miniskirts, 6-inch strappy stilettos, wedding invitations unreceived and coffee dates gone awry. Also: escrow. I’m at least 30% closer to understanding what “escrow” means after binging this show, as well as 65% closer to believing, against all evidence, that I will own a $4 million house with an infinity pool by the age of 42. Look, no one ever doesn’t buy a $4 million house on this show, so I can only assume the experience is universal.
Since Rich Text is new to “Selling Sunset” — and especially since I was absorbing all five seasons of drama simultaneously — we had endless material and could have talked for 12 hours. We compromised at two hours, in which we discussed the show’s very sleek, very tan, very L.A. aesthetic; whether the Oppenheim boys have charisma; whether we’re team Christina or team Chrishell; the limits of dividing and conquering; and what kind of home we’d buy with a budget like the buyers on this show.
NOTE: This episode does not cover the reunion episode! Emma had to move (and I had to get a haircut, equally important and stressful) on Friday, the day of the reunion drop, so we weren’t able to squeeze in a taping. But we will be back later this week with a mini-episode on the reunion (spoiler: AHHHHH) and also touch on some of the season five drama that we forgot to mention because I was so overwhelmed by how often Heather must get her hair professionally braided.
Hope you enjoy! xo -Claire
ShareWe’ve been reading…
Matt James’s surprisingly illuminating memoir, “First Impressions,” which offers more substance and insight than most post-“Bachelor” books (low bar, but nevertheless).
Also, the upcoming debut “Schmutz” by Felicia Berliner. It’s a very, uh, explicit novel about a young Hasidic woman who gets a laptop for her accounting studies and quickly becomes addicted to porn. Definitely NSFW. -Claire
Finally started Jennifer Egan’s “The Candy House.” I absolutely loved 2011’s “A Visit From The Goon Squad,” so I’ve been very excited to get into the long-awaited follow-up novel. I also loved Jia Tolentino’s New Yorker essay on the potentially radical nature of public, universal motherhood/care work. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
Five seasons of “Selling Sunset.” Obviously. I’m a professional. -Claire
The second season of “The Flight Attendant” on HBO Max. I love a thriller vibe, and I love Kaley Kuoco’s zany energy. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Some pods about the recent Roe vs. Wade news, including a satisfyingly rude episode from the lefty Supreme Court podcast “Five Four” and an “On the Media” episode about underground networks of activists teaching each other how to administer safe abortions outside of a doctor’s office. -Claire
The second season of “Queen of the Con” about a scammer CPA in Orange County. You know I love a good scam story. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
A lipstick from Merit Beauty, in hopes of reconnecting with my orange-red-lipstick-wearing roots. Also, an extremely soft nightgown from Hill House’s PJ collection. The days of summer glamour are coming! -Claire
I’ve been moving, so I have mostly been buying a whole lot of home things? My favorites include: these Threshold Coiled Rope bins from Target, this Wirecutter-recommended bath mat, this Backdrop paint in Surf Camp for an accent wall, and this indulgent wallpaper from Anthropologie which I am going to attempt to put up myself in my closet. (Because I am now living with a man, my more maximalist, pattern-driven tastes have been banished from the main living spaces. Rude!!!) -Emma
Give a gift subscriptionWhat if you really did have to work all the time? What if there were no family, no friends, no evenings or vacations, not even eight (okay, six and a half) hours of restful slumber?
Would a stack of colorful erasers and an occasional offering of melon or deviled eggs be enough to make this life worth living? What about collegial but superficial friendships with a handful of coworkers? A quarterly stack of waffles and burlesque performance? Constant assurances that you’re part of a family and that your work has profound, benevolent meaning?
“Severance,” the buzzy Apple TV+ show pushes the question to its limit. The series follows Mark (Ben Scott), an office worker at a creepy mega-corporation called Lumon who, along with his officemates, has undergone a procedure called “severance” to separate his work and personal memories. Though they leave the office every day at five and go home to their lives, they remember nothing that has happened at work. And because severed workers retain no knowledge of their outside lives once inside, the process essentially creates a new person, a new consciousness, who lives in the windowless office. It’s a work-life balance so complete that it ceases to be a balance at all.
As the series opens, Mark and his team are seemingly content with their lot — the little in-jokes, the incentives (erasers and waffle parties), the assurances that they’re making the world a better place as part of the Lumon family. Behind the carrots, of course, are sticks: when workers don’t fall in line, they’re psychologically tortured. But when Helly (Britt Lower) joins the team and refuses to accept that she can’t leave, the whole group begins to radicalize. Office comedy blends into dark corporate satire, which blends into scifi thriller as the workers begin to untangle the mystery of what Lumon is doing, why they’ve been created, and how to end their imprisonment.
It’s a beautifully realized, powerfully acted, and startlingly funny show, so we had the best time talking through the premise, the aesthetic, the performances, the misery and solidarity found in office drudgery, the many forms of labor exploitation, and even some fan theories about season two.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“Sea of Tranquillity,” the newest Emily St. John Mandel novel. If you’ve read her previous two books, “Station Eleven” and “The Glass Hotel,” you probably know that there’s some slight overlap between them — a couple of shared characters, hints that they exist in the same universe. “Sea of Tranquillity” draws even more heavily from the world of “The Glass Hotel,” but with a strong sci-fi twist. It dips into 19th century British Columbia and 25th century moon colonies, and several places in between. The common link is a time-traveling detective who’s investigating a glitch in the fabric of time. (Much of the novel also seems to be drawn from her reflections on having written a popular pandemic novel just a few years before a catastrophic pandemic.) By the end, I found myself pretty distracted by my conviction that the time-travel element didn’t quite hang together, making the whole central thread of the book suspect. Not my favorite of hers, but she does go some lovely places with the question of what makes a life worth living — a perennial interest in her work. -Claire
I just started reading an advanced copy of our bud Jessica Goodman’s latest thriller, “The Counselors,” and I am hooked! I mean… camp vibes! Murder! Teen angst! First loves! What more could you want from a well-crafted, propulsive novel? -Emma
We’ve been watching…
Oh, everything! It’s been a catchup week over here. I finally finished “Bad Vegan,” Netflix’s breathless true-crime documentary about how the celebrity chef owner of Pure Food and Wine, a groundbreaking raw vegan restaurant in NYC, got sucked into a cultish relationship with some guy named Shane who used to tweet with Alec Baldwin (apparently this was considered cool in 2011). I’d never followed the story, so it was all new and fascinating. Points off for the troubling ending to the series; after presenting mountains of evidence that chef Sarma Melngailis was in a psychologically abusive, cult-like relationship, the shows pivots to lightly suggesting that maybe she was trying to scam her abuser and just wasn’t as successful as he was. It left an odd taste in my mouth, to say the least. -Claire
The second season of “Upload,” Amazon Prime’s underrated dystopian tech show. “Upload” explores an America in which the wealthy can now upload their consciousnesses to a private digital afterlife. The series focuses on Nathan Brown (Robbie Amell), a 27-year-old computer programmer who dies under mysterious circumstances and is uploaded into Lakeview, an elite digital afterlife, and his very-much-alive handler, Nora Antony (Andy Allo), who is a mid-level employee of Horizen, the shady mega-corporation that runs Lakeview. If you like the Big Tech themes of “Severance,” highly recommend checking out “Upload.” -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Scamfluencers,” the new scam pod from Scaachi Koul and Sarah Hagi. The first two stories they’ve zeroed in (a ballet company grift and an actor-producer who pretends to be backed by Howard Schultz) have been totally new to me and profoundly satisfying to hear unravel. -Claire
“Sympathy Pains,” a new podcast hosted by journalist Laura Beil, about Sarah Delashmit, a woman who spent two decades faking muscular dystrophy, cancer, lost pregnancies, and other traumas, in order to solicit friendship, favors and sympathy from the people around her. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
A chunky-knit cotton cardigan from Everlane, in their spring sale! After a year of feverishly, compulsively shopping, trying to figure out a functional style for myself post-baby and mid-Covid, I am really trying to cool my jets and settle into a wardrobe I feel good about. (Thanks to Dacy Gillespie’s Mindful Closet Instagram, into which I took a deep dive last month, for the inspiration.) I’ve been trying to pare back my closet, find things to sell or store or donate, and focus on making sure I have things at hand every day that I can reliably feel good in. And apparently I feel great in a sturdy cardigan? Incredible that it took me 33 years to really figure that out. -Claire
I also indulged in a little Madewell mega-sale shopping. I snagged this MWL Knit Cami and a pair of MWL Form High-Rise Leggings, both an extra 50% off. I have been trying to get back into a regular movement/exercise routine to help with my anxiety, and as dumb as it sounds, sometimes having a cute outfit to do it in is a helpful motivator. (Also, forcing your friends to move with you.) -Emma
Give a gift subscriptionIf you watch “The Bachelor,” in some small part, to soak in the befuddling spectacle of 24-year-old women weeping because they’re not engaged yet and will never be chosen… boy, has Netflix got a series tailor-made for you!
“The Ultimatum” is the streaming platform’s latest romance reality show, and, more specifically, it’s part of the Lachey cinematic universe. Like “Love Is Blind,” the show is hosted by the notoriously happily married B-list couple, Nick and Vanessa; also, like “Love Is Blind,” it forces its participants to drink out of matching metallic wine glasses, and it bills itself as an “experiment.”
The hypothesis: Taking time apart and seeing other people can help established couples decide if they’re ready to get married.
The experimental design: Six couples, in which one partner wants to get engaged and the other doesn’t, exchange partners for a three-week “trial marriage,” followed by a three-week “trial marriage” with their original partner.
The results: The various couples break up or get engaged, thus proving that Nick and Vanessa are correct. About something.
Okay, so the scientific method is not closely followed in the course of this experiment, or at least what we remember of it from 9th grade chem.
But what this show does offer, in abundance, are very, very young people who desperately want to get married now. Not when they’re 25, not when they’ve dated for four years, not when their partner is ready, but now. The cast is appropriately unhinged for a juicy dating show. Some standouts:
April, a 23-year-old influencer who almost exclusively refers to herself as “April,” as in, “April has had that maternal instinct since she was a little girl. April wants her own little girl.”
Rae, a 24-year-old who explains that her man should propose because “I have my degree, I stay in the gym, I cook, I clean, and I know how to fuck.”
Colby, a 25-year-old who dresses like a middle-aged ranch-owner and wants his girlfriend Madlyn to marry him immediately so that everyone will know she belongs to him.
Madlyn, a 24-year-old who treats Colby with barely-veiled contempt but seems completely open to marrying him at the end of this experience.
Alexis, a 25-year-old who admits she’d leave her boyfriend if he didn’t make enough for her to live a lavish lifestyle.
Though these characters can be jaw-dropping to watch in action, one thing these Netflix dating shows have going for them, oddly, is a fair amount of nuance. While “Bachelor” cast members are almost always neatly slotted into archetypes — villain, wifey, good guy — and carefully edited to keep their roles clear to the audience, even the most off-putting of the characters on “The Ultimatum” are shown as complex, confusing, complete humans. Even Alexis, who comes off as nosy, rude, and self-centered, is presented through the eyes of her boyfriend, Hunter, as lovable for her strong opinions and sense of self.
It’s juicy, disturbing TV — compulsive viewing, but also a bit concerning. The structure of the show involves taking a relationship with a fair amount of preexisting issues — disagreements about having kids, about money, about compatibility — and, without any apparent therapeutic support, injecting a huge dose of jealousy and insecurity. When the original couples reunite, they each not only have to deal with whatever physical and emotional connections their partner had while they were separate, but they have to field hurtful comparisons to the temporary partner. Most of the participants, by the end, seem to regret having done it, even if they got where they needed to go in their relationships.
On this week’s pod, we discussed as many twists and turns of “The Ultimatum” as we could jam into a two-hour taping. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
I’m still reading “Pure Colour” by Sheila Heti, and it’s only getting wilder and woolier. For a long stretch, a leaf is simply having a conversation with themself (themselves)? I can’t describe it in a short blurb, I can only highly recommend. -Claire
A lot of brisket recipes to prepare for Passover seders. (Which by the time this comes out, will have already happened.) I settled on Alison Roman’s horseradish-y, shallot-y recipe, with a few tweaks of my own, like adding tomato paste. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Severance”! I’m a bit late to the melon party — Emma insisted that I watch for a future pod — but having just finally finished “Station Eleven,” I was very ready to start another show with some real teeth. -Claire
I binged “Severance” in less than 48 hours. I am still shook. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Randall and Jake, fresh off “The Ultimatum,” opening up a bit more about their experiences on the Ringer Reality TV podcast. We particularly loved hearing Randall call out his partner Shanique’s haters for being unable to accept an outspoken Black woman, and learning a bit more about what was going on with Jake and April’s relationship off-camera. -Claire
“Scamfluencers,” Wondery’s podcast, hosted by journalists Scaachi Koul and Sarah Hagi, about people who wield influence, both off and online, and use it to grift. The first two episodes are about a ballet company with allegedly lofty ideals, that ended in chargers of domestic violence and murder. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
These beautiful Swedish Hasbeen boots, which I coveted all fall and winter. I wore my Target knockoffs almost every day, but they were getting pretty scratched and gross by the end of the season, so when I saw that Bloomingdale’s had marked down the shearling clog boots I had originally longed for, I pounced. They were still a major splurge (though I was lucky to be able to combine a couple sale deals), but they’re super comfortable and I know they’ll be a cold-weather staple. -Claire
I saw my friend wearing these Everlane Easy Jeans with an elastic waistband, and I had to have them. Now that I’m going out to eat again regularly, I’ve re-remembered the deep discomfort of jeans cutting into your abdomen for a protracted period of time while sitting. They also happen to be on super sale right now. -Emma
This is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter about cultural obsessions from your Internet BFFs Emma and Claire. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors! Coming soon: A subscribers-only episode about Netflix’s batshit new reality dating show “The Ultimatum.”
In the final episodes of the NBC sitcom “The Good Place,” our intrepid ensemble of Bad Place fugitives finally arrive at the real Good Place: an eternity of ease and joy. Almost immediately, they notice that all is not quite right. The denizens of the Good Place, finally delivered unto their eternal reward, are very fucking not okay. They’re happiness-poisoned, so surfeited with fun and relaxation that they’re drowning in their own boredom. They’ve developed anhedonic armor against the relentless pleasure of heaven. The gang of newcomers looks around, shocked and horrified. All this time they’d been hearing about how rapturously wonderful the Good Place was… and this was the reality?
Heather Havrilesky’s new book, “Foreverland: On the Divine Tedium of Marriage,” gives us a similar surprise reveal for a more earthly dream: wedded bliss. That moment of shocking reveal is what made the pages of the New York Times, in an excerpt that catalyzed a massive Twitter storm. “Until Bill has enough coffee,” she writes, “[h]e is exactly the same as a heap of laundry: smelly, inert, almost sentient but not quite.” She also writes of his throat-clearing, his sneezes, his monologues on educational sciences. Marriage, she seems to conclude, “requires turning down the volume on your spouse.” Also, she writes, “he’s still my favorite person.”
Yes, this is what marriage to your favorite person might actually look like — not a rosy fantasia of passionate kisses and ardent speeches and your partner somehow doing and saying everything you’d like at exactly the right moment. It might be sort of a mess, and full of frustrations and disappointments. It might also still be really wonderful, and part of the wonder of it might come through the mess and the frustrations and disappointments. A marriage is a shared project, a puzzle; figuring out, together, how to survive the boring sameness and the human failings can be the most intimate and fulfilling part.
That’s what Havrilesky wanted to write about: not a perfect marriage, and not a broken one, but the gripping drama that takes place in a strong, happy marriage. The kinds of conflicts that are often breezily referred to as “ups and downs,” or with the vague admonition that “marriage takes work.”
We both loved Havrilesky’s book (we’re long-time fans of her advice column, Ask Polly) and were baffled by the backlash to “Foreverland,” so we were thrilled she agreed to join us for a conversation about her book, marriage and long-term partnership, aging and hanging on to your identity as a woman in this society, and why people had such a strong reaction to her book.
This week’s episode is free. For more Rich Text episodes, including podcasts on Love Is Blind, The Gilded Age, and Bridgerton, become a paid subscriber!
Subscribe nowWe’ve been reading…
Sheila Heti’s “Pure Colour,” a dreamy origin myth and love story.
Also, Lydia Kiesling’s crackerjack essay on Horatio Alger, “Fifty Shades of Grey,” and the weird mix of American ambition and erotic predation that undergirds our culture’s most successful and enduring rags-to-riches fantasies. The disturbing truth she reveals about Alger truly shocked me, though, as she points out, it’s not a secret so much as rarely discussed, and her analysis of his life and work illuminates elements of the billionaire romantic fantasy that have never quite clicked into place for me before. -Claire
Blair McLendon’s New York Times magazine piece on America’s Black billionaires. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Minx,” the HBO Max show about a prim feminist (a Vassar grad and tennis club member) who joins forces with a porn mag publisher (played by a swaggering Jake Johnson) after no one else takes an interest in her consciousness-raising magazine, The Matriarchy Awakens. The twist he adds: nude male centerfolds. It’s not groundbreaking — it’s pretty classic uptight-lady-meets-charming-dirtbag material — but it’s well-executed and fun, and the 1970s hair doesn’t hurt. -Claire
All the screeners of “The Ultimatum.” Netflix’s newest reality romance show is a complete mess, but I cannot look away!!!! -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
The bonus episodes of “Biohacked: Family Secrets” on Apple Podcasts, each of which follow someone whose life and identity was upended by a home DNA test. The stories are utterly gripping. -Emma
This week’s bonus episode of Love to See It! I couldn’t make the taping because I was sick, so for this episode, I get to be a fan. Emma went to see The Bachelor Live in New York last weekend, and she recaps the whole bizarre evening with our friend Liviya Kraemer and our old producer Harry Huggins. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
A chelating shampoo, because apparently Jersey City has ridiculously hard water. (Our faucets have the white mineral stains to prove it.) Hard water can build up in your hair and make it dry and brittle — but chelating shampoo is also super drying?? Seems like a conspiracy. Why is it so hard to have hair? Should I just try to install a showerhead filter? My level of handiness is “Ikea dresser assembly.” -Claire
I took advantage of Sephora’s spring sale to get some of my favorites lightly discounted. After months of searching and revamping my makeup routine, I’ve finally landed on a concealer: ILIA True Skin Serum Concealer with Vitamin C. I grabbed two of those — I have been wearing some light concealer under my eyes and on any blemishes on days when I want to look fresh but don’t want to do a full face of makeup. I also grabbed Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Setting Spray, a tube of Benefit 24-Hour Lamination Effect Brow Gel, and a Beauty Blender sponge, because mine has gotten pretty gross. -Emma
ShareGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
When “Bridgerton” season 2 dropped a week and a half ago, we couldn’t wait a single day to share our first reaction to the season: where is all the sex? We’re too impatient for a 7 episodes of sexual build-up, and we’re too impatient for a week of reflection before demanding that the creators of this Netflix live-action romance novel give us more horny content. If you missed our quick chat about it, you can find it here. (Also, Claire contributed some thoughts to a fun New York Post article on why some fans wanted more sex, giving her the opportunity to sound completely unhinged. “It should be hornier because I would enjoy that” sounded like a normal thing to say at the time.)
But after a week of reflection, we DO have more thoughts about why we care so passionately about sex scenes – as well as thoughts about how much emotional connection we get to see between our lovers, the season’s many changes from the Julia Quinn novel, whether Anthony is made into too much of a dick and whether Kate’s grief journey is shortchanged, how Edwina is done dirty, how Eloise is done even more dirty, the joy of seeing an Indian heroine taking center stage, the pitfalls of the show’s efforts to build a diverse world out of source material (Quinn’s series) that is unremittingly white and uninterested in questioning the aristocracy or British empire, and the path forward for Penelope after the Lady Whistledown debacle. And despite all the nits we pick, we also tried to extol the parts we loved about this season, which is just as candy-hued and frothy and compellingly acted as season 1.
In this episode, we reference some comments made by the people behind the show about the sex quotient this season, as well as this fantastic article about the history of Indian women in British high society – and how the Sharma ladies in “Bridgerton” both reflect it and cast it in a far rosier hue than reality. Not referenced in this episode, but a fascinating and relevant read: Are the corsets on “Bridgerton” needlessly tight and painful?
Now please bring on season 3: we’re yearning for more Kate and Anthony (happy and domesticated), more Edwina (getting the heart-pounding romance she deserves), a continuation of Eloise’s thoroughly modern dalliance with radical printer Theo (maybe some kissing??), and for the scales to finally fall from Colin’s eyes so he can finally ravish Penelope.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“Foreverland” by Heather Havrilesky, in anticipation of our upcoming chat with her. I’ve been a fan of her writing since discovering Ask Polly on the Awl almost a decade ago, and though she’s taken a bit of a beating for the book’s bluntly funny description of marriage to her husband, I have not been at all surprised or put off by what I’ve found in the book. It’s viciously hilarious, unsparing of herself, her husband, her family, the suburbs, and the concepts of parenthood and marriage themselves. It’s also forgiving and accepting. She embraces the romantic stories she tells about herself and her life, but she also rips them open and turns them inside out to see what the romance is hiding. As someone who is in the marriage trenches (parenting a toddler who is constantly sick while both working full-time), I needed this book. -Claire
In a Bridgerton haze, I started reading “Romancing Mister Bridgerton,” Julia Quinn’s novel about Penelope and Colin. The romance! The sexiness! Swoon! -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Moana.” The toddler is, in point of fact, home sick as I write this, and has been home sick for four days. (I calculated the other day, and he was out sick or due to a Covid exposure for almost 50 percent of March. February’s rate of absences — 25 percent — looks positively aspirational.) After two years of trying to minimize his screen time, we have become desperate enough to try to actively teach him to watch Disney movies. He doesn’t want to. He wants to run around the apartment, pulling all my books off the shelves and hurling wooden blocks across the room. When the atmosphere in “Moana” turns a bit spooky, he bursts into tears. But, with well-deployed snuggles and additional narration, we’ve convinced him to watch up to 30 minutes at a time. Such a fun movie! Can’t wait to find out what happens once they reach Te Fiti, maybe when he turns three. -Claire
For the first time ever (somehow!!!), I have been watching “Temptation Island.” And oh my goodness. I have QUESTIONS. Mostly… why the fuck would anyone put their relationship through this? Is this show simply a torture device for people who already distrust each other? Why is Hania my new mortal enemy? -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“What Happened to Sandy Beal,” a podcast reported and hosted by our brilliant ex-colleague Melissa Jeltsen. She reports, with tremendous compassion and insight, on violence against women, and in this podcast, she looks into the cold case of a teenage girl who was found dead of a gunshot wound in 1977. The incident was quickly ruled a suicide by the local police, despite suspicious circumstances — including her recent, troubled romance with a married policeman a decade older. Melissa lets us get to know Sandy deeply, through interviews with her family and glimpses into her diaries, and also turns her lens on the power and relative impunity enjoyed by the cops. -Claire
A big freaking +1 to Claire’s rec of “What Happened to Sandy Beal.” Proud to know Melissa, and the podcast is absolutely gripping. I also really loved the latest episode of Virginia Sole-Smith’s “Burnt Toast,” about the myth of visible abs, and how that false north star can not only enforce chasing the thin ideal, but also create a lot of alienation around practical core work. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Ughhhh Madewell sweats. Truly back on my bullshit. I feel immense guilt whenever I succumb to the urge to buy overpriced Madewell loungewear (though I snagged this floral sweatshirt and shorts in a site-wide sale, at least). But if I’m honest with myself: the sweats get more wear than anything else in my closet. So I might as well feel good in them, right? During the 50 percent of the month that we’re stuck inside trying to work and parent simultaneously, getting dressed is a mountain I don’t bother climbing. Having some decent sweats already on (from sleeping in them, obv) is what works for me. -Claire
I too succumbed to the call of Madewell and the continuous false hope I will find the perfect jeans!! I bought and ended up loving their Superwide-Leg Jeans in Blaisdell Wash, which come in Petite, Regular and Tall and Plus sizes. They feel somewhat trendy without making me feel like I’m dressing like a teenager. (An excellent sweet spot!) I’ve also been trying to pare down on things I currently have — so I’ve been going through my clothing and putting some good stuff I just no longer wear on Poshmark. -Emma
Share Rich TextIt’s extremely fitting that, for his latest glistening but somewhat creaky period drama, Julian Fellowes (the creator of “Downton Abbey”) selected Gilded Age New York, the historical stomping ground of obscenely wealthy robber barons and their socially ambitious, upstart wives. Much like our own, it was an era of excess and extravagance made visible, of luxury goods flaunted in order to advertise one’s own wealth and status. The economist Thorstein Veblen, having observed the spending habits of the socialite class during the Gilded Age, coined the term “conspicuous consumption” to describe them. The term “gilded” itself suggests that the order of the day was not exactly value, but the appearance of it — a thin veneer of opulence over something worthless.
Perhaps it would be a bit harsh to describe “The Gilded Age” itself this way, though the comparison does spring to mind. As a show, it’s fascinated with wealth and its visual trappings. We both adored the luxuriant draped satins and swishing bustles, the architectural hairstyles, the lavish interiors, Carrie Coon’s velvety voice, the ball. (Above all, the ball.)
The substance was a bit less flawless. Some elements were gripping, in particular the single-minded but compelling quest of Bertha Russell (Coon) to dominate the New York social scene the way her husband George (Morgan Spector) dominates the railway business, and the journalistic ambitions and hidden heartbreak of Peggy Scott (Denée Benton), the daughter of an affluent Brooklyn family who works as a secretary for a white society matron while pursuing her impractical dreams.
Some of the other key characters failed to add up (the age, personality, and true desires of romantic heroine Marian Brook, played by Louisa Jacobson, somehow remain a mystery), and the dialogue is often threadbare. The plot threads are endless, many of them wispy or dangling, and the perspective can be so contemporary that it’s more jarring than relatable. There aren’t many depths to plumb in the show, especially in the society scene where most of the action takes place.
But a soap is a soap, and it can offer an immense amount of fun. As “The Gilded Age” found its legs, there was plenty of that. And some of the best machinations and set-pieces — like George Russell’s successful attempt to squeeze his business rivals to save his fortune (and ruin theirs), and the tense negotiations between Old New York social maven Mrs. Astor and arriviste Mrs. Russell over invitations to Gladys Russell’s debutante ball — were drawn from real Gilded Age events.
In this week’s pod, we nerd out about some of the historical figures and events behind the characters of the show, dissect our reactions to the key characters and plot points, and discuss how the show explores class and social change during an time much like our own.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“Rethinking Sex: A Provocation” by Christine Emba, a WaPo columnist (and old college friend of mine!). Emba’s book takes on the miseries of today’s heterosexual dating and hookup scene, arguing that while consent is a necessary legal concept, it is insufficient to establishing a sexual ethics that would truly promote the wellbeing of its participants. In part, she argues, the greater sexual freedoms we’ve fought for have left us without a shared understanding of what a mutually comfortable sexual encounter might include. Some thoughtful guardrails, she suggests, might actually increase pleasure, just as basic etiquette can make a dinner party more fun. She talks to women made wretched by an app-fueled dating scene, where consensual but unfulfilling sexual encounters are plentiful and committed relationships seem impossible to secure, and makes a case for embracing a sexual culture not based solely in consent or even enthusiasm, but in mutual care. I haven’t yet finished, so I don’t want to offer half-baked responses, but so far it’s a thoughtful addition to a necessary discourse around what would help more people have more joyful, pleasurable sex. -Claire
I’m still making my way through “The Season,” the book about the social history of the debutante by Kristen Richardson, at Claire’s suggestion. I’m learning so much and having a very throwback-to-college experience of underlining things and making notes in the margins. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
The heaving bosoms of “Bridgerton,” of course! Our pod on the new season is coming next week. -Claire
Disappointingly, Bravo’s “Summer House” out-hornied our Regency-era smutty fave “Bridgerton”! But I did watch them both. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
The same old stuff. It’s been so long since I’ve had time for a good old-fashioned afternoon of house-cleaning that I’m actually behind on most of my podcasts and haven’t started any new ones lately. Just trying to be transparent! -Claire
I caught up on the last two episodes of Jo Piazza’s podcast, Under The Influence. I know I’ve recommended it here before, but I really enjoyed these episodes, about mental health and fertility Instagram/TikTok. Jo manages to do such a skillful job of exploring why these spaces exist in the first place, and how they can both provide relief and support, and do harm. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
These cropped black Luxe Leggings from Girlfriend Collective. I have an old pair in the longer inseam, which I have worn a million times. They’re hands-down my favorite leggings: thick, velvety soft, with the sleekness of a workout legging and the elevated look of an anywhere legging. The only problem: the extra length bagged at my ankles. I was very excited to finally use some Girlfriend points and treat myself to a cropped pair. -Claire
My friend Liv alerted me this week to the fact that comfy shoe brand Aerosoles is having a big heading-into-spring sale. I hadn’t perused the Aerosoles site since I was in my early 20s and trying to purchase sensible office shoes, but to my surprise and delight, they have some really cute stuff! And the sale is *good.* I sprung for these Dada platforms (which are on sale and come in a bunch of great colors) and these Ebba velcro (!!!) sneakers. -Emma
It seems impossible that anyone could want to bring low-rise jeans back.
Right? On that point, we thought we were safe. They require a bikini wax and low-coverage underwear; they feel like they’re perpetually on the brink of slipping off your butt. Sitting down in them, much like sitting down in a hoop skirt, requires a keen sense of spatial awareness and precise, practiced movements. They are designed to present the full, uninterrupted length of your abdomen for public scrutiny. Low-rise jeans were a terrible mistake, of course.
Anyway, as Vogue confirms, they’re back! Along with scarf tops, glittery butterfly clips, shrunken tees, Ed Hardy shirts, and so many other early-aughts trends that were, in our recollection, miserable to grow up under. Generations of adolescents have struggled to master the current fashions and put in a good showing with their peers, but were any other era’s so inherently daunting?
Neither of us missed Y2K fashion; it’s associated with little but middle-school social anxiety and the unbridled fatphobia of the time. But to stay relevant, to feel still young and alive and full of possibility… would we venture back?
In this episode, we briefly discuss vibe shift survival anxiety (remember that discourse? It was a million years ago), and then really dig into our high school fashion memories, our feelings about low-rise jeans, the gendered aspect of the vibe shift and fashion trends, and more!
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“Checkout 19” by Claire-Louise Bennett!!! Just read it.
Also, sometimes I like to read literary criticism, when I’m strong enough to do so without sinking into a depression because I almost never write it anymore, and Lauren Oyler has an extremely sharp review of the new Jennifer Egan book Are in Harper’s. Lots of gems in it: “It’s true that being on the internet is a huge waste of time that could be spent reading and writing, plus there’s what it does to language—the way it manufactures clichés through the repetition and imitation it encourages. Yet the desire to waste time is ultimately a human one; it allows us to pretend we have an unlimited supply.” -Claire
I’m still working my way through “Foreverland.” Still really enjoying it and — surprise! — we’re going to have Heather Havrilesky on the pod to discuss it! -Emma
We’ve been watching…
Oh, so many things I’m dying to talk to Emma about. “The Gilded Age”! “The Dropout”! And, most baffling of all, “The Courtship”!!! (We will be covering the latter on Love to See It during the offseason of “The Bachelor” — join us.) -Claire
Truly cannot wait to discuss “The Courtship,” especially its absolutely bonkers ballroom dancing elimination ceremonies. I’ve also been catching up on the “RHOSLC” reunion. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Susie’s interview on “The Viall Files,” to get some more insight on the woman who broke “The Bachelor” and put it back together again, sort of. She’s extremely charming and thoughtful in the interview, is justly critical of Clayton but also owns her own mistakes, offers some insight into her mindset going into the fateful fantasy suite conversation, and does her best to make the case that her boyfriend is actually a good dude who is working on himself. -Claire
“Biohacked: Family Secrets,” a new podcast about donor-conceived children and the complicated history and ethical implications of making conception a massive for-profit industry. Like most things under capitalism, the answers are fucking complicated. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
High-waisted shorts that fit me like a glove. I had to size down a couple — Madewell’s sizing is a mess lately — but for once, no waist gap. Summer is coming (in two to three months)!!
I also optimistically resubscribed to Nuuly, hoping for a March and April with some actual outfit opportunities. (Our first date night of 2022, perhaps? My first hangout with a friend since last December? A park jaunt on a day warm enough that I don’t need a fully zipped parka and hat over my clothes?) I learned that Levi’s Ribcage jeans are unforgivingly true to size, unlike most denim brands I’ve worn lately, but otherwise my selections have been winners — though the outfit opportunities have yet to materialize. -Claire
As I said on the podcast, I was recently informed that showing your ankles is now cheugy, so I panic purchased some fun socks from Lele Sadoughi. A dumb purchase? Perhaps. But turns out I really love them? And they look so cute with loafers. At some point I’d like to pair them with formalwear and some platform heels. -Emma
Spoiler alert: This episode contains plot descriptions for each movie discussed. Don’t listen if you don’t want to find out how these (hint) romantic comedies end!
After bathing our brains in intense reality TV drama for the past few weeks — from devouring “Love Is Blind” to taping our eyelids open to make it through the four hours of “The Bachelor” this week (with four more to anticipate this coming week) — we both felt the irresistible urge to retreat to the warm embrace of scripted romantic comedies. The predictability of the formula, and the comfort of being able to expect some human connection and kissing, soothes the soul in troubled times. (In the podcast, Claire refers to “the consolation of genre,” a reference to this great LARB piece on romance novels by Cailey Hall.)
So, this week: a streaming rom-com double feature! We watched “Marry Me,” the glitzy Jennifer Lopez-Owen Wilson vehicle on Peacock, and “I Want You Back,” a cozier romance starring Jenny Slate and Charlie Day on Amazon. We loved the latter (though it needed more kissing) and we found the former boring (though at least we got to see J-Lo perform some high-quality pop songs in concert).
Much has been said about the death of the rom-com, and its resurrection on streaming platforms, and before we dissect these two movies, we discussed the state of the streaming rom-com. Anne Helen Petersen recently interviewed Scott Meslow on Culture Study about his book on the topic, and he offered some sharp insights about the history of the modern rom-com and why it’s so compatible with streaming platforms. Is the relegation of the rom-com to streaming an unmixed blessing? We’re thrilled that they’re getting made in meaningful numbers again, but it’s also hard to see how any but the rare breakout hit (see “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before”) could make a real impression in a saturated streaming marketplace. We also chat about the challenges of casting leads with the right charm and chemistry, and of making rom-coms that feel both escapist and relevant in our modern dating context.
After zooming out, we narrow the scope to lightly recap and critique “Marry Me” and “I Want You Back,” try to figure out what each is saying about modern love, social media and celebrity, discuss why every rom-com in America today is also about professional success, and ask how we can start dressing exactly like Jenny Slate’s character. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“Checkout 19” by Claire-Louise Bennett. I adored her previous book, a collection of linked short stories called “Pond,” so I was eagerly anticipating this one. She’s a writer who plunges you deep in the perspective of her idiosyncratic characters, and who revels in evocative words and images; reading it feels like being at sea in someone’s mind, tossed about by their spirals of thought about a crush, a book, a childhood memory, a fascination with the skins of aubergines or an unusual name. -Claire
Also, this incredible piece from Meg Conley’s Homeculture, from which I learned that Charlotte Perkins Gilman (author of the classic short story “The Yellow Wallpaper”) advocated for reinstating slavery so that white women like herself could be fully liberated from domestic labor. Conley researches the history of modern kitchen design — from the Communist iterations to the capitalist ones — and illuminates not only how we arrived at the current American ideal kitchen, built for a showy lifestyle rather than productive work, but also how privileged white women have tried to envision utopian kitchen set-ups that actually relied on the violent exploitation of Black and working-class women. -Claire
“Foreverland,” Heather Havrilesky’s (a.k.a. Ask Polly’s) sharp memoir about the “glorious tedium” of marriage. The response to this book has been a truly mixed bag, and while I find some of her points to be a bit repetitive, especially at the beginning, the honesty and humor with which she approaches longterm commitment is admirable and makes for a really engrossing read. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Station Eleven,” slowly. It’s incredible how, despite never going anywhere, Greg and I so rarely feel we have time and energy to watch a single full hour of TV at night, but whenever we get to fit an episode in, it’s a treat. I’m watching “The Gilded Age” solo, planning for future coverage, and it’s a much more ridiculous and soapy experience, but also visually arresting in its sumptuous period-costumed way. -Claire
“The Dropout,” Hulu’s Elizabeth Holmes series. After the disaster that was “Inventing Anna,” I’m really digging “The Dropout,” a scam series that actually has something to say that feels worth interrogating. Also, Amanda Seyfried is fantastic as Holmes. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“The Rise and Fall of LulaRoe,” hosted by BuzzFeed reporter Stephanie McNeal. Coincidentally, in her latest episode she interviewed none other than Meg Conley about how the devaluation of care work within a capitalist system makes mothers vulnerable to multi-level marketing schemes like LulaRoe. -Claire
Damn it, Claire! That was gonna be mine too! Oh well, guess you just took one for the team and wrote the blurb for both of us this time. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
A placemat with dinosaurs on it for my toddler. We’re always a bit late to move him up to the big-kid versions of things (he’s 27 months old and the only part of potty training we’ve begun is getting him a training toilet), but we’re finally transitioning him to eating at the table instead of his high-chair tray. Dinosaurs always help.
Also, my quest for easy-on, easy-off sneakers never ends. All the moms I know are wearing Vejas (a sustainable/socially conscious brand manufactured in Brazil), and I noticed one particularly stylish mom friend sporting a pair with Velcro locks. So I bought Vejas with Velcro locks: the Recife style in Pierre Natural. They were a splurge, but honestly, the Velcro experience is amazing. I may never wear lace-up shoes again. -Claire
I have been seduced by yet another TikTok skincare trend. This time it’s called “slugging,” and involves slathering Cetaphil Healing Ointment (which I did purchase explicitly to try this) all over your face to seal in your moisturizer and serums overnight. I thought it might be a disaster on my acne-prone skin, but I was pleasantly surprised by how soft my skin felt the next day! (Warning: If you are a side sleeper like I am, you might find some of the ointment rubbing off on your pillow overnight.)
I also just went on a weekend trip with some girlfriends to Miami and found myself dreaming of chic swim and beach coverups come summertime. So I splurged and bought this crocheted Everything But Water one. I also love this one, which gives a similar effect but at a less splurge-y price point. -Emma
No sooner had the “Love Is Blind” season 2 reunion episode begun than Shake started trolling. “How are y’all feeling?” Nick Lachey asked the group. “I’M NERVOUS ABOUT HOW WE GET EDITED,” blared Shake, who desperately wants everyone to know that he only appeared to be making cruel comments about his fiancée Deepti behind her back because of editing. And also, as he suggests later in the episode, because he’s the only one he’s keeping it real, being honest, and self-consciously playing a villain archetype. Shake packed up every excuse he had and brought it to this reunion.
Everyone onstage reacted with visceral repulsion every time Shake spoke. The groans were audible. “This is a joke,” Deepti whispered frequently. At one point, Vanessa told him that she thought he’d grown after his initial pod meetings, when he seemed to realize that his obsession with finding a tiny, fit blonde was shallow and rooted in his own damage. Shake responded that he was actually going to “double down” on the beginning, and went on to express that the only woman present that he was attracted to was Vanessa. Shake, no one asked.
It was cathartic to see everyone from Shayne to Danielle airing Shake out for his callous treatment of Deepti, and perversely satisfying to see Shake doing himself no favors. But Shake’s obsession with truth-telling — for example, explaining that love isn’t really blind because attraction is important, or pontificating about why Sal and Mallory’s relationship fell apart as if he were posting commentary on Twitter instead of talking directly to two people who understood their own relationship much better than he did — combined with the Lacheys’ lackluster moderating skills to create a reunion that was short on revelations and long on defending the concept of the show.
Shake is an asshole, and a particularly shallow, fatphobic, misogynistic, and status-obsessed guy; he should never have come on this show if appearance is so central to romantic attraction for him, and if he has such narrow criteria. Many people do have the capacity to fall in love primarily based on someone’s mind (ask a sapiosexual, or just stand near one for five minutes) or have a far more capacious range of people they’re attracted to. Shake’s focus on “animalistic attraction” also serves as a cover for his obsession with the status associated with dating an extremely thin, blonde woman. Despite the vulnerable conversations he had with Deepti about his own body insecurities in the pods, he’s not actually interested in unpacking the disgust with fat bodies and the craven desire he has to be seen as worth more because he has a high-status woman on his arm.
He’s also not wrong that physical attraction and chemistry are both important in romantic relationships and not entirely within our control. He’s not even alone; perfectly likable people in both seasons, like Kelly and Mallory, hinted at struggling with that side of the relationship after meeting their fiancés. They just handled it much more sensitively, with consideration for the emotions and dignity of their partners.
But everyone was so eager to shut Shake down, and to distance themselves from his repugnant superficiality, that the hosts and the rest of the cast seemed to align along a virtuous but fantastical premise: that for everyone else in the experiment, love really was completely blind, and that looks had nothing to do with how their engagements played out. It allowed Shake to look, at moments, like he was the only one willing to be honest and real, which only served to provide cover for his true misdeeds. Deepti was the only one to clearly put words to the truth: “It’s okay to not be physically attracted to somebody,” she said. “It’s how you do it and how you say it that’s extremely disrespectful. It’s degrading to women.” Thank you, Deepti!
There was a lot more to discover in this reunion — are Natalie and Shayne back together? why did things fall apart with Mallory and Sal? can Shaina defend calling Shaynatalie “fake”? how is Jarrette making Iyanna feel chosen and like the number one goddess of all time every day? has anything ever happened with Shayne and Shaina? are Kyle and Deepti dating? — and unfortunately, we don’t get clear answers on very much.
The cast either came to play the cartoon villain (Shake), apologize and make nice (Shaina, Mallory, Jarrette, Natalie), demand an apology for stuff we already knew happened (Sal, Kyle, Shayne), or just sit there and beam (Nick, Danielle, Iyanna). The Lacheys prefer not to prod for specifics, and they completely biffed a few VERY obvious follow-ups. At one point, Kyle said his only regret was not proposing to Deepti in the pods, and Nick and Vanessa keep it moving to a new topic rather than asking 1) uhhh, did you two have a romantic connection in the pods??? or 2) ARE YOU DATING HER NOW? We’re begging these people to ask even one useful question.
We taped a quick reaction pod this morning with some more of our thoughts on the reunion fiasco, Shake’s wild Instagram behavior since the finale dropped, and more. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe are reading…
I just started an advanced reader copy of Jenny Mollen’s forthcoming novel, “City Of Likes.” I love fiction that comments on influencer culture, and Jenny is just such a sharp and funny and fun writer. So far, I’m very into it! -Emma
Still absolutely loving “The Season,” Kristen Richardson’s history of the debutante, which I think is the perfect preparation for watching the deranged-looking dating show “The Courtship.” -Claire
We are listening to…
Part 1 of “Maintenance Phase’s” two-part series on Jordan Peterson and the absolutely unhinged “carnivore diet” that he and his daughter popularized. -Emma
Deepti and Shaina on “The Viall Files,” where they disclose way more detailed behind-the-scenes info than we got on the reunion. -Claire
We are watching…
“The Dropout,” Hulu’s Elizabeth Holmes series based on the ABC News podcast of the same name. I got press screeners of the first 7 episodes, and so far I’m finding it gripping and sharp. And unlike another scammer show (cough, “Inventing Anna,” cough), “The Dropout” seems like it’s pretty successfully threading the needle of interrogating Holmes’ behavior and situating Theranos within a larger critique of Silicon Valley, while still holding her feet to the fire. -Emma
The third season of the French rom-com series “The Hook-Up Plan,” which finds Elsa and Julio trying to conceive, Charlotte and Max trying to launch his political career, and Antoine and Emilie struggling with both work and parenting. Oh, and everyone is fighting. I do struggle with sequels to rom-coms, because I hate to see my happy endings complicated (that’s not why I watch rom-coms!), so it didn’t give quite the same high as the first season, but the women’s friendships really take center stage and offer just as much pathos and humor. -Claire
We are buying…
I don’t know whether it’s my ongoing makeup renaissance or just weeks and weeks of staring at Rachel Recchia’s lightly laminated brows on “The Bachelor,” but after years of using Glossier’s Boy Brow, I decided to change things up. During a recent trip to Sephora, I was advised to try Benefit Cosmetic’s 24-Hour Brow Setter Clear Brow Gel and to brush my brows up. I wasn’t sure if I could pull it off, but I’ve been doing it for a few weeks now and I’ve been really enjoying the effect. I also love that the brush of this product has two sides, which allows you to go subtler or really get a faux lamination style, sans chemicals. -Emma
A weekly planner. I know…. I already missed 20 percent of the year. But hey, I got my 2022 planner at a steep discount. Organization is really a struggle for me, especially now that we’re no longer part of a newsroom with regular editorial meetings (and now that I have a toddler who is home from daycare maybe 30 percent of the time due to minor illnesses. He was home every day this week but Friday! Again! But I digress). Recently I read that you can make yourself better at personality traits like conscientiousness, maybe, sometimes, so my plan is to set out weekly chunks of time on my Google calendar to do things like handle emails, update social accounts, and planning what I want to write or pod about in the future. Will it work? Will a pretty notebook help? Let’s add a “check in on how becoming more organized is going” event to my calendar for next month, and please share your tips in the comments. -Claire
Share Rich TextWe all know it’s possible to develop to develop deep, passionate feelings about someone you only know through their voice. It’s called “listening to a podcast.” But would you agree to marry your favorite podcaster, sight unseen?
This is the conceit of “Love Is Blind,” a Netflix reality show about 28 hopeful singles who step into custom-built pods (coincidence? we think not) and speak to each other through an illuminated but completely opaque wall. After a dating period, some couples choose to get engaged, after which they’re able to meet face-to-face, enjoy a honeymoon together in Mexico, and then spend a few weeks living together in their hometown. The grand finale is a legally binding wedding; at the altar, each half of the couple responds “yes” or “no” to the wedding vows to reveal whether they wish to marry the person they met in the pods.
Season 2 of the series just dropped, with the finale — in which we learned which couples would say “I do” in front of all their nearest and dearest — hitting Netflix on Friday.
While season 1 brought us sweet angel babies Lauren and Cameron, as well as irritating but well-matched Barnett and Amber, season 2 had nothing for us but train wrecks. Of the six couples we see get engaged in the pods, at least three seem to actively dislike each other, and most of the ones who like each other aren’t attracted to each other. Their relationships range from “distant but friendly acquaintance” to “drunk hook-up turned chaotic two-month relationship that ends with a screaming match outside a Denny’s.” Nick and Vanessa Lachey, we beg of you: Do not make any of these people get married.
We’ve also gone from a season with essentially one villain — Jessica, aka “Messica,” who got engaged to Mark but couldn’t stop trying to pry Barnett away from Amber — to a season that is roughly half villains, several of whom seem like worse people, fundamentally, than a Jessica who was mostly drunk and spiraling.
Take Shake, who starts his pod experience by asking the women, through thinly disguised questions (“would I have trouble lifting you on my shoulders at a music festival?”), how much they weigh. He seems to have a breakthrough by connecting with Deepti, and through their conversations he processes how he dealt with his own body insecurities by seeking out thin and conventionally hot partners. But once he’s with Deepti in the real world, his superficiality takes over again; soon, he’s sharing his lack of sexual attraction to his fiancée with everyone but her, and in cruelly mocking terms.
Heading into the finale, we were morbidly curious about who would end up legally tying themselves to each other, but not exactly rooting for any of them to take the leap. In this episode, we talk through each couple, from most to least dysfunctional. We also decide whether each person is our enemy (Shake!!!) or our friend (Deeps wlu). Enjoy! xo
Subscribe nowWe’ve been supporting…
This has been a rough news week. Between virulent anti-trans/anti-gay governing directives and legislation in Texas and Florida, and Putin launching the most significant war Europe has seen in 80 years by invading Ukraine, there has been a lot to feel depressed and scared about. In an effort to feel less useless, we’ve been donating.
Here are some organizations that you can support:
Transgender Education Network of Texas, which works to lift up the voices of Transgender Texans.
Allgo, a Texas organization which nurtures and celebrates queer people of color by building, educating, and mobilizing communities toward a just and equitable society.
Zebra Coalition, a Florida-based network of organizations which provide services to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and all youth (LGBTQ+) ages 13 – 24.
Fiesta Youth, an organization supporting and empowering LGBTQ+ youth in San Antonio, Texas.
Nova Ukraine, a Ukraine-based nonprofit which provides citizens with food, household and clothing essentials.
People In Need, which is providing humanitarian aid to over 200,000 people on the ground in Ukraine. They provide food packages, emergency shelter, safe access to drinking water, hygiene items, and coal for heating.
We’ve been reading…
“The Season: A Social History of the Debutante” by Kristen Richardson. As a lover of Jane Austen novels, and Regency romance novels distantly inspired by her biting romantic comedies, I had always been vaguely aware of the shared DNA that linked them to “The Bachelor.” But never having paid much attention to the more recent incarnations of the debutante tradition, the connective tissue between them had been less obvious to me. As soon as I picked up Richardson’s history, however, the ongoing influence of the debutante in American society — its purpose, its form, the values it promoted, the rituals that shaped it — came into sharp focus. Highly recommend. -Claire
Shamefully, I had never read Eve Babitz’s “Sex and Rage.” After she died, I ordered it from Bookshop, and because it was backordered, I just received it. Hot take: Babitz, a great writer. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“The Woman in the House Across the Street from the Girl in the Window,” a bizarre Netflix series starring Kristen Bell as Anna, a grieving mom who drowns her sorrows in giant glassfuls of red wine and preoccupies herself by watching her neighbors through her upscale suburban window. If you’ve read or seen “The Woman in the Window,” it’s basically that — but a spoof. The show mostly leans more into reproducing the genre elements rather than parodying them, though there are enough goofy moments to make clear, periodically, that it’s not a serious show. It’s almost as if the goal was to intentionally create something camp, a so-bad-it’s-good delight, which I’m leery of. But Bell and the cast are phenomenal, and there are a couple of genuine laughs each episode… plus, I somehow got sucked into caring about the ludicrous “mystery.” There are worse ways to spend a laundry-folding marathon. -Claire
“Love Is Blind: Japan,” because I simply needed more. Is this cause for concern? Probably. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Chameleon,” the Campside Media podcast about the scammer who convinced countless Hollywood strivers that they had just gotten their big break. Typically posing as big-name female producers like Amy Pascal and Debbie Snyder, the scammer would offer up-and-comers in the industry a job on a blockbuster movie filming in Indonesia — but once they arrived, having fronted their own travel expenses with promises of reimbursement, the promised meetings with production would never happen. I remembered reading some news coverage about this years ago, but nothing that cracked the mystery, so when my brother mentioned this podcast, I was intrigued. The first season of the pod, created by Vanessa Grigoriadis and Josh Dean, dives into the details of the scam, and slowly unravels the identity and motivations of the person behind it. -Claire
“Twin Flames,” a new Wondery podcast about Jeff and Shaleia, a young couple who got big on YouTube because of their romantic coaching — specifically their quest to help the lovelorn find their “Twin Flame,” a divine love connection that followers were encouraged to pursue at any cost. The podcast interviews former members of the cult-like community that Jeff and Shaleia formed, and it’s chilling stuff, which exposes how our cultural obsession over the primacy of couples can be harnessed in really dangerous ways. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
My makeup journey continues. This week I dipped my toes further into Kosas and DIBS, and grabbed Kosas’ brand new foundation to try, as well as DIBS’ Lip Definer (I’ve been using their Lip Liner, which doubles as lipstick, and been loving it). -Emma
I’ve been making a number of purchases that didn’t work out lately — Everlane wide-leg jeans that just didn’t fit me right, moisturizer that broke me out, a dress that looked dreamy on the model and pioneer-frumpy on me. Currently I have a sack full of returns to make and a lingering sense of guilt for all the wasted deliveries, and I just want to go back to trying on jeans in store. Here’s something that has worked out, so far: the Mielle Honey & Ginger Styling Gel that my stylist used after my last haircut. It’s a lighter hold than I usually use, but it’s so slippery and moisturizing and smells like a spicy tea. -Claire
ShareThe slippery thing about scams, cults, pyramid schemes, grifts: As horrifying as it is to be caught up in one, it can be difficult to explain what makes them any different from the general rules of life under capitalism — especially America’s religiously inflected version, in which hierarchical structures are a given, charismatic personalities are venerated, and wealth is synonymous with moral worth. We all live by those rules. Many of us also rage against them, how living in this society means being exploited by predatory banks, for-profit schools, health insurance companies, venture capitalists — giant corporations that are enriched even as the people they supposedly serve are left sick, miserable, and in debt. The fake-it-until-you-make-it mantra of hustle culture. The obsession with brand-building, getting in on the ground floor, finding some way to claw yourself into an echelon where you’re doing more exploiting than being exploited.
In the pleasurable furor that tends to spring up around audacious scammers like fake German heiress Anna Delvey, one can find oneself chasing the slippery thing around in circles, never getting anywhere. If the scam is just a version of how we all live, then how can it be so wrong? On the other hand, if the way we live sucks, and scams are to blame, how can they be right? Is there a way out of this hell, paved by particularly delightful scammers? Or by valorizing them, are we just finding a new way to worship the fucked-up ethic of getting yours that has produced our shitty status quo?
“Inventing Anna,” a Shonda Rhimes production based on Jessica Pressler’s New York Magazine article, “How Anna Delvey Tricked New York’s Party People,” as well as the life rights of several key players (most notably Anna’s), doesn’t even bother doing much chasing. Instead, it settles into a depiction of Anna (Julia Garner) as a girlboss, a brilliant woman clawing her way through a sexist, xenophobic New York finance milieu, trying to fake it until she made it just like any other startup founder with more vision than money. The show’s antiheroine drops trite lines about how men fail their way to the top, like a 2014 feminist blog; meanwhile, one of the most visible non-wealthy victims of Anna’s grifts is twisted into a pathetic user who got what was coming to her — worse, somehow, than Anna, who is a cool user who deserves Instagram celebrity.
Through the eyes of Anna’s friend, Neff Davis (Alexis Floyd), and the almost starstruck investigative journalist Vivian Kent (Anna Chlumsky), the fake heiress takes shape as a mysterious, charismatic genius, both fragile and admirably strong. Vivian becomes so enmeshed that she’s practically part of the defense team, in a shocking succession of lapses in journalistic ethics. Her colleagues cheer when Anna is found not guilty on several counts. In the end, Anna is seen as worthy because of the sheer nerve of her scams; her victims are seen as unworthy and craven because she deceived them.
Sure, the banks are hardly sympathetic victims. They also aren’t her only victims. But as intoxicating as it is to see a young woman outwitting massive financial institutions, interpretations like “Inventing Anna” only reinscribe the same scam ethos that has made our society such a broken place. She never aspired to siphon wealth and prestige and power away from the top 0.1 percent; she wanted in. She tried to defraud banks for millions of dollars so she could start a high-end, exclusive social club for the super wealthy, both catering to and permanently ensconcing herself in the upper echelons of American robber barons.
It’s not a very inspiring story, in the end. Maybe it is fair to call it girlboss-y. We just thought everyone had realized that was a bad thing.
Emma wrote a great piece on this for MSNBC this week — that and some other background reading are below. Hope you enjoy the pod! xo
Reading List:
How Anna Delvey Tricked New York’s Party People by Jessica Pressler
Netflix's 'Inventing Anna' and the 'girlboss-ification' of Anna Delvey by Emma Gray
False Profit by Chloe Wyma
‘Inventing Anna’ is about a scammer. So why does the show itself feel like a bait and switch? by Inkoo Kang
Trick Mirror: Reflections on Self-Delusion by Jia Tolentino
My Friend Anna: The True Story of a Fake Heiress by Rachel DeLoache Williams
ShareWe’ve been reading…
All of Jezebel’s Horny Week content. This is the Valentine’s Day-related writing and analysis I crave. -Emma
My understanding is that all the hot girls are reading “Vladimir” by Julia May Jonas, so I’m reading “Vladimir” by Julia May Jonas. (Not sure where I got this impression, but I follow my gut.) Narrated by an older female professor at a small liberal arts college who develops a head-spinning infatuation with her new colleague, a hot younger novelist named Vladimir, while her husband faces a spate of allegations of sexual misconduct with his students, the novel delves into campus politics, generational resentment, and the erotic desires and ambitions of a woman who is no longer young enough to have either taken seriously by most people. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
You know I love a rom-com, so I was really excited about “I Want You Back.” Prime’s new romantic comedy stars Jenny Slate (who is always the most delightful and relatable) and Charlie Day as strangers who both get dumped by their long-term partners and then bond over scheming to break up their exes’s new relationships. It’s not a revelatory movie, but it’s a fun one, and it definitely scratched the itch. Jenny Slate forever! -Emma
“The Tinder Swindler,” to pair with “Inventing Anna.” The Netflix documentary, unlike the scripted series we discussed in the podcast, focuses on the perspective of the victims — especially two young women who were bilked for hundreds of thousands of dollars by the serial grifter Simon Leviev after he developed a romance with one and a close friendship with the other. Though Delvey’s grifts were less interpersonally sophisticated than those of Leviev, who essentially used the massive funds he secured from each woman to fund his shock-and-awe courtship of the next, the parallels are real. His victims were treated as money-grubbing and stupid by many who heard their stories, and meanwhile Leviev is free to build a business and brand on the back of his notoriety. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
Season 2 of “Under The Influence,” Jo Piazza’s podcast about the wild world of influencers. Season 1 focused on mom influencers, and this season they’re expanding the scope. -Emma
Music! The music kick continues. This week I joined the Spotify defection. A few newsletters ago, I wrote about how the app, which seemed like such a godsend at first, has slowly eroded my music listening habits (or at least enabled my drift away from deep, engaged listening). But the thought of not having access to music seemed anathema, so I signed up for Apple Music premium instead. (I know, I know. Akin to canceling Uber and signing up for Lyft.)
This time, though, I wanted to be more intentional about seeking out good music, not just the earworms I seek out after overhearing them on the radio. I went through and added some of my favorite indie albums — The National, Rilo Kiley, Vampire Weekend, The Weakerthans, Camera Obscura — and then clicked into a suggested album: “Jubilee,” by Japanese Breakfast. I’ve known about the band for years but somehow have never bothered to listen to a single song. I was hooked from the first track, shimmery and lilting and euphoric. I might not yet have a solid library of music I own, but when I’m listening to music I really love, down to my toes, I can envision a future me putting a good record on while I cook dinner, the most seductive dream of bougie pleasure I can conjure. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
Finally had to refill my 3-in-1 Blemish Camouflage from August and Monroe (been using it daily! I love this stuff!).
I also got it into my head that I really needed a pair of flare jeans, the 2022 updated version of the Limited Too jeans I coveted in middle school. Abercrombie has been having some great sales, so I bought these black Ultra High Rise Flare Jeans. -Emma
I am also having seasonal denim anxiety. Finding “mom jeans” that have a high enough rise to sit at my natural waist is proving impossible, but, like the follower I am, I’m getting tired of being in skinny jeans while the youth embrace a fresh new silhouette. This time I’m trying the Everlane Way High Jean and hoping they’re a winner.
The warmish weather late last week also inspired me to order a hydrangea blue version of the olive Jansport fanny pack I’ve been wearing slung across my chest all year. Clear, bright blue is really speaking to me for this spring/summer (or maybe I’m just sick of gray skies). -Claire
In the finale of season 1 of “And Just Like That…”, our gals are in the full swing of their third acts — mid-widowhood, mid-divorce, and of course, mid-happy marriage and motherhood. Carrie, almost a year after Big’s death, needs to decide where to put his ashes to rest, possibly with the aid of Big’s eternal spirit speaking to her through a malfunctioning reading lamp. Miranda finds out, through a semipublic musical number, that Che is moving to L.A. to shoot a pilot (the studio thinks they’re “the new Roseanne”). Charlotte is throwing what she terms a “they mitzvah” for Rock, who could not be less interested, no matter how many hipster sourdough challahs and Dylan’s Candy Bar bars Charlotte buys.
By the end of the episode and the season, the gang has been set asail on their own solo journeys for a time: Carrie is the girl who goes to Paris, Charlotte is the girl who gets uninvited from Paris, and Miranda is the girl who goes to L.A. to spend the summer with her new boo instead of doing a super-cool internship. (And naturally, Carrie starts a solo podcast, and naturally, it’s awful.)
Our new central cast are also off on their own paths: in Nya’s case, mid-marital crisis over the Child Question; in Seema’s, mid-sexy fling with a French club owner; in Che’s, mid-pivot to Hollywood; in LTW’s, well, mid-happy marriage and motherhood.
This finale was (like most of the season) frustratingly disconnected from reality; refreshingly interested in exploring new directions for its old characters, while infuriatingly unwilling to engage with the depth of the conflict these changes would cause; at times cringe; and at times quite delightful. Hari Nef is a treat as Rabbi Jen, who steps in to handle Rock’s disastrous they mitzvah and Carrie’s tiff with Miranda over Paris vs. L.A. with equal aplomb, and the sherbet-hued ensemble Carrie dons to scatter Big’s ashes simply has to be seen to be appreciated.
We dig into all this, plus: What is Carrie’s worst breakup story, actually, and why is it definitely “I got broken up with by a Post-It”? Is the resolution of the Samantha plotline satisfying? When did Carrie get so rich? Is she qualified to give relationship advice via podcast? Would we take a second season? And if so, what do we want to see in it? Hope you enjoy! xo
We’ve been reading…
“My Friend Anna” by Rachel DeLoache Williams, the then-Vanity Fair photo editor who was invited on a lavish Moroccan vacation as a guest of Anna Delvey (née Sorokin) and then stuck with the catastrophically high bill. She’s also a character in the upcoming Netflix series, and the differences in perspective are fascinating, to put it lightly. -Claire
I’ve also been down an Anna Delvey/Sorokin supplementary reading hole ahead of the release of “Inventing Anna,” reading Sorokin’s recent Insider essay (which she wrote from ICE custody) and Williams’ latest piece for AirMail which has some choice criticism for Netflix. I also re-read Jia Tolentino’s 2018 New Yorker essay about our cultural obsession with grifters, and why Anna’s particularly brand of folk hero-like scam was so intoxicating to gawk at. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Inventing Anna,” the aforementioned Netflix series on the grifting folk hero Anna Delvey who infiltrated the most elite and moneyed New York circles by claiming to be a connected German heiress. It’s very ripped-from-the-headlines, and the angle is very girl-bossy, and the whole thing feels a bit dated — and surprisingly gray and dour for a show about such a juicy tabloid story. We’ll both have more to say on this soon! -Claire
Anyone who has been following our work and pods knows that I’m not the harshest critic and have a pretty strong stomach for soapy trash of all varietals. However, I have some… FEELINGS, not particularly positive ones, about “Inventing Anna.” Can’t wait to share them when we record next week’s Rich Text episode. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
The “You’re Wrong About” episode on Tom Cruise’s viral Oprah couch-jump, featuring Willa Paskin. The pod offers some light debunking (though I personally don’t see much difference between seeing someone jump up onto a couch and seeing them give an extra bounce or two once up there); more interesting to me is how it positions the episode as taking place at a moment when the context collapse of Internet virality was just becoming possible, but before the celebrity machine had really cottoned onto it. Paskin points out how safe and warm Oprah’s show and audience — including its very enthusiastic in-studio audience — would have seemed to Cruise, and how that context simply didn’t translate for viewers catching a clip of the weirdest moments later. It’s a really lovely conversation and left me with more knowledge of this watershed moment in Cruise’s career than I ever thought I needed. -Claire
I tore through “Sweet Bobby,” the Tortoise media podcast about a woman who was elaborately catfished for a decade by her distant cousin. It is a fascinating look into the world of online scams, the psychology behind them, the damage they leave in their wake, and why the shame that surrounds victims so often prevents scammers from being stopped. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
There was a Hill House nap dress drop this week, and I succumbed to the lure of black lace (for weddings??). -Claire
I did it. I got the beautiful lilac tulle Hill House dress (it’s now sold out, but her navy sister isn’t) and it’s simply too pretty to even contemplate returning. My other favorite — and far more practical — buy from the drop was the Samantha Dress in black poplin, which is not sold out! I suspect she will be in my heavy rotation for years to come. -Emma
In episodes 7 to 9 of HBO’s “Sex and the City” reboot “And Just Like That…”, the mid-life crisis season, the crises continue apace. Carrie writes her grief memoir and goes on a tragic date. Charlotte discovers her 15-year-old daughter knows about thirst traps. Miranda has an affair AND a divorce without ever having an on-screen conversation with her teenage son. These three episodes offer only slight attention to details like “plot continuity” and “the number of seasons that pass in three months,” but they’re distractingly action-packed and full of eye candy (hello, Carrie’s old Versace ballgown), as well as some classic scenes of the besties joking about their sex lives. As episode 9 wraps, Miranda and Carrie are in completely different places than they were when the series opened, and Charlotte — well, Charlotte, for now, is on top at last.
And with that, “And Just Like That…” has careened, like a glittering rollercoaster, into its home stretch. Only the season finale remains to tidy away an enormous amount of loose ends, most of them related to our messy queen Miranda (is Brady ever going to have feelings about his parents’ divorce — or, uh, learn about it at all? Has Miranda moved out? Is she still in recovery? What happened in Cleveland? Are she and Che ever going to actually talk about what kind of relationship they can have?) but also related to our other heroines (is Carrie ever going to get back on the merry-go-round, and will she do it with hirsute teacher Peter? Will there be any sort of detente with Samantha? Is Charlotte totally satisfied being a mom and charity board member, or does she want to rejoin the professional art world? Will Nya and André decide about trying for a baby once and for all? Will Seema fall in love? Will LTW ever get a real solo plot? Does Stanford just live in Tokyo forever now, no further questions?).
Next week, we’ll be discussing the finale and looking back at the season as a whole, but for this episode, we discussed the penultimate three episodes in alarming detail. Key topics include Carrie’s yearning for cool, the Che Diaz backlash cycle, doddering Steve, cynic Miranda vs. romantic Miranda, Kristin Davis’s acting, sex-positive parenting, appropriate outfits for house-painting, Nya’s baby ambivalence, how late is too late to be partying on a stoop in NYC, and more!
ShareWe’ve been watching…
I love a period piece, so I have been enjoying HBO’s “The Gilded Age,” Julian Fellowes’ new drama set in the 1800s among the elite in New York City. The costumes are sumptuous, Brooklyn is treated like another country, robber barons are building railroads, and everyone who’s anyone lives uptown by the park. (Also, it quite topically features Cynthia Nixon in a prominent role!) -Emma
“Too Hot to Handle” Season 3! I think this actually might be my favorite crew yet, from the Hot Topic fuckboy (has everyone talked about the Hot Topic fuckboy without me?) to the most beautiful friends-to-lovers romance of our time. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
“Miss Me With That” by Rachel Lindsay, of course! The iconic former Bachelorette’s memoir hit bookstores this week, and it’s a rollicking read — she covers her upbringing, her romantic history, the nitty-gritty of her casting experience on “The Bachelor,” and even some mansion gossip.
I’ve also been catching up on some lit world chatter, and most of it right now is about Sean Thor Conroe’s heralded debut “Fuccboi.” The book was given the seal of approval by legendary internet lit publisher Giancarlo DiTrapano of Tyrant Books, who died last April, and reviews have been split between the admiring and the horrified. (As Hanson O’Haver put it for Gawker, “More Like Suckboi.”) Every passage I see from it is mortifying to read; for example, Conroe’s struggling writer narrator reportedly refers to all women as “baes,” including “editor bae” and “ex bae.” Meanwhile, author Sam Pink posted a blog claiming “Fuccboi” is “a complete rip off of my style.” Does the book suck, or is it a faithful rip-off of an actual artist’s work? Can it somehow be both? Art… it’s complicated. -Claire
I have of course found time to read “Miss Me With That.” Rachel Lindsay says early on in her memoir that it’s not going to be your “typical Bachelor book.” She delivers on this promise, and it’s a real fun ride.
I’ve also been reading the second book in Julia Quinn’s Bridgerton series, “The Viscount Who Loved Me,” to get myself excited for the second season which is coming out on Netflix in March. Swoon! -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Where You Are” from “Moana,” which is my son’s current YouTube favorite. We still haven’t seen “Moana” (he doesn’t have a movie-level attention span yet) but he will demand this song on repeat, and now it is in my head on repeat and probably will be until I die. At least it’s a constant reminder to “find happiness right where I am” (in our small apartment with a high-energy two-year-old who has been in daycare for less than 10 days since the holidays). -Claire
I’ve been a bit under the weather this week — apparently illnesses other than Covid still exist, which is a real indignity — so I’ve been opting for calming music that won’t make my migraines worse. Lots of light jazz. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Merit makeup, a clean beauty brand which has been advertised relentlessly to me on Instagram but also, recently, recommended on Instagram by writer Esmé Wang, who is so enviably glamorous that I immediately bought two of the products she posted about using for at-home beauty treatments.
I wrote last week that my skin has been abysmal, and my Glossier routine — which looked so lovely with my fresh summer skin — was not cutting it. I needed something with more coverage that I could do in five minutes (in other words, not a full face of foundation). I got the Minimalist complexion perfecting stick in Dune and use it on my undereyes, around my nose and chin, and over blemishes. It is a bit dry, so it does cling to flaky patches on the face. But if I make sure my skin is fully prepped and very moisturized, it’s a dream: goes on quick, lasts all day and doesn’t make my skin oily whatsoever — it really does look and feel like clean skin once it’s buffed in. I’ve also been loving the Merit mascara, which gives me natural-looking, fluttery length and has quelled my longing to try a lash lift, and the brow pomade, which never smears on application like my Boy Brow. -Claire
Somehow Claire and I seem to consistently be on the same wavelength with our purchases. I don’t know if it’s the winter season or just two years of Pandemic-land, but I’ve been wanting to upgrade my makeup routine. I’ve recently started using creamier products with setting spray, rather than relying so much on the bareMinerals powders and Glossier finishers I’ve been using forever. This is a somewhat shameful confession, but I found myself on Rachael Kirkconnell’s daily makeup tutorial video on my IG Explore page, and decided to check out some of the makeup brands she used. I ended up purchasing a few products from DIBS Beauty, including their Desert Island Duo (a blush/bronzer stick) in Shade 2 — I like that you can use it as blush, bronzer, eyeshadow and lip color! — the No Pressure Lip Liner in Shade 1, and the No Pressure Lip Gloss Topper in pink, which really feels like an upgraded versions of the lip glosses I used to buy at CVS right next to the Wet n’ Wild. -Emma
If there’s anything more horrifying than being a teenage girl stuck in a hormonal body and a socially treacherous high school, it’s being a teenage girl stuck in a hormonal body and the Canadian wilderness as winter approaches, food dwindles, and your fellow teenage girl companions are growing increasingly hungry and restless.
That’s the topline selling point of “Yellowjackets,” a Showtime drama about a New Jersey state champion girls’ soccer team who have to survive 19 months in the Ontario forest after their plane crashes en route to nationals. The show, which opens with a nightmarish sequence in which a girl is killed, butchered, and eaten by people draped in animal skins, became an unexpected smash hit this winter. But, as Emma argued in a fantastic MSNBC essay, “Yellowjackets” used teen girl cannibalism as a hook for a show that, in its first season, offered very little cannibalism — and much more meat.
The show unfolds as two parallel narratives: in 1996, the girls win the state championship, crash in the Ontario wild on the way to nationals, and struggle to survive a summer and autumn filled with danger, deprivation, and death. In 2021, four of the survivors — Nat (Juliette Lewis), who has been in and out of rehab for years; Shauna (Melanie Lynskey), a miserable and repressed housewife who married the high school boyfriend of her best friend Jackie, who died in the woods; Taissa (Tawny Cypress), a successful lawyer with a wife and son who is putting it all on the line to run for state Senate; and Misty (Christina Ricci), the former team equipment manager and now a hospice nurse by day, citizen detective by night, with a cruel streak fueled by her yearning for acceptance and connection — are brought back together by shocking events, including the suspicious death of Travis, who survived the wilderness with them, and ominous messages threatening to expose the truth about what they did to survive.
For two squeamish gals, watching this show was something of a challenge. It’s heavy on the gore, from compound fractures to plane crash close-ups to straight-up butchery, and the show also creates a lingering sense of unease throughout, with the frequent use of a droning hum in the background and ominous music cues to remind us that danger always lurks nearby.
But we watched it, and it was worth it. The show offered so much red, bloody meat for discussion, it’s little wonder that it’s fueled endless fan theorizing and critical conversation. We could have talked for hours. Here’s what we did talk about: the show’s dual structure and genre interplay, Christina Ricci’s wig, the ‘90s fixation on beautiful teen killers, the identity-obliterating intensity of adolescent female friendships, Munchausen-by-proxy syndrome, the depiction of Lottie’s mental illness and/or supernatural powers, the trauma plot and trauma bonding. And more!
We’ve included a list of some of the great criticism and interviews we read before taping this below. Hope you enjoy! xo
A “Yellowjackets” syllabus:
“Horror And Hormones, Grief And Gore, In ‘Yellowjackets’,” Doreen St. Felix, New Yorker
“The Rival Shows of ‘Yellowjackets,’” Andrea Long Chu, New Yorker
“Christina Ricci Knew The Spiky Roles Were Coming,” Rachel Syme, New Yorker
“Melanie Lynskey Is Mad as Hell and Not Going to Take It Anymore. Maybe.,” EJ Dickson, Rolling Stone
Juliette Lewis, an ‘Imagination Freak Fairy,’ Knows Her Worth,” Melena Ryzik, NYTimes
“Now and then: How ‘Yellowjackets’ purposefully reminds Gen Xers of who we thought we'd be,” Melanie McFarland, Salon
“‘Yellowjackets’ Season Finale Teases Cannibalism — But Delivers On Much More,” Emma Gray, MSNBC
ShareWe’ve been reading…
Lots of “Yellowjackets” coverage (see above), and continuing to read Danielle J. Lindemann’s “True Story: What Reality TV Says About Us.” -Claire
I too have been devouring any and all “Yellowjackets” content, but have also been re-reading an adolescent favorite of mine: Francesca Lia Block’s magical “I Was A Teenage Fairy.” It’s such a joy to go back and revisit material that meant so much to you when you were young and see what lands when you read it again as a full adult. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“I Could Cry Right Now If You Wanted Me To,” the first LP from Brooklyn-based indie rock band Razor Braids. It’s been a few years since I made any real effort to find new artists, or even listened much to anything but the handful of breakout pop albums of each year, so I might not have come across this group except for a fortuitous coincidence: One of the four musicians is also my sister-in-law’s sister! She described their sound in an interview as combining “indie rock vulnerability with a punk rock energy tied up in a little 90s DIY package,” and the riot grrrl vibe is really giving me the “Yellowjackets” energy that I’ve reluctantly become hooked on. -Claire
I loved hearing Jacqueline Trumbull and Paul Seli’s Love Fest episode on Dear Shandy. It was like getting to hang out with a bunch of my friends and their love soothed my soul. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
We finally finished the second season of “The Great” this week — which hit a bit of a lull halfway through, but then picked dramatically back up with the introduction of Gillian Anderson as Joanna, Empress Catherine’s undermining mother, who rapidly reduces her headstrong daughter to a puddle of indecision soup. We’re still trying to decide on our next show, since we’re watching “Station Eleven” separately (he got impatient while we were finishing “The Great”). -Claire
Season 3 of “To Hot To Handle.” So much underboob! So many new iterations on the cutout swimsuit! So many hot people from the UK talking about the importance of ban-tuh! I have few critical thoughts about it, but I devoured the third season extremely quickly, so clearly I’m still into it. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
This fall, my skin took a severe turn for the worse — it’s been rough, flaky, oily, uneven, with ever-expanding pores and a stubborn cheek cyst that has been refusing to heal for months — so I started prescription tretinoin from Apostrophe, which has been slowly working but also drying my skin out. Add in the winter freeze, and my face has been as flaky as a croissant. I had to go against my decades-long practice of avoiding face creams and add more intense hydration. Recently I’ve been using the Summer Fridays Cloud Dew Oil-Free Gel Cream at night and mixing a smidge of Glossier FutureDew serum into my morning moisturizer. I’ve been shocked at how soft and even my skin seems after using the Cloud Dew cream in particular — and as a lifelong oily gal, there’s something kind of thrilling about giving dehydrated winter skin something to drink up, getting silky soft and bouncy in the process. -Claire
I’ve been obsessed with stretchy pants that elevate one’s look more than leggings — hence my constant search for great vegan leather pants. I bought these Split Hem Vegan Leather Pants in both black and tan, and now Abercrombie released a Curve Love version, which I am tempted to jump on as I think it would fit me even better. They’re comfy, flattering and make me feel fancy even if I’m just throwing a casual, oversized sweater or sweatshirt on top. -Emma
Share Rich TextWe both have a lot in common with famous comedy multi-hyphenate Mindy Kaling. We often wonder if everyone is hanging out without us, and we adore romantic comedies. Most importantly, we graduated from college over a decade ago, and some part of us can’t help but wonder: Are young women on campus these days having more fun than we did, personally? (Or would they be, you know, Covid aside.)
To be fair, we have no reason to believe this niggling question was the exact inspiration for Kaling’s delightful (if sometimes a bit didactic) comedy “The Sex Lives of College Girls.” However, watching the show did make us surprisingly wistful for the world of college dating and hookups — an experience that seems much more pleasurable, sex-positive, and thrilling for the central characters than we recall it being for us in the late aughts. It’s a sweetly funny vision of undergrad life, populated by women who might not have everything figured out, but who are at least having very satisfying sex at least some of the time.
Our main foursome — Bela Malhotra (Amrit Kaur), Kimberly Finkle (Pauline Chalamet), Whitney Chase (Alyah Chanelle Scott), and Leighton Murray (Renée Rapp) — are freshwomen who have been thrown together by the housing gods at Essex College, a fictional Ivy-ish school in Vermont. Bela is a gregarious aspiring comedy writer and abs enthusiast eager to climb the ranks of the legendary campus comedy mag and enjoy a sexual Rumspringa after years as a pimply nerd. Awkward Kimberly, a sheltered girl from a small town in Arizona, just wants to study hard and wow her French professor — at least until she develops a major crush on Leighton’s hot older brother Nico. WASPy Leighton is a tortured snob in Cher Horowitz-esque designer skirt suits who winds up in their suite after her two prep school besties ask not to be roomed with her; she’s also deeply in the closet, and holds everyone at arm’s length to avoid being found out. Whitney, the clean-cut daughter of a well-known progressive senator, is a rising star on the Essex women’s soccer team — oh, and she’s having a secret affair with the hot assistant coach.
As these four very different women become friends and explore the college experience, they encounter many frat parties with elaborate themes, hot guys, and triumphant successes on math assessment quizzes. But it’s not all fun and naked parties. Leighton’s journey to self-acceptance is an emotionally painful one. Kimberly, who comes from a working-class background, struggles to acclimate to the socioeconomically privileged space she’s worked so hard to reach. Whitney wants to escape the burden of her mom’s high-profile, all-consuming career. And Bela finds that the path to comedy glory at Essex is littered with leering men and overt sexism. But again and again, they find supportive allies and communities to lift them up and set them on the right path.
In this episode, we talk about the way “Sex Lives” portrays the sex lives of young women, how the show explores class and race, which characters we identify with, and whether the show’s cozy vision of women’s lives on campus — even in the aftermath of sexual harassment — is perfectly comforting or at times a bit too perfect to resonate. We hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“Abbott Elementary”!!! It’s been a minute since I’ve been wowed by a network sitcom, but I saw a fair amount of buzz for this new single-cam mockumentary created by and starring Quinta Brunson, so I checked it out. And… wow. It’s a workplace comedy very much in the vein of “The Office” — the conceit of a documentary team following an ordinary group of workers, the incompetent and narcissistic boss, the smart but downtrodden lead, the characters always punctuating awkward moments with a glance at the camera — which happens to be a vein I really love. It’s super funny, full of heart (especially for public school teachers and kids), and is setting up a classic will-they-won’t-they for Brunson’s character and the handsome new sub, which I am prepared to ship.
Also, I’ve been watching “Yellowjackets” for a future pod, which is wigging me out to the point that on Friday night I couldn’t go to sleep because I kept thinking someone had broken into our apartment and was standing behind our bedroom door. I love art. -Claire
The final season of “The Hookup Plan,” a criminally underrated French Netflix show which centers of the romantic and professional and personal travails of three Parisian women in their early 30s. Whereas the first season focused in on the absurdity (and ultimately romance) of Elsa’s two best friends, Charlotte and Emilie, setting her up with a very sexy sex worker, Jules, season three is quieter and less bombastic in nature. The three main characters have gotten a bit older, settled into careers and relationships and are looking ahead at what the next stage of their lives might be. Elsa and Jules are desperate to have a child but are encountering fertility issues. Emilie and husband Antoine wonder if they were meant to be parents to just one child after a surprise second pregnancy. Charlotte, who has never wanted kids, starts to lose herself in a relationship and wonder what it looks like to really take care of herself. I loved this short and sweet season because it mirrored — in a lighthearted way — many of the questions my peers are currently asking ourselves, and it provides some reassurance that friendships can persist even when best friends don’t answer these questions in the same way. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
Danielle J. Lindemann’s upcoming sociological survey of American reality TV, “True Story: What Reality TV Says About Us”! We’ve always talked a lot about how “The Bachelor” both reflects us and shapes us, holds up a funhouse mirror to society and also helps perpetuate the aspects of society that it captures. But Lindemann’s book dives deep on this, examining shows from “The Real World” to “Survivor” to “Real Housewives” and drawing upon decades of scholarship on this genre and mass media generally. Much like another recent reality read, “How to Win ‘The Bachelor’” by Lizzy Pace and Chad Kultgen (whom we interviewed about their book on “Love to See It” last week), “True Story” takes a rigorous, critical look at reality TV. While “How to Win ‘The Bachelor’” focuses on deconstructing how players experience the form, “True Story” deconstructs how it represents and works in our society. Both books have been really thought-provoking and clarifying, and just a wonderful way to begin a new year of “Bachelor” coverage with renewed vigor and perspective. -Claire
I (appropriately) literarily-binged my way through “How To Win ‘The Bachelor’” before our podcast last week, and I finally finished Lauren Oyler’s wonderful “Fake Accounts,” a book I had gotten halfway through last year when it came out, loved what I read and yet just never finished. Sometimes, it’s nice to go back to the things that your brain couldn’t concentrate on for whatever reason. The latter half was just as satisfying as the first. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Normal Gossip,” the new Defector podcast hosted by our bud Kelsey McKinney! Just a little something she cooked up when she wasn’t publishing a brilliant novel, cofounding a worker-owned media company, reporting, and writing scorching essays. Each episode features an anonymized but real piece of gossip from the lives of normal people. I’m not the kind of person who receives a lot of gossip, probably because I have a relatively small social network, don’t like to pry and am not charming enough to do it tactfully, and can be kind of judgmental (friends, please feel free to let me know other reasons why you don’t want to tell me gossip). This is unfortunate, because I LOVE GOSSIP. This pod fills a real hole in my life and I’m grateful. -Claire
I find Claire’s recommendation rude because I was ALSO planning to recommend “Normal Gossip” this week. (JK Claire, I guess we can share this one!!!) As someone who has a completely insatiable thirst for delicious gossip, Kelsey’s new pod washes over me like a balm — a balm that I immediately want more of the minute it’s soaked in. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Long underwear on sale from 32 Degrees. Jeans aren’t enough to keep my legs from going numb on playground trips this time of year (I used to be able to just choose to stay inside in the winter, but no more). A previous purchase from Land’s End proved to have a ridiculously thick, wide, loose waistband, but these seem to fit and have a much more normal amount of elastic. Stay warm out there, kids! -Claire
I’ve already raved about August + Monroe’s 3-in-1 Blemish Camouflage stick, which I’m about to place a refill order for, but I recently tried their Calm Cream, a beautifully-packaged, lightweight moisturizer (my boyfriend even loved using it when we were traveling), which can be easily turned into an effective tinted moisturizer when mixed with the blemish camo! I’ve been wearing it daily and it makes me feel like I don’t need to put on foundation most of the time.
I also have continued my Abercrombie obsession, and have found that their seamless bodysuits, like this crewneck one and this mock turtleneck one (which is currently on sale!) are the perfect layering pieces for freezing NYC winter weather if you want to both be warm and feel chic. -Emma
Share Rich TextOver the last four episodes of “And Just Like That…”, our awesome threesome has really gone through it.
SPOILER ALERT: We will now talk about what they’ve gone through. Proceed with caution.
Carrie begins to suspect Big carried a torch for, or had an affair with, Natasha. Then she needs to get major hip surgery due to a congenital defect, and face the possibility of never walking in heels EVER AGAIN.
Miranda spirals deeper into her alcoholism, finally hitting rock bottom and deciding to quit — oh, and she realizes she’s into Carrie’s boss, Che, and has sex with them in Carrie’s kitchen while her post-op friend lies helplessly nearby.
Charlotte… has a wonderful child who is exploring their identity. Okay, so Charlotte is not super going through it, but hey, they can’t all be in crisis at the same time!
In this middle batch of “AJLT” episodes, the show also tries — only somewhat successfully — to make space for its four new central castmembers. Nya, Miranda’s professor, gets a mini-arc about her ambivalence about continuing IVF; Seema, Carrie’s glamorous realtor, gets one about the family pressure she’s under to find love. Lisa (or LTW), Charlotte’s PTA buddy, wants acceptance from her mother-in-law, and Che, podcaster and comedy concert performer, wants… to fuck Miranda and perform comedy, presumably.
But their screentime is minimal compared to the original three, and the show still seems to be grappling with how to integrate so many new perspectives — and with how to bring Miranda, Charlotte, and Carrie into 2021. Both Miranda and Charlotte are shown spectacularly fucking up in their attempts to come off as anti-racist and with it (in one episode, Charlotte tries to strong-arm her Black neighbor into coming to dinner so that LTW and her husband won’t be the only Black friends there), and while there’s an honesty to showing the kind of missteps they make, it’s also jarring how few consequences they face, other than some momentary awkwardness quickly smoothed over by their Black acquaintances.
There’s so much more to explore in these four episodes — so much that we went SUPER LONG on this pod, learning that we simply can’t do four episodes in under 2 hours next time. We discuss plotlines about aging and plastic surgery, extramarital affairs, parenting trans children, ultra-modern apartments and mystery beeping, Stanford’s necessary but inglorious exit, problematic dolls, and the rise of Anthony.
We hope you enjoy this very long episode! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
I just got the press screener for the “Yellowjackets” finale and I am very relieved to report that this brilliant show about trauma, girlhood, and the viciousness of the latter, sticks the motherfucking landing. Buzz buzz, bitches. -Emma
“Starstruck” on HBO Max. It feels like every week I report to the teacher (all of you) that I couldn’t finish my homework (reading/TV watching/podcast listening/newsletter writing) because my son has been home sick from daycare, but: he’s been home sick from daycare. Since CHRISTMAS. So we needed a light half-hour comedy to watch in the evenings while we shoved frozen pizza in our mouths before falling into bed. “Starstruck,” a sweet romcom series from the U.K., turns “Notting Hill” upside-down as it follows a snarky nanny/cinema usher through her unexpected hookup-turned-romance with a famous actor. It’s a very pleasant way to pass a few hours. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
I really needed to dive into a story that would make me feel warm and fuzzy inside, and Alison Rose Greenberg’s debut novel, “Bad Luck Bridesmaid,” did just that. It follows Zoey Marks, a woman in her early 30s who is uninterested in (and bordering on terrified of) marriage as she navigates the end of a relationship with a man who desperately wanted marital bliss, and the impending nuptials of her best friend. The novel is light and funny and well-written, and wraps up in a way that defies your cookie cutter happy ending. -Emma
I decided to read Colson Whitehead’s “Harlem Shuffle” over the break. My son even helped me out by shouting “MOMMY BOOK!” whenever he spotted it lying around the apartment and running to bring it over to me. Unfortunately I’m stalled halfway because I had to start doing work during naptime again after the holidays, but the first half conjures such a rich world, and creates a compelling protagonist in Carney, a somewhat shady furniture salesman from a family of crooks, who’s trying to keep his family afloat and climbing the social ladder — an almost impossible task to achieve honestly. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
“Harsh Reality: The Story of Miriam Rivera.” This 7-part podcast looks back at the life of Miriam Rivera, the trans woman who was at the center of “There’s Something About Miriam,” a horrifyingly misguided and transphobic 2003 reality show in which a group of British men vied for Miriam’s affections. The twist? At the end, Miriam would “reveal her secret” — aka her identity as a non-cisgender woman. Rivera died in 2019, and this podcast, hosted by Trace Lysette pays beautiful tribute to her and forces many of the players involved in “There’s Something About Miriam” to reflect on its uncomfortable legacy. -Emma
The ongoing “You’re Wrong About” series on “The Amityville Horror,” the book by Jay Anson that launched the true-haunting media empire. Sarah Marshall and Jamie Loftus walk us through the book, the backstory, and all the weird cultural norms baked into the narrative — like how it’s treated as completely normal that the new husband and stepfather in the family isn’t honest with his wife about anything and constantly shouts at his stepchildren. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
This sweater vest dress from Abercrombie. I am legitimately obsessed with the A&F rebrand and I can’t stop buying their eminently wearable, classic-feeling basics. -Emma
My skin has been, like, terrible lately?? And while Instagram moms always seem to have a full face of makeup on, it feels a bit pointless to me — my toddler literally ground a handful of snow in my face the other day ten minutes after I applied concealer and mascara. But Glossier hasn’t been cutting it, and I was starting to just feel down about my ~whole look~.
So I was in a very vulnerable place for impulse cosmetic shopping, and ended up ordering some Merit products after resisting the Instagram ads for months. The idea is that they allow you to do a quick easy routine, but do offer some coverage — rather than a totally sheer skin tint like Glossier’s, the Minimalist foundation/concealer stick is meant to be applied to targeted areas (like undereye circles and blemishes) and then blended out. They also sell a very popular tinted lip oil, and even with nightly applications of my beloved Laneige lip mask, I could use some more daily lip moisture. So I caved! I will update when I see how they work on my face. -Claire
Share Rich TextThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter about cultural obsessions from your Internet BFFs Emma and Claire. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
We soft launched Rich Text one year ago. It was supposed to be a hobby, an experiment, an attempt to rediscover joy in writing after a demoralizing year of Covid scares, lockdowns, and (for Claire) new motherhood. Instead, in the 12 months since our inaugural newsletter — thanks to an unexpected layoff — it became one of our primary projects and sources of income.
We rapidly ramped up our newsletter capacity, and, in an attempt to keep up with our Bachelor coverage as Matt James’s season wound to a chaotic close, we began publishing our recap podcasts here as well. Our Bachelor podcast, Here to Make Friends, eventually found a new home with Stitcher as Love to See It with Emma and Claire, but we immediately realized that we had an opportunity with Rich Text to podcast about everything else: scripted TV, books, weird Twitter storms like Bad Art Friend and broader cultural topics like motherhood. We kept writing essays, if less frequently than we should have. In the year since we launched this newsletter, it’s grown from a tiny side gig to the center of our work life.
And that, to be honest, is about all of you. We were, and are, profoundly grateful for everyone who subscribed to the newsletter in the wake of our involuntary departure from HuffPost, and we are grateful for everyone who subscribes now. We appreciate everyone who reads and/or listens to Rich Text, everyone who shares it, and everyone who lets it pile up in their inbox because it really can be pretty hard to keep up with all your subscriptions (Claire says, eyeing her stack of unopened NYRBs in the corner). And, of course, we appreciate those readers and listeners who pay for premium subscriptions. Everyone who pays to subscribe to Rich Text makes it possible for us to keep doing what we love, which is writing and talking about culture.
Subscribe nowStarting a newsletter was a sort of optimistic, clean-slate New Year’s gesture in 2021, when we wanted it to signify our renewed commitment to blogging it out and keeping our synapses firing. Now it’s another new year, and another moment to take stock. Much like 2020, 2021 didn’t go much like we expected (globally, politically, professionally, or personally). Professionally, it’s been a terrifying and yet exhilarating new world for us. In this week’s pod, we talk about how this year of Rich Text went, what we’re proud of, and what we want to work on in 2022.
This week, in lieu of recommendations, we’re digging into the Rich Text archives. Here are our favorite podcast episodes and essays of 2021.
Claire
On 'Superstore' And The Ties That Bind
Sally Rooney's Glittering Surfaces
Emma
Did The Pandemic Steal Our Youth?
Rage Against The (Diet) Machine
All My Group Texts Are Filled With Despair
Podcast Episodes
Bonus Chat: We Rewatched 'The Nanny'
Audio Chat: Bridging The Motherhood Divide
The Lord Is The Ultimate Upline: 'LuLaRich' With Ali Barthwell
'Sex/Life' Doesn't Elucidate Much About Sex Or Life
'Sex And The City' Revisited: Season 1
Please let us know in the comments what you’d love to see more of in 2022! And again, thank you for being here. Happy New Year!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
The perennial question faced by protagonists in fiction — especially, let’s be honest, female protagonists — is whether they are “likable.” It’s both an understandable question (to convince an audience to spend any significant amount of time in their company, one would think it should be pleasant to be around them) and a limiting one (“likable” characters are not the only ones who are interesting and rewarding to engage with).
Emily Cooper, the heroine of “Emily in Paris,” has been widely deemed unlikable, despite her immaculate brunette waves, kooky couture ensembles (courtesy of Patricia Field), and sunny disposition. Lily Collins, who plays Emily, has even felt compelled to defend her character’s “beautiful qualities” in interviews. “To have someone be optimistic, bright, and bubbly — it's sad to think that people would look and go, ‘That’s a lot,’” she told Nylon.
And we have to admit, we’re among those people. Since Emily first stepped a stiletto on the cobblestones of Paris, we’ve found her a bit grating, a bit hard to relate to. Which leaves us with the question: so what? Does it matter that we don’t particularly like Emily, and if so, why can’t we like her? In this episode, we dig into the spunky Chicagoan as a character — her seemingly limited emotional range, her purported work addiction, her truly mind-boggling fashion — and her Parisian hijinks, particularly her slowly imploding love triangle with Gabriel and Camille.
Happy holidays! We’ll see you in 2022.
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been watching…
“The Sex Lives of College Girls”! Once again I’m a week behind Emma. After everyone from David Plotz of Slate’s Political Gabfest to my brother-in-law recommended it, I had to take Emma’s tip. The first episode feels like it could have been like four episodes, and maybe provided some more backstory, but the central foursome have already charmed me, and so has Leighton’s hot brother. -Claire
“Yellowjackets”!!!!!!! Holy fuck, I cannot believe that my terror of all things horror/gore-adjacent kept me from starting this brilliant show. But since I was stuck in Omicron quarantine — I am triple vaxxed so my symptoms were mild! Get boosted, everyone! — I have had time to catch up on all of the TV I’ve been meaning to watch, including Showtime’s fantastic new drama. “Yellowjackets” follows a high school girls soccer team who are in a plane crash en route to nationals, and end up stuck in the Canadian wilderness for 19 months in the mid-’90s. The show toggles back and forth between the past and present, and it has it all: Gen X icons like Christina Ricca and Juliette Lewis! Exploration of trauma and female rage! A soundtrack that features Hole and Liz Phair and The Cranberries! I bit the bullet and paid for Showtime streaming for this, and I do not regret it. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
“The Days of Afrekete” by Asali Solomon, in which our frazzled hostess is now struggling through a painful dinner party freighted with microaggressions and social gaffes while recalling her college years and her 20s, when she dated women and dreamed of becoming a writer or a DJ. The “Dalloway” resonances are profound. I’ve also started “Zami” by Audre Lorde, a biomythography, to which the title of Solomon’s book is a reference. -Claire
To be perfectly honest, I’ve had some fatigue and brain fog from Covid, so I haven’t read much of substance that’s new. However, I have been reading a lot of good tweets and memes. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Random music from my Apple Music library! When I hit play on my iPhone, intending to restart Spotify or Overcast, it often has dropped the last app I was listening to from the queue and instead starts playing something from my Apple Music tracks.
Currently, this library contains only purchases I made from Apple, and because most of my music pre-streaming was purchased on CD and then uploaded, my Apple Music consists of the most random shit: three songs from “Red,” one from “Speak Now,” and all of “1989”; “Paper Planes” by M.I.A.; “Wavin’ Flag” by K’naan; the Glee cast recording of “Valerie”; songs by Alexz Johnson from the Canadian teen soap “Instant Star”; Anaïs Mitchell and A Fine Frenzy and Eve 6 and Florence + the Machine and Jack’s Mannequin. It’s a hot mess of music I didn’t bother to buy CD albums of from 2004 to 2012, and no matter what song comes up, I’m still into it. It’s an instant time capsule. I listened to Hey Monday and Savage Garden the other night while making beans.
Then I thought about how I was seduced by the streaming era into listening to music in such an unconsidered, frictionless way that I am now 33 and can never remember what music I like. I have no library of records or CDs to browse, just a search bar waiting for me to tap in a request. It sucks! This is why everyone is into vinyl now, right? -Claire
I’ve been catching up on the latest season of “Heavyweight,” Jonathan Goldstein’s beautiful storytelling podcast in which he delves into one person’s past — a trauma, a lingering question, something that’s stuck with them since childhood — in each episode. He’s just so very good. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
More huggie hoops — this time from Ana Luisa, which has a nice selection of plain and detailed choices. I wear these fuller-bodied hoops every day now, and I also love the slightly more interesting look of these beaded ones.
Plus, searching for some tighter tops to pair with mom jeans (the changing of a denim silhouette is murder on the entire wardrobe), I found this mockneck sweater at Urban Outfitters. The chocolate shade I bought is no longer available, but I’m jealous of anyone who can pull off the red and bright yellow ones that remain. It’s such a cute basic, and the huge back cut-out makes it, well, a little less basic. -Claire
I also bought some gold hoops recently, though they’re bigger than huggies. I’ve shouted out Second Wind before for their beautiful masks and mask chains, but they also have gorgeous jewelry! I got their smallest 14k gold-plated hoops, the Alexandra Hoops, and they are perfect.
I’ve also continued to be on an Abercrombie kick, which my 13-year-old self would find incredibly bizarre. They’re still having a pretty big holiday sale, and I got these great Tailored Menswear Dad Pants in off-white, and this Vegan Leather Mini Puffer in white to complete my winter white ~lewk~. Basically I’m stuck at home trying to channel the vibes of a rich lady hanging at the fancy ski lodge. -Emma
Leave a commentA glamorous romance author tries to buy a Scottish castle from a grumpy duke. Not one, but two L.A. writers travel to the frosty East to spend Christmas with a prospective lover’s family, only to encounter a himbo who throws a spanner in the works. A foxy noblewoman joins forces with her childhood sweetheart, now a private security expert, to recover a stolen Vatican relic — and her relationship with the identical cousin whose throne she tried to steal.
This is what Christmas in the Netflix holiday-romcom-verse looks like: Everyone is beautiful, everyone is ready to finally have someone to love at the holidays, and the plots range from classic (boring) to utterly unhinged. We watched four of Netflix’s new romances — “Love Hard,” “Single All the Way,” “A Castle for Christmas,” and “The Princess Switch 3: Romancing the Star” — for a quadruple-feature podcast in which we break down our favorite parts of each movie, ruthlessly mock our least favorite parts, and revel in the holiday spirit.
Plus, for a more wide-ranging breakdown, Claire binged the platform’s 2021 Christmas movie slate and wrote about that surprisingly overwhelming experience for Thrillist.
Merry Christmas to those who observe, and a restful week to all! xo
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been reading…
Amanda Gorman’s gorgeous book of poetry, “Call Us What We Carry.” No surprise it was an instant NYTime bestseller. -Emma
“Harrow” by Joy Williams (finally finished Sunday while fending off a toddler), a climate/existential crisis novel featuring a woman who perhaps came back from the dead when she was an infant, or perhaps was never born, and a 10-year-old judge named Jeffrey. It’s weird and disturbing and very worth reading.
Also, started “The Days of Afrekete” by Asali Solomon! It’s been a minute since her debut, the coming-of-age novel “Disgruntled,” and her latest opens on a frazzled Philadelphia hostess wondering whether to cancel her dinner party (for which she did buy the flowers herself) after hearing that her husband, who recently lost his first bid for office, likely will be indicted by the FBI. Consider me hooked! -Claire
We’ve been watching…
I tore through Prime’s original holiday rom-com series, “With Love.” Gloria Calderón Kellett’s 5-episode miniseries follows a Latinx family over the course of a year, zeroing in on various members’ romantic triumphs and tribulations. (The series starts and ends around Christmas.) It’s joyful and sweet and prioritizes representation in a way that feels earned and natural rather than shoe-horned. Highly recommend. -Emma
We’re finally starting season 2 of “The Great,” the first season of which defined an epoch in our household’s nightly pandemic routine of dinner-and-an-episode-of-some-TV-show. The mercurial violence has not abated much, though enlightened Catherine (Elle Fanning) is in the process of winning her coup against her brutish husband and emperor, Peter (Nicholas Hoult), but neither have the quippy and incredibly vulgar dialogue, the comedy of political maneuvers both brilliant and foolish, and the absolutely mouth-watering costumes. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
My latest podcast binge is “A Death In Cryptoland,” a CBC podcast which investigates the sudden death of Gerald Cotten, the young CEO of Canada’s largest cryptocurrency exchange. When he died in 2018, he left a quarter of a billion dollars completely inaccessible to the people who had invested. (And naturally set off a wild string of conspiracy theories.) The pod came out in June, but I’m really enjoying it in December — especially as someone who is a total crypto neophyte. -Emma
This week, it’s my turn to be all about Christmas music.
I also listened to the latest episode of “Know Your Enemy,” a longstanding fave in my rotation, in which hosts Sam Adler-Bell and Matt Sitman talk to rising right-wing intellectual star Nate Hochman. Like most rising right-wing intellectual stars, he’s 23, drowning in conservative grants, and when he’s really pressed on any of the cruel and violent policies he lends his support to, just starts complaining about how people being too “woke” really gets on his nerves. The hosts do try to press Hochman, at least toward the latter half of the podcast, but I was left with no less doubt than I had before about the value of these kinds of conversations between the right and the left: it gave them an opportunity to chat amiably about their shared horror at the hypocrisies and failings of the liberal establishment, and no one wanted to ruin the vibe by going for the jugular when Hochman casually referred to, for example, the “corrosive” effect of “transgenderism” on our society. This episode stuck with me more than most, though, maybe because the desire to find a way out of our current hell through real, humane, open-minded conversation with our opposition is such an eternal and ever-frustrating one. When one actually tries, it often gets one absolutely fucking nowhere. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
I swear this is not an ad, more like a skincare PSA, but I cannot stop raving about August + Monroe’s 3-in-1 Blemish Camouflage. This product was aggressively advertised to me on IG for months before I finally caved and bought it after a friend did the same, and I couldn’t be happier that I did. It works as both a spot treatment, a primer AND a coverup! And the coolest part about it is that when you rub it in, pigment-bursting beads match whatever your skin tone is! I have acne-prone skin, and to have a product that both covers up spots and simultaneously treats them is truly game-changing. -Emma
A Christmas tree!!! This is our first Christmas tree since having a kid, and it was a tiny bit of a mess (it took forever to identify a good spot in the apartment to put one; we never had enough time to actually go get one; once I found the perfect tree another buyer snapped it up while I had my back turned; poor Greg, who doesn’t even celebrate Christmas, had to carry our consolation conifer 10 blocks while pushing the stroller because our son cries hysterically if I push it instead). BUT. But. Then I put it up in front of our window, and we played Christmas standards while I draped string lights. The toddler helped me put on my favorite ornaments; he’s old enough now to be impressed by an actual tree covered in lights being in our apartment all of a sudden. As evening fell, the whole living room smelled like pine needles and cheer. (Letter of recommendation: making your home smell like a winter forest.) We’re not sure what the rest of our holiday season will look like, thanks to Covid, but at least we have the tree. -Claire
And just like that, we watched “And Just Like That…”!
In this subscribers-only pod, we discuss the return of sad Carrie, problematic Miranda, and boring Charlotte — and, sadly, of “she-lives-somewhere-else-now” Samantha. (This time, she isn’t going to get tired of waiting for Smith under a mountain of sushi and decide to move back to New York.) The pod is, obviously, chock-full of spoilers for the first two episodes, so read no further if you don’t want to find out what happened.
…
…
…
WHY DIDN’T CARRIE CALL 911?? We ask this question, wonder if we’re being too hard on Carrie, and now conclude that we weren’t hard enough. The first episode of this series is essentially an anti-PSA: it implies that Mr. Big has a heart attack because he’s riding his Peloton (a heart-healthy activity, Peloton would very much like you to know) and then shows Carrie romantically screaming and holding him while he falls unconscious instead of calling for emergency responders and initiating CPR. He could be alive today, a cardiologist told NY Mag! He is alive today, a very savvy last-minute Peloton commercial told the world!
We also wonder where things are going with the show’s very transparent attempts to diversify and address the racial myopia of the franchise’s entire history. Four new BIPOC central cast members are being introduced — the three so far are Carrie’s podcasting boss Che Diaz (Sara Ramirez), a queer nonbinary comedian; human rights professor Dr. Nya Wallace (Karen Pittman), who endures Miranda’s truly horrific white-lady monologue about her braids during the first session of class; and Charlotte’s intimidatingly cool and accomplished fellow private school mom Lisa Todd Wexley, or LTW (Nicole Ari Parker).
It’s heartening that the new series wants to do better — and even, in a way, that the cast and creators are willing to show how gross and harmful the ignorance of its main characters is, rather than normalizing or even justifying the occasional overt racism they showed in previous installments. Mostly, we’re hopeful that giving these new characters their own storylines and perspectives will make them more than learning props for the original three.
Then again, so far evidence for that is limited. Our old colleague Julia Craven argued in her newsletter on the new series, “it felt like the reboot was trying too hard to make up for the social contours they failed to address in SATC—while still trekking into stereotypes—to convince the viewers that the trio has evolved with the times.” Have they evolved? Is the current political moment just making it obvious how unevolved they’ve always been? Are their new friends of color going to “fix” them? We can’t help but wonder.
All that, plus: What was with the fraught meta-conversation about why Samantha isn’t their friend anymore? What makes a funeral chic? Is Carrie terrible at podcasting, and why does she need to be employed by another podcaster when she’s inconceivably wealthy and has a successful media brand? The Manhattan School of Music, Carrie! The Manhattan School of Music!
Hope you enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscriptionWe’ve been watching…
“The Sex Lives Of College Girls,” Mindy Kaling’s new HBO Max show about four college freshman from very different walks of life who are thrown together as roommates, and it’s a freaking delight! I got to the end of the 10th episode of the season and was so mad that there wasn’t more. -Emma
If I’ve watched it, there’s been a pod about it — except for “12 Dates of Christmas,” the HBO dating show, and lots of Netflix holiday movies. Exactly as much mindless fun as you’d expect, except for “A Castle for Christmas,” which is excruciatingly boring. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
Sarah Jones’ essay in New York Magazine about Josh Duggar, the oldest son of the Duggar family, the Quiverfull movement-following family who gained fame on TLC through their show, “19 Kids And Counting.” (Duggar was recently convicted of receiving and possessing child sexual abuse material, and faces decades in prison.) Jones explores why an extremist, ultra-conservative family found a welcome home in the living rooms of so many Americans, and what it says about all of us. "Hypocrisy and cruelty are as American as the flag,” Jones writes. “The Duggars merely took on the qualities of their environment and perfected them, all for willing audiences." -Emma
Profiles! I have always found celebrity profiles really, really dull, but this is probably a function of the fact that in this era, they’re constrained by a powerful PR industry. Michael Schulman’s recent profile of Jeremy Strong, fueled by in-depth access and lots of frank quotations from Strong’s colleagues and friends, is an exemplar of what the form could be. It’s not exactly flattering — it’s hard not to come away with the impression that, for example, Kieran Culkin loathes working with his costar — but on the other hand, it actually makes him seem interesting. There’s something there to sink your teeth into. Maybe it’s actually the smartest branding play of all.
In a similar vein, Lauren Collins’s riveting new profile of Alison Roman doesn’t sand all the rough edges off the already-controversial food writer and influencer. It astutely diagrams the components of her appeal and the type of public figure she has become, the elements of a Roman recipe, dinner party, and room decor. It follows her through her 2020 explosion of fame during Covid lockdown — and implosion after making glib comments calling Marie Kondo and Chrissy Teigen sell-outs for collaborating on branded product lines. I left not necessarily liking Roman more (perhaps even less) than I did before, but she was more real to me, more textured. In this day and age, not many celebrity profiles actually accomplish that. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
So much Christmas music! I may be Jewish, but I just threw a holiday party and making the playlist required a lot of very holiday-cheerful research. -Emma
The new season of “One Year,” which is about 1995! Though I was actually alive during this year, most of the stories — big news stories at the time — are completely unfamiliar to me. American students who think they’ve gotten into Oxford only to find they’ve been scammed by a low-rent school in the same city with misleading marketing materials! A popular website claiming to be the dramatic ongoing diaries of a group of hot, arty housemates in Santa Monica, which turned out to be the fictional creation of a group of aspiring screenwriters who worked at an ad agency! There’s also a heartbreaking episode on the suspicion and hostility faced by Muslim Americans in Oklahoma City after the bombing, including a man who became a suspect for no apparent reason. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
These J. Crew tapered leg plaid wool pants. I love a trouser, especially one that comes in petite sizes for us shorties. -Emma
This jewelry-cleaning brush!!! After years of trying various at-home cleaning products for my wedding set, plus occasional quick cleans at jewelry stores, I still wasn’t satisfied with any of the options. This thing is the truth. My ring actually sparkles again.
Also, I have been trying to figure out how to style mom jeans in the winter, and decided to try clog boots. Which are $400, apparently. So I got these Target ones to experiment with, and they’re great?! And hopefully durable, because I’m not sure when I’ll have $400 to spend on clogs. -Claire
As 2021 winds to a miserable conclusion — a couple highlights: a new Covid variant, Supreme Court hearings over a case that could overturn Roe v. Wade, the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse — we found our thoughts turning inexorably back to a simpler time (in the sense that we were, personally, ten years old). After a long day of catching up on the latest soul-crushing news and trying to find toddler-sized N95 masks, we craved the sweet escape of Cosmopolitans and Manolo Blahnik strappy sandals. And rather than wait for the upcoming, Samantha-free series “And Just Like That…”, we decided to indulge in a rewatch — and a journey back in time.
The year: 1998. The show: “Sex and the City,” HBO’s hottest new sex-com. The reviews: decidedly mixed. When the escapades of Carrie Bradshaw, Miranda Hobbes, Samantha Jones, and Charlotte York debuted that year, it wasn’t foreordained that it would become a juggernaut that would revitalize HBO and profoundly influence the way a generation of (predominantly white, affluent) women would think about sex, shoes, being a writer, and New York City.
But ohhh, it did. In this episode, we talk about how season one of the show worked — the blunt diagnoses of different types of single men, single women, married couples, and moms; the endless debates among the foursome about how single, professional women in their 30s could and should navigate a world full of toxic men; the flawed yet charming women whose misadventures we follow — and how it hits us now, over 20 years after it first aired.
Hope you enjoy! xo
Give a gift subscriptionAction items…
For obvious reasons, we’ve been spending the last week thinking a lot about reproductive justice, and the way that this country exhibits a fundamental lack of care, even an outright hatred, towards women and other people with uteruses. We fetishize motherhood, but do not support mothers. We force birth, but do not let the people doing the birthing heal afterwards or support children once they have been born. We are so fucking tired, and we bet you are too.
If you have some extra money this holiday season, consider giving to one of these amazing organizations doing the work to keep abortion care safe, accessible and legal:
National Network of Abortion Funds
Mississippi Reproductive Freedom Fund
We’ve been watching…
Netflix’s entire holiday romcom slate, for… reasons. Thumbs up to “Single All the Way,” thumbs down to almost everything else, as of this writing. -Claire
I’ve been binging terrible made-for-TV holiday movies across Netflix, Lifetime and Hallmark for ~research~ and I think my brain has officially turned into red and green holiday cheer mush. Brb while I move to a small town named Snow Globe in order to reconnect with my elementary school boyfriend and rediscover the meaning of Christmas/ the value of a successful, small, family-owned business. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
A deeply moving piece in Airmail by Bill Adair (initially with the rather mean headline “Stephen Glass’s Biggest Lie,” now apparently changed to “Loving Lies”) about the disgraced ex-journalist Stephen Glass who lost his New Republic gig after fabricating splashy scoops. In the 20 years since then, Glass has rebuilt his life outside of media — going to law school, finding a new career, and scrupulously trying to make amends — only to find himself in the midst of a slowly unfolding tragedy that required him to deny reality again.
Also, author Merritt Tierce’s searingly honest, generous essay in the New York Times Magazine about the abortion she didn’t have at 19, the son she gave birth to too young, and the tangled knot of regret and love that has lived inside her ever since. Her story celebrates the profound love she has for her son and the joy he’s brought her, but it doesn’t flinch away from exploring precisely how his unplanned birth destroyed the life she had dreamed for herself and left him with a mother who, she argues, wasn’t ready to be the parent he deserved.
At a moment when the Supreme Court is weighing a woman’s right to an abortion, and looks almost certain to take it away, the conservative justices and amicus briefs seem to be presenting various formulations of “women don’t need abortions now that they can easily give up their babies for adoption, or now that there are more policies to help them continue their careers after starting a family, etc. etc. etc.” Essays like Tierce’s, and Elizabeth Spiers’s heartbreaking piece on the trauma left behind when women see no choice but to give up a child for adoption, put the lie to such facile, callous arguments. Horrifyingly, our Supreme Court, and the conservative movement, aren’t listening. But the rest of us should be. -Claire
I also read Tierce and Spiers’s essays, and I can’t say it better than Claire just did. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Gone South,” a Cadence13 podcast about the 1987 murder of prosecutor Margaret Coon. It starts like a more run-of-the-mill true crime podcast, but ends up going into the history of the LGBTQ+ community in Louisiana, and the systematic failures of law enforcement. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
A washable rug to put under our kitchen/dining table! My cat used to claw up carpet in chunks, so we went pretty much rug-free for years. But I was sick of the table and chairs sliding around on our bare wood floors, and how unfinished the whole apartment looked, so we finally sprung for a Ruggable. It’s incredible how much more like a “room” our dining area now looks, and how much more homey our apartment feels. Rugs: has everyone heard about these? -Claire
I finally caved and ordered a Dyson vacuum after finding a V8 Fluffy Cordless model on major Black Friday sale. I look forward to gleefully sucking up all the dust off of my floor and other surfaces in my apartment. -Emma
Pour us a shotski of Vida and fry us an egg: we’re back in Salt Lake City, babies! When we last convened here in the frozen realm of the newest “Real Housewives” franchise, Claire was just getting the lay of the land as we discussed the first two episodes of the second season. We toured rented 7-bedroom ski chalets; we heard about who (Jen) had liked mean tweets about whose (Meredith’s) child; we joined Jen Shah and Heather Gay in an ice palace for a cozy truce. Table-setting, really.
Nine episodes later, shit’s getting real. The timeline of the show has finally caught up to Jen’s arrest on charges of wire fraud and money laundering, and whispers that Gucci-clad preacher Mary Cosby might be running a cult have swelled to shouts.
It’s just too juicy to ignore. So we’re not! Emma summoned Claire out of her (really, really) early RHOSLC retirement to unpack some of the wildest threads of the last nine episodes, including Jennie and Duy Nguyen’s child-bearing drama, the Whitney Rose-Lisa Barlow-Angie Harrington friendship shuffle, and the above-mentioned Jen Shah and Mary Cosby scandals.
As we prepare this episode the week of Thanksgiving, we’re deeply grateful to have had so much fun binging this bananas show and taping our conversation about it, and we’re thankful to all of you for subscribing and listening. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“The Shrink Next Door,” the new Apple TV original starring Paul Rudd and Will Ferrell (in dramatic roles!) based on the Wondery podcast of the same name. It’s such a gripping story and so Jewish, that while the show isn’t perfect, I’m still really enjoying the ride. -Emma
Nothing. Parents of small kids, remember when a long holiday weekend meant vegging out for Hallmark movie marathons or binging an entire season of “The Sopranos”? Yeah, that’s a distant memory now. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
I’m still reading Harrow by Joy Williams, and it’s only getting weirder and more unsettling in how it depicts an ecologically ravaged and temporally unmoored world much like ours.
Also, Nandini Balial’s gorgeous meditation on cardamom, pandemic cooking, and finding sweetness in unexpected places. (Plus a delicious-sounding parfait recipe.) -Claire
This Washington Post feature on the rise and fall and rise again of Abercrombie, a brand that was best known for cultivating an air of exclusivity and positioning men with chiseled abs outside of its stores, and now has pivoted in a big way. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Blake Moynes’s interview with on “Talking It Out” with Bryan Abasolo and Mike Johnson, including the sad postscript about his ex-fiancée Katie Thurston’s announcement that she’s dating one of the guys who was eliminated early on her season (and who became a close friend after filming), John Hersey.
Aside from that … mainly Cocomelon. The toddler is sick (AGAIN) and “Wheels on the Bus” sung by round-headed cartoons is the only thing that eases his misery. -Claire
I too listened to Blake’s “Talking It Out” interview. (I mean… DUH. The tea!)
Also, the true crime podcast, “Shadow of Truth,” which is about a twisty and turny Israeli murder case. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
These gold-plated huggie hoops (sadly this specific pair now seems to be available only in silver). I’ve been wearing the same pair of earrings every day, sleeping in them, etc., for years. They are classic post studs in a triangle shape, so when I lay on my side (I am a side-sleeper, so this was frequent), there would be four sharp points to dig into the soft skin of my ears and neck. And I just accepted this! When I put my head down at night now, I take a few moments to marvel at the fact that my little hoop earrings don’t poke me in even ONE place. I can’t even feel that they’re there?! Why was I living with pain for so long?? May all our purchases bring us this perfect blend of frivolous enjoyment and substantive life improvement. -Claire
I’ve been staring at Sheertex’s allegedly un-rippable tights for months, but could never justify spending $100 on something so un-fun. So when I saw they were having a major Black Friday week sale, I bought the bullet and got a pair of the Classic Sheer Tights. They just arrived, and let me tell you, they are FANTASTIC. And hopefully they’ll last for a few years! -Emma
Do you love Rich Text? Give the gift of a subscription this holiday season!
Season 1 of “Love Life,” starring Anna Kendrick as the unlucky-in-love Darby, left both of us underwhelmed. Though it was very watchable, and undeniably spoke to our passion for love stories, it was also weirdly lugubrious for a happily-ever-after tale. The chapter structure felt a bit choppy. The British (why??) narrator overexplained Darby’s emotional journey, and lent an odd whiff of pomposity to the whole proceeding.
So when season 2 rolled around, we might have given it a pass — except that the new lead was William Jackson Harper, playing unlucky-in-love Marcus. And look, we watched “The Good Place” and developed crushes on philosophy prof Chidi just like every other male-attracted person with a pulse. We were back in!
Harper’s Marcus is, like Chidi, a neurotic intellectual type, a 30-something book editor in New York with a ripped physique so unlikely that one of his lovers is compelled to ask him whether he is actually a CrossFit instructor. When the show opens, he’s at a wedding (Darby’s doomed union with Magnus, for viewers of season 1) with his wife, Emily, when he meets Mia (Jessica Williams). He and Mia have an immediate, electrifying chemistry and strike up a flirtatious friendship, which also prompts him to question his marriage to Emily, a white woman he loves but doesn’t feel truly understands him. Though Mia herself has a boyfriend, his crush on her eventually blows up his marriage, and after his separation, he begins to date again. The series follows his attempts to find love (or at least sex) with other women, even as he carries a torch for Mia.
Under showrunner Rachelle Williams, season 2 is thematically ambitious, taking on the Covid-19 pandemic and Black Lives Matter protests of 2020, and in Marcus delivers a complicated, flawed hero who spends most of the show in search of his own identity both within and outside of his romantic relationships.
It also suffers from some of the same elements that most bothered on us in season 1: the unctuous narration (again, British??), the gloomy vibe, the choppiness. The worst parts of “Love Life” season 2, in other words, are the “Love Live” brand kit parts.
In this episode, we break down the major plot points and themes, the show’s overall approach and aesthetic, and try to figure out why the “Love Life” recipe isn’t quite to our taste.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
“Harrow” by Joy Williams, a climate despair novel set in a terrifyingly possible-seeming future.
Also, Rolling Stone’s stomach-turning Marilyn Manson exposé. In the report, numerous ex-girlfriends accuse him of rape, physical abuse, and confining them in a soundproofed booth. Just as horrifying as the actual allegations are the frequent citations of previous published interviews and Manson’s own memoir, in which he openly boasts about abusing his mom, getting turned on by making young girls afraid, and having done things that could get him sent to prison. Another fun reminder that just a decade or so ago, men not only hurt women with impunity, they were considered impish and cute for bragging about it. -Claire
Haley Nahman’s essay on the value of structure and commitment, two things I have been trying to craft since being laid off in my professional life.
Also, this NYT Magazine deep dive into the terrifyingly intense post-pandemic real estate market. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Red (Taylor’s Version)” has been on constant rotation, and I’m even getting into gems I’d never listened to much before, like “State of Grace” and “Begin Again.” Especially loving the new verses on the 10-minute “All Too Well,” which seem to introduce some of her recent, more indie-girl-in-the-woods sound into her all-time classic. -Claire
Adele’s “30.” I continue to love Adele, and continue to love a breakup album. What is it about heartbreak and reflection that consistently seems to produce the most emotionally resonant, beautiful art? (Also, there’s a whole song titled “I Drink Wine”!!! Relatable content!!!) I’ll be listening to this album and weeping for the foreseeable future. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
“Real Housewives of Salt Lake City,” in preparation for an upcoming Rich Text pod! I’m at episode 8 and I’ve already collected a new mortal enemy (watch your back Duy) and so many questions about what the fuck is going on for Emma. -Claire
“Winter House,” because apparently I really enjoy subjecting myself to watching hot, 20 and 30-somethings be drunk in the snow. Also, a man builds an igloo with his bare hands in this show and it is absurd. Also also, my dear friend Miriam worked on this show, which isn’t absurd but is very cool. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Slip-on high-tops! Now that I’m a Mom™ I have been more and more reliant on comfortable shoes that can slip on in three seconds, handle a little dirt, and stay securely on my feet as I carry a toddler down two flights of stairs. Now that it’s fall, they also need to keep my ankles warm. I just installed elastic laces in a pair of Gola high-tops, eliminating the lacing and unlacing process that made wearing them a hassle. Also easy and cute: These zip-up black leather Clarks, a splurge but perfect with leggings, joggers and jeans. -Claire
As we head into winter, I’ve fully committed to the look, feel and vibe of vegan leather. I recently purchased this vegan leather pleated skirt from Abercrombie — a bunch of sizes are now sold out, but this Nasty Gal one (currently 70% off) and this South Moon Under one achieve a similar look — and I also invested in a second pair of Commando vegan leather leggings. They are lined, so they fit super nicely and don’t stick oddly to your legs. -Emma
Share Rich TextBy the end of the Netflix series “Maid,” Alex Russell (Margaret Qualley) is an expert at having the rug pulled out from under her. (And an expert at cleaning it neatly as she’s thrown to the floor.) A single mom who left an abusive relationship with the father of her toddler, Maddy (Rylea Nevaeh Whittet), Alex dreams of going to college in Missoula, Montana and becoming a writer. Instead she’s cleaning houses for Value Maids, scrubbing stovetops and toilets and baseboards for rock-bottom wages while her bank account balance constantly hovers near zero.
Alex, a bright, pretty, white woman who had gotten a scholarship to college before getting pregnant with her daughter, navigates the bureaucratic obstacle course of accessing government benefits (SNAP, daycare grants, subsidized housing) as ably and comfortably as anyone is likely to. She has work. She’s doing her best. And still, at every turn, she’s thwarted by the merciless realities of American capitalism and our moth-eaten social safety net.
She has little choice but to supplement her own income and government aid with assistance from her community — what little of it there is. She has to ask a friend for shelter when she flees her ex, Sean (Nick Robinson), in the middle of the night. She has to ask her eccentric mom, Paula (Andie McDowell) for babysitting so she can do a trial shift with Value Maids. She has to accept more and more help from a well-off former coworker, Nate (Raymond Ablack): a hot breakfast for her and Maddy after he finds them sleeping on the floor of the ferry terminal, an old car he no longer drives, a place to stay when she’s left homeless yet again. She also has to accept a place to stay from her estranged father and stepmother, and eventually from Sean.
And each time, she’s eventually left twisting in the breeze. Her friend won’t hide her from her furious ex, who is her own boyfriend’s best friend. Her mom can’t handle the responsibility of babysitting for more than a couple hours. Nate wants to be kind to her, but he also wants to date her, and when he’s tired of being rejected, he also gets tired of helping. Both her estranged father and Sean, she painfully remembers when she stays with each of them, are abusive.
Throughout “Maid,” Alex desperately tries to erect boundaries to keep her and Maddy safe and stable. She resists taking help from her unreliable parents, her ex, from Nate. She resists accepting additional favors, like the offer of her new landladies to have Maddy’s third birthday party in their gazebo. Letting these boundaries down means introducing risk into a life already so fragile, so close to falling apart. Allowing someone to help her or do her a casual kindness means allowing them leverage over her. It gives them space to develop expectations of her gratitude, her obligation to them. It might even involve them in the mess of her life, a mess they will likely regret touching.
But drawing a healthy boundary is a luxury Alex doesn’t often have. Her existence is so precarious, so dependent on the goodwill of those with power over her, that she can neither afford to let her boundaries down nor to keep them up. Sometimes she needs what they can offer her too desperately — an address where Maddy will be eligible for a good preschool, childcare or transportation for a crucial work shift. Sometimes she simply needs not to offend them by rejecting their kindness too emphatically. She navigates their moods, their whims, their shifting levels of generosity.
This morning I (Claire) was reading Anne Helen Petersen’s newsletter about living in community, which touched on another that really spoke to me this week, Kathryn Jezer-Morton on the cozy aesthetic. Both essays are engaged with something that I’ve been wrestling with over recent months: how desperately we need the comfort of a community, and how desperately many of us try to fill that hole with our earning and spending power. If we buy something (a throw blanket, a candle, a day of childcare, a latté), it belongs to us. We can have it when we want it, on our terms. Its inertness is why we cling to it (it can’t resist us, it will always comply) and also why it will always disappoint.
This is, of course, a very middle-to-upper-class experience of being socially alienated by capitalism. Paying for things is easier and more straightforward than being in community, so we choose that path and then, perhaps, feel empty among our bought-and-paid-for things. For Alex, there is no easier or more straightforward option; she has to accept help, and she has no control. In one scene, Alex tries to explain to Nate that she can’t date him because things aren’t equal between them. He disagrees, saying that he doesn’t care about the economic differences. But she’s right. He can walk away from their friendship on a whim, whereas she needs the shelter he’s providing to survive.
Left in such dire straits, doing hard labor for hourly wages that nearly disappear after paying for gas and cleaning supplies while keeping her paperwork updated to receive meager government benefits, Alex is thrown back on a community that’s mostly unable or unwilling to be a true community for her. For her wealthier friends and acquaintances, she has little to offer in exchange that they can’t easily buy once they’re tired of dealing with the complications of her life; other poor people she knows have little emotional or financial bandwidth to truly help her. The financial stratification, commodification, and grinding need of American life has blasted her social fabric to hell.
In this week’s podcast, we talked a lot about this, and much more, including the depiction of Alex and Sean’s relationship, the endless labor of being poor, the cruelty of means-testing, and the fantastical touches that bring Alex’s personal experience to life.
ShareThis is the “Squid Game” recap you’ve been waiting for: the perspective of two women so squeamish they probably missed, at a conservative estimate, 15% of this ultraviolent show because they were covering the screen with their hands and whispering “no no no no no no no noooooo whyyyy.”
But whatever! The violent parts aren’t important, right? The important thing is that we know what this show is about: capitalism, wealth inequality, the myth of meritocracy, ugly Americans, and nice cops who restore your faith in humanity.
In this episode, we discuss all this and more. Let the games begin!
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“Love Life” season 2! Which I am enjoying significantly more than season 1. (Though it is by no means perfect.) We will probably have to podcast about it, as two rom-com lovers. -Emma
I have also been watching “Love Life” season 2, and it is better… but there’s still something about the whole concept that doesn’t seem to work for me. The portentous voiceover? The gloomy aesthetic? The way we only get to know our leads as unsatisfied lovers? So much to ruminate on as the season continues. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
Don’t laugh — I’m finally finishing “Great Circle” by Maggie Shipstead. Long books are back, baby.
On a darker note, Insider’s horrifying investigation of Barstool founder Dave Portnoy’s (recent) history of seeking out teenagers for very rough, coercive sex. Being an unapologetic misogynist is sort of his brand, so it remains to be seen whether this will do anything more than burnish it, but the details are deeply distressing. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
“Fallen Angel,” an investigative podcast from journalists Vanessa Grigoriadis and Justine Harman into the rise and fall of Victoria’s Secret. Fascinating, especially if you are also a member of the microgeneration that spent afternoons at the mall browsing through drawers of lacy thongs. -Emma
I think my podcasts are making me anxious (?!?) so I’ve been trying to get back into music (has anyone heard of this?). Highlights: putting on Brendan Benson’s “Cold Hands, Warm Heart” and delighting my toddler into starting a dance party; cooking chickpea stew with a glass of wine and the Wet album “Still Run” in my earbuds. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
I’ve been on the hunt for a soft, layer-able, cute, cream-colored quarter-zip sweater, and I *finally* found one — at a reasonable price point! — from Quince. -Emma
This is so humiliating (in addition to the humiliation of doing product recs on a post about “Squid Game”) but I got influenced by Serena P. to buy a hand/jewelry soap called Radiance Wash from Shinery. It reportedly keeps her giant rock from Grocery Store Joe shiny, and now it (actually) keeps my perpetually filthy wedding set shiny.
The heart-wrenching origin story: the founder tried to clean her ring with “luxury hotel soap” before her wedding and it didn’t work. “I got married with a cloudy film on my ring. I was devastated.” May no one else ever suffer this way again. -Claire
Share Rich TextWe’ve been obsessed with — fixated on, really — “You” since it premiered on Lifetime in 2018. Three years and three seasons later, the thriller has taken Joe Goldberg (Penn Badgley), the sensitive, intellectual stalker/murderer at the center of the show, from a single bookseller in New York City to a married dad in the (fictional) tony NorCal suburb of Madre Linda. It’s been a journey littered with one true loves, heartbreaks, betrayals, hope, and, of course, heaps of dead bodies.
Now that Joe has started a family with Love Quinn — a woman he adored until he learned at the end of season two that she would ALSO kill to protect her loved ones, thus ruining her virtuous feminine image — he would seem to have everything. But Joe loathes the lush suburban hell where they now live, an enclave saturated with athleisure-wearers, bio-hackers, and anti-vaxxers, and he also loathes his new wife. Soon he’s finding new women to receive his attention, and new complications arise.
At long last, we have a podcast outlet to have the long, juicy conversation about this show that we’ve been longing to have. This week, we chatted about season three and all the themes it brought to the fore: stealth toxic masculinity and the Nice Guy, the constriction and seduction of gender roles, girlboss feminism as a weapon of affluent women, wellness and mommy influencing, and the agonies and ecstasies of modern marriage and parenting.
We hope you enjoy this chat! xo
ShareMore reading about “You” which we mention in the podcast:
“Netflix’s New No. 1 Show Found Something Worse Than Serial Killers,” Julia Craven, Slate
“Penn Badgley Gets Meta About His Return To TV As A Very Charming Stalker,” Emma Gray, HuffPost
Last week, we held a live panel discussion at SaksWorks with the always eloquent Sharleen Joynt of “Dear Shandy” about navigating the parasocial waters we swim in — specifically as podcasters and as reality TV commentators (and, in Sharleen’s case, as a one-time participant on “The Bachelor”), but also as people who live in a society that is increasingly structured by parasocial, rather than social, relationships.
We talked about John Mulaney and how he disappointed us by getting a divorce and also how he must be protected from us. We talked about making fun of people on reality TV and also feeling deep empathy for them. We talked about how almost everyone is now in a position to be watched on social media by people who don’t know them, and how close even a not-at-all-public figure is to going viral and experiencing the crush of mass attention. We talked about Chris Hayes’s wonderful essay in the New Yorker, “On the Internet, We’re Always Famous,” and how it captures the destabilizing nature of fame (whether brief or enduring), and the way in which the surveillance powers of social media have brought on an age of democratized fame. We talked about influencing, and how monetizing a relatable version of your own personality inevitably invites massive, overwhelming feedback on who you are as a person — both positive and negative.
The event was a lot of fun for us, and while we wish you all could have been there in person, we hope you enjoy this taped version.
We were hosted by SaksWorks in Manhattan, which is lovely and full of hydroponic herb gardens. Many thanks to Rachel Sklar for inviting us, all of the wonderful people at SaksWorks for making this happen, and Ron Passaro for recording the conversation for us!
More reading about parasocial relationships:
“On The Internet, We’re Always Famous,” Chris Hayes, The New Yorker
“John Mulaney Was Performing A Role All Along,” Aja Romano, Vox
“John Mulaney And The Great Celebrity-Sympathy Overcorrection,” Lili Loofbourow, Slate
“Podcasters Are People: The Intimacy of Medium vs. Parasocial Relationships,” Wil Williams
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“Only Murders in the Building,” which I just finished. It’s so charming and zany, with all the darkness heavily couched in scenery-chewing camp, and while I feared the true crime satire would peter out by the end, the finale was one of the funniest and sharpest episodes yet. Plus, it perfectly sets up a season two, which will reportedly be here next year.
Also, has anyone heard that “Succession” is back? -Claire
GUYS I FINALLY WATCHED THE MARBLES EPISODE OF “SQUID GAME” AND I COULDN’T STOP WEEPING. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
Haley Nahman’s beautiful essay about “feeling like yourself.” -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Celebrity Book Club with Steven and Lily,” a podcast in which comedians Lily Marotta and Steven Phillips-Horst read celebrity memoirs, coffee table books, and cookbooks in order to gaily rip them into a tattered pile of clichés, clunky prose tics, faux authenticity and diet tips. I’ve actually had to stop listening to it in public because people are weirded out when I giggle quietly while I shop for groceries. -Claire
“Queen of the Con: The Irish Heiress,” a podcast hosted by a reality TV producer in his 40s who got scammed by a woman who he thought was his best friend — and turned out to be a serial con artist. I’m a sucker for a scam story. I can’t help myself. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Tartan. -Claire
Velvet. -Emma
On Rich Text Book Club this week, we’re talking about “Carefree Black Girls,” a new book from culture critic Zeba Blay, who also happens to be (full disclosure) our friend and old HuffPost colleague!
In 2013, Zeba tweeted a post with the hashtag #carefreeblackgirl. She was an early popularizer of the term, which reached toward a conception of Black girlhood that could be joyful, relaxed, at ease in the world — carefree in a way that white girls were often shown as being. Almost a decade later, her hashtag has evolved into the title of a book of essays about Black women in pop culture and her own experiences as a Black woman and critic. In “Carefree Black Girls: A Celebration of Black Women in Popular Culture,” Zeba blends the personal and the critical in order to explore how Black women have created our culture, how they’ve been depicted in it and treated by it, and how these narratives affect how Black women and girls experience the world.
As the subtitle suggests, it’s a celebration of women like Josephine Baker, Mel B, Serena Williams, Countess Vaughn, Viola Davis, and Cardi B — but it’s also a searching, tender excavation of the humanity of these women. Zeba examines how societal demands of and cultural tropes about Black women limit them, demand that they appear smaller or flatter or less complex than they truly are; she also, through her own experiences and those of the women she writes about, does an accounting of the suffering this causes.
It’s a beautiful and illuminating book, and we were so thrilled to talk to Zeba about it. This was also a mini-reunion, since we all worked together at HuffPost Culture for years — and getting to talk pop culture on Zoom again was, simply put, a huge treat.
You can buy “Carefree Black Girls” here, or wherever you get your books!
ShareWe’ve been watching…
The new “Great British Baking Show” season. It’s not quite like it used to be — I preferred it when the showstopper for Cake Week involved making a nice Victoria sandwich rather than an anti-gravity illusion cake (what is this, “Nailed It”?) — but I’ll accept it. -Claire
I’m still making my way through “Squid Game,” because I am a MASSIVE baby when it comes to violence. But I still am loving it. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
“Carefree Black Girls,” “Crossroads,” and this horrifying deep dive on a series of brutal murders at Woodson Houses, a public housing complex in Brooklyn. -Claire
“Carefree Black Girls,” of course, and our bud Jess Goodman’s great Bustle piece on the perils of being a Very Online author. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Michael Hobbes’s goodbye episode of “You’re Wrong About,” which broke my heart (all-time fave pod, changing forever!) but also inspired many thoughts about how we decide where to expend our creative energy and how to keep the joy alive in projects that were once passion projects and became, well, work.-Claire
In the spirit of keeping this Michael Hobbes-themed, I really loved the deep dive his other podcast, “Maintenance Phase,” did on Rachel Hollis. As someone who was only peripherally aware of Hollis before her TikTok/IG scandal, I really loved having Hobbes and his co-host Aubrey Gordon walk me through it all. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
We’ve both been saving up for next week’s Hill House Holiday drop. Yes, we’re extremely predictable.
The question of the bad art friend keeps reemerging, under new auspices and nomenclature — most recently, last week, thanks to a transfixing investigation by Robert Kolker in the New York Times Magazine, which plumbed the sordid depths of a long-running legal conflict between writers Dawn Dorland and Sonya Larson. The site of the battle is an acclaimed work of short fiction by Larson; the grievance is that, Dorland argues, Larson not only based the story on Dorland’s own experience of making an open-ended kidney donation, but plagiarized the letter she wrote to the anonymous recipient of her organ.
It’s a messy saga. If you haven’t read the Kolker piece, maybe you’d like to do so. If not, we do recap in more detail in this week’s episode. It raises a number of juicy questions we couldn’t resist trying to unpack: friendship as mutual surveillance (especially on social media), the ethics of one-sided friendship, what qualifies as plagiarism, what makes for a good work of fiction and, of course, whether and how it’s okay to turn a real person into a fictional character.
When you lay it out so bluntly — “whether it’s okay to turn a real person into a fictional character” — it almost seems ludicrous to me. Of course it’s okay. What other materials do authors have to work with? The question keeps recurring because it’s inevitable that writers will draw from real people they know, real experiences they’ve heard about or had that involve other people, and it’s also inevitable that those people will sometimes recognize themselves and feel confused, uncomfortable, even violated. It’s hard to imagine a set of ethical guidelines that would allow for reasonable artistic freedom but also prevent anyone from ever feeling hurt after reading a story by a friend that seems to have cribbed from their own personal life. In Dorland’s case, for example, she is hurt as soon as she discovers that Larson has written a story about kidney donation without asking or consulting with her — but can we really expect writers to ask permission to write a story about kidney donation simply because they know someone who donated a kidney?
All stories are cobbled together from some combination of the real and the imagined, if only because the real is the language through which they’re told. We all need to recognize what’s on the page enough to grab hold of it — we need to know what the objects are, the kinds of people, the emotions, the behaviors, from seeing something akin to them in our own life. Some stories, like autofiction and memoir, contain far more direct mining from life, but even memoir, technically nonfiction, relies on imaginative work to link together fragmented memories, hazy moments, and transform them into a story. So which parts are real and which are imagined? The mixture is different in each work, and as hard as we try to pin down the exact line between them, we never really can.
In a fantastic episode of “On the Media” (I’m biased because we were in it, but it’s great), Xandra Ellin examines how this exact storytelling dynamic plays out in reality TV: we know that the people are real, and we’re told that their personas and interactions are unscripted and authentic as well. But we also know that what we see is heavily edited, often prompted if not actually scripted, and likely misleading. We know that what we’re watching is both true and not true, and we have to hold both of those realities as we watch the story unfold. We have to accept that the real and the constructed exist side-by-side, in a Schrodinger’s box of narrative, because we can’t know which parts of what we’re seeing to believe.
Or we should! Because more often, we accept what we’re shown and attach TV narratives to real people without much reflection, and even inflict real harassment on them based on an edited storyline. But I love how Ellin approaches the ambiguity of the reality in reality TV, and I think that might be the best model for how we could all approach narratives on the page and on screen: it’s real and it’s made up, it’s impossible to know which part is which, and we should be gentle with any real humans involved.
And to that last point, here’s something we discuss in more detail in the podcast: a short story should not be a “takedown” of a real, normal person you know. It’s not good for the art, and it’s not kind. Some confusion over fiction and reality is unavoidable, but do artists have some ethical responsibility not to use “it’s fiction” as a fig leaf for propagating a harmful narrative about a real, identifiable person? We’d say yes. -Claire
Episode Reading:
Robert Kolker, “Who Is the Bad Art Friend?”
Michael Hobbes, “Identifying the Bad Art Friend Is Easy”
Alexis Nowicki, “Cat Person and Me”
Katy Waldman, “Who Owns a Story?”
Katy Waldman, “The Short Story at the Center of the Bad Art Friend Saga”
ShareWe’ve been watching…
Hulu’s “High Fidelity,” belatedly. It’s hard because I’m absolutely driven to distraction by how perfect Zoë Kravitz’s cheekbones are, but I think I’m getting the main gist of the storyline, which is about breakups? Breakups are hard to do? -Claire
I finally started “Squid Game,” and turns out that apparently the most popular Netflix show of all time is in fact good. lol. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
Claire sent me the latest Ask Polly, and it really hit me deeply. It’s been a weird transition time for our careers, and it felt like sweet relief to see Heather Havrilesky’s words: “As dorky as it sometimes feels, we deserve to take ourselves and our work seriously… And it’s hard to savor the work itself when you keep telling yourself that everything you do is stupid and empty. Pay attention to the FEELING that your work is empty, because it will show you what you’d prefer to cover instead, but lose the STORY that everything you’ve made until now is worthless.” -Emma
I got the new Jonathan Franzen novel, “Crossroads,” which is approximately the shape and weight of a Bible, and also, aptly, set amidst the dramas of a progressive church youth group in 1971. So far, about two-thirds of the way through, it’s annoying me less than “Purity” and “Freedom,” which is to say that I’m unable to put it down. His fascination with American idealists and fanatics is beautifully explored and his characters are resolutely flawed, teeming masses of human contradiction. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
“The Bravo Docket,” a podcast where two attorneys break down Bravo legal drama. (I’ve been especially into the episodes about Jen Shah and Erika Girardi.) -Emma
We’ve been buying…
I’ve been lusting after these Horsebit Lug Sole Gucci loafers. I cannot come close to affording those, so these Zara ones felt like a budget-friendly option for a similar vibe. -Emma
Thanks to everyone who sent me children’s clothing recs! I got my son some very charming leggings and tees from Primary, which he immediately tried to put on himself. -Claire
This is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter about cultural obsessions from your Internet BFFs Emma and Claire. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
In Christine Pride and Jo Piazza’s new novel, We Are Not Like Them (out tomorrow at your finest book purveyors), lifelong friends Riley and Jen find their bond being tested in the most profound way possible. Riley, a Black TV news reporter recently returned to her hometown of Philadelphia, is assigned to cover a shocking police shooting of an unarmed teenage boy, Justin. Her childhood bestie Jen, a white woman who is late in her longed-for pregnancy, is also caught up in the case — because her husband, Kevin, was one of the two cops who shot the boy.
As Riley is drawn into covering the case, wrecked emotionally by yet another episode of anti-Black police brutality and developing a personal relationship with Justin’s grieving mother and uncle, she also must contend with Jen’s resentment that her best friend isn’t supportive of her husband, as he faces an investigation and public wrath. Both Riley and Jen ultimately have to face the reality of how race plays a role in both their lives, and in their friendship, after years of avoiding tough conversations about racism.
Pride and Piazza drew on their own perspectives as a Black woman and a white woman, as well as their own friendship, to tell Riley and Jen’s story in We Are Not Like Them. In our conversation, the four of us discussed the agony and ecstasy of creative partnership, the importance of Google Docs, how to build three-dimensional characters, storytelling for a cause, and all the tripwires that make interracial conversations about race so difficult (especially if you’re talking to your white friends!).
ShareGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
What’s up #CircleFam? The big finale of “The Circle” season 3 — which we would describe as “50% filler, but perfectly pleasant to watch” — dropped on Wednesday, so now we’re dropping our subscriber-only recap of the last five episodes. Writer Mychal Denzel Smith joined us to unpack the events of the final third of the season, and to weigh in on the elements of a good catfish, emoji selection, and the eternal question: Is he a strategic genius, or is he just a tall white guy?
This batch of episodes brings to a close a particularly calculated season dominated by gameplay and strategic alliance-building rather than emotional connections. The Circle crew has sorted into two opposing forces battling it out for dominance. Who will triumph, Team Nick or Team Kai? Will one of our stalwart alliance generals take the crown, or will a wily foot soldier sneak into the lead at the opportune moment? Will Nick ever learn how to be friends with a woman who isn’t down to get her flirt on with him? Let’s find out!
ShareWe’ve been watching…
The second season of “The Other Two,” on HBO Max, which is that rare sitcom that actually packs in 10 perfectly delivered jokes a minute. The first season follows the attempts of Cary and Brooke, washed-up millennials struggling to establish footholds in the acting world (Cary) and adulthood generally (both of them), to ride the coattails of their Internet-famous teeny-bopper little brother, Chase. Season two is, somehow, funnier. Ken Marino and Molly Shannon are the mom and almost-stepdad I’d rather not have to imagine having, and, like early “Schitt’s Creek,” the show balances a ruthless cynicism about its greedy, mediocre characters with a genuine core of humanity at the center of each.
Also, “Reservation Dogs,” the new FX comedy about four teenagers on an Oklahoma reservation who turn to, uh, extralegal methods to scrounge together the money they need to escape to California. I just started this, and the first episode was masterful. -Claire
The triumphant return of Bravo classic, “Vanderpump Rules.” What can I say? I love some good good trash. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
Yes, I’m still reading “Great Circle.” -Claire
I read and keep re-reading Chris Hayes’ New Yorker essay, “On The Internet, We’re Always Famous.” It hit home on so many levels. This passage in particular has really stayed with me: “Everyone is losing their minds online because the combination of mass fame and mass surveillance increasingly channels our most basic impulses—toward loving and being loved, caring for and being cared for, getting the people we know to laugh at our jokes—into the project of impressing strangers, a project that cannot, by definition, sate our desires but feels close enough to real human connection that we cannot but pursue it in ever more compulsive ways.” -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“Suspect,” Wondery’s deep dive into the unsolved 2008 murder of 24-year-old Arpana Jinaga. It starts off as a straightforward true crime mini-series and then morphs into a look at policing, race, and the limits of DNA evidence. -Emma
The first episode of “This Is Critical,” a cultural criticism podcast hosted by Virginia Heffernan, the newest project of Producer Harry (of “Love To See It”). He actually appears on it, discussing trash talk (perfect topic), and it would be derelict of us not to suggest everyone go check it out! -Claire
We’ve been buying…
This perfect blazer from the Nili Lotan x Target collection, and these Schutz bright pink mules for an upcoming wedding. -Emma
I saw Michelle Zauner wearing a cropped faux-cardigan from Madewell, so I… refreshed that cropped faux-cardigan page for 36 hours until my size showed up in stock. This is more a humiliating confession than a recommendation.
Also, can anyone tell me where to get cute, reasonably priced, not aggressively-gendered clothes for an almost 2-year-old? I just want some cute sweaters and stretchy pants that don’t have trucks or pink unicorns all over them, thank you! (Neither trucks or unicorns should necessarily be “gendered” but it’s beyond obvious why they’re on the clothes, and also, I hate them.) -Claire
It’s Monday morning! My coffee is hot, but not as hot as my takes on “Real Housewives of Salt Lake City.” (I invite you to picture me twirling in a silver cocktail dress as I deliver this line, winking glamorously.)
I firmly believe that my life is only big enough for one extended cinematic universe, and The Bachelor franchise is happily devouring all of that space. We haven’t even done a cast bios episode for Michelle’s season yet and the women from [INSERT MYSTERY BACHELOR HERE]’s season have already been released?! Slow down!!
But Bravo was gonna get me in the end. Emma convinced me to watch the first two episodes of the second season of “RHOSLC” last week, and then she patiently talked me through all of my confused feelings at being flung into the maelstrom of backbiting, statement puffer coats, shady Twitter likes, and shifting alliances.
The show is an unsettling blend of aspirational fantasy and dystopian realism, from the witchy intro package in which the women hold hovering snowflakes in their hands and the literal ice palace which appears in one episode to the exhausting, circular arguments about whether Jen Shah can make peace with assorted other housewives. Everyone appears to live in a gigantic, chilly mansion or ski chalet, where a spread of snacks ever awaits a strategic guest, and they all either hate each other or are dear friends with someone whose other dear friends they hate. Someone possibly leads a cult. Someone else is being hunted down by the FBI. Yet someone else is rebranding her skin oils line in order to be a good role model to her slightly younger stepsons.
The wintry setting and strong religious themes evokes Narnia; the viciousness and murkiness of the feuds evokes high school; the fact that it’s all televised evokes the Hunger Games. Bravo may not be my drug of choice, but I can recognize the potency of this kind of hard-edged fantasia.
In our conversation, we discussed all of this, plus how the show made me think, in a twisted way, about how hard it is to build community when people are flawed and selfish and hurt each other. We hope you enjoy this subscribers-only pod, for which I gave up my Bravo celibacy! -Claire
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“The Morning Show,” which my household did not watch when it first came out to tepid reviews. I’ve heard that it gets better, so we decided to give Jen and Reese a chance; the first episode was certainly watchable (with talent like that, you’re at least going to get flawless performances). I hate to say that a #MeToo storyline is tired, but mostly I think the execution, from framing to characterization to dialogue, is fairly rote — the women victimized are thus far off-screen, the main players are stereotypes, the script is hardly revelatory — but we’re going to keep seeing where it goes. -Claire
“Scenes From A Marriage,” the HBO remake of Ingmar Bergman’s 1973 mini-series. It stars Jessica Chastain and Oscar Isaac as Mira and Jonathan, a married couple whose relationship is bound to go through a long and painful dissolution. The acting is superb and mesmerizing. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
“Image Control” and “Great Circle,” as previously mentioned here, plus Justin Taylor’s barnburner of a rave review for Joy Williams’ new novel “Harrow” that led me to immediately put the book on my TBR (for the next time I’m emotionally ready to read truly grim climate fiction and confront some despair). -Claire
I’ve been reading “We Are Not Like Them,” a novel about interracial friendship written by Christine Pride and Jo Piazza, in preparation for an upcoming Rich Text Book Club pod we’ll be recording! -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
I’ve got nothing this week — just the same old roster of pods! -Claire
“Life After MLM,” a podcast from Roberta Blevins, one of the former LulaRoe retailers featured in “LulaRich.” Literally inject MLM content straight into my bloodstream. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
The new Glossier retinol cream, after The Ordinary’s squalane-based retinol serum gave me some truly heinous cystic breakouts. I’ve only used it a couple of times, but the composition seems much more friendly to my oily skin, and my face feels velvety soft after I massage it in. -Claire
I caved and ordered a few items from Target’s latest designer collection. I’m particularly excited about this Rachel Comey denim jumpsuit and this Sandy Liang gingham shirtdress. -Emma
ShareGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
Hello lovely subscribers! Welcome to another Monday recap podcast to tide us all over before BIP airs on Tuesday.
Today, we’re diving into the week 2 drop of “The Circle.” And this is the week that things really start to get interesting. Alliances are forming! Twists are coming out of nowhere! Catfishes are being hunted! Sexy selfies are being sent from bed! Weirdly culturally appropriative costumes are being delivered to the doors of the players!
There’s a whole lot to unpack. Hope you enjoy! xo
ShareWe’ve been watching…
“Motel Makeover,” a delightful Netflix mini-series about two women, April Brown and Sarah Sklash, who renovate a motel (the title is fairly descriptive!) in Sauble Beach, Ontario during 2020. (Spoiler alert: Covid fucks some shit up.) -Emma
I just started “Only Murders in the Building,” Hulu’s murder mystery comedy starring Steve Martin, Martin Short, and Selena Gomez (who is giving me fall fashion goddess vibes throughout). The three of them play tenants of a big NYC apartment building who are obsessed with true crime podcasts and decide to make their own about a murder in their building. So far, it’s fairly amusing — worth watching especially if you’re familiar with the true crime pod genre, since it comes in for some well-deserved skewering. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
Our old friend Maddie Crum’s lovely and rigorous review of “Inseparable,” a never-before-published novella by Simone de Beauvoir, which delves into the way feminism can be used as a marketing ploy, the various motivations a writer might have for keeping certain work from a public readership, and de Beauvoir’s 1967 (published) novella “The Age of Discretion,” which I now desperately want to read.
Also, Patrick Nathan’s “Image Control: Art, Fascism, and the Right to Resist,” a terrifying look at how the stream of decontextualized images that we now constantly consume undermine our sense of collective understanding and ability to process the threats to freedom and justice that surround us. I am not alone in often reaching for tired complaints about the hell of social media, or cable news, without reaching any useful insights about why they strike me as hellish. This book puts some of those pieces together. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
I cannot get enough of scammer stories. So when I learned that journalist and author of Bad Blood John Carreyrou was releasing a new podcast, “Bad Blood: The Final Chapter,” during Elizabeth Holmes’ trial, I was legally obligated to subscribe. (And yes, I did sign up on Apple so I could get the bonus content too.) -Emma
So, remember what I was saying before about true crime podcasts and how much they deserve to be skewered? Yeah, I’m still listening to them anyway. I recently started “Suspect,” a podcast about an unsolved murder during a Halloween party years ago, and the man who was wrongly convicted of the crime. I appreciate that the show looks closely at how the police investigation came to focus on a Black party guest instead of other prime suspects, closely examining the revealing and inconsistent statements made by the cops about the suspect, without relegating the murder victim to a sidebar. -Claire
This searing essay in The Washington Post from Dr. Alan Braid, a doctor and abortion care provider, who wrote about his civil disobedience in the face of Texas’ near-total abortion ban. The op-ed is brave and powerful and is basically daring someone to sue him. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Weddings are apparently back? Which means I need dresses to wear to fall weddings? I took advantage of Reformation’s big end-of-season sale, and got this one-shoulder number. -Emma
The first hints of fall weather threw me into a bit of a panic at the idea of another cold season indoors, cycling through the same handful of pilled, droopy sweatsuits that got me through Winter 2020-21. The result: I’m trying out one of Madewell’s MWL sets for the first time and trying to open my mind to wearing outside pants… inside. -Claire
Share Rich TextAfter Emma and I watched “LuLaRich,” the new Amazon Prime series about the mostly imploded multilevel marketing company LuLaRoe and its oddball founders, DeAnne and Mark Stidham, all we wanted to do was talk about it. Ali Barthwell, the Emmy-nominated “Last Week Tonight” writer and Vulture recapper, felt the same way.
So we did a podcast for our beloved angel subscribers about it! We talked about everything pyramid-shaped (Christianity, racism, capitalism — oh, oops, the foundational principles of our whole society, wonder why things aren’t going so great), the whiteness of LuLaRoe and “LuLaRich,” recklessly bad fabric prints, and more. Please enjoy!
As a non-MLM joiner, LuLaRoe was always emblematic to me of something other than great leggings or an opportunity to get a down payment for a three-bedroom house. It represented the death of Facebook. When I joined Facebook on the cusp of my freshman year in college, social media seemed like a realm of sheer recreation. My peers and I were teenagers with our lives ahead of us; we were all curating our lists of favorite movies and posting albums of party photos and deciding whether to return “pokes” from guys we barely knew. But as I got into my twenties, graduated, moved to NYC and got a job editing dozens of blog posts a day, Facebook changed. It was, like my email and literal inboxes, full of junk mail.
I was still friends on the platform with lots of old high school classmates who still lived in Indiana, and now lots of them were trying to sell me protein shakes. Or something called “nail wraps.” One frequently posted about It Works!, but never in a way that clarified to me what the actual product was; the pitch was that she felt very empowered and happy to be selling whatever that product was. Most of these women were young moms, and they were caught up in multilevel marketing schemes that promised flexible work, high income, and personal fulfillment.
Somehow I don’t recall encountering LuLaRoe, but by 2021, I knew about the leggings, the mold on them, the angry sellers, the lawsuits. LuLaRoe offered a clear target to documentarians seeking to recreate the Fyre Festival docu-farce bonanza (the directors of “LuLaRich” were also behind “Fyre Fraud”): Its rise was meteoric, and so was its fall, amid widespread rumors about wet, stinky and tissue-thin clothes going out to vendors and lawsuits alleging it was a pyramid scheme. The core product, absurdly patterned leggings, were often praised as silky soft, thick, and comfortable, before the quality took an inexplicable nosedive. (If you want an explanation for this quality collapse, don’t hold your breath, as one is not forthcoming in “LuLaRich.”)
The popularity of multilevel marketing companies among a certain demographic — lower- to middle-class millennial women, especially white women — has piqued media interest in the last few years, and fairly so. It’s a space where so many toxic elements of American society make themselves almost comically plain: the obsession with entrepreneurship and unchecked financial growth, the messianic fervor of white evangelical Christianity, the white ideal of the stay-at-home mother who finds complete fulfillment in unpaid care work, the girlboss/empowerment strain of corporate feminism, and the inevitable exploitation and scarcity that leave so many scrounging for a way to survive a society built as a rapacious hierarchy with few winners and many losers.
And “LuLaRich” does not fail to note the comedy of how on the nose LuLaRoe’s story can be. That a company that profits from women going into debt in hopes of contributing financially while still raising their kids full time might have some deeply rooted misogyny at its foundation is to be expected, but that cofounder DeAnne Stidham advised her top sellers to give their husbands blowjobs daily to keep them happy? That I did not see coming. The fatphobia, too, seems expected — it’s everywhere, and a fashion company geared towards blonde Mormon moms would seem particularly prone — but that Stidham pressured her sellers to get weight loss surgery in Tijuana??? Every detail is cartoonish.
The show is so full of truly unhinged touches (two of the Stidham children married EACH OTHER; one former corporate employee very solemnly proclaims that he can’t listen to Kelly Clarkson anymore because she performed at a LuLaRoe conference) that Emma, Ali and I couldn’t even cover them all in our conversation. But what’s even wilder is how many massive, systemic issues are either gestured at or not addressed at all. Maybe a better show, as Meg Conley and Anne Helen Petersen discuss in their vital conversation about “LuLaRich,” would have focused less on the goofy bits and more on the question of what was going on in the factories where these increasingly slapdash garments were being constructed (a guess: probably terrible pay and terrible working conditions).
But what “LuLaRich” depicts, despite all its omissions, is a parody of where the American ethos of capitalism leads. Everything valuable is pillaged for profit, profit that mostly goes to the people who led the pillaging. Places like Facebook that were presented to users as playgrounds were never actually intended to be simply that, but were ransacked for profit still more thoroughly than Mark Zuckerberg could probably have dreamed. MLMs mine their sellers’ actual social networks, chewing up friendships and sucking out whatever money there is to be had. (Several women who appear in “LuLaRich” have gotten divorced and lost friends because of the pressures of the business.) The problem with a pyramid scheme is the same as the problem with the capitalist drive for growth: Eventually, you run out of people to sell to. Eventually, you run out of resources to extract.
It makes sense that the Stidhams chose to appear in “LuLaRich,” amid all the controversy and lawsuits, perfectly groomed and genial and unashamed. What did they do wrong, in the eyes of America? They built a pyramid with themselves at the top, and that’s exactly what we’re all told to do. -Claire
Share Rich TextGive us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
“Bachelor in Paradise” has moved to Tuesdays for the rest of the season, so let’s make Monday special: Let’s talk about “The Circle.”
Season 3 of the reality show, in which contestants compete to become the most popular player in a closed social media platform called The Circle, began dropping episodes this week. In this week’s recap, we discuss the first batch of four episodes — meeting the new contestants (from Crazy Kai to Mama Michelle), watching flirtations develop and strategies take shape, and, of course, the show’s baffling new twists.
This episode is for subscribers only! We hope it starts your week off right.
ShareWe’ve been watching…
No time for anything but “The Circle” and “Bachelor in Paradise,” sadly — except that Greg and I are nearly caught up on “Ted Lasso.” I do think the season is improving as it goes on, and the last episode or two did not leave me utterly cold. Hoping this trend continues, though I stand by my critiques of the first handful of episodes! -Claire
Damn it Claire, I was *also* going to say “Ted Lasso”! I’ve also been catching up on “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills,” which is a wild fucking ride this year. -Emma
We’ve been reading…
Sally Rooney (see previous newsletter), Maggie Shipstead’s Great Circle (it’s long but worth it!).
Also, if you’re into no-holds-barred reviews (and I am!!!!), it’s been a prime week or so in book criticism. Dale Peck’s blistering pan of Andrew Sullivan’s Out on a Limb: Selected Writing 1989–2021 in The Baffler is a treat, and both Andrea Long Chu and Charlotte Shane published bracingly rigorous reviews of Maggie Nelson’s On Freedom: Four Songs of Care and Constraint in Vulture and Bookforum, respectively. -Claire
Just started Jill Gutowitz’s forthcoming essay collection, Girls Can Kiss Now, which explores queerness, identity and desire through the lens of pop culture. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
There was a new Hill House drop this week, so… like, are multiple ruffly smocked dresses winging their way to me right this second? No comment. -Claire
Hill House, you say? No no, I definitely didn’t buy a very unnecessary transitional quilt coat and extremely Cher Horowitz-meets-cottagecore dress. Never heard of it. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Remember Ryn Weaver? I was algorithmically served “Pierre” by Spotify after another artist’s album ended (apparently this was a TikTok thing months ago but I missed it), and I realized I’d never actually listened to anything of hers after “Octahate” and “Promises.” Turns out her 2015 album “The Fool” has some bangers! -Claire
Kacey! Freaking! Musgraves! I know it’s perhaps an obvious choice, but I’ve had “Star-Crossed” on repeat since it dropped. I’m a sucker for a thoughtful heartbreak album. -Emma
Share Rich TextThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter by Claire Fallon and Emma Gray. Rich Text is a space for the indulgent and the incisive, for witty and wistful explorations of the cultural, the personal, and the political in both written and audio formats. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
When the pandemic began, there was talk of a baby boom. More than a year later, that never materialized. But know what did? An egg-freezing boom.
Turns out that lots of women, predominantly in their 30s, decided there was no time like the Covid present to explore their options for fertility preservation. (If you peruse Instagram, you’ll even find a number of “Bachelor” ladies who publicly documented their egg-freezing journeys.) It was a perfect storm for women of a certain socioeconomic class: time to reflect on their desires and life choices while not going to the office, paired with the pre-existing trends of delayed parenthood and more employers offering coverage as part of their benefits packages.
Our dear friend — and OG Here To Make Friends producer — Katelyn was one of the many women who chose to undergo egg freezing in the last year and a half. She joined us to discuss fertility preservation, the terror of regret, and the general mindfuck that is being a 30-something woman during Covid.
More resources on egg freezing:
“How Egg Freezing Went Mainstream,” NYTimes
“Everything You’ve Ever Wondered About Egg Freezing, Answered,” Elle
Subscribe nowWe’ve been reading…
Ghosts by Dolly Alderton, about a 30-something writer in London who gets on dating apps for the first time after ending a long relationship, meets a guy she really likes, and then gets ghosted. It’s wry and well-observed and it broke me wide open. -Emma
A Touch of Jen by Beth Morgan, a sly and sardonic novel about two thirty-something servers, Alicia and Remy, whose romantic relationship is sustained by their joint obsession with Remy’s ex-coworker Jen, a microinfluencer he has long fostered a crush on. After the pair runs into Jen in real life and strikes up a new friendship, things rapidly get weirder and darker, even downright supernatural. Instagram addiction, the service economy, woo-woo self-help and the alienation of (what else) life under late-stage capitalism all take on an eerie sheen in this book, which is equally funny, disturbing, and uncomfortably revealing of the world we live in. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
“A Little Bit Culty,” a podcast by former NXIVM members Sarah Edmonson and Anthony “Nippy” Ames. I would especially recommend their bonus interview with India Oxenberg. -Emma
The recent "Decoder Ring” episode on selling out, which actually offers a new insight on a topic I thought I’d already considered exhaustively: Jonathan Franzen’s selection for Oprah’s Book Club for The Corrections, and his public comments expressing that he didn’t want the Oprah’s Book Club sticker on his book because it would scare away his coveted male readers and diminish his artistic cred. Willa Paskin is a razor-sharp critic and, as always, I learned a lot from her analysis and research. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
Ok so this might be embarrassing but I am low-key obsessed with TLC’s “Welcome To Plathville,” and season 3 just premiered. -Emma
I just finished AMC’s “Kevin Can F*ck Himself,” a high-concept drama built around a traditional multi-camera sitcom featuring a schlubby, prank-pulling, Pats-obsessed, cable-repairing dude named Kevin and his hot, long-suffering wife Allison. When Kevin is offscreen, Allison, played by Annie Murphy (“Schitt’s Creek”), lives in a gritty drama about marital dissatisfaction. Fed up with his endless capers, his narcissism, and his inability to leave space for her to be anything but a tireless servant and comedic foil, Allison decides to kill him. The premise is a neat bit of commentary, if a bit heavy-handed (as is the execution). -Claire
We’ve been buying…
Supergoop! Unseen Sunscreen in SPF 40 so that I can carry it around in my tote and hopefully actually be reminded to put it on every day multiple times a day. -Emma
The Ordinary retinol serum, in hopes that I’ll soon have successfully weaned my son and be allowed to contaminate my breast milk with aggressive skincare products again. Optimism! -Claire
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
You asked for it, so we are here to deliver: A recap of the delightful insanity that was the three bonus episodes of “Love Is Blind” that Netflix dropped like a beautiful gift within a burgeoning Covid storm.
Join us on this journey as we catch up with The Hamiltons, The Barnetts, Jessica, LC, Diamond, Carlton… and the specter of Mark.
We hope you enjoy this subscribers-only pod! Happy weekending!
ShareWe’ve been watching…
I have been rewatching “Sex and the City” from season 1 for the first time in years and I can’t stop. It’s a whole new joy to watch the (imperfect) series now that I’m actually their age. Oh, and be a Miranda. -Emma
Just been dipping my toe into “White Lotus” and the new season of “Ted Lasso” — so far, so disturbing and comforting, respectively. PLUS, we’ve both been watching and actually reveling in HBO’s OTT new dating show “FBoy Island,” and recapping it for Love to See It. Definitely worth your time. -Claire
We’ve been reading…
This beautiful essay on being single during the pandemic by columnist and author Dolly Alderton. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Necklaces from Second Wind, a brand created by an NYC-based Latinx designer who started her company to make masks and mask chains during the pandemic. The pieces are affordable, beautiful and very wearable. Will definitely be buying more. -Emma
Saltines and Coca Cola (it’s a migraine week over here). -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
Maintenance Phase’s excellent deep-dive into the history of the BMI. Can’t recommend this whipsmart show enough, and especially this episode. -Emma
The “Gleeks and Gurgles” episode of Reply All, in which I learned that my inability to burp is a known medical condition that can maybe be fixed with Botox?? Weighing my options here! -Claire
Share Rich TextThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter by Claire Fallon and Emma Gray. Rich Text is a space for the indulgent and the incisive, for witty and wistful explorations of the cultural, the personal, and the political in both written and audio formats. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
Welcome to our third Rich Text book club! We have officially reached trend status, y’all.
For this episode, we were joined by our friend Jessica Goodman, the author of “They Wish They Were Us,” who has a twisty, page-turning new novel out this week called “They’ll Never Catch Us.” Like her fantastic first book, it’s a Y.A. thriller about murder, gossip, the terror-scape that is the high school lunchroom, and competitive young women with ambitions too big for the boxes they’re expected to fit into.
The book’s primary narrators are Stella and Ella Steckler, two sisters who are competing for the top spot on their competitive cross-country team at a high school in the Catskills — as well as athletic scholarships that could be their ticket out of town. Stella’s college hopes have already been shaken by a murky scandal from the previous season, and she’s more determined than ever to catch the eye of recruiters. When Mila Keene, a star runner from Connecticut, moves to town and begins to compete with them for dominance on the team, the girls are rattled but also drawn to Mila’s warm personality and competitive spark. Then Mila goes missing, and suspicion quickly turns to the two sisters who had most to gain from her absence in competitions. Did one of the Steckler sisters take out their competition? And if not, what happened?
In this chat, we talked about the intense pressure placed on elite female athletes, who are asked to be explosively competitive on the field while always maintaining a polite, ladylike facade; the complexity of the bond between sisters; the gentrification of the Catskills; and so much more.
You can buy the book here!
Give us feedback or suggest a topic for the pod • Subscribe • Request a free subscription
In this episode of Rich Text, we watch the final four episodes of Netflix’s “Sex/Life” (now with 17% more Betty Friedan!). Billie’s journey to figure out whether she’s too horny for marriage continues, and she’s ever more torn between her edgy ex-lover Brad and her clean-cut husband Cooper; meanwhile, Columbia professor and party girl Sasha agreeably devotes all her free time to Scotch-taping together her bestie’s marriage by babysitting Billie’s children on a moment’s notice or pretending to be Brad’s girlfriend to make Cooper less suspicious of him.
As the series draws to a close, flailing efforts are made to make Billie’s desire to have a hot sidepiece into a profoundly feminist act, and we’re left with many questions about what “having it all” means and the feminism of wealthy white women behaving badly. And by the way, why weren’t we into the endless, acrobatic, purple-lit sex scenes? We discuss all of this and more in this recap — hope you enjoy!
ShareWe’ve been reading…
People We Meet On Vacation, by Emily Henry. It’s scratching my itch for rom-com fare. -Emma
Coventry, Rachel Cusk’s 2019 essay collection. I’m currently on my first family vacation since my son’s birth, which involved a long drive upstate, and so it feels fitting that the first two essays are on driving as a metaphor and on narrative control and suspension of disbelief within the family unit — and, of course, they are extraordinarily insightful and crisply written.
Also, my friend Laura Hankin’s gorgeous essay on mourning her mother while planning her wedding, and the return of the cicada swarms to D.C. after 17 years. -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
The latest season of Rom Com Pods. It’s pure, frothy delight. -Emma
A Spotify playlist of various versions of “Baby Shark,” including pop punk and jazz renditions, played on repeat. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
This Charlotte Tilbury Airbush Flawless Setting Spray, which the woman at Sephora told me was “Tik Tok famous.” I used it and it is in fact extremely effective, especially great for New York City humid summers. -Emma
I am being really, really good about my spending fast. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
“The White Lotus” on HBO Max, Mike White’s brilliant examination of privilege via the guests and staffers at a luxury resort in Hawaii. -Emma
Share Rich TextThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter by Claire Fallon and Emma Gray. Rich Text is a space for the indulgent and the incisive, for witty and wistful explorations of the cultural, the personal, and the political in both written and audio formats. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
We’ll admit it: we weren’t exactly champing at the bit to watch “Sex/Life,” the new lightly pornographic Netflix drama. The trailer, and first twenty minutes, suggested that the show would be both heavy-handed (a butterfly in a jar to symbolize a hot mom being smothered by the confines of domesticity? groundbreaking) and bizarrely menacing in tone. If we’re going to watch a campy, graphically sexual romance, we prefer a bit more spark and frothy fun and a bit less foreboding voiceover.
But then, well, everyone started watching it. A lingering moment of male full-frontal fueled a think-piece cycle. Reviews were, uh, less than kind. Against our own initial instincts, we grew intrigued. And so, at last, we binged.
“Sex/Life” tells the story of Billie, a ragingly hot and miserable Greenwich stay-at-home mom. She has a preschooler and a newborn, a sculpted Greek god of a husband who is also a successful hedge funder and living saint, a long-abandoned career as a psychologist and PhD candidate, and a throbbing need for sexual adventure and fulfillment that has begun to explode messily all over her life.
In a melodramatic voiceover, taken from the pages of her Word doc journal, Billie recalls the explosive sex she used to have with her bad-boy ex, Brad, who broke her heart, and yearns for a rekindling of that part of herself. And then, oops, her husband reads the diary — AND she runs into Brad, who she learns has been hooking up with her best friend, Sasha, but still has feelings for her. Who will she choose? What will her husband do? The drama unfolds from here, but all the plot is crammed into a handful of minutes in between endless explicit sex scenes, which manage to feel more grim than sensual.
In this discussion, we cover the first four episodes of “Sex/Life”: getting to know the paper-flat characters, unpacking the themes, and breaking down the credulity-stretching plot turns. We hope you enjoy!
We’ve been reading…
Filthy Animals, the new short story collection by Brandon Taylor, author of the recent novel Real Life, which I absolutely adored. There’s a thread of linked stories, about an unusual relationship that forms between three young people at a university — two dance students, who are dating, and a man who becomes entangled in a sexual game between them — that serves as a spine for the collection, but the stories also dip into the lives of a desperate nanny, a tenuously closeted woman in her first lesbian relationship, and more. The whole collection is acutely observed and emotionally nuanced, a true pleasure to read. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
“My Unorthodox Life,” a reality show on Netflix about Julia Haart — current CEO of Elite World Group, and former member of an Ultra-Orthodox community in Monsey — and her four children. It’s a fascinating look at religious fundamentalism and the path one family took in walking away from it. -Emma
The second season of “I Think You Should Leave”! I almost cried with joy when I saw a new season of Tim Robinson’s relentlessly uncomfortable, painfully funny sketch comedy show in my Netflix carousel. The new season is rife with absurd bits that spoof office politics, social niceties, and the death throes of capitalism. (If you’ve never watched the show, start with this season 1 sketch and then watch all two seasons.) -Claire
We’ve been listening to…
“Drama Queens,” the podcast where former “One Tree Hill” stars Bethany Joy Lenz, Sophia Bush and Hilarie Burton recap the series, episode by episode. The first episode gave me all the nostalgic feels about my days of WB-watching. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
Heeled sandals from Zara. I decided I needed to mix up my shoe collection and wanted some fun heels that also weren’t super high and weren’t super expensive. I landed on these fun pearl-trimmed ones! -Emma
I’m on a personal spending fast after months of trying to figure out what my summer style would be, in a postpartum world — I’ve figured it out, it’s floaty dresses and high-waisted shorts with tank tops, next question — but my neighborhood park has a composting drop-off site, so I got a compost pail for our kitchen counter! It’s part of my long-term plan to suck less at making sure everything in our home is recycled and disposed of in the most sustainable possible way. Recently I’ve also been trying out Bee’s Wrap and Stasher bags to cut down on our plastic use, and reusable paper towels. -Claire
Happy Friday! Last week we dug into the divide that seems to spring up between women with and without kids, especially in our own millennial milieu. We loved opening up to each other and all of you about the resentments and pressures and societal structures that conspire to sort moms from non-moms, and how we try to foster friendship and community across those lines in our own lives.
We got so many wonderful messages about this episode, and we want to build off of it and address many of the important topics you brought up — women who have always known they want to be childfree, women who are unpartnered, women who are also taking care of elderly parents, and so much more — in future episodes. (Some will be public, and some will be subscriber-only.)
But we have a much more frivolous topic today, because this was actually going to be the second half of last week’s episode, and we didn’t want our notes to languish forever. So our topic today: the nap dress and cottagecore for moms and non-moms!
We both read Anne Helen Petersen’s Culture Study essay “Unpacking the Nap Dress,” which traces the historical precedents for romanticized, pastoral styles like the current crop of gauzy, ruffly nap dresses and the corresponding trend of mommy-and-me dressing, and draws out the ways in which these styles have been harbingers of backlash against change and attempts to reassert conservative values around women’s roles and the domestic sphere. She zeroes in on the ways that these dresses appeal to millennial moms, in particular, and work to signal class, politics, and race.
As big fans of the nap dress, we were intrigued, and it inspired a long and enthusiastic chat about dressing our changing bodies, reimagining a world without the capitalist rat race, and finding common ground through fashion. Hope you enjoy!
ShareThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter by Claire Fallon and Emma Gray. Rich Text is a space for the indulgent and the incisive, for witty and wistful explorations of the cultural, the personal, and the political in both written and audio formats. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
Last year, it seemed like everyone was predicting a pandemic baby boom; this year, it turned out to be a baby bust (maybe because, thanks to reliable and accessible birth control, it takes more to get even straight people pregnant than forcing them into lockdown with their partners for months on end).
Cue the media freakout. “Experts sound the alarm on declining birth rates among younger generations: ‘It's a crisis’,” blared a CBS headline. Time went with “Why the COVID-19 Baby Bust Is Bad for America.” Arguments swirled about the need for stronger benefits to encourage young people to start producing kids in order to replace the population, or, conversely, the oppressive nature of pro-natalist policies. Should everyone be pushed to have lots of kids? Should everyone, rather, be discouraged from it?
As a mom and a non-mom belonging to the fail-generation in question — those hapless millennials — we were both vaguely aghast by this discourse, which seemed to betray parents and non-parents alike. In our free time, we talk a lot about motherhood and the ways in which it’s both fetishized as a concept by our society (especially for white women) while actual mothers are left without the resources or support they need.
We talk about the ways in which a lower birth rate can be reflective of hard-won and valuable new freedoms for women, but also of a failure by our country to provide economic and healthcare benefits that would make having kids feasible for more people. We talk about how non-mothers are made to feel as if they’re simply mothers-in-waiting, or as if they’ve failed to achieve the pinnacle of female value and experience; we also talk about how once women become mothers, their material needs are ignored and their individual identities are viewed as disposable.
We also talk about how fraught it can be for women to talk with each other about the big question of motherhood from different experiences. Moms and non-moms are often set in opposition, resentful of the freedoms or plaudits offered to women who made the other choice, rather than being encouraged to connect across different experiences and find shared purpose in improving the lives of women who have kids — and their children — and the lives of women who don’t.
So we decided to have a talk about it! We unpack some of the discourse around the baby bust news cycle, look back at the Elizabeth Bruenig essay on early motherhood that fueled days of controversy back in May, and try to sort through our feelings about parenting, or not parenting, in a society that is hostile to parents and yet, at the same time, hostile to childfree people.
We hope you enjoy! (And let us know if there are other topics like this one that you’d like to see us discuss!)
ShareWelcome to another bonus pod here on Rich Text. As always, we are so very grateful to you, our paying subscribers, for keeping this project afloat!
Today we are discussing “Hacks,” an HBO Max series starring Jean Smart as Deborah Vance, a veteran comic in the stylings of Joan Rivers who has come to be seen as a bit of a hack, and Ava, played by Hannah Einbeinder, a 25-year-old upstart comedic writer who has been “cancelled” for a tasteless joke. The two are thrown together by their mutual agent, and growth, arguments and a whole lot of comedy writing ensues. We get into the characters in “Hacks,” and the generational divides and gender issues explored.
Happy listening and happy (almost) weekend!
ShareWe’ve been reading…
The heart-wrenching and infuriating transcript of Britney Spears’ court testimony. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
Lately I’ve been digging more into the back catalog of Citations Needed, a leftist media crit podcast hosted by Nima Shirazi and Adam Johnson, and I really recommend it to anyone who pays attention to the news (hopefully everyone?!). Their episodes push back on common tropes in mainstream media — such as, recently, the wave of stories about how workers were too lazy to apply for jobs at restaurants because they’re surfeited on overly generous unemployment benefits — and help break down the easy, often misleading frames in which we’re accustomed to seeing political issues presented. -Claire
I’m deep into the archives of “Dear Shandy,” the relationship podcast our bud Sharleen does with her husband Andy. Even when I don’t agree with the advice given — which definitely happens! — I always feel better for listening. -Emma
We’ve been watching…
The second season of “Breeders,” an FX comedy about a London couple who adore their children, but have, uh, serious anger issues. As someone with a tendency to snap, I find it to be a cautionary tale of the awful parenting than can ensue when you don’t learn to control your temper with your kids, but it’s also pretty funny, and sometimes even heartwarming. -Claire
We’ve been buying…
Along with making an ironclad pledge to stop buying things (maybe slightly not ironclad), I’ve finally found jean shorts that are cute and comfortable: the Madewell curvy perfect jean short in lunar wash. I did have to size down a full size from my usual, but they’re soft, flattering, and don’t give me an insta-wedgie. -Claire
This perfect 1-quart cold brew maker from Takeya. My morning quality of life has been wildly improved from being able to pour myself a not-watered-down ice coffee. -Emma
After watching the finale of “Cruel Summer,” Freeform’s twisty-turny summer teen soap, we had THOUGHTS. So naturally, we decided to podcast about them. And then, due to some technical difficulties, the entire file was lost, so we decided to podcast about them again. Here is the fruit of our labors. (Warning: This episode is VERY spoiler-y, and contains discussions of sexual abuse, grooming and suicide.)
Our conversation gets into the big twists of episodes 9 and 10, the complicated nature of depicting grooming, gaping plot holes, skin suits, and how we feel about where Kate and Jeanette ended up in the final moments of the finale.
Happy Friday and happy listening!
We’ve been reading…
A searing deep-dive by our former colleague Jess Schulberg on the story of Kip Kinkel and the battle over juvenile life without parole. -Emma and Claire
This NYTimes investigation into the reality of what it was like to work at New York City’s only Amazon fulfillment center during the pandemic — and what it says about the culture and labor practices that billionaire Jeff Bezos is building. -Emma
We’ve been listening to…
“HiberNation,” our friend Mallika Rao’s gorgeous new podcast about what happens when we sleep. Mallika is a brilliant journalist, insightful critic, and matchless conversation-haver, and the first episode, about why people sleep with their partners (despite it being harder to actually get good sleep that way), left me in floods of tears. -Claire
“To Live And Die In LA” season 2. There are some very real issues with the true crime genre of podcasting, and yet I can’t stop listening to this one. -Emma
We’ve been buying…
The new Hill House summer drop. The Nap Dress brand has done it again with its expanded apparel collection and I will be living in fun prints and smocking all summer long. (If you wanna check it out, here is a discount code. And no, this is still not an ad. I am just a genuine enthusiast lol.) -Emma
Same, and this is why we’re always accidentally matching on Zoom. -Claire
We’ve been watching…
“Starstruck,” a short, sweet lil rom-com structured series on HBO Max about a woman who has a one-night-stand on New Year’s Eve and realizes afterwards that the guy is a giant movie star. -Emma
The finale of “Hacks.” I know I’ve recommended this show before, but it has really stuck with me. If you haven’t yet watched the HBO Max show, get on it right now. You can binge the whole thing straight through. -Emma
This is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter by Claire Fallon and Emma Gray. Rich Text is a space for the indulgent and the incisive, for witty and wistful explorations of the cultural, the personal, and the political in both written and audio formats. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
Welcome to another book club episode of Rich Text. Our second! Three times will make it official, right? Our book today is God Spare the Girls, a powerful exploration of American evangelical girlhood and coming of age, by Kelsey McKinney. (If you missed our first book club episode with Laura Hankin, you can listen to it here.)
McKinney is a features writer and cofounder of Defector Media, as well as the author of God Spare the Girls, which will be out on June 22. Her novel tells the story of two young women, the daughters of a wealthy megachurch preacher, who begin to question their lives and their faith in the wake of a scandalous revelation about their father. You can pre-order the book here!
On this episode of Rich Text, we chat with Kelsey about the appeal of celebrity pastors, what it’s like to grow up in a community whose tenets you come to question, and the way the capitalism intersects with American evangelicalism (and other organized religion) in icky ways.
We also get into one of our favorite topics: the way that evangelical Christianity has become inextricably linked to “The Bachelor.” Come for the book talk, stay for the in-depth conversation about Ben Higgins’ Bible verse tat.
Share Rich TextThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter by Claire Fallon and Emma Gray. Rich Text is a space for the indulgent and the incisive, for witty and wistful explorations of the cultural, the personal, and the political in both written and audio formats. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
Subscribe nowBe warned: This chat contains ALL THE SPOILERS.
Who murdered the durder? We finally found out on Sunday night, after a spasm of national curiosity so intense that it overloaded HBO Max and left “Mare of Easttown” fans hanging.
The show ultimately revealed itself to be as much of a family drama as a whodunnit, following the titular detective Mare (Kate Winslet) as she attempted to finally grieve for her late son, solve the disappearances of two young women and the murder of another in her small community, and hold her own crumbling family together. In the finale, the central mystery of the show — who murdered young mom Erin McMenamin? — is dramatically solved, and the relationships between Mare and her loved ones are further tested.
Special guest Esmé Wang joined us to discuss whether “Mare” is actually a good show, the Delco accent PR blitz, how the show explores motherhood and friendship, and the thorny question of how to make murder mysteries without making copaganda.
ShareThis is the free edition of Rich Text, a newsletter by Claire Fallon and Emma Gray. Rich Text is a space for the indulgent and the incisive, for witty and wistful explorations of the cultural, the personal, and the political in both written and audio formats. If you like what you see and hear, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Rich Text is a reader-supported project — no ads or sponsors!
Subscribe nowIt’s been a minute since we’ve podcasted, so this week we’re trying something a little bit different. There’s so much in pop culture world we want to talk about and dissect — sometimes in obsessive detail. And we’ve absolutely loved getting to expand beyond “The Bachelor” here on the newsletter.
That’s something we will continue to do on “Rich Text,” in both audio and written formats. Some episodes, like this one, will be public. Others will continue to live behind a paywall, for subscribers only.
Today’s episode is all about The Kids (sort of). First, we talk about Pilot Pete and Kelley Flanagan, who can’t stop giving long-winded, extremely vague podcast interviews (well Pete’s was really just a monologue on his own podcast) about the messy end of their relationship.
Then we really get into The Teens with a discussion of Freeform’s soapy, ‘90s-set, teen thriller, “Cruel Summer.” Beyond just being a fun watch, the show is really a meditation on the power and danger of being a teenage girl, dressed up as a fast-paced, nostalgic mystery.
Finally, we dive into Olivia Rodrigo’s debut album, “Sour.” Is it creepy that adults — like us! — have been listening to it on repeat? What does it say about our culture that even we adults form obsessions over the things teenagers produce? Should we all just stop worrying and give into the ecstasy of playing “traitor” and “good 4 u” at high volume while dancing around our living rooms and/or driving down the highway?
Happy weekend, and please enjoy our (slightly long, extremely fun) conversation about Kids These Days!
ShareYou asked, and you shall receive!
And by “you asked,” we mean we really wanted to keep talking about “The Circle” and a few of you said that you might enjoy that as well! So here we are.
“The Circle” finale was frankly everything we hoped it would be. On today’s pod, we dive into the gender and racial dynamics of the show, the genius of “The Circle” casting, and why we are so damn happy with how it all played out in the end.
Happy listening, friends! And happy weekend.
ShareWe’ve been reading…
This fantastic piece on the GOP obsession with critical race theory by Adam Harris.
The excellent labor reporter Sarah Jaffe on the crisis in conditions for care workers (both paid and unpaid) that was laid bare by the pandemic.
Alexandra Kleeman’s upcoming dystopian satire “Something New Under The Sun,” a terrifying yet hilarious exploration of a future marked by accelerating climate change, resource scarcity, and the capitalist vultures poised to strip humanity for parts as we all careen into oblivion! Claire highly recommends preordering for a blistering August read.
We’ve been listening to…
“Welcome to the OC, Bitches!,” the new, deeply nostalgic, OC recap pod from Rachel Bilson (who played Summer) and Melinda Clarke (who played Julie Cooper). It’s freaking delightful.
“Poog,” a lightly ironic, self-aware wellness podcast by comedians Kate Berlant and Jacqueline Novak, whose riffs on sunscreen and cellulite remedies will leave you haunted by both the certainty that you should be doing more self-care and the suspicion that it’s all bullshit.
We’ve been watching…
RHONY’s return — specifically for the debut of Eboni K. Williams, the first-ever Black New York housewife.
We’ve been buying…
This week I (Emma) have been mostly filling my Zara cart and then NOT buying anything, which I take as a sign of progress.
Baby clothes from H&M, one of the only affordable places where a gal can find adorable toddler outfits that aren’t covered in sharks driving racecars or unicorns eating cupcakes.
*Apologies for the occasional interruptions in this episode. We were contending with door knocking, phone calls and very loud package deliveries.*
Imagine, if you will, a very safe and special place for women. It’s candy-hued and tastefully lit; it’s a space of female community and mutual empowerment. Most of all, it’s secret, exclusive, guarded. If a cis man ever tries to enter, he will be met with force. It’s The Wing meets Skull and Bones, and behind the gates, New York’s most elite women are plotting change.
This is Nevertheless, a clandestine social club at the heart of Laura Hankin’s witty, suspenseful satire A Special Place for Women. The novel follows an out-of-work, lonely journalist named Jillian Beckley who pitches a moonshot story to her old editor and crush: An exposé of what really goes on inside the long-rumored, never-confirmed-to-exist club. She believes that the powerful women of Nevertheless were behind the election of the city’s first woman mayor, and that they engineered her downfall after she tried to pass a wealth tax. She infiltrates the club — with some help from her childhood friend, Raf, a celebrity chef who agrees to pretend to be her boyfriend — and quickly discovers there is a lot going on. But what exactly? Is it just kitschy cute you-go-girl feminism, salary negotiation workshops, and virtue signaling? Or is there something darker… even something genuinely spooky?
We chatted with Laura — who is, full disclosure, a longtime close friend — about her new book, safe spaces for women, girlbosses, Rachel Hollis, capitalism, female friendship, and so much more.
Here’s a brief excerpt of our conversation:
Claire: There's so much to discuss in this book: corporate feminism and girlbosses, pastel furniture and cute neon signs that say, like, fuck the patriarchy, Tarot decks on sale at Urban Outfitters, and, of course, being special women, which we all are. Laura, thank you so much for joining us.
Laura: Thank you so much for having me. We've had so many conversations over the years, but never one recorded before.
Emma: The pressure is on! To kick us off, where did the idea for this book come from?
Laura: So the funny thing that I don't think you knew until today, Emma, is that you played a role. About four years ago, you invited me to come and meet you for a coffee at this exclusive women-only space, The Wing. I remember being so excited to meet you there. I had never been before, but I had obviously seen the gorgeous Instagram. And I was like, “Oh my god, it's gonna be this incredible utopia for women. I'm gonna feel so welcomed. Maybe I'll try to join.” And I was at this place in my life where I didn't feel particularly impressive — [My first book], Happy And You Know It, had not been published yet. I was running around to a bunch of day jobs. And I remember going and meeting you and you were so wonderful. But I just felt so out of place and so self-conscious. I was like, “What am I doing here? My dress is so wrinkly. I'm too short.” It just made me wonder, what would happen if a woman who really did not picture herself being part of an exclusive club had to infiltrate it for her career?
Claire: I was really intrigued by the idea of setting a really dark thriller/satire/mystery in these really glossy, cozy spaces that are supposed to be safe spaces for women who are threatened by male violence at every turn. I'm curious for you, what appealed to you about this juxtaposition of genre and setting?
Laura: I think I was always like, “Oh, if I could just get into those beautiful spaces, and be surrounded by other women, and suddenly, I just had my allies in the fight and we could rest together, then everything would be great.” And that is obviously not the case. And so I wanted to dig underneath these shiny surfaces. Because I feel like sometimes the shiny surfaces can hide the deepest secrets. And also, I'm really drawn to shiny surfaces, and I want to be a part of them.
Emma: In the book, you get at the inherent tension between advocating for gender equality and the exclusivity of an elite club — even if it is focused on women. It erases so many other ways that oppression plays out in our culture [other than gender], and also turns this social justice mission into a capitalist product. It's something that I think was you dealt with really compassionately, which, as someone who was a member of The Wing, and loved it, but also felt really conflicted about it the whole time, I really appreciated.
Claire: It's so seductive to believe that you could belong to this beautiful place full of impressive people. And I feel like your book really gets at this. [Places like] The Wing, and more importantly, Nevertheless [the fictional women’s club in the book], they're trying to embody an ideal of acceptance. That is what social justice is built on. It's not exclusivity, it's everyone gets the same, everyone gets their needs met equally. But what we really want in our communities is to be special. There's no community, the way that humans build community, without some people not being in it. And that is fundamentally inextricable from the appeal of a social club. So how do you find community without betraying the ideal of “everyone is equal, everyone is accepted”? It’s very difficult for the women of Nevertheless to resolve that. Do you feel like you're still struggling with resolving that?
Laura: A little bit? It's really nice to be able to have a “common enemy.” That might be the wrong [term], but to be able to be like, “well, the men can't come.” And I think a lot of the women in the club in the book will say the right things. Like, “we have to remember these other women, too, we have to support them, the ones who are not as fortunate as us.” But it takes hard work to actually reach out and include those other people. And also, then it would make going to the club not feel quite as exciting and fun, right? Having something be secret or exclusive makes it automatically feel so much more important than it actually is.
Emma: I think so many of us don't want to admit the appeal of that, because it feels kind of gross to be like, “I like being special. I like being included in the thing that not everyone is [included in].” And so if you can dress that up in a mission, then you don't have to feel bad.
Claire: There's this incredible balancing act that these companies are trying to do, which is marketing both acceptance and exclusivity, and trying to capitalize on both of those desires. Because what we all want is to be accepted and for other people not to be. And so if you can sell both sides of that, that's very effective.
Emma: Laura, you do a really good job of interrogating those impulses, and universalizing the experience [of wanting to be chosen] and then picking it apart, but doing it from a really compassionate place, which makes A Special Place For Women such a fantastic read.
Laura: Ultimately, I always really love my characters. And so I always do want them to succeed and try to be better. So I think I was coming at the writing of the book from that place. It's like, okay, they might fail, they might do some bad things. But is there hope for redemption for us all? Can we find a way to both belong and not keep people out unnecessarily?
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. You can listen to the full Rich Text audio chat in this newsletter, or wherever you get your podcasts!
You can buy “A Special Place For Women,” which comes out May 11th, here, check out her virtual book launch here, and follow Laura on Instagram and Twitter!
Twenty-eight years after Fran Fine first flounced out of that bridal boutique in Flushing, Queens and into her role as the Sheffields’ nanny, Fran Drescher’s iconic sitcom is streaming on HBO Max. So, naturally, we watched it. (In Emma’s case, rewatched it; Claire was a “Nanny” virgin.)
And -- spoiler alert! -- we were pleasantly surprised by how delightful it still is.
The show is a symphony of high-rise denim and tailored vests, knockoff shoes and well-sprayed hair. And lots and lots of Yiddish. (Nuchslep! Punim! Shiksa! Meshugenah!) In Fran Fine, the show lovingly spotlights an unabashedly Jewish, working-class woman who celebrates her sexuality, her distinctive voice, and her loud fashion.
We discussed the show’s kooky cast of characters, its representation of Jewish culture and stereotypes, and the tensions it captures around female sexuality. And, of course, curly girl vibes.
Hope you enjoy, and have a wonderful May weekend!
Share Rich TextFor this week’s audio chat, we ended up with two, uh, pretty different things to discuss: the resurfacing of old, misogynistic blogs by Reality Steve as well as new allegations about him from Demi Burnett… and season two of Netflix’s social media challenge show “The Circle.”
An odd mash-up? Perhaps. As you may be gathering, this week’s bonus chat was originally supposed to be about just “The Circle.” But shit happens, and now here we are.
During this rather long episode, we discussed Reality Steve’s complicated place in Bachelor Nation, the wacky gimmicks and catfish hunting on “The Circle” — and, in both cases, the conflicting motives and crafted identities that shape all of our friendships, especially in reality TV world.
Have a wonderful weekend, y’all. And as always, happy listening, friends!
We’ve been reading…
“A Special Place For Women,” our friend Laura Hankin’s forthcoming novel.
Vulture’s brutal oral history of what it’s like to work for producer and allegedly abusive boss Scott Rudin.
We’ve been listening to…
The “Dear Shandy” podcast, where Sharleen Joynt and her husband Andy Levine answer callers’ relationship questions and interview Bachelor couples like Kaitlyn Bristowe and Jason Tartick about their relationship styles. Sharleen and Andy have the best dynamic, and it’s a Bachelor-adjacent pod without actually being about “The Bachelor” at all.
We’ve been watching…
“The Circle”! Duh!
The gritty HBO Max adaptation of Alissa Nutting’s gloriously sharp-edged tech satire “Made for Love,” starring Cristin Milioti’s eyes.
We’ve been buying…
Giant architectural scrunchies from small, woman-owned brand Room Shop. They are perfect, especially for days when you do not want to wash your hair.
On Wednesday morning, Colton Underwood sat down with Good Morning America’s Robin Roberts to make a big announcement: He is gay.
“I’ve ran from myself for a long time. I’ve hated myself for a long time. I’m gay and I came to terms with that earlier this year," he told Roberts.
The interview packed a lot into less than 15 minutes. Underwood discussed the ways in which growing up in the Catholic Church and in the uber-macho world of professional football impacted his desire to avoid reckoning with his sexual identity. He talked about the mental health issues this repression wrought, culminating in a morning last year on which he “didn’t have the intentions of waking up.” He spoke about the heterosexual cachet of “The Bachelor” franchise, so powerful that when he was named the titular lead, he remembers “praying to God the morning I found out I was the Bachelor and thanking him for making me straight.”
He also addressed ex-girlfriend Cassie Randolph, although Roberts did not press him much on the temporary restraining order Randolph was granted against Underwood in September 2020.
“I would like to say sorry for how things ended. I messed up. I made a lot of bad choices,” said Underwood. “I’m sorry from the bottom of my heart. I’m sorry for any pain and emotional stress I caused. I wish it wouldn’t have happened the way it did. I wish I would have been courageous enough to fix myself before I broke anybody else.”
We felt like Colton’s interview — and all of the discourse around it — deserved more than a bonus chat. (There are layers! So many complex layers!)
So we talked about it with the wonderful Daryn Carp, host of PeopleTV’s Reality Check, and podcasts “Scissoring Isn’t A Thing” and “Shaken And Disturbed.” In our hour-long conversation, the three of us all sorted through our reactions to the news, the broader implications of Colton’s coming out, how to ensure Cassie’s pain is accounted for in this moment, and the reports that he will be starring in a Netflix series currently being filmed.
We also didn’t want this one to be behind any paywalls, so we are making this post and the episode public. (You can copy the RSS feed from this newsletter into your podcast app of choice, or you can search Rich Text directly on Spotify.)
Happy listening, friends 🌹
One of the (deeply unimportant) indignities of a year lived largely in social isolation is the lack of gossip. In the absence of office gossip, dating gossip and friendship gossip, we’ve had to rely on… Bachelor Nation gossip.
So that’s what we dive into on this week’s Rich Text pod chat. (There may be a small audio glitch at one point during our conversation thanks to Emma’s shaky Zoom connection. Apologies in advance.) We chat about Kit and Bennett’s alleged date, the joy of seeing the women of Matt James’ season finally get to be friends sans show-driven conflict, and, of course, all of the weird drama that has unfolded between Matt and Rachael this week.
Hope you enjoy this grab bag of moderately interesting gossip. Somehow we managed to talk about it for 35 whole minutes.
Call to action…
We have been outraged and heartbroken over the killing of 20-year-old Daunte Wright, yet another Black man killed at the hands of a white police officer during a routine traffic stop. There are many ways to support Wright’s family and the Brooklyn Center community, whether you live in the Minneapolis area or want to show solidarity and financial support from afar. We’ve rounded up a few:
Directly send funds to Chyna, Wright’s girlfriend and mother of his nearly 2-year-old child, on CashApp ($hubby98). @thuy-jones is collecting funds for her on Venmo, and @holisticheaux is doing the same via PayPal.
Donate items for Wright’s son via local wellness business Holistic Heaux. They are looking for diapers, clothing (18-24 mos.), groceries and gift cards. Items can be dropped off or shipped. Holistic Heaux is asking that people DM them on Instagram or Facebook in order to get the address.
Donate to the verified GoFundMe that Wright’s family has set up to cover his funeral costs.
Donate to the Brooklyn Center Mutual Aid Fund.
Donate to a GoFundMe that has been set up to support students and families in Brooklyn Center who are struggling in the wake of this latest trauma.
And last but not least, advocate for real, systemic change when it comes to policing. American policing has always been linked to the enforcement of white supremacy. To stop these extra-judicial killings, we need more than police “reform.”
We’ve been reading…
“Police Keep Creating Black Corpses. We Are Being Crushed Under The Weight,” by Hayes Brown for MSNBC. I can’t stop thinking about this one part of his beautiful, aching piece: “I saw Wright's picture, smiling in a red Chicago ball cap at his son's first birthday, before I learned he was dead. I still knew. Black men don't have their names and pictures, frozen in random moments of happiness, go viral like that while they're alive.”
“Libertie” by Kaitlyn Greenidge, a historical novel about the dreamy, rebellious only daughter of a Black woman doctor who runs a women’s hospital in 19th century Brooklyn.
We’ve been listening to…
The “Why Are Dads?” episode about “10 Things I Hate About You,” which reminded me (Emma) why that movie is such a perfect teen rom-com.
The finale of Jo Piazza’s fantastic pod about mom influencers, “Under The Influence.” (Please, iHeart, give us a second season!)
We’ve been watching…
“Summer House” on Bravo. I (Emma) can’t stop. Also, my friend Miriam got her first story producer credit on the most recent episode, so I’m partial.
Claire’s son tear apart the apartment during a two-week break from daycare (thanks to a Covid cluster). Pray 4 us!
This week, celebrity gossip Instagram account DeuxMoi posted some blurry photos of two peoples’ backs. But these weren’t just *any* backs, they (allegedly, as DeuxMoi does not verify the claims it posts) belonged to Bachelor Matt James and his ex-girlfriend, Rachael Kirkconnell.
The last we, the viewers, had seen, Matt and Rachael were being forced to relive their relationship — and in Matt’s case, the racial trauma it wrought — on a soundstage during “After The Final Rose.” Both of them were raw and emotional, and the distance between them was palpable. But now, they appear to be just strolling around Brooklyn! Naturally, the people of Bachelor Nation had questions.
This made us think about what couples who come off of “The Bachelor” owe the public, and what they don’t. It also made us think a lot about breakups, and how sometimes you need to return to a person face-to-face in order to get some real closure. So on this week’s bonus audio chat, we talk about breakups — Bachelor Nation breakups and reunions, as well as some of our own experiences.
Happy listening!
ShareWe’re reading…
Our friend and former colleague Laura Bassett’s interview with the man who keeps posting photos of her feet to WikiFeet.
Kelsey McKinney’s propulsive, bittersweet novel “God Spare the Girls” (worth a pre-order if you’re hoping for some engrossing beach/park reading this summer).
We’re listening to…
Olivia Rodrigo’s new single, “deja vu,” trying to reclaim our youth.
“Death at the Wing,” a podcast about the NBA and a spate of deaths among young basketball stars in the ‘70s and ‘80s — which is actually about the immiseration of the Reagan era, structural racism, and the usual American bullshit.
We’re buying…
Emma recently had a whole bag of her laundry stolen, so this week she placed an order for a bunch of basics from American Eagle, like a couple of these Aerie seamless ribbed crop tanks. (Also, the Aerie underwear is seriously great!)
This Commando faux leather crop top, in the hopes of one day, “going out” again.
One of those mooned-over Lithuanian linen sack dresses (this one), which was actually purchased over a month ago and finally arrived this week. The buttons are wood, and the fabric is a summer dream.
If you are a member of Bachelor Nation, you might have seen Suzana Somers’ — better known as @bachelordata’s — charts floating around Instagram. After a season of avidly following her work, and watching her deftly crunch the data on everything from screen time to Instagram growth to overnight date order, we really wanted to talk to her.
So we did! For this newsletter! (Disclaimer: The audio was recorded last night, so we were a little bit tired and may have had a few minor audible Zoom glitches. Apologies!)
It’s always a joy to get to nerd out about this franchise, so this chat was, despite the hour and tech limitations, an absolute blast. In our conversation, Suzana shared some of the nitty-gritty details of how she tracks and visualizes the data, what this project has revealed to her about the franchise’s race and diversity problems, and how it has shaped the way she consumes the show.
We are also really excited that Suzana is letting us republish some of the ~exclusive~ data content that she reserves for her Patreon patrons right here on Rich Text. After Matt James’ season wrapped, she calculated the total screen time of each contestant, including Matt James and Chris Harrison. The results paint an illuminating picture. Like… Victoria Larson, who was eliminated about halfway through the season, got as much featured screen time as Bri Springs and Serena Pitt, two women of color who made it to the final four.
Take a look:
We hope you all enjoy listening to the conversation — and, of course, follow the @bachelordata Instagram account, and support all of Suzana’s incredible work on her Patreon.
ShareCall to action…
It’s a pretty heavy news week. We’re following both the Derek Chauvin trial and the horrifying spate of anti-trans bills (many of which target trans kids) in state legislatures across the nation.
The first thing we can all do is just… pay attention. Talk to your friends and family about what’s going on. Take breaks, especially because this sort of news can be really triggering, but don’t tune it out.
You can also contact the Arkansas governor and ask him to veto the bill that just passed which prohibits doctors from providing gender-affirming medical care for transgender children. You can send a message to Gov. Asa Hutchinson through the ACLU's website.
If you have some money to spare, donate to organizations like the Trans Youth Equality Foundation, Intransitive, Black Lives Matter, or directly to the GoFundMe for George Floyd’s daughter.
We’re reading…
Rosie Danan’s forthcoming rom-com novel, “The Intimacy Experiment,” which features a super sexy rabbi named Ethan.
Every article about Real Housewife of Salt Lake City Jen Shah being arrested for fraud while the second season was filming. (!!!)
“Play It As It Lays” and “Slouching Towards Bethlehem”! Joan Didion: turns out she’s pretty good.
“Trashberg,” our buddy Ashley Feinberg’s newsletter, which promises to fill the neglected “weirdly attentive blog about Newt and Callista Gingrich Instagram selfies” niche.
We’re listening to…
The first two episodes of “Even The Rich’s” Jackie O and JFK mini-series.
“Lost Hills,” a podcast based on the also excellent New Yorker piece about a spree of shootings in the Malibu wilderness, and the failure of the sheriff’s department to take it seriously.
We’re watching…
“Ted Lasso,” the show everyone told me (Emma) to watch but I resisted because like, a show about a man coaching sports ball? But fine fine, it’s absolutely delightful.
“The One,” a weirdly terrifying show about true love. Started it because of the love thing, now finishing it to find out who did a murder.
“Call My Agent!”: If you haven’t watched this stylish French comedy, set in a Parisian talent agency, it’s time to binge and decide whether you’re an Andréa, a Camille, a Sofia or a Noémie. Or a Mathias or a Gabriel or an Hervé or — look, the characters are all perfection, just watch it.
We’re buying…
Chunky Fila sneakers in a light beige color that feels oddly elegant for a so-ugly-they’re-cute kind of shoe. (The ones Emma bought are mostly sold out, but here are a very similar pair on Revolve.)
Summer lounge sets! Last summer I (Claire) did very little online shopping and mostly look like a frazzled wreck in bike shorts and stretched-out tees in photos. I got addicted to lounge sets over the winter, and I’m not ready to give up looking cute and comfy at home just because it’s too hot for sweats. My first choice: this Aerie pointelle duo.
Hey everyone! We’re here with a little bonus episode for our paid subscribers (we love you!).
Bachelor Nation never sleeps, and even though Matt James’s season is over, the fallout continues. Plus, filming is starting for Katie Thurston’s season of “The Bachelorette,” and there will be two new hosts: Tayshia Adams and Kaitlyn Bristowe.
Before getting into Bachelor news, we also talk briefly about the horrific shooting spree in Atlanta spas that took the lives of 8 people, including 6 Asian women. The rise in hate crimes against Asian people -- especially Asian women -- in the U.S. is terrifying, and we should all be doing what we can to help.
We really encourage people to find and support local charities, advocacy groups and mutual aid organizations to help the Asian-American community and sex workers. A couple we wanted to call out are Red Canary Song, an NYC-based advocacy organization focused on migrant & Asian sex workers in NYC, and to the AAPI Journalists Therapy Relief Fund hosted by Sonia Weiser on GoFundMe. (Drop more orgs that you have come across in the comments!) Claire also signed up for a free bystander intervention training next month with Hollaback!
Some housekeeping:
If you were following us on Instagram, you might have noticed that our handle changed! We are now at @claireandemmapod. Follow us there for updates on our newsletter, audio chats and future projects.
We’ve been reading…
“‘I Felt Like A Zoo Animal’”: Black Contestants Share Their Experiences On ‘The Bachelor,’” by Stephanie McNeal, BuzzFeed News
“I’ll Meet You Anywhere,” Saeed Jones, The Cut
Our former (also laid off) colleague Jamie Feldman’s new newsletter, Jamie AF. Her post about grappling with — and celebrating — the ways that our bodies may have changed during the pandemic really hit home.
We’ve been buying…
Clogs. Both of us. Emma got this Highwood Brown Oiled Nubuck pair from Lotta From Stockholm. Claire got these natural leather open-toe ones from the same brand. Yes, this means we are solidly, solidly into our 30s. Also we’re becoming the same person.
Special thanks to Sara Patterson for producing and editing this Rich Text audio chat. If you need an amazing audio producer, hire her!
This week on Rich Text we dive into the finale of Matt James season of “The Bachelor.” As you can imagine, we had *a lot* of thoughts on the bleak conclusion of a season that was meant to signal historic change for the franchise.
After you listen, check out our essay about the finale and After The Final Rose special on Cosmopolitan.com!
Want more Rich Text? Consider becoming a paid subscriber to support this now-curricular writing project, and receive subscriber-only posts and audio.
We’re trying something new today! A bonus audio chat.
On this “episode,” we discuss some of the very tepid Women Tell All drama that we didn’t get to talk about on our podcast. We also open our chat with a conversation about Chris Harrison’s Thursday morning appearance on “Good Morning America,” in which he told Michael Strahan that he did not “speak from the heart” in his interview with Rachel Lindsay. Strahan didn’t seem to particularly buy it, and honestly, neither did we.
You can watch the interview here:
As we said, this is a new format for us — one that we are hoping to repeat for newsletter subscribers — so please let us know if you like it, and if there are other things you’d want to hear us chat about!