Friday, January 8, 2016

Click tease!

Speaking of Alyssa Milano...


I have to admit, she totally owned Wendy Williams on the subject of breastfeeding.

I never watch Wendy Williams.  Even if I lived in the States, I doubt I would watch her.  I find her a little odd.  In fact, watching the above clip, I'm a bit weirded out by how Wendy Williams is sitting and practically flashing everyone with that short red dress she's wearing.  I did happen to catch this clip of Alyssa' Milanos visit on Williams' show and I must say, I think she's very articulate on the topic of breastfeeding.  Besides that, she's very likable, sensible, and normal.  So yeah, I like Alyssa Milano 98% of the time... just not when she's dramatically imploring people to send 50 cents a day to UNICEF.   


See?

What else is on my mind?  Not much right now.  I guess I could comment on how annoying I think OK! Magazine is.  Their links always show up on my start page and they're always click bait that amount to nothing.  Yesterday, there was a link to a story about Duchess Kate expecting her third child.  If you click it, it takes you to the OK! page, which is akin to the National Enquirer at a newsstand.  There are nothing but huge pictures and screaming headlines.  And you can't find the article you were looking for.  There was another link to a story about Queen Elizabeth skipping Charles in favor of William to be King of England.  Once again, I fell for the trick before I realized it was an OK! clip.  Fuck that.  That's what you call being a tease...  a "click tease", if you will.

I shouldn't be reading that kind of stuff, anyway.  I am too interested in celebrities and what they're doing and not interested enough in things that actually matter.  That's why I'm a shallow, boring housewife who blogs all the time.

Speaking of celebrities that don't matter... the other day, I happened to catch a news flash about America's favorite hypocritical pervert, Josh Duggar.  He has apparently filed to dismiss the battery lawsuit brought against him by adult film star, Danica Dillon.  Duggar's lawyer, Jeffrey A. Conrad, argues: "the Plaintiff has not alleged that Defendant attempted by force to do injury to her."

The documents also claim that Dillon "did not provide anything more than a formulaic recitation of the elements of assault and/or battery," adding, "Her labels and conclusions are not adequate, particularly because she states that she consented to physical and sexual contact in exchange for payment."


In other words, Dillon is no better than a whore and got what she was asking for when she consented to exchanging sex for money.  Dillon admits that she never said "no" to Duggar, but she did tell him he was being too rough.  She claims that she felt like she was being raped.

To be honest, as much as I dislike Josh Duggar's behavior and think he has turned out to be a class one creep, I'm not sure how far Dillon's case is going to go.  It sounds to me like she was prostituting herself, which is an illegal act in most parts of the United States.  She also admits that she didn't say "no".  Josh Duggar, to be sure, is a cretin.  But he didn't rape Dillon because she consented to having sex with him and supposedly even took his money.  That being said, no one deserves to feel like they're being raped.  I have empathy for Dillon, even though I think she shares in the responsibility of what happened to her.

I hope other women steer clear of Josh, including his wife.  He's got some serious problems.

The sun is shining brightly this morning.  I guess I'll take the dogs for a walk in a little while.  That may give me more to write about.





2 comments:

  1. I don't think there's a great deal of substance to Danica Dillon's lawsuit. Women expect the word "no" to stand when men say that women's actions are telling them that "no" means something other than "no." It would seem that "yes" should have similar ramifications. If he was being too rough, I have sympathy for her. I don't think rough sex is something I would like. If she'd uttered the magic word ("no"), it would be an entirely different case in my opinion. Also, I'm not terribly well-informed regarding the case, but didn't she make allegations about things that happened in the initial encounter with Duggar? If she met with him for a second time, that would to me seem to negate the legitimacy of any claims of impropriety that allegedly occurred in the initial encounter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. I think she's trying to cash in.

      Delete

Comments on older posts will be moderated until further notice.