Is Britney Spears’ memoir actually outselling Prince Harry’s Spare or are these numbers being pulled out of someone’s rump? [OMG Blog]
This funny-pet-stories comment section is amazing. [Go Fug Yourself]
Unpopular opinion: Post Malone is genuinely underrated as an artist & vocalist. [Pajiba]
Bradley Cooper & Gigi Hadid’s shoe connection. [LaineyGossip]
Beyonce will do two premieres for her Renaissance film. [Just Jared]
Review of Britney Spears’ memoir. [Jezebel]
A Southern Charm star lost 10 pounds to be on the show. [Starcasm]
I love Annie Potts, such an underrated character actress. [Seriously OMG]
Some “glitch in the matrix” photos. [Buzzfeed]
Nick Bosa is so pretty but so problematic. [Socialite Life]

The Evening Standard is not one of the go-to British outlets for royal gossip, nor royal embiggening. As of late, the Windsors’ favorite outlets are the Telegraph, the Times and the Mail. Those are the royal reporters getting all of the confirmations and major briefings. So imagine my surprise at this weird Evening Standard piece, “Inside the Prince and Princess of Wales’ Quiet Transformation of the Monarchy.” The sub-headline is the funniest part though: “As Harry and Meghan fail to generate headlines, Kate and William are in stealth mode as they strategically shake up the Palace.” Excuse me? First of all, are we treating Harry and Meghan like they’re the king and queen and they must “generate headlines”? Secondly, the Sussexes DO generate headlines constantly. Thirdly, I guess “stealth mode” is the new royalist code for “being too lazy, stupid and enraged to do anything substantive.” Anyway, some highlights from this curious piece:

The Sussexes’ “desperate quest”: While the Duke and Duchess of Sussex continue on their increasingly desperate quest to become Hollywood power players across the pond, on home turf, the Prince and Princess of Wales have been quietly cementing themselves as a more grown-up brand of superstars.

The Keens’ showbiz credentials: Earlier this month, it was revealed the royal couple has been shoring up their own showbusiness credentials by hiring TV bigwig Dame Pippa Harris as a director of their Royal Foundation. The appointment is being seen as a shrewd move in royal circles, with Dame Pippa known for being an “expert at getting things done”, and comes hot on the heels of reports that the future king and queen are also set to hire a CEO to head up their team, in what’s being hailed as a “revolutionary move” at the palace.

Hiring a Top CEO: It’s William and Kate’s other staffing move, however, that is said to have ruffled feathers at the Palace…Many royal insiders see the appointing of a CEO as a sensible strategic step and a crucial indication of how the future king and queen are positioning themselves for the throne. “I think it’s a smart move for William and Kate to corporatize the court as they move up the royal ladder,” says Claudia Joseph, author of Kate: The Making of a Princess. “The new CEO will oversee both their legacy projects, such as the Earthshot Prize and the Princess’s Centre for Early Childhood, as well as the Duchy of Cornwall and the Royal Foundation. Inevitably, some noses will be put out of joint when the new CEO arrives and makes changes, but that is normal in any section when a new boss takes over.”

People are critical of the CEO hire: “It seems to me the title of CEO, obviously intended to make the monarchy sound more business-efficient, is woefully misguided,” says Christopher Andersen, author of The King: The Life of Charles III. “People don’t want to be reminded that ‘the Firm’ is exactly that – a multi-billion-pound moneymaking enterprise. I’m sure William and Kate think they are helping Charles ‘streamline’ the monarchy by creating this new post, but all they are really doing is adding another layer of bureaucracy and creating a recipe for even more backstabbing and intrigue [in the palace]. I think it is highly unlikely that Charles will embrace the CEO concept. He is very much a traditionalist when it comes to the way the house works, and believes that the private secretary system has served past monarchs well.”

Heartthrob Peg: William has also started to evolve as more of a global statesman over recent months, most notably on his trip to New York in September. There, he was greeted by hundreds of well-wishers, all desperate to grab a selfie with the popular prince – both William and Kate’s approval ratings are currently soaring, with the prince the second most popular royal after the late queen, on 67 per cent, according to the latest YouGov survey, and the princess not far behind on 62 per cent (Meghan and Harry, meanwhile, are on a measly 29 and 27 per cent respectively). William was praised by the American media for being “warm and genuine”, while his dip in the Hudson to see the Billion Oyster Project was said to have revived his “heartthrob status”.

Copykeening the Sussexes: That popularity will stand William and Kate in good stead with Gen Z, who the couple are keen to court. Eagle-eyed royal watchers have noticed that the Waleses’ social media feeds have been publishing increasingly slick videos of their work lately, such as the clips released around the King’s Coronation in May. These punchy video montages have racked up millions of views, likes and retweets, and the prince and princess have also increased their social media team to three people, including a new head of digital. A Kensington Palace source was quoted as saying the couple recognised this new aspect of being a working member of the royal family as “incredibly important”.

A new kind of monarchy: With the arrival of a CEO, a glitzy new showbiz hire and a more prominent social media presence, William and Kate now seem poised to take the royal family into a whole new era. “Monarchy in the 21st century is a very different beast from the 1950s, when the late queen succeeded to the throne,” says Joseph. “We live in a different age, where the royals are scrutinised as never before and people are less reverential towards the Firm. Charles has already begun a programme of modernisation as he takes on the role of king, but William has to look to the future for how Britain will look in 2050.”

[From The Evening Standard]

That quote from Christopher Andersen was from this Daily Beast piece, which I covered in September. This ES piece just regurgitated a lot of other coverage from the Mail, and added some hilariously unhinged digs on the Sussexes for no real reason other than “the Sussexes live rent-free in the Windsors’ heads.” The Sussexes have all of the power, celebrity and fame they want – they live quiet lives in Montecito and they can easily dominate headlines whenever they want. Meanwhile, Will and Kate are two desperados copying every single thing about Meghan and Harry. The CEO move, hiring people from the entertainment industry, the social media stuff, it’s all the Waleses attempting, in their lazy way, to become an all-white version of the Sussexes. As for “William has to look to the future for how Britain will look in 2050”… the assumption seems to be that King Charles will live to be 102? And that William will be a keen and hip 68-year-old king?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

As of yet, Justin Timberlake has not issued any public statements about Britney Spears’ memoir, The Woman in Me. His publicist has been working overtime though, and the tabloids have been on a feeding frenzy with all of the vintage gossip. I wonder if JT will eventually have to issue some statement or apology on the record, but we’re not there yet. Right now, he’s still in damage-control mode, trying to pretend like he didn’t build his entire solo career on cultural appropriation and slut-shaming Britney. Notably, Justin has turned off his Instagram comments. I don’t blame him – people can do whatever they like with their social media pages, and clearly, Britney’s fans were yelling at him. Meanwhile, TMZ tried to write a positive “people still support Justin” piece, but even they had to admit that Justin has canceled some scheduled appearances.

Justin Timberlake is feelin’ the heat amid Britney Spears’ new book release — and all the spilled secrets about their relationship — but we’re told his *NSYNC bros still have his back. Sources familiar with the situation tell TMZ … Lance Bass, Joey Fatone, Chris Kirkpatrick, and JC Chasez have nothing but love for Justin, and they’re supporting him through all the harsh criticism due to “The Woman in Me.”

We’re told they’ve all known him for 25 years, and would be more than happy to be back performing with him … despite all the negative energy Britney and her loyal fans are aiming at JT.

Remember, in her book Brit blames him for talking her into an abortion, accuses him of cheating and claims a run-in with Justin triggered a panic attack that ruined her 2007 VMA performance.

While *NSYNC fans and RCA Records would love another Reunion, it isn’t in the cards right now — we’re told Justin’s focused on his new solo single, album and a tour next year.

BTW, our sources say the hate JT’s been getting isn’t impacting his career plans. The single and tour for next summer are a full go — however, we’re told he’s quietly removed some club appearances that were set for early next year, tied to the release of his single and album.

[From TMZ]

There’s been some talk on Twitter/X that Justin is basically in hiding (he’s not) or that his comeback plans are now on hold because of Britney’s memoir. The original source for that is some random report from The Sun from last week. I’m not saying it’s bullsh-t, but who knows. It’s clear that Timberlake is revising his comeback plans and “quietly removing” some appearances, but mostly, he seems to be waiting things out. He has a lot of faith in his team and their damage-control work.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images. Cover courtesy of People.

You guys, there’s a SECOND poster campaign in Bucklebury, England. The first poster campaign was done by an as-yet-unknown hooligan. The person runs around at night, hanging laminated posters around the Bucklebury village, slamming Carole Middleton for defrauding people when Party Pieces collapsed back in May and June. The new poster campaign is being done by a woman who put her own photo on her posters – her name is Molly and she apparently worked at one of the companies which got ripped off by PP and she lost her job when Party Pieces left vendors and small businesses on the hook for millions in credit they gave to Carole.

The Princess of Wales’s parents have been targeted by another cruel poster campaign — featuring an OnlyFans model. The signs have gone up in Carole and Michael Middleton’s home village of Bucklebury in Berkshire. The young woman on the posters bizarrely claims the Middletons are to blame for her ending up posing on the adult site.

The Sun on Sunday reported earlier this month about the first hateful poster blitz. But this second wave — featuring a model called Molly — appears to involve a far greater number of signs. Scores of posters were found across a three-mile radius of the couple’s village. One was stuck to a sign for ­Bucklebury Farm, owned by Kate’s sister Pippa Middleton, 40, and her ­husband James Matthews, 48. Prince George has been seen at the farm’s family-friendly petting zoo.

An email sharing photos of the posters was also sent to hundreds of people from an anonymous address. The pictures showed Molly in a pink bra and had a note claiming she started her OnlyFans after being let go by a company which was left out of pocket when the Middletons’ Party Pieces firm went bust.

Some have called on the couple — who set up the business at their home in 1987 — to pay the debts themselves. Pals claim Carole was trying to make sure creditors were paid.

Speaking to The Sun last night, Molly, 23, said she had asked friends to put up the posters on her behalf on Wednesday night. She refused to name the company which allegedly let her go — and denied it was all a publicity stunt. Molly said: “The point needs to be made that if you don’t pay your creditors, it doesn’t just affect one person, it affects all employees of the company. Hence why I say I was made redundant because of this. It’s not part of a promo, but as you can see by the photo, it would be a great publicity stunt for me. Don’t you think I deserve something back after being made redundant? I think I do.”

Asked about claims the Middletons are being unfairly ­targeted, she said: “Do you think being unfairly treated is not paying millions owed or being made ­redundant? I think I was the one that was wronged and others.”

She said she started her OnlyFans in January just as a side job, claiming she then ended up doing it full-time after she was made redundant from her admin role in April. Molly added: “I was told it was due to their company. After seeing the first posters online, I then wanted to vent my frustration and let everyone know how I feel. I’m sure many others do too. I understand how this looks to the public and how the public feels about OnlyFans creators, but I was at rock bottom.”

Molly’s note, posted across the village, read: “This is what I’ve turned to!! The company I used to work at has now let me go. This is because: PARTY PIECES HOLDINGS LTD have not paid their creditors!”

The posters were taken down almost immediately by furious locals, who have valued the Middletons as their neighbours for decades. Villager Sharon Fry, 49, told The Sun: “There were posters everywhere — all across the farm gates and even at the church. It’s not right for a semi-nude model to be plastered all over our lovely village.”

[From The Sun]

At first I was like “this woman worked at Party Pieces?” But no, she worked for one of the small businesses which extended credit to Carole because she is the mother of the future queen. Carole then sold Party Pieces through an insolvency process by which the new owner, James Sinclair, wasn’t on the hook for Party Pieces’ massive debt. So, not only did Party Pieces let all of their employees go, the businesses they defrauded had to let people go too. Anyway, I love it. I’m glad Molly is mad about it and she knows where to direct her ire. I hope she makes a lot of money on OnlyFans.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

British people have a lot of ghost stories and, in my opinion, they’re entirely too comfortable with all of the ghosts and hauntings in their country. Don’t get me wrong, there are spooky parts of America and we have ghosts and ghost stories too, but it genuinely feels like every British town has at least five local ghosts and some kind of spooky tradition. “Yes, we burned dozens of witches here and the local river still turns blood red three days out of the year and no one knows why, please stop by our lovely gift shop.” The ghosts are not confined to peasant areas of the country either – there’s a grand tradition of hauntings and ghosts in or on royal properties too, various beheaded queens and Catholics. Speaking of, apparently Prince William and Kate’s Norfolk abode is haunted by the ghost of a Jesuit priest.

The Prince of Wales, 41, reportedly knew just what to say upon learning that Anmer Hall was haunted. Queen Elizabeth gifted her grandson with the stately Georgian mansion in the Norfolk countryside when he married Kate Middleton in 2011, and paranormal historian Richard Felix has claimed that the royal didn’t wince about the ghost of Anmer Hall.

“When the Prince of Wales and Princess of Wales moved into Anmer Hall, it’s more or less on the Sandringham Estate, there was a ghost there of a Catholic priest that lived there and was hanged, drawn and quartered for high treason, and for some reason, has returned to his home,” Felix said on the latest episode of Hello! A Right Royal Podcast, titled “Ghost Story Special.”

“Although he was executed in York, they’ve actually heard his voice. And they have seen the ghost of what they say is a priest, wandering around Anmer Hall,” he continued. “Before the Waleses moved in, they were warned about the ghost and the comment was, I presume it was from Prince William, he said, ‘No old hall would be complete without a ghost, would it?’ ”

Felix, a veteran ghost tour guide based in the U.K., was likely referring to Henry Walpole, the Jesuit priest who was executed in 1595 for his faith, according to The Tudor Society. Legend has it that he returned to his family’s Anmer Hall home after death with his spirit being seen roaming the grounds.

[From People]

“No old hall would be complete without a ghost, would it?” As I said, entirely too comfortable with ghosts. I don’t care if Anmer Hall was a special gift from the queen herself – as soon as you hear “the ghost of a Jesuit priest who was hanged, drawn and quartered in York, whose spirit returned to his home,” I would have been like “you know what, maybe Norfolk isn’t for me.” I genuinely wonder if Kate and William have ever seen the Jesuit ghost or if spooky stuff ever happens in Anmer.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Without getting too far “into the weeds” of Byline Times’ exclusive cover story, I do think there are many unanswered questions and loose threads which still need explanation. It’s clear that Prince William’s press secretary Christian Jones and Jones’s partner were selling information about the Sussexes to Dan Wootton, and it’s clear that Byline has documentation of that, plus documentation of the coverup within Kensington Palace and the larger institution. But what’s driving me crazy is that A) there actually isn’t solid evidence as to how Dan Wootton got the information about the Sussexit and B) why the situation was considered so dire that Charles was perfectly willing to put Harry, Meghan and Archie in mortal danger, all to protect… William’s press secretary and/or the f–ked up invisible contract between the Windsors and the press. Here are more highlights from Byline’s cover story:

Christian Jones’s partner was absolutely selling info about the Sussexes in 2019: Part of the testimony, which was initially supplied to the respected retired investigative journalist Nick Davies, reads: “I think the publicist’s ZC number is ZC634***. My friend thinks there was a payment for £3,000 made around the 15th of July last year [2019] for a story about the Duchess of Sussex and her nannies which was published on 28th of June. There was also a payment of £1,000 made for a story about godparents to Meghan’s son.”

It feels like, even now, they’re hanging everything on Jones: A second source with links to the royal households told Byline Times that the “Christian Jones problem promised to drag the hidden dealings between the palaces and the press into the public domain”.

Harry’s anger at Wootton’s Sussexit exclusive in January 2020: But the Sussexes – particularly Harry – were very keen to get to the bottom of it all.“He wanted to know how their private information kept being spun into negative headlines in the biggest newspapers. He and Meghan had been stung very badly by the timing and manner of Wootton’s reporting on their plans to live part of the year abroad,which wasn’t even a new idea as the Queen had previously given her blessing for a move to South Africa, which hadn’t worked out. And then detailed intelligence had come up to suggest Wootton was paying the partner of a Kensington Palace official,who had a lot of access, for stories about his family. Harry seemed pretty determined to get to the bottom of it.

Bringing the Sussexes to heel: “A view was quickly taken within the royal households that everything needed to be brought under control.The removal of the transition funding,which Prince Charles knew was his son’s only lifeline to keeping safe,was considered a very effective way of trying to bring Harry and Meghan to heel in the UK. But it didn’t work.”

It wasn’t about Jones specifically: “This is why it was such a problem when Christian Jones was named in those legal letters. Whether it was true or not true that information Jones collected in the course of his work was ending up in The Sun, was not really the point. The point is that the Royal Family is doing deals and trades with the press all the time for favourable coverage and protection and to maintain public relevance. The naming of Christian Jones threatened to shine a light on the entire unethical relationship between the institution and the press barons and that could not be tolerated and had to be punished.” And so it appears that the monarchy chose to side with a press secretary over Prince Harry.

[From Byline Times]

While I do think it was much, much larger than Christian Jones and his partner, again, it feels like we’re missing critical information. I’ve never been sure that the Sussexit leak to Dan Wootton came from William or Kensington Palace, although William and KP absolutely put their spin on it in the hours and days that followed. Does Harry believe that particular leak came from KP? Because I’ve always had the impression that he believed Charles and Camilla sold him out in that moment, January 2020. Also: while I believe that this Jones stuff was definitely a factor in Charles suddenly deciding to renege on the summit deal, there were other significant factors too. It simply makes no sense – even for the sadistic, short-sighted Windsors – that all of this was being done to protect William’s compromised press secretary and/or the system of leaks and briefings. What is this big, awful secret that everyone is talking around constantly?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar, Cover Images.

I still remember when Gawker posted photos of Taylor Swift and Karlie Kloss maybe kissing in 2014. To be fair, there were “Kaylor” rumors long before then, as Karlie and Taylor had already been inseparable for a while at that point. Things got really interesting in 2016, when there seemed to be a significant cooling off between Karlie and Taylor, then things turned downright icy when Karlie started hanging out with Katy Perry and other snake enemies (at the time). It really was the end of Karlie and Taylor’s friendship or whatever it was, but “Kaylor” still lived in people’s hearts and minds. Well, on Thursday, ahead of the release of 1989 (Taylor’s Version), someone leaked her new album prologue in which she specifically called out the “Gaylor/Kaylor” rumors.

Taylor Swift’s version of her Grammy-winning 2014 album 1989 drops tonight at midnight, but there’s already an apparent leak of the written prologue that accompanies the rerecorded LP. And with it, revelations about Swift’s sexuality are taking the internet by storm. Specifically, if the prologue is indeed authentic, the pop star seems to refute years of speculation about her sexuality with just a few sentences. (A subset of her fans, who dub themselves Gaylors, believe she has long been closeted.)

Tweets purporting to show the 1989 (Taylor’s Version) prologue include paragraphs where Swift writes at length about the slut-shaming she endured earlier in her career.

“Being a consummate optimist, I assumed I could fix this if I simply changed my behavior,” the leaked prologue reads. “I swore off dating and decided to focus only on myself, my music, my growth, and my female friendships. If I only hung out with my female friends, people couldn’t sensationalize or sexualize that—right? I would learn later on that people could and people would.”

Swift diehards are taking this to mean that the pop star is reinforcing the notion that, as has always been her public-facing identity, she is straight. In another purported passage, Swift thanks listeners for following her on her musical journey: “You, who saw the seeds of allyship and advocating for equality in ‘Welcome to New York.’” This, too, is being interpreted as Swift planting a flag in her heterosexuality: The 1989 opening track includes the lyrics, “And you can want who you want / Boys and boys and girls and girls.” By casting this as “allyship,” Swift seems to be saying that she’s a supporter of, but not a participant in, queer culture.

[From The Daily Beast]

Taylor has every right to set the record straight (heh) just as she has the right to keep people guessing. She doesn’t owe anyone her letters, and everyone should let people come out in their own time. Or not come out, as the case may be. Now, do I also think Taylor has spent years having fun with the “Gaylor” rumors, knowing that her obsessive fans would pore over every Easter egg, every clue, every bisexual code? Yeah, she did that too. I remember that thing with her hair dyed a certain way and people were CONVINCED that she was sending visual clues to her bisexuality.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

I still remember when Gawker posted photos of Taylor Swift and Karlie Kloss maybe kissing in 2014. To be fair, there were “Kaylor” rumors long before then, as Karlie and Taylor had already been inseparable for a while at that point. Things got really interesting in 2016, when there seemed to be a significant cooling off between Karlie and Taylor, then things turned downright icy when Karlie started hanging out with Katy Perry and other snake enemies (at the time). It really was the end of Karlie and Taylor’s friendship or whatever it was, but “Kaylor” still lived in people’s hearts and minds. Well, on Thursday, ahead of the release of 1989 (Taylor’s Version), someone leaked her new album prologue in which she specifically called out the “Gaylor/Kaylor” rumors.

Taylor Swift’s version of her Grammy-winning 2014 album 1989 drops tonight at midnight, but there’s already an apparent leak of the written prologue that accompanies the rerecorded LP. And with it, revelations about Swift’s sexuality are taking the internet by storm. Specifically, if the prologue is indeed authentic, the pop star seems to refute years of speculation about her sexuality with just a few sentences. (A subset of her fans, who dub themselves Gaylors, believe she has long been closeted.)

Tweets purporting to show the 1989 (Taylor’s Version) prologue include paragraphs where Swift writes at length about the slut-shaming she endured earlier in her career.

“Being a consummate optimist, I assumed I could fix this if I simply changed my behavior,” the leaked prologue reads. “I swore off dating and decided to focus only on myself, my music, my growth, and my female friendships. If I only hung out with my female friends, people couldn’t sensationalize or sexualize that—right? I would learn later on that people could and people would.”

Swift diehards are taking this to mean that the pop star is reinforcing the notion that, as has always been her public-facing identity, she is straight. In another purported passage, Swift thanks listeners for following her on her musical journey: “You, who saw the seeds of allyship and advocating for equality in ‘Welcome to New York.’” This, too, is being interpreted as Swift planting a flag in her heterosexuality: The 1989 opening track includes the lyrics, “And you can want who you want / Boys and boys and girls and girls.” By casting this as “allyship,” Swift seems to be saying that she’s a supporter of, but not a participant in, queer culture.

[From The Daily Beast]

Taylor has every right to set the record straight (heh) just as she has the right to keep people guessing. She doesn’t owe anyone her letters, and everyone should let people come out in their own time. Or not come out, as the case may be. Now, do I also think Taylor has spent years having fun with the “Gaylor” rumors, knowing that her obsessive fans would pore over every Easter egg, every clue, every bisexual code? Yeah, she did that too. I remember that thing with her hair dyed a certain way and people were CONVINCED that she was sending visual clues to her bisexuality.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

From what I gather, many of you guys will skip The Crown’s final season. I won’t skip it, but I’m leaving myself open to be mad about it. As someone of a certain age, I have to say that The Crown is absolutely getting several things right: the iconography of Princess Diana, the starkness of her final summer, the chaos that surrounded her at every turn in 1997. Netflix released the trailer of Season 6 Part 1:

I said before that the poster of Diana in the turquoise one-piece, sitting on the diving board, gave me chills. I got goosebumps when I saw how The Crown shot it too – from the perspective of the paparazzi trailing the Jonikal that summer. I’m not saying that Peter Morgan did right by Diana by any stretch, but the combination of historical accuracy, amazing art direction and Elizabeth Debicki’s transcendent performance is something else.

I’ve been waiting to see if King Charles throws another tantrum about The Crown this year. I hope he does – he won’t have his mother to hide behind, and 26 years later, I am more convinced than ever that he and the institution had a hand in her death.

Photos courtesy of Netflix/The Crown.

Tara Reid is one of those actresses who tabloids and mean girls have always considered to be fair game. I know she has her demons, but as Britney has reminded us, tabloid culture in the late 1990s/early 2000s was absolutely brutal and a complete double-standard. Over the years, Tara has been scrutinized for her social life, looks, and interviews she’s given while seemingly not-fully sober. She’s not perfect, and she’s had bad public moments (likely a result of her substance abuse issues), but she doesn’t seem like a bad person. One of the most frequent things that Tara gets criticized for is her weight. Over the years, Tara has received unwanted comments about her weight, and periodically, she gives an interview to clap back at the noise. Following her recent appearance on season two of Special Forces: World’s Toughest Test, Tara has faced another round of what she considers to be skinny-shaming and concern-trolling. Once again, Tara is trying to set the record straight.

The Days of Our Lives alum, 47, recently spoke to the Los Angeles Inquisitor and opened up about the constant criticism she receives about her weight.

“If we were overweight then they can’t say anything because that’s bullying. But it’s the same thing if you’re skinny. That’s still bullying too,” [Reid] said.

Reid said her body has been a topic of discussion since the early 2000s when her career kicked off. However, she’s received more criticism lately after appearing in season 2 of Special Forces: World’s Toughest Test. Now she’s hoping to shut down the speculation that she’s suffered from eating disorders once and for all.

“I have no anorexia and never have,” she clarified. “And I definitely don’t have any bulimia. I’m terrified of throwing up, so that’s not gonna happen. And I love food too much. So anyone that says I’m anorexic or bulimic, they’re wrong. So stop it. Leave me alone. Pick on me again on something else, but not on those two things. It’s not right.”

The American Pie star has previously slammed some of the body-shaming she’s gotten over the years. Back in 2021, Reid took to Instagram to shut down the hate she received after posting a photo of herself in a bikini.

“I am not too skinny, I have a high metabolism,” she told her followers. “Anyone with a high metabolism understands it’s impossible to gain weight. All I do is eat. To everyone who wrote something nice and stuck up for me, I love you! And keep spreading that love, it is the only thing that will save this world.”

The actress later told PageSix that she was “doing well” despite the constant scrutiny.

“I’ve always been thin,” Reid said at the time. “So these stories are kind of crazy because it’s like there’s nothing that has changed for forever. This is who I am, this is what I am, this is what I’m [aspiring] to be.”

Reid explained that hopefully her self-love and acceptance will “change the minds of bullies.” However, if not, then she’s “OK with that.”

“I’ve gone through it for so many years that, you know, sometimes I feel bad for them because if they’re that miserable writing things at home, what are they doing?” she said. “That’s negative. You know, it’s hurtful.”

“Love will always beat hate,” Reid added. “It’s just so hard to find love because you’ve got to find it in yourself first.”

[From People]

Honestly, I feel for Tara, because I think she is one of those people who just cannot beat her demons. I get what she’s saying about commenting on weight being a double-standard. Even if she were too thin as the result of disordered eating or drug use, there’s a difference between trying to shame someone publicly for being “too thin” and sitting them down in private to find out if they are okay. Tara infamously had an unfortunate boob job and some pretty bad liposuction done back in 2004 because even though she knew she was skinny, she “wanted a six pack.” She suffered through years of ridicule and was asked about it so many times in subsequent interviews that it couldn’t have been good for her mental health. Honestly, for all of her talk about self-love, something in her words worries me that she still isn’t quite there yet. I hope this is just a case of, “You can’t tell tone over text,” though, and that she really is finally doing better. Also, I just went back and relistened to that wild exchange she had with Jenny McCarthy several years ago, and her bitchy quip, “I hope your tits get even nicer, because they’re amazing. The same guy who did mine, right?” is giving me life right now.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Tara Reid (@tarareid)

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: Faye’s Vision/Cover Images, Jeffrey Mayer/Avalon, Getty and via Instagram