Pedro Pascal is covering the May/June issue of Esquire. Their profile, written by Dave Holmes, is fabulous and the editorial is fire. The Esquire people sent us the photos and I’m so grateful to them. Look at his arms my God. Look at his face! This is a beautiful man and he’s not my “type,” I like bald men don’t hate, but there’s something about him. I think it’s the fact that he’s just a genuinely lovely person and he’s completely himself. Esquire also has a video interview with Pascal, I put that below. He’s tired, his hair is a mess and he’s a giant goofball but he’s still so hot. When he caressed his knee I screamed!

Holmes’ profile is filled with quotes from Pascal’s friends and coworkers and it gives so much background and context to his hard-won fame at 48. He grew up going to the movies as a child, he would sometimes spend all day at the theater, and he lost his mom when he was just 24. He’s fiercely protective and loyal to his family and friends, who feel the same about him. He’s tight with Sarah Paulson, Oscar Isaac and of course Bella Ramsey. Everyone has kind things to say about him and they’re all so happy for him, as are the people who approach him on the street. Here are some quotes from that story and you can read it at the source.

On what it means to be middle aged: “I had a moment of thinking, You’re in your forties and you don’t own a home? Grow up. But I’m relinquishing expectations around what it is to be middle-aged and what it means to be fully grown up. Why am I trying to force a square shape into a triangle? I just don’t want to make any decisions.”

On hosting SNL for the first time: “I’m usually not all that interested in challenging myself…I could not have had a better time.”

More on SNL, which fell on the anniversary of his mother’s passing: “I was so scared that week that I was talking to her…there would be that terror waiting for me—that practical fear of bombing in front of the world. And then I talked to her, and it was really comforting. I had sort of the realization that it would be nice to talk to her more…I love you. I miss you. Thank you. I’m scared. I would love it if you would help me believe in myself, because I know you do.”

On his little sister, Lux: “I wouldn’t want to speak on her behalf, but she is and has always been one of the most powerful people and personalities I’ve ever known. My protective side is lethal, but I need her more than she needs me.”

On why safeguarding the emotions of others—including his siblings, his father, and their extended family—is always front of mind for him: “It could have to do with the fact that I don’t have my own family, and that my siblings and my chosen family are where I invest all of my emotional energy. But I’m also a little protective of people’s experience in general.”

On worrying about whether he’d ever make it as an actor: “I died so many deaths. My vision of it was that if I didn’t have some major exposure by the time I was twenty-nine years old, it was over, so I was constantly readjusting what it meant to commit my life to this profession, and giving up the idea of it looking like I thought it would when I was a kid. There were so many good reasons to let that delusion go.”

On the fate of his character in the second season of The Last of Us: “It wouldn’t make sense to follow the first game so faithfully only to stray severely from the path. So, yeah, that’s my honest answer.”

[From Esquire]

Pascal didn’t have to worry about his stint on SNL as he was delightful and so entertaining. There was of course his skit with longterm friend Sarah Pauley where they played up his zaddy status and there was also the restaurant bit where he broke character and busted out giggling. He talked about that in his video interview, admitting that “I’m a corpser, as they say in the UK, a giggler.”

My favorite quote from a friend of Pascal’s in that story was from The Last of Us showrunner Craig Manzin, who so expertly summed up Pascal’s appeal. “There are two kinds of actors: There are actors you feel slightly intimidated by, and then there are actors you want to take home and hug and give some soup. And he’s both.”

The quote in the title comes from Pascal’s video interview, below, where he acknowledged that the term “Daddy” can be triggering but played it up with a wink. I also related to his story of trying to play The Last of Us but not being able to work the controller and just giving up and watching his nephew play it.

Now Pedro Pascal knew EXACTLY what he was doing with this photo/pose pic.twitter.com/Dpd2Mf2Y9n

— Meech (@MediumSizeMeech) April 11, 2023

Image credits: Norman Jean Roy for Esquire. Used by permission

Ever since Kate became “the Princess of Wales,” her styling has gone straight to hell. The quality of her wigs and extensions has fallen off a cliff, she staggers from dowdy Victorian gear to Meghan cosplay and she’s spending way too much money on ugly clothes she’s only worn once. But to hear the Salt Island media tell it, William and Kate are setting the style standard for the rest of the Windsor clan. The Telegraph did a ridiculous piece called “The royals have never looked so chic – and it’s all thanks to William and Kate.” It should have been called “Busted Wiglets & Doom: White Privilege and Single White Female-ing Your Sister-in-Law to fill the hole in your soul.” I am giving you just the most bonkers highlights:

The Edwardian Disruptors: The word disruptor doesn’t instantly spring to mind in the context of the Prince and Princess of Wales. Yet in the 13 years since their engagement, Kate and Wills have quietly revolutionised the way senior royals dress, honing a modern royal style strategy that makes them and their three photogenic children both charmingly traditional and highly relatable.

Color coordination & normcore: Despite the careful colour coordination at work in all the Waleses’ family walkabouts – including Easter Sunday’s rhapsody in blue – William remains the embodiment of normcore although if he absolutely must, he can scrub up well for a Bafta red carpet or a royal procession. The Princess, meanwhile, is the always appropriately dressed mum of three who shows other mums how to make M&S look aspirational by getting it altered to fit properly and ensuring her hair and make up are as glossy as they are when she’s in Alexander McQueen.

Frugal Peg: William may not share either of his parents’ interest in clothes, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have Views. It was William, sensitive to charges of extravagance, who encouraged Kate to adopt a high/low approach to fashion. Mixing high street with designer played well to the frugally minded as well as adding a degree of interest for royal watchers who can now share and comment on the pictures of the royals that whizz onto websites and social platforms the moment they leave the house.

CopyCamilla? None of this has been lost on the other royals who are (mostly) as keen as the King and Prince of Wales to ensure there is no significant seepage of popularity in the coming years. In their different ways, they’ve all been taking notes from the Waleses for years.

One must dress your children like lil’ colonialists: The Wales children mostly look as though they’ve stepped out of the 1950s – and against all reason, even republicans wilt. In the face of mass logo-isation, the three Waleses’ shorts, smocking and Start-Rites have sparked a mini revival in traditional childrenswear.

Matchy-matchy: Go viral by colour-coding your outfits – On Sunday, the senior royals (King Charles, Queen Camilla, Princess Anne and the Waleses) all wore blue. Less senior royals (the Duchess of Edinburgh, Zara Tindall, Princess Beatrice) were in pink. Is this a modern version of the Sumptuary Laws – the medieval legislation that regulated the fabrics and colours people wore according to their status? None of this choreography happens by accident.

Rebel Keen: “Small rebellions make it interesting – It took Kate the outsider years before she felt comfortably deviating from royal protocol. These days the Princess is more daring: witness the red nail varnish that on Sunday had replaced the nude pink which was the late Queen’s preferred choice. Meanwhile the Queen Consort loves a hint of leopard print and swapped a coat for a cape last week. These small but revealing touches are widely appreciated by all but the most curmudgeonly of observers as they suggest both women are now feeling more at ease with their roles.

Pro tip, “Humble-brag your heritage jewellery”: Both the Queen and Princess of Wales have been amping up the heirloom family jewellery lately. In late March, Camilla wore the late Queen’s necklace and Queen Mother’s fabulous Art Deco Greville tiara to a state banquet in Berlin. Meanwhile, for Common-wealth Day last month, Kate accessorised a sprigged navy silk Erdem suit, one of her most regal day looks yet, with the Prince of Wales three feathers brooch, a royal heirloom dating back to 1863, and sapphire and diamond earrings which once belonged to Princess Diana.

[From The Telegraph]

I lost it at “heritage jewelry.” It’s a stretch to even refer to Royal Collection pieces as “heirloom pieces” rather than what they are – stolen, grifted or illegally gifted. Plunder from another era, symbolizing their privilege and neo-colonialist attitudes. Look no further than Kate’s red nail polish suddenly branded as a “small rebellion.” When Meghan wore colored nail polish, she was called vulgar, unroyal, common, disrespectful, etc. It’s so different when it’s a white woman, I guess. Anyway, Peg and Keen are not disruptors nor are they rebellious. Kate, in particular, wanders around like an extra from Downton Abbey who borrowed a Call the Midwife wig.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

There are several amazing stories in the British media this week about coronation chaos, aka Chubbly Shambles. Apparently, the Windsors and their staff have only begun to organize the actual ceremony and try to pace out how long everything will be and it’s just been one catastrophe after another. King Charles is worried he’s going to collapse under the weight of his cloaks and stolen jewels. No one has made a firm decision about who gets to wear tiaras because Charles keeps dithering over the dress code. And to make matters even worse, the seating chart can’t be finalized because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex still haven’t RSVP’d.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s reluctance to confirm their attendance at the King’s coronation has caused huge headaches for organisers. Sources close to Prince Harry last night confirmed “no decision” had been made by the couple.

Despite the Sussexes, who quit their royal roles in 2020, being aware of the April 3 cut-off date, Buckingham Palace staff are still none the wiser as to whether they will show up. It means organisers in charge of details such as seating arrangements, transport and security for VIPs, are unable to sign off on their plans. Buckingham Palace last night admitted seating plans were still not confirmed, just over three weeks away from the May 6 ceremony.

Royal sources revealed how organisers are “exasperated” with the couple, who have spent two years railing against the monarchy after they decided to leave in favour of earning millions in the corporate world. The Duke and Duchess have been in “email correspondence” with the palace in recent weeks, but Harry reportedly remains in a “predicament” about whether to attend. Palace insiders said they expected him to attend but were unsure whether Meghan would accompany him and may choose to stay in the US given it is their son Archie’s fourth birthday on the day of the coronation.

A source with knowledge of the plans, said: “They (Harry and Meghan) still haven’t confirmed either way. Of course they will be afforded extra time but in all honesty, everyone is exasperated with them.”

The Mirror last week revealed how Harry and Meghan, who now live in Montecito, California, do not feature in plans for a roaring coronation day finale on the famous Buckingham Palace balcony, featuring the Red Arrows. The King declared he would only share the historic moment with the “working royals”, those who have dedicated their lives to the monarchy and public service. One well placed source said: “His Majesty wants to be surrounded by those who he considers to be the heartbeat and future of his family, hence there is no place for the Duke and Duchess (of Sussex) or the Duke of York.”

Palace sources said they would continue to plan for the Sussexes to attend “unless advised otherwise”.

[From The Daily Mirror]

FAFO, that’s all I’ve got to say. If you wanted Harry to come at his father’s command, then his father should have thought of that years ago. In the same breath as these courtiers are melting down at the fact that the Sussexes won’t confirm, they’re proudly declaring that the Sussexes are not the heartbeat or future of the family. Imagine saying that about your son and grandchildren.

The Mirror is also running an interview with a “PR expert” who claims that if the Sussexes had rejected the invitation back in February, “the story would have died after a few days,” and that Harry and Meghan are trying to “create drama” by keeping everything up in the air. That’s incorrect analysis – if the Sussexes had said, back in February or March that they weren’t coming, every single tabloid story would be about how the Sussexes are terrible people who should be stripped off their titles for disrespecting Charles, and ALL of the coverage would still be about “why aren’t they coming.” Same if they had RSVP’d immediately and said “we’re coming!” The same media would be complaining about THAT and issuing violent threats about how the Sussexes will be punished. Say what you will, but I think the Sussexes have played this the right way, especially since their silence just emphasizes how f–king crazy everything is over there.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.

Can you believe it’s been four years since the “rural rival” story broke? It’s true. Throughout March and April of 2019, shady little stories began popping up in the Sun and Daily Mail about the then-Duchess of Cambridge’s falling out with her Norfolk neighbor Rose Hanbury aka the Marchioness of Cholmondeley. Over the years, I’ve put together a working theory on how all of it happened: Prince William and Rose (allegedly) had a torrid affair, likely in 2017 and 2018. The affair was an open secret in Norfolk society and those toffs just shrugged. Then Kate found out about the affair and tried to push her “rural rival” out of the Turnip Toffs, and Rose said: no, bitch, that’s not the way it works. The original leaks came from Rose and the Toffs laughing about the affair and Kate’s cluelessness when it came to navigating aristo dramas.

In any case, Rose won – she’s still the queen bee of the Turnip Toffs, she still operates one of the best estates in Norfolk and she’s still welcome in royal circles. Kate and William both had to go to events with the Rocksavages, from state dinners to the opening of Parliament to Sandringham church walks. What’s even funnier is that King Charles is making a point of including Rose and her husband even more – Charles appointed David as his Lord-in-Waiting, and Rose and David’s son Oliver will be one of the king’s pages at the coronation. All of which means, Rose is going to the coronation. From The Daily Beast’s shady exclusive:

Rose Hanbury, the neighbor of the Prince and Princess of Wales who was the subject of baseless rumors that she had an affair with Prince William, will attend the coronation, The Daily Beast understands. Rose will likely attend not only because she is the spouse of David Cholmondeley (pronounced Chumley), 7th Marquess of Cholmondeley, who has been named as King Charles’ Lord-in-Waiting, but also because her son, Oliver, has been named as one of the king’s pages, tasked with holding the robes of the king, alongside Prince George.

A friend of the family told The Daily Beast: “There has never been any enmity between Kate and Rose. The rumors were all a load of rubbish. The family are ancient allies of the Crown and they will be there.”

Concurring with this view, another friend of the king and queen told The Daily Beast it would be “unimaginable” that David wouldn’t be at the coronation with his wife.

However, Buckingham Palace is not confirming individual RSVPs and did not respond to an email seeking confirmation of Rose’s attendance. An email on the matter to the estate address listed on the Houghton Hall website also went unreturned.

A Marquess (and his wife, a Marchioness) holds the fourth most senior rank in the British nobility (behind King/Queen, Prince/Princess, and Duke/Duchess). The Cholmondeleys are particularly notable, however, as they are hereditary co-holders of the office of Lord Great Chamberlain. The role—which involves welcoming the monarch to the Houses of Parliament and dressing them for state events—alternates between the Cholmondeleys and the Carrington family with each change of reign.

This meant that David was Lord Great Chamberlain until the death of Elizabeth. However instead of being cast aside by the royals on Elizabeth’s death, he was named Lord-in-Waiting by the king, meaning he will be present at all important state and royal occasions and can even stand in for the king at diplomatic events. He is only 62, and is likely to still be alive when Charles dies and the role of Lord Great Chamberlain reverts to his family. He is therefore likely to be William’s Lord Great Chamberlain when William accedes to the throne.

[From The Daily Beast]

LMAO, David will be William’s Lord Great Chamberlain. Good luck with all of that. The Royalist also did a little background on the whole “rural rival” story and he name-checks Giles Coren, who was one of the society writers in the UK saying yes, there was an affair between Rose and William. Interestingly, Giles Coren’s name popped up recently in that sugary piece about Tom Parker Bowles, Queen Camilla’s son, and how Tom is the “firm’s new secret weapon.” Tom and Giles are close friends. Meaning… there are all kinds of connections and if you told me that Camilla had been pulling on some strings, I would believe you.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

The Daily Mirror’s big cover story today is “Coronation Chaos.” I’m excerpting parts of their coverage in other posts, because some of the Windsor chaos is about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s amazing refusal to RSVP to the Chubbly. But beyond the Sussex drama – the “red meat” of most tabloid coverage – there is absolutely a sense that every part of the coronation is in utter shambles. Like, King Charles hates his robes, Camilla is drunk, no one can firm up the timeline so the fly-over might not happen with precision, the procession is in chaos and on and on. I can’t believe that we’re only three weeks away and they haven’t figured out this stuff yet. Some highlights:

Stumbles at the mock-up Abbey: Sources revealed how the King and Queen Consort have been diligently practising their roles in a “mock-up Abbey”, specially built inside Buckingham Palace. During a fitting for his elaborate robes Charles is understood to have commented on how heavy they were, leading aides to privately express “real fears” that he could stumble on a walk up to the Chairs of State, where Charles and Camilla sit in the centre of Westminster Abbey after being crowned. In recent days master craftsmen have been drafted in to build a ramp up to the two Throne Chairs so the King does not struggle getting to his seat.

Tiara drama: One source remarked how indecision between the households had also led to rows over what tiaras the female royals would wear. They added: “Senior female royals were only informed of outfits this week prompting a rush to finalise fitting arrangements.”

They are woefully unprepared: An insider said: “It’s all very frantic, complete chaos to be frank. There is a plan, which is supposed to be the blueprint of how the day should operate, but things are changing daily which is causing massive headaches.” Other royal sources last night attempted to dampen down the anxiety, saying: “It’s fair to say it will go down to the wire, but there is huge confidence everything will go to plan on the day. This is naturally a huge event and the important point is everyone is pulling in the right direction. The King and Queen Consort want it to be perfect as does everyone involved which is why everything is being done to make it so.”

Hiccups: But a well placed insider with knowledge of the plans said there were concerns the coronation could add to the King’s woes, after the first seven months of his reign have been marred by protests and hiccups.

Timing it out: King Charles’s coronation service was originally planned to last 90 minutes – considerably shorter than the late Queen’s coronation in 1956, which lasted for three hours and 20 minutes. Plans seen by The Mirror now show the service beginning at 11am and finishing at 12.45pm, with the King’s procession setting off from the Abbey back to Buckingham Palace at 1pm. Insiders have also revealed how the King was understood to be in favour of a larger procession, taking him and the Queen through the streets of central London. But senior aides decided it would be too elaborate, while voicing concerns over the spiralling cost of policing the event in a cost of living crisis.

So stressful: Our source added: “Everything should be planned to the minute and such overruns would be a disaster. The schedule from the programme, the carriages, balcony appearance and the RAF flypast is planned to the minute, so it’s all incredibly stressful. If the service is too long, or too complicated, the television audience will turn off and that could be devastating. (We) want to create a sense of majesty and Charles and Camilla have seen months of protests by a growing republican movement.”

[From The Daily Mirror]

If I was in a managerial position for this sh-tshow, I would quit and join Republic’s “Not My King” protests. At least the protests seem well-organized. I mean, I’ll say one thing in defense of the Windsors – they haven’t had a coronation in seventy years, so there’s little institutional knowledge about how to organize one of these things. But honestly, they should have been working on all of this for months, rather than frantically trying to organize everything at the last minute. The big tell, in my opinion, was the fact that the new king was so disorganized that he sent out the invitations only one month beforehand. Another big tell is the fact that royal and aristocratic women still don’t know if they’re supposed to wear tiaras – like, the dress code has NOT been finalized. This is all on Camilla and Charles – they’re dithering and mismanaging their big day.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red, Buckingham Palace.

I don’t mind gossiping about what went wrong in Taylor Swift and Joe Alwyn’s six-year relationship, and I seriously doubt Taylor minds us gossiping about it either. I consider these stories promotion for her next album, where she will explain to us exactly how it fell apart. Red lips/don’t cry/you said I’m too famous/I said but you’re my guy. We danced by the fairy lights for the last time/I knew it was over when you punched that mime. Come on! It will be good. In the meantime, the Daily Mail is now running exclusives about what went wrong. Some highlights:

Taylor Swift and Joe Alwyn’s romance began to struggle over their career differences as the superstar’s career overshadowed her beau’s once the pandemic ended, DailyMail.com can exclusively reveal. The Anti-Hero hitmaker, 33 and the Brit actor, 32, shocked fans with the revelation they had gone their separate ways after six years last week – with a source close to the star saying Joe had struggled to get his career off the ground, driving a wedge between the pair, especially as Taylor headed back on tour.

The source told DailyMail.com: ‘The bottom line for the difficulties in their relationship was that Taylor’s career took priority over Joe’s – which can be awkward for a couple when it’s not balanced. This drove them apart and ultimately, they both realized they were not on the same page anymore. It’s been hard for Joe trying to make it in Hollywood and not quite becoming leading man material while dating one of the most famous women in the world over the last six years.’

‘It was easier during the pandemic when it was just the two of them, but once things returned to normal, Taylor Swift the superstar emerged, and their differences were even more apparent. They really made a go of it and tried everything they could but ultimately were unable to save the relationship.’

[From The Daily Mail]

This does seem to be a recurring theme of the gossip, that Taylor was too famous, too rich, too successful and he was a salty baby about it. I am begging men to stop dating famous, rich and successful women if they’re just going to whine about feeling emasculated. You never hear a woman say “my boyfriend is too rich and successful and it hurts my feelings.” Only men suck that bad. What’s crazy is that I genuinely feel like there are so many men these days who would love nothing more than to settle down with a rich woman and just chill out all day, supporting her and playing video games (see: Orlando Bloom). Besides, for Joe in particular, what did he expect? Did he think that dating Taylor would help his career? Honestly? Tom Hiddleston dated Taylor for like four months in 2016 and he’s STILL picking up the pieces of his professional life.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex still haven’t announced anything publicly about whether they’ll go to King Charles’s coronation (as of this writing). It’s my sincere hope that the veil has been lifted and Prince Harry sees clearly how ridiculous, spiteful and petty his family is and always has been. I also suspect that Harry has already privately indicated his decision to the palace, and that’s why they seem to be in full panic mode. Speaking of, the Daily Mail’s Ephraim Hardcastle would have people believe that the Sussexes’ sticking point is Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet’s inclusion in the coronation somehow. Keep in mind, the palace continues to make it abundantly clear that Archie and Lilibet are not invited, that the king’s mixed-race grandchildren are utterly unwelcome at the Chubbly.

Still dithering over their Coronation RSVPs, could Harry and Meghan be quibbling over bringing their children?

Demanding that Archie be let in for part of the service (so Prince George doesn’t steal all the limelight) and Lilibet be held up at the Palace window to see the Coronation procession depart would imitate the roles played by Charles and Anne back in 1953.

Whatever the cause of delay, they need to get a move on if they want their names in the order of service. A source says the first draft has been drawn up and proofed and once the King signs off on it then no changes will be possible.

[From The Daily Mail]

Just stand back and think about how utterly bizarre this whole melodrama has been. The palace has said clearly: the mixed-race kids are not invited, how dare you make this day about Archie’s birthday, you need to forget about your children and just focus on the king’s special day, when you come we’ll treat you like sh-t, no one will speak to you and you’ll be seated next to the family rapist. And Harry’s reaction is supposed to be “let’s negotiate whether we put Lilibet in the window?” Are you f–king joking? Unhinged doesn’t even cover this. Meanwhile, Harry and Meghan are also being cited as one of the big reasons why the Chubbly planning is in shambles:

The King’s Coronation has been plunged into chaos after rehearsals overran significantly, prompting fears the nation will switch off and heap more pressure on the stuttering start to the monarch’s reign. With little more than three weeks to go, organisers face a “race against time” to finalise details of the King and Queen’s historic crowning at Westminster Abbey.

A source said royal aides are working around the clock in their determination to ensure everything is perfect for the big day. But a catalogue of major issues have emerged at the heart of planning for the May 6 event, with insiders revealing: Seating plans are still not arranged, owing to Prince Harry and Meghan who have still not confirmed their attendance despite the April 3 cut off point; Fears the King could stumble over his elaborate robes in front of a TV audience of 100 million; Rows over the Coronation route, with planners wanting a smaller procession to keep costs down to avoid scrutiny; Confusion over whether women will wear tiaras into the church before the Queen Consort enters the Abbey.

[From The Daily Mirror]

“Prince Harry and Meghan who have still not confirmed their attendance despite the April 3 cut off point” – sounds like Harry and Meghan’s silence IS a confirmation that they’re not coming. I doubt it slipped their mind, you know? As for the rest of it… the Chubblyshambles doesn’t even sound like it’s primarily about the Sussexes. It sound like the Windsors and their staff have half-assed the planning and preparations and now we’re about three weeks away and the whole thing is going to be an overpriced disaster.

Photos courtesy of Instar and Cover Images.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Bre Tiesi (@bre_tiesi)

Nick Cannon had a really busy 2022 in which he welcomed FIVE children with five women. He currently has 11 living children (his son Zen tragically died of brain cancer in 2021). Nick has talked a lot of different stuff about his approach to his relationships and parenting and finances. Now, during his most recent appearance on The Howard Stern Show, Nick says he’s not dating. He’s trying to focus on work and himself and his children. He doesn’t have the “bandwidth.” Uh yeah, ya think?

Being a dad to 11 children makes it hard for Nick Cannon to date.

The Masked Singer and Wild N’ Out host, 42, appeared on SiriusXM’s The Howard Stern Show on Monday where he opened up about the impact fatherhood has placed on his dating life.

“I’m not out there like that,” Cannon said. “I’m really trying to focus on myself and my children… my bandwidth doesn’t even allow me to kind of be in that space.”

Talking with Howard Stern and co-host Robin Quivers, the comedian said he maintains a “healthy balance.” “It sounds wild, but my main focus is either my children or work,” Cannon shared.

He went on to explain that being celibate for nine months — a journey he previously said he began after conceiving his 8th child — only contributed to his single status, though it backfired because it didn’t stop his family from growing. “One therapist told me I should be celibate — that didn’t work, I had like more kids after that,” he joked.

The comedian shares 11-year-old twins Monroe and Moroccan with ex Mariah Carey, whom he was married to from 2008 to 2016. He is also a father to sons Golden Sagon, 6, and Rise Messiah Cannon, 6 months, and daughter Powerful Queen, 2, with Brittany Bell.

Cannon shares twins Zion Mixolydian and Zillion Heir, 21 months, and daughter Beautiful Zeppelin, 4 months, with Abby De La Rosa; son Legendary Love, 8 months, with Bre Tiesi; daughter Onyx Ice Cole, 5 months, with LaNisha Cole. Additionally, he’s dad to two children with Alyssa Scott: son Zen — who died at 5 months old in December 2021 after being diagnosed with brain cancer — and daughter Halo Marie, 3 months.

Asked by Stern if he was “done” having children, Cannon admitted: “I don’t know.” “Every time I answer this question, I can never answer it correctly because I don’t know.”

“I’m happy currently with the [children] that I got,” Cannon said.

The 42-year-old said if he had more children it would have to be with an “amazing” woman. The confession prompted Stern to ask if Taylor Swift was amazing enough. “Absolutely, I’m in — let’s go… That’s the one!” Cannon joked as he praised the pop star’s songwriting talent.

When Quivers pointed out Swift is currently single, Cannon laughed that his “Spidey-sense is tingling.”

Dad life kept Cannon very busy over Easter, when he visited all 11 children while dressed as the Easter bunny.

Cannon shared pictures from his busy day on his Instagram Story Sunday, showing him soaking up special holiday moments with his kids and the mothers of all of his children.

[From People]

Alright, these comments beg the question: Nick may not be “dating,” but is he f–king? Because I don’t think Nick really dates the way the rest of us date. In late 2021, he said he was going to be celibate, but then he had FIVE babies throughout 2022. I really can’t tell when those supposed nine months of celibacy from the Howard Stern interview happened because he had babies in July, September, November, and December 2022. Anyway, Nick has talked out of both sides of his mouth before. I would hope he is actually focusing on his children, but he definitely does need to focus on his work because children are expensive normally so imagine having 11 of them. He did dress up as the Easter bunny on Easter and visit all his kids, which was nice and must have been tiring. Imagine how busy Father’s Day will be for him!

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Bre Tiesi (@bre_tiesi)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Alyssa (@itsalyssaemm)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by NICK CANNON (@nickcannon)

Photos credit: Faye’s Vision/Cover Images and via Instagram

The May issue of Vogue is devoted to Anna Wintour’s tribute to her dear friend, the late Karl Lagerfeld, ahead of the Costume Institute’s show and gala devoted to the Lagerfeld theme. I already see a lot of people complaining online that Karl Lagerfeld was a snob who hated women (in general) and especially hated women who are bigger than a size 2. That’s real, he said all of that and more in many interviews. It was part of his whole persona – he was a hater, he was a snob, he thought Americans were gauche and unfashionable. Personally, I do think he mellowed in his final years, and becoming a father to his beloved cat Choupette definitely helped with his image.

Vogue organized various designers to “interpret” Lagerfeld’s staggering fashion archives with new looks, and I have to say, most of the new designs ATE. They’re so good, to the point where people are asking why none of those designers took over Chanel. Vogue also did a cover with “ten of the models that Lagerfeld loved the most”: Anok Yai, Shalom Harlow, Kendall Jenner, Liu Wen, Adut Akech, Natalia Vodianova, Naomi Campbell, Amber Valletta, Gigi Hadid, and Devon Aoki. Karl loved Kendall? Really? She walked some Chanel runways, but I doubt she was one of his faves. Amazingly, the magazine also brought out Choupette for the editorial! Naomi Campbell got to pose with Karl’s beloved cat, who I believe is now living with one of Lagerfeld’s senior staff.

You can read Wintour’s letter here. I was actually quite moved by what she said about her dear friend, and I appreciate that she didn’t want to do a somber or funerial tribute to Lagerfeld – she wanted it to be joyful and appreciative of his fashion legacy. Vogue also put a lot of their editorial on Instagram – they put a lot of time and money into this and it’s very cool.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Vogue (@voguemagazine)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Vogue (@voguemagazine)

Cover & IGs courtesy of Vogue.

Every detail that comes out about the Scandoval just paints the Tom Sandoval of it all in a worse light. So we already know that Tom and Raquel Leviss were having an affair behind his longtime girlfriend (and Raquel’s supposed friend) Ariana Madix’s back since probably late last summer. It all hit the fan when Ariana found evidence on Tom’s phone and promptly dumped him in early March. But apparently Tom’s family was aware in December? According to TMZ, Tom took Raquel for a hometown visit to St. Louis in December and his family refused to meet her. Good!

Just months before the world was rocked by “Scandoval,” Tom Sandoval’s family was faced with a shock of their own.

The “Vanderpump Rules” star reportedly brought his co-star and lover Raquel Leviss to his hometown of St. Louis in Missouri in late December, TMZ reports.

While there, Sandoval reportedly brought Leviss round to his family’s home, and even asked them if they wanted to meet the 28-year-old with whom he’s been having a months-long affair behind Ariana Madix’s back.

According to the outlet, his family declined the offer and had “no interest” in meeting her.

Sandoval even brought Leviss to meet his pals after reportedly telling them that he tried to split from Madix before the trip.

His friends thought it was “inappropriate” for him to parade his new love interest around, TMZ added.

The outlet also adds that the pair posed for a loved-up snap together in front of the Apotheosis of St. Louis statue in his hometown.

Page Six has reached out to reps for Leviss and Sandoval for comment.

Madix was faced with horror heartbreak last month while out cheering Sandoval on during a performance by his cover band in West Hollywood.

She discovered a sexually explicit video of Leviss, 28, on Sandoval’s phone, prompting her to dump him after nearly a decade together.

The secret tryst kickstarted in July 2022, but it wasn’t until early March that the world learned about it.

Madix and Sandoval had been dating for almost 10 years and even owned a home and a dog together — which she will reportedly be keeping.

As news of the full-blown affair came to light, both Sandoval and Leviss issued social media statements, respectively.

“I want to apologize to Ariana. I made mistakes, I was selfish, and made reckless decisions that hurt somebody I love,” Sandoval wrote in part earlier this month.

For her part, Leviss issued a lengthy statement in which she blamed the affair on her “addiction” to love and vowed to do better from here on out.

“I am reflecting on my choices, speaking to a counselor and I am learning things about myself such as my patterns of codependency and addiction to being and feeling loved,” she wrote.

[From Page Six]

So Tom didn’t even break up with Ariana, his girlfriend since 2013, before trying to introduce Raquel to his friends and family. I don’t know much about Tom’s family, but I’m glad they refused to meet Raquel instead of being like “our son can do no wrong” or “he’s wrong, but he’s still our son.” Because sometimes that’s the enabling energy from families and you can see how people ended up being bad so I’m glad that’s not the case here. It sounds like his friends did meet her, but didn’t think much of the pair. And they’re right that it was wildly inappropriate for Tom to take Raquel home and “parade” her around while he’s still with Ariana. Okay, he “tried” to break up with her. Sure, obviously not very hard. Even his little buddy Tom Schwartz said he kept “procrastinating” on breaking up with Ariana because Tom Sandoval is a coward. And he’s also trying to lay a lot of blame on Ariana. He appeared on Howie Mandel’s podcast and said Ariana was distant and turned a blind eye and they lived separate lives. Dude, maybe you’re just an excellent liar and your girlfriend didn’t expect you to cheat with her friend. He also said he and Raquel are taking a break from doing it right now, as if that helps at this point. My question is: I thought Howie Mandel was a germaphobe? I can’t believe he got that close to Tom’s skeeze.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: Cover Images, Avalon.red and Getty